In the lead-up to Netflix’s live-action remake of Avatar: The Last Airbender (ATLA), headlines around changes made in the upcoming remake have dominated media news. From decisions to remove Sozin’s comet, an important plot point to the original show, to cutting out the “filler” episodes that many fans remember fondly – ATLA’s most controversial change has been to remove one of its most beloved character’s sexist traits.
In a world that looks to condemn sexist and patriarchal views, removing overt sexism seems like a great way to modernise the show, right? Well, not entirely, and let’s take a look at why.
ATLA was released between 2005 and 2008 and focused on the Avatar, Aang, a boy tasked as the last airbender to save the world from the totalitarian reign of The Fire Nation. The first season follows a trio of characters: Aang; Katara, the last female waterbender from the Southern Water Tribe; and Sokka, Katara’s headstrong yet loveable brother. As the trio ventures to the Northern Water Tribe to find Aang, a waterbending teacher, Zuko, a prince of The Fire Nation, relentlessly stalks them.
The set-up for ATLA is simple, designed to be a children’s show after all. Still, the showrunners of the original series (Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko) were aware of the adult audience it would attract and rarely shied away from mature themes that included war, genocide, indoctrination, and patriarchies, to name a few. These topics embedded within the show are an often dark but realistic commentary on the state of human politics and philosophy, and its psychoanalysis of the human psyche (especially in much later seasons with the inclusion of characters like Azula) is often thoughtful and heartbreaking. Yet, Netflix’s latest decision to remove what may seem like a trivial character trait has more significant implications for the show’s depth and its commentary on the effects of sexism.
Read Rehana Nurmahi’s review of Netflix’s Avatar: The Last Airbender for The Indiependent here.
During an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Ian Ousley (the actor who plays Sokka) said, “I feel like we also took out the element of how sexist [Sokka] was. I feel like there were a lot of moments in the original show that were iffy.” No doubt well-intended in its meaning, fans were quick to rally at Netflix and call this change ridiculous, arguing that Sokka’s eventual abandoning of sexist, patriarchal views was crucial to his character growth.
However, the biggest problem with this removal isn’t around Sokka’s character but how it negatively affects ATLA’s female characters and starves them of one of their biggest strengths.
Let’s clarify one thing: ATLA never intentionally cites pro-sexist or patriarchal views; instead, it extensively focuses on a strong class of female characters and warriors that drive much of the narrative forward. Katara often proves herself as a capable waterbender despite no formal training, and additional characters like Suki, a leader of the Kyoshi Warriors (an all-female army that protects Kyoshi Island), as well as many others – ATLA’s most formidable characters, for better or worse, are often its female ones.
What’s important here is that despite the physical strength of these characters, the original Sokka of season one ATLA always thinks he’s better – after all, he’s male, and they’re not.
Removing this mentality in Sokka might make him more pleasant to new audiences, reflecting values more appreciated and universally acknowledged. However, it also rejects the nuance of complex characters written to have faults that they conquer as a means of character growth – the bulk of most audiences’ anger towards the change. However, what it also does in the process is take away the spotlight from how female characters, and women more generally, fight against these views and attempt to achieve equality.
Perhaps this change exists because the adaptation’s showrunners believed the animated show’s frequent scenes of characters smacking Sokka over the head, tripped, or having some element flung at him wasn’t an appropriate response – although this might be a debate for another day. However, often used for more immediate and comedic effects, the depiction of violence never comes across as an agreeable way to challenge oppressive views. Instead, the more meaningful challenges of Sokka’s sexism happen in the conversations that surround him and are with him, with displays of female capability and strength, and the constant juxtaposition of Sokka’s capability against those women that he thinks less of.
Considering himself a warrior, Sokka quickly learns he is no match for Suki, let alone many other Kyoshi warriors. Katara often usurps him in their sibling battles and, on many occasions, saves him against other benders in which his trusty boomerang has little effect. All these displays of what women are capable of are influential to the audience because Sokka’s words temper them. As Sokka’s words constantly put down characters, they often prove his assumptions and beliefs wrong, forcing him to question his assumption’s validity when faced with dire circumstances. What becomes an essential message in these displays is that the view that men are superior to women is outdated and unfounded.
So why is it important to keep these remarks if they’re not true?
Because, whether we realise it or not, it’s educative and plays into the fact that young minds are impressionable. When people, young girls, in particular, see strong female characters oppose sexist views and complete incredible feats, they begin to internalise those views. In seeing Sokka’s sexism, audiences find the real comedy of the character in how misguided his opinions are. Audiences start to value that all people are capable of equal and great things, but the value of those “things” may appear differently with alternate strengths.
With Ousley’s recent insistence in an interview with Metro that he “… think[s] that the essence of the character that Sokka is, is 100% the character that is portrayed in the live-action version of the show,’ it’s unclear to what extent Sokka’s sexism has been changed. However, one thing is clear: choosing to remove problematic and sexist views doesn’t reflect new and changed ideologies but instead squashes the genuine struggle and unfortunate place they continue to have in society. Instead, we should push to show how to deal with those issues when they present themselves rather than pretend they never existed and that the modern world is perfect.
Words by Sam Pegg
Support The Indiependent
We’re trying to raise £200 a month to help cover our operational costs. This includes our ‘Writer of the Month’ awards, where we recognise the amazing work produced by our contributor team. If you’ve enjoyed reading our site, we’d really appreciate it if you could donate to The Indiependent. Whether you can give £1 or £10, you’d be making a huge difference to our small team.