Dr Seuss rockets up US charts after books pulled over racist portrayals

[Fat is a type of crazy]

 

The issue for me is not that he was 'bad' or racist - he exaggerates all his characters -  but that whether kids of today might benefit by seeing an updated portrayal.

Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication. The pictures reflect this. On the other  foreigners could be seen as appearing as  different in a disparaging way to normal people. The African one is worst with the bug eyes and luba lips - you could argue there is an inference about the intelligence of those people. 

You could have 2 versions.

The original for those who want it - it could come with a separate page giving context like they have done with Gone with the wind  - and parents could give their kids context if they so desire.

A new copy that shows a more modern fair and realistic portrayal of those peoples.

 

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by Fat is a type of crazy

[johnnybangkok]

33 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

 

The issue for me is not that he was 'bad' or racist - he exaggerates all his characters -  but that whether kids of today might benefit by seeing an updated portrayal.

Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication. The pictures reflect this. On the other  foreigners could be seen as appearing as  different in a disparaging way to normal people. The African one is worst with the bug eyes and luba lips - you could argue there is an inference about the intelligence of those people. 

You could have 2 versions.

The original for those who want it - it could come with a separate page giving context like they have done with Gone with the wind  - and parents could give their kids context if they so desire.

A new copy that shows a more modern fair and realistic portrayal of those peoples.

 

 

Errr, that's exactly what you have. The 'old' version will still be in circulation (no ones burning them) but you will have a new edition with the updated imagery. There will therefore still be a choice for anyone willing to put in the time to find the old version and of course, explain the images.

And as much as I don't disagree that 'Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication', it's just excusing ignorance (albeit unintentional ignorance). Much in the same way we don't allow cigarette adverts pretending the smoker is 'cool' or god forbid, cigarettes are in some way 'healthy', society updates where the bar is set for acceptability. So therefore gollywogs, sambos, Ching Chong Chinamen and the likes are just no longer acceptable.

It's really not that hard to understand.  

 

[johnnybangkok]

2 hours ago, blazes said:

 

Which parts of "white" civilization would you like to abandon?  That which says good grammar is racist?  That mathematics is racist (because for a child all answers are "correct" -only white culture insists on what is "correct" and "incorrect"?)  Shakespeare because he has a black man die (yet again) or portrays a Jew in an unfavourable light?  Socrates for daring to suggest that debate of all issues is rational and necessary?  (And on and on and on and on....)

Way to overly exagerate to try and make a terrible point. 

Your answer is already there; none of what you are attempting to badly show as an example is banned simply because none of it is considered racist. However showing black people with big lips, naked apart from a grass skirt and bones through their hair is. 

 

P.S. Your also mixing your metaphors;  'That mathematics is racist (because for a child all answers are "correct" hasn't anything to do with racism, it's positive reinforcement. Something again you seem to have a problem with. 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

2 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Errr, that's exactly what you have. The 'old' version will still be in circulation (no ones burning them) but you will have a new edition with the updated imagery. There will therefore still be a choice for anyone willing to put in the time to find the old version and of course, explain the images.

And as much as I don't disagree that 'Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication', it's just excusing ignorance (albeit unintentional ignorance). Much in the same way we don't allow cigarette adverts pretending the smoker is 'cool' or god forbid, cigarettes are in some way 'healthy', society updates where the bar is set for acceptability. So therefore gollywogs, sambos, Ching Chong Chinamen and the likes are just no longer acceptable.

It's really not that hard to understand.  

 

I pretty much agree with you but I personally think it's OK to have the old one for sale too but it's up to the company. They are essentially banning an original work for new purchases. If they edited The adventures of Tom Sawyer and stopped new sales of the original I wouldn't be happy.

On the other point I am just defending the author somewhat from being tarred with the same brush as imagery that had  always been racist e.g. imagery of blacks coming from the post civil war days as  lazy stupid eating fried chicken and watermelon. Not many are doing that but some are. His  imagery is of exotic people doing exotic exciting things. It is I guess ignorance by definition though that word I feel  is a bit loaded, i.e. an  ignoramus is defined as a stupid person, and I think an author who pictured everyone in exaggerated terms did what made sense at the time.

[johnnybangkok]

7 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I pretty much agree with you but I personally think it's OK to have the old one for sale too but it's up to the company. They are essentially banning an original work for new purchases. If they edited The adventures of Tom Sawyer and stopped new sales of the original I wouldn't be happy.

On the other point I am just defending the author somewhat from being tarred with the same brush as imagery that had  always been racist e.g. imagery of blacks coming from the post civil war days as  lazy stupid eating fried chicken and watermelon. Not many are doing that but some are. His  imagery is of exotic people doing exotic exciting things. It is I guess ignorance by definition though that word I feel  is a bit loaded, i.e. an  ignoramus is defined as a stupid person, and I think an author who pictured everyone in exaggerated terms did what made sense at the time.

Again not disagreeing. The author did what the author did at the time and shouldn't be castigated for it but times move on and acceptability moves with it. 

I also think it's important to note this is only happening with 6 books and it's more about the images than the actually stories.

Edited March 7, 2021 by johnnybangkok

[sanuk711]

[blazes]

31 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Way to overly exagerate to try and make a terrible point. 

Your answer is already there; none of what you are attempting to badly show as an example is banned simply because none of it is considered racist. However showing black people with big lips, naked apart from a grass skirt and bones through their hair is. 

 

P.S. Your also mixing your metaphors;  'That mathematics is racist (because for a child all answers are "correct" hasn't anything to do with racism, it's positive reinforcement. Something again you seem to have a problem with. 

 

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.

Positive reinforcement of ignorance helps a child?????  What fatuous nonsense (but at least you do admit that this latest offence against rationality is occurring.)

[Neeranam]

 

I knew things were going to get worse when Biden came to power.

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by Neeranam

[Blue Muton]

12 hours ago, chilli42 said:

It’s a census report.  It has nothing to do with attitudes and beliefs that exist today.  Am I to conclude that you believe the majority of US citizens are in support of the cancel culture/progressive movement today?  Can you kindly share the survey statistics that have informed your opinion?

What complete nonsense. How you can argue that peoples ethnicity has nothing to do with their attitudes and beliefs is beyond me. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 3/6/2021 at 1:56 PM, mtls2005 said:

You do realize that "they" are not burning the books, or banning them? Still in your public library, assuming the local militia hasn't stormed that yet.

LOL. Librarians refused to have Enid Blyton books in libraries in NZ way back last century. PC before PC was invented. Didn't stop them being best sellers in book stores.

 

What difference does it make if a book is burned or banned- same result.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

 

The issue for me is not that he was 'bad' or racist - he exaggerates all his characters -  but that whether kids of today might benefit by seeing an updated portrayal.

Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication. The pictures reflect this. On the other  foreigners could be seen as appearing as  different in a disparaging way to normal people. The African one is worst with the bug eyes and luba lips - you could argue there is an inference about the intelligence of those people. 

You could have 2 versions.

The original for those who want it - it could come with a separate page giving context like they have done with Gone with the wind  - and parents could give their kids context if they so desire.

A new copy that shows a more modern fair and realistic portrayal of those peoples.

 

 

What right does anyone have to "edit" an author's work just to keep making money off it?

The people have the right to buy a book as the author wrote it, but if it's really offensive make the case to ban it.

 

If people don't like it they won't buy it.

 

Perhaps the problem is that people just aren't interested in PC books, so they have to keep selling the old ones by any means possible.

[cdemundo]

I learned to read by reading those books that I got from the public library.  Of the four pictured I only know "Mulberry Street".  For me it's a "temptress in a teacup"  (for those who know), sorry about "Mulberry Street" but the world will go on.

[cdemundo]

On 3/5/2021 at 5:06 PM, Sujo said:

I think i may be the only person who has never heard of him or his books

You might be right, but they are books written for children in English.  Because of the fact that they were all in rhyme I don't know if they were translated to other languages.  Well known in the USA for sure, I don't know about the rest of the English speaking nations.

[cdemundo]

On 3/5/2021 at 6:56 PM, J Town said:

This got one of the books pulled. Pure STUPID!

Does seem inoffensive to me as well, not sure I understand the problem.

[J Town]

Just now, cdemundo said:

Does seem inoffensive to me as well, not sure I understand the problem.

They printed the skin yellow.

[cdemundo]

13 hours ago, Dart12 said:

Almost all corporations are pandering to China censorship to get access to their population buyer power.

I have heard that American movie makers quake at the idea of offending the Chinese market.  Chinese culture has some attitudes that are definitely not PC by current US standards.

[gunderhill]

On 3/6/2021 at 9:38 AM, Dart12 said:

This is one of the items they deem racist.  Including the long neck canary being racist.  Do you think these characters are racist?

 

 

That mountain being yellow is a  straight up slur against Asian mountains, I'm  disgusted, at the very least it should be rainbow  coloured with a pretty  bow and speak in an effeminate way as everyone knows that's the norm.

[gunderhill]

3 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

I have heard that American movie makers quake at the idea of offending the Chinese market.  Chinese culture has some attitudes that are definitely not PC by current US standards.

Will that be a  chink in their armour? or  is that just my  Black  humour ,nowt as queer as  folk.

[gunderhill]

12 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Errr, that's exactly what you have. The 'old' version will still be in circulation (no ones burning them) but you will have a new edition with the updated imagery. There will therefore still be a choice for anyone willing to put in the time to find the old version and of course, explain the images.

And as much as I don't disagree that 'Foreigners were genuinely seen as exotic at a time before significant  travel and widespread communication', it's just excusing ignorance (albeit unintentional ignorance). Much in the same way we don't allow cigarette adverts pretending the smoker is 'cool' or god forbid, cigarettes are in some way 'healthy', society updates where the bar is set for acceptability. So therefore gollywogs, sambos, Ching Chong Chinamen and the likes are just no longer acceptable.

It's really not that hard to understand.  

 

Tell that to the Gweilo's

[irishman25]

On 3/5/2021 at 6:10 AM, DrDave said:

Unfortunately, some misguided, self-anointed "social re-engineers" will not permit these books to stand the test of time.

What else will now be band history will now be rewritten, a day will come and further generation will ask why could not stop this. we wont for FEAR of been called A racist   

[chilli42]

11 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

What complete nonsense. How you can argue that peoples ethnicity has nothing to do with their attitudes and beliefs is beyond me. 

Are you seriously saying that you are projecting today’s attitudes and beliefs based on projected demographic trends for the future?  That’s the best you can do?  I can’t believe I wasted my time responding to your original request.  

[Surelynot]

Well this topic certainly flushed out the racists.......almost certainly the same barstool, beer swilling, tattooed clique that are apoplectic when having to pay farang prices for anything (racism they shout)......yet more than happy to see racial stereotypes propagated for their children to read about and laugh at and quite comfortable with risking racist attitudes being instilled in their children.