Just in the last few days I bought to collections of classic animation, Tom & Jerry and Looney Tunes. At the begining of each was Whoopi Goldberg giving a quick little speech about how these cartoons are form of art and entertainment and a part of the culture. This is why even if some of the cartoons might be racist or violent and aggressive by our modern standards we need to understand that they were a product of their times and simply love them for what they are.

Now, do you think animation of any kind whether for adult or child is harmful?

Do you think cartoons should require well known people defending them at the begining of DVD collections?

Is animation an art form and thus should be treated with the same level of thought that most of us use to judge movies and books?

If it is an art form does it have limitations? If so what kind?

Please feel free to respond to any or all of the questions. Thank You.

Thaibebop

I read once that Tom & Jerry was classed as being racist because the Housemaid is a black woman from the deep south which many took to represent a slave rather than hired help.

"Are"

Tom is a mouseist

Tom is a mouseist

The term is mousaganist

cv

inferior animation...both characters have the same outline but with different ears and tails...a pathetic attempt to enjoin uniformity on unsuspecting masses of people...

Just in the last few days I bought to collections of classic animation, Tom & Jerry and Looney Tunes. At the begining of each was Whoopi Goldberg giving a quick little speech about how these cartoons are form of art and entertainment and a part of the culture. This is why even if some of the cartoons might be racist or violent and aggressive by our modern standards we need to understand that they were a product of their times and simply love them for what they are.

Now, do you think animation of any kind whether for adult or child is harmful?

Do you think cartoons should require well known people defending them at the begining of DVD collections?

Is animation an art form and thus should be treated with the same level of thought that most of us use to judge movies and books?

If it is an art form does it have limitations? If so what kind?

Please feel free to respond to any or all of the questions. Thank You.

Thaibebop

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think the art of animation itself is harmful to adults or children. It depends on the content of the animation. Watching poor Wiley Coyote get squashed, splattered and blown up everytime he tries to get a meal may perhaps send the wrong message to some people, but it also sends the message to keep trying and be persistant (plus, despite all the tragedy, the ol' Coyote always comes back).

Certain cartoons may require explanations (as in your example) so that people of today can understand the situation at the time the cartoon was created. Having a well known spokesperson giving the explanation grants it a higher level of acceptance/credibility than some nameless voice would.

Animation can be considered an art form. Animation is the visual expression of the ideas of other people, in a way, not much different than sculptures, paintings, photography and cinema.

Even so, being considered an art form does not allow it freedom to propagate messages/images that today are considered inappropriate (i.e. racist, sexist, discriminatory, ect).

Various cartoons and shows (for example "All In The Family) did convey messages that today would be considered inappropriate. One has to remember that society's attitudes were (in most places) quite a bit different than they are now (in most places).

Much of what was created from the 20's-70's would not be considered appropriate for todays audiences. There are slews of groups that look at everything created today (books, films, even music) to determine if it meets what society deems as acceptable in accordance with today's standards.

(think about those groups that supposedly find sexual images hidden inside animations like The Lion King and other Disney productions)

Now that I've bored you all to death, I'm off to the Tits thread (less writing, more looking !)

Now, do you think animation of any kind whether for adult or child is harmful?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe people should be able to see and buy whatever they want to see and buy, unless it harms someone else. But personally, I don't see the benefit of all these gorey bloodsport computer games.

It's a far cry between seeing Wile E. Coyote rocket off a thousand foot cliff five times an episode, and watching imperial ninjas hacking off body parts and watching computer animated blood spurt all over from the open wounds.

As for the racist bit in the cartoons, I never thought twice about it as a kid. But as an adult, I find a lot of the older cartoons like T&J to be racially offensive. There are many examples like these where blacks are portrayed offensively, and many more from the WW2 era with offensive portrayals of the Japanese. Maybe it was okay at the time. Maybe it is okay for historical purposes. But it is hardly okay for mainstream broadcast to children.

Now, do you think animation of any kind whether for adult or child is harmful?

I believe people should be able to see and buy whatever they want to see and buy, unless it harms someone else. But personally, I don't see the benefit of all these gorey bloodsport computer games.

It's a far cry between seeing Wile E. Coyote rocket off a thousand foot cliff five times an episode, and watching imperial ninjas hacking off body parts and watching computer animated blood spurt all over from the open wounds.

As for the racist bit in the cartoons, I never thought twice about it as a kid. But as an adult, I find a lot of the older cartoons like T&J to be racially offensive. There are many examples like these where blacks are portrayed offensively, and many more from the WW2 era with offensive portrayals of the Japanese. Maybe it was okay at the time. Maybe it is okay for historical purposes. But it is hardly okay for mainstream broadcast to children.

You dont think it is possible your dislike for computer games has something to do with your age, and computer games not being part of 'your generation'?

This is a genuine question as it seems to be a human trait to complain of the youth and what they're up to. Lots of that going on among the Ancient Greeks too.

We tend to find excuses and arguments for what we know and like, but find fault with what we are not a part of.

I agree the racist stuff is offensive today. I bet most of the audience did not raise an eyebrow though - after all, if what I have read is true, there was no educated black middleclass who had the luxury of going to the movies and watch cartoons to speak of... much less have the means (or perhaps even the inclination - look at the Uncle Tom syndrome) to express their dislike.

As a perspective, have a look at how Arabs are portrayed in Hollywood flicks like Independence Day, etc.

I do not know since I was not around at the time of WW2, but it seems likely that if at that time, you tried to say the Japanese had a lot going for them (sturdiness, determination, will to progress, cultural integrity), somebody would call you a traitor (a word which in today's war propaganda has been changed into 'an apologist') pointing out and focusing on their war crimes as an example to point out how twisted and 'different' they were...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the important point is that as a parent you should not trust your TV to be a babysitter. Limit kids' viewing time, and if possible watch actively with them, so you can answer their questions or make them reflect over what they see instead of just accepting it, keeping it inside and trying to make up their own ideas about how the world works (there will be enough of that anyway).

The same goes for computer usage... still, with the internet as wide open and unregulated as it is today, we have to accept that kids today are not unlikely to have seen hardcore porn already at the age of 8 or 9 (because if I were ten years old today, I would know how to bypass NetNanny, CyberPatrol, the works... to get to porn sites and violent online games. When I grew up in the 80s we had copying networks sending each other the latest cracked games by regular mail, some of which had sexual, and some very violent content. And there would be little brothers or sisters around the house who would be in on these secrets... Can't imagine how it'd be different today.)

In other words, I guess you should be 'annoying'.

The benefit of shoot-em-up and hack-em-up computer games is better coordination, reflexes and stress training, something that has already proven to create lots more people suitable for piloting advanced aeroplanes. There are many kids who prefer tactics games, which develop creative thinking and working within the boundaries of set parameters.

As far as I know, no studies have been able to demonstrate prolonged or long-term violent behaviour in children who play violent computer games or watch kung-&lt;deleted&gt; flicks - apart from the initial excitement, they will play similar games to their peers.

Tom and Jerry with a public health warning ... wow, what has the world come to?

What I find offensive is the blatant censorship of such works of art as T & J and the wonderful Fantasia.

I LOVE T & J (alway have), my kids loved it, my grand kids love it and I am 100% certain that they NEVER had the 'black momma' with at least 20 peticoats down as anything other than either the housewife or (less likely) the hired help.

That said, I am a white Brit. and in an increasingly PC world I suppose we must go with the flow.

I now think that the cartoons can be used to educate people. It would be better to introduce to my child to racism through something like Tom & Jerry or Looney Tunes rather then news media or film. What do you guys think?

People read more into them then what they are. Looney Toons were the best as well as Hanna Barbara. I'd think Simpsons are far worse than the oldies but goodies.

People read more into them then what they are. Looney Toons were the best as well as Hanna Barbara. I'd think Simpsons are far worse than the oldies but goodies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true and no one ever complains about the Simpsons only the violent cartoons, or what they think is violent. Does this mean the most people are too slow to "get" the Simpsons or just don't the kids won't understand it?

People read more into them then what they are. Looney Toons were the best as well as Hanna Barbara. I'd think Simpsons are far worse than the oldies but goodies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true and no one ever complains about the Simpsons only the violent cartoons, or what they think is violent. Does this mean the most people are too slow to "get" the Simpsons or just don't the kids won't understand it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BTW itchy/scratchy - a parody of old tom/jerry.

agreeing very much with britmaverics last post here, I find the old classics, particularly hanna barbera, and the irrespressible WB Loony Tunes are without fail classics. Humourous, somtimes meaningful, always entertaining.

Agreed that YES, there is a lot of violence in cartoons, but unlike the itchy and scratchy simpsons style, there is no blood or gore, nothing to make a young child really squeemish, and generally it is overblown and exageratted violence. Somebody falling off a building and passing through a meatcleaver on the way down.. NOT FUNNY.

Somebody walking through a silent library, trying not to make a noise, and a safe fals on his head... FUNNY.

Absurdist humour I love.

No they shouldn´t come with warnings, but in this day and age, you can´t buy an egg without having a warning stamped on it.

People read more into them then what they are. Looney Toons were the best as well as Hanna Barbara. I'd think Simpsons are far worse than the oldies but goodies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true and no one ever complains about the Simpsons only the violent cartoons, or what they think is violent. Does this mean the most people are too slow to "get" the Simpsons or just don't the kids won't understand it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BTW itchy/scratchy - a parody of old tom/jerry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oops. I didn't know you were talking about I&S I thought you meant the Simpsons themselves. Sorry.

This used to be considered hilarious for some reason :

that`s cos you used to imply that it was you beating me over the head. A lot of folk want to see me get beat over the head.

...

I think the important point is that as a parent you should not trust your TV to be a babysitter. Limit kids' viewing time, and if possible watch actively with them, so you can answer their questions or make them reflect over what they see instead of just accepting it, keeping it inside and trying to make up their own ideas about how the world works (there will be enough of that anyway).

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is also important for us to continually express to our children that Television is not reality.

The only way we can successfully do this is to do our best to ensure that their experience of reality is as varied and as exciting as anything portrayed on a screen.

that`s cos you used to imply that it was you beating me over the head. A lot of folk want to see me get beat over the head.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not guilty! I did not........ it's your conscience playing tricks with Klazy mind

That was never meant to be my avatar, but it was perfect timing for the Idle gang thread