6 Dr. Seuss books will no longer be published here, there, everywhere due to offensive imagery
Aux News Books
Though some of his verses have been known to pack a political punch, prolific writer Theodor Seuss “Ted” Geisel—or Dr. Seuss—has definitely missed the mark more than once, employing racist caricatures packaged for young audiences. Of course, none of those instances would pass muster today (ideally, anyway) and on Tuesday, Dr. Seuss Enterprises attempted to fall in step with today’s audience by ceasing all publications of six titles due to their racist illustrations.
The company released the following statement announcing the decision:
“Today, on Dr. Seuss’s Birthday, Dr. Seuss Enterprises celebrates reading and also our mission of supporting all children and families with messages of hope, inspiration, inclusion, and friendship. We are committed to action. To that end, Dr. Seuss Enterprises, working with a panel of experts, including educators, reviewed our catalog of titles and made the decision last year to cease publication and licensing of the following titles: And To Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street, If I Ran The Zoo, McElligot’s Pool, On Beyond Zebra!, Scrambled Eggs Super!, and The Cat’s Quizzer. These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong. Ceasing sales of these books is only part of our commitment and our broader plan to ensure Dr. Seuss Enterprises’s catalog represents and supports all communities and families.”
The books came under fire because they included highly offensive depictions of certain characters: If I Ran The Zoo, the most popular out of all these titles, featured two African characters drawn to look like apes, donning a loincloth and not wearing a shirt or shoes. And Dr. Seuss’ first book under his pseudonym, To Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street, features a character referred to as a “Chinaman who eats with sticks,” who is wearing a conical hat and has bright yellow skin.
As we previously mentioned, this is far from Dr. Seuss’ only instances with racism. Per Business Insider, Dr. Seuss began his career making ads that depicted Black people as savages and used exaggerated features on Asian characters. Over the years, a number of his political cartoons—specifically, anti-Japanese takes that were illustrated during WWII—have been pulled out of print due to his questionable caricatures.
290 Comments
Two of the three books in that header image are still available. Everyone can calm the fuck down and stop acting like they were about to buy any of the six books. We need a better word for grifty virtual signaling of virtual signaling.
Just accept what the official censors have added to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. It’s for our own good. Not to mix metaphors but you people would have been right at home in East Germany.
God forbid a private company make decisions about its products on its own terms. Go bake a cake or something.
“Just accept what the official censors have added to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum.”Uh . . . ‘official censors’? At what point was this a government action?
Who are you even talking to?
It’s still virtue signaling, even if the virtue being signaled is freedom of expression rather than sensitivity toward others.
Eh, I might have picked up Scrambled Eggs Super at some point because that was a childhood favorite of mine, mainly because I liked scrambled eggs. I don’t remember any racist imagery, but I was also like a 7-year-old white kid at the time, I don’t remember the exact contents, and the book was about traveling the world, so there very well could have been.Still not that upset about it being removed.
I wonder why they wouldn’t just edit out or replace the offensive lines and photos.
Because then it’s not a book by Dr. Seuss.
Some of these would be hard. The Chinaman in Mulberry Street is part of the rhyme scheme, which means that you would have to figure out something to replace him with to make the story still work.
Ebay sellers seem to be happy with this decision.https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1313&_nkw=if+i+ran+the+zoo&_sacat=0
I get how in this case there may be collectors who would scoop up a banned/discontinued book as a curio, but it’s hilarious to think of the people who champion problematic artists/art. Like right now someone’s listening to an Ariel Pink album they hate and doing a readthrough of If I Ran the Zoo, just to own me.
My favorite thing about the Ariel Pink controversy were people trying to own the libs by buying an album with this artwork.
And burning their Nike apparel.
My favorite was the guy who dumped his Gillette razor in the toilet only to have to fish it out by hand a few minutes later.
Keurig equipment they already paid for.
I remember when it was the Keurigs (or some other coffee maker, I forget which now), and people (well, men mostly I think) were filming themselves smashing up their expensive coffee makers. There was a flurry of them, and I always imagined that these guys proudly showed off their videos and were immediately told to go get another one.
Similarly I wondered how many parents or spouses got mad when people burned their Nike clothes. That stuff’s spendy!
Anyone who has ever worked in a record, book or video store can confirm how much of a real thing this is. Pearl-clutchers who could not have cared less for someone or their output will go on a buying rampage just to demonstrate their enraged bigotry to some hapless sales person.
Totally. Once it’s announced that someone is unpersoned and all their work forbidden only a piece of shit doesn’t roll with the crowd.
Sounds like every record, book, and video store should have a special shelf for the latest ‘cultural outrage’ victim. Would make shopping that much quicker for the pearl-clutching brigade.
Believe it or not some people are able to understand certain things were created in a particular context and don’t find the need to censor books and artists become some of their catalogue can be viewed as offensive. When you grow out of your diapers you’ll understand.
Do you have a camera in my room or something?
Damn. Was hoping The Cat in The Hat got cancelled. Pretty sure that hat says MAGA on it.
Well, if you open this news piece with the headline “6 Dr. Seuss books will no longer be published here, there, everywhere due to offensive imagery” and the accompanying photo featuring The Cat In The Hat, you might very well assume that book will no longer be published! What the hell, Newswire.
Yeah, if your read the headline and looked at the photo you’d be forced to assume that the headline was a typo and they’ve only canceled four books: The Cat in the Hat, What Pet Should I Get, What Pet Should I Get and Green Eggs and Ham.
What are the other two books????
Jokes aside, that really was poor form on their part, wasn’t it? AVC Newswire used the same tactics clickbait sites, Fox News and a bunch of other right wing sites did by showing pictures of the popular books, and not the ones actually affected. They didn’t go on to spew a bunch of bullshit like FNC but its still poor practice. Get the right picture.
I’m assuming the photo loads in shareable platforms, Facebook and Twitter etc., to encourage those hate-clicks, and even if it only shows up here it’s just crap journalism. Fuck, bring back the Big Red No and slap it on a picture of Seuss! That’s more journalistically sound, not to mention funnier, than this bullshit.
Could we just cancel the Mike Myers movie? Please?
Yes, indeed. And let’s get rid of Jim Carey’s Grinch trainwreck too.
Excellent suggestion. Both movies, but especially the Grinch, make my eyes and brain hurt.
Yes, indeed. And let’s get rid of Jim Carey’s Grinch trainwreck too.
I had a too much Christmas cheer moment a few years ago when the topic of How the Grinch Stole Christmas specials came up. I like Jim Carrey as the Grinch, but the movie was just terrible as a whole. This is unavoidable when you try to drag a 100 minute movie from a picture book that takes 8 minutes to read. A family member was arguing that we needed to know the backstory of how the Whos mistreated a young Grinch and made him into a villain.I responded with something along the lines of “No! He’s a green asshole who lives on a mountain and hates Christmas! That’s all we need to know”.Some of my wife’s little cousins overheard my mildly profane defense of a simpler and better telling of the classic story. I still argue that I did them a favor… and that I should have stopped after that 4th beer.
Party on, Weird!
Related: Dr Seuss actually wrote some books to teach about equality and racism. One always stuck with me since childhood: the Lorax and Sneetches
Calm down, only the red stripes say MAGA.The white stripes are a klan hood.
It’s likely next. There was a book that argued that The Cat in the Hat is a racist minstrel.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/12/11/just-how-racist-is-childrens-literature-the-author-of-was-the-cat-in-the-hat-black-explains/
This is great news for right-wing media segment producers looking to pad out a lean schedule.
The last few years I had started watching the Evening News every night to keep abreast of The Daily Donald Trump Constitutional Crisis (TM). Now we are back to seeing fluff pieces and “news” that is a commercial for the network’s primetime lineup 10 minutes in. It’s refreshing that the Evening News is irrelevant once again.
Dog trapped on ice, turns out to be river otter not trapped on ice. Adorable film at 11.
Kelly Clarkson pulls dog out of ice only to realize it isn’t a dog. Grab a tissue before you click here.
Tucker Carlsan was a man,Of spamYes indeed,A can of flamHe stared down the camera,And said with great stamna,“It’s all the Chinese fault.”
So accurate it’s Faux News’ current story.
The Seuss estate probably could have spared us this news cycle by just quietly pulling the books without releasing a press release to make sure everyone knew how virtuous they were being and giving Fox News an opportunity to drone on about cancel culture.
They certainly could have. However the majority of the 50 Best Selling books on Amazon are currently Dr Seuss books. I think they knew what they were doing.
YUP
https://www.vox.com/2021/3/2/22309176/fox-news-dr-seuss-cancel-culture-fox-news-biden
Lil’ Marco is on his knees thanking White Jesus as we speak.
EXTRA! EXTRA! CANCEL CULTURE AT IT AGAIN!Get outraged. Get real mad. They’re coming for our racism now and they won’t even let us explain it away. Nobody is safe. Better get on ebay today so your children can still get familiar with ugly stereotypes of the past at an early age. Also better show them a couple episodes of “Family Guy” while you still can. You are great parents, never change!
Dr. Suess was fine yesterday. Today he’s been declared forbidden. Better just nod and agree or be branded a bigot. Super healthy culture we’ve developed.
Yes and all of his most famous works will now disappear. All we are left with is second-tier nonsense. The real classics, on the other hand, are forever gone. All of them. This definitely isn’t the first time I’ve ever heard of the works listed in the above article.
Are you suggesting we didn’t all grow up memorizing McGarnagle’s Pool and Something Something Something Mulberry Street?
I’m definitely not suggesting that and I’m also definitely not suggesting the opposite. Neither am I suggesting that there is any neutral ground here.
People are also calling for The Cat in the Hat to be banned, but the company has said no for the time being. Apparently someone has decided that The Cat is a minstrel stereotype and the subtext is about how he is not welcome in a white home. Not sure where someone comes up with this, but they did.
Well consider the Cat in the Hat guilty because accused. And when they add it to the list the same people on this thread will be calling anyone who still wants to buy it a bigot.
Could you please just fuck off and go cry in the corner?
Keep whacking at that straw man! You’re doing great.
When I was a kid, I’d whack the straw like a couple times a day.
You aren’t allowed to criticize the collateral damage of the WokeLeft’s penchant for hysterical censorship and moral purity. They will ad hominem and strawman you to death and brand you a pariah.
Super healthy movement, one that reacts as such when it has their methodology questioned. Funny, I remember getting into leftist activism that was formed on the principle of BATTLING such knee-jerk censorship (from the right). Yet here we are.
Remember the willful scandalized naivety and you’ll do fine: people are either fully good or fully evil, all morality is black and white, and intent/context/nuance/grey areas don’t exist. Depiction is always to be taken as endorsement. You’re either in or out. And don’t dare raise objection or you’ll have outed yourself as a wicked bigot and fraud. People are just that simple. The real world isn’t insanely more complex than that.
Fear Of A Cat In A Black Hat
Makes about as much sense as Kevin Smith’s “racist Star Wars” bit from Chasing Amy.
Recently I re-watched Chasing Amy after many years, and while plenty of it does not hold up, the opening at the convention still cracked me up. “What’s a Nubian?”
For the 90’s it was still downright revolutionary, especially the anti-slutshaming message.
Oh yeah, watching it as a sexually inexperienced straight male teenager in the late 90s it was definitely a net-positive in expanding my world view. Its just watching it as a more worldly adult in the modern day you really see how limited it was to Smith’s perspective as an only slightly more sexually experienced straight male twentysomething in the late 90s, even if it was admirably trying to push beyond that.
Shut the fuck up!
Let’s face it, as long as we get to keep Green Eggs and Ham and the Grinch (tv special or book, take you pick), most of us couldn’t give a shit!
I will eat green eggs and ham!
I will eat them in all places, I will eat them with a racist!
I will eat them from a can, I will eat them with the Klan!
This definitely isn’t the first time I’ve ever heard of the works listed in the above article.To be fair, several of these are in fact well-known. I grew up with Mulberry Street and If I Ran the Zoo. I wish that they would just put a forward on these explaining that they are from a different time and explaining why the caricatures are wrong, but I understand why they feel the need to remove them from publishing.
Yeah, I’m kind of there too. But also the book being out of print doesn’t mean there won’t be a zillion copies circulating over that little old thing we call the internet.
Won’t this drive the price of ‘em way up?
Very true. On the internet nothing is ever gone, for better or worse.
I’ve looked up every old toy I’ve thrown out over the years, and pretty much all of them are there. I wish I sold them, but they’re gone for a reason. Mostly.
It’s a bit too late but you guys really should just dismiss his ass whenever you see it pop up out of the toilet bowl it dwells in.
Yes and all of his most famous works will now disappear. All we are left with is second-tier nonsense. The real classics, on the other hand, are forever gone. All of them. This definitely isn’t the first time I’ve ever heard of the works listed in the above article.
I’ve never heard of any of these particular Dr. Seuss books either. I don’t remember them from childhood, and they aren’t among the old favorites I’ve read to my own kid. It’s almost like I had adults in my life who looked through the books first and skipped over the racist ones…
Do you think that the illustrations in question _aren’t_ bigoted? Did you actually click through to the articles to see any of them?
– It’s all evil metaphor, I tells ya.
It hasn’t been declared forbidden, dipshit. The publisher stopped printing it. You’re still free to purchase and own a book you never gave a shit about until today.
that’s not what is happening. stop doing that.
Why do you think those books were fine yesterday?
“Dr. Suess was fine yesterday. Today he’s been declared forbidden. Better just nod and agree or be branded a bigot. Super healthy culture we’ve developed.”Let me swap out a reference for you, so we can take a look at the sort sentiment underlying your faux outrage.“Slavery was fine yesterday. Today slavery’s been declared forbidden. Better just nod and agree or be branded a bigot. Super healthy culture we’ve developed.”
false equivalency.
“false equivalency.”He was excusing racist stereotypes. I merely carried his principle to its logical conclusion to illustrate its ridiculousness.
You were comparing a discussion about perceived prejudice in literature to a massive institution of oppression and violence. ‘Logical conclusion’ doesn’t apply here. Intended to communicate ridiculousness or not, it’s a false equivalency meant to insult and damn by association.
If intent doesn’t come into play with matters such as caricaturing, then it doesn’t come into play when you make an overblown and insulting comparison. Can’t have it both ways.
Again with the outrage troll.“You were comparing a discussion about perceived prejudice in literature to a massive institution of oppression and violence.”I was comparing racism with aggravated racism. Again, are you going to contribute to this conversation, or just yell from the sidelines?
Again, are you going to face that you trotted out an egregious and offensive false equivalency, or try to dismiss my points with ad hominem rage and pretending I didn’t raise a valid concern? I think I know the answer, sadly.I know the impulse with your ilk is to simplify extremely complex and nuanced issues into stark black and white binaries, but that isn’t how the real world actually works. Sorry to rain on your willful naivety parade.
*sigh* Again with the self-righteous tut-tutting.The OP was positively operatic in its hyperbole and simplification. I simply used that in response. I don’t regard it as a false equivalency. Your sadness is not going to affect my assessment. I stopped regarding your concern as valid when you made it clear that you weren’t going to discuss anything except how you disapproved of my comments. My ilk? Oooh, now who’s being dismissing someone with ad hominem rage . . . spoiler: that would be you. In case you’ve forgotten, this was the original post:“Dr. Suess was fine yesterday. Today he’s been declared forbidden. Better just nod and agree or be branded a bigot. Super healthy culture we’ve developed.”Is THAT the extremely complex and nuanced argument that you’re accusing me of treating reductively?Have fun with your own little naivete parade.
DANCING is forbidden!
Yeah, whose business is it if you want to buy the audiobook of, for example, Mein Kampf? Fucking cancel culture.Oh, except you’d have to find a company willing to produce and distribute it. Which the company who owns the Seuss books has decided to stop doing. But hey, maybe if you braindeads force them to manufacture the books then you’ll feel much better!
What are we gonna burn over ‘The Cleveland Show’? No, really.
You leave his happy mustache face alone!
Probably “Family Guy” is sexist. It should be called “Family Person”.
Meanwhile, we learn the Pentagon was ordered not to help stop an attempted violent coup
It’s amazing that you guys don’t get a basic fact: Companies don’t really have to do these things if they don’t want to. They make these decisions for money.
And Dr. Seuss’ first book under his pseudonym, To Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street, features a character referred to as a “Chinaman who eats with sticks,” who is wearing a conical hat and has bright yellow skin.
The published version my kids have, the character’s skin was de-pigmented to white like all the others.
Which really says something as Seuss was an absolute tyrant about his drawings, and was known to blow his stack if the Random House printers were ever unable to properly duplicate even one color he used.
“Great news, Mr. Geisel, the new print run looks great! Two million copies, all pre-ordered and ready to go! We just had to swap out a perwinkle for a cerulean in one of the puddles, you can’t even tell—”“PRINT A NEW RUN AND DESTROY THE OLD ONE! PULP AND BURN EVERY LAST COPY!”“…of The Lorax?”“YOU HEARD ME!”
Dr. Geisel.
Me, Doctor?
This is my favorite comment in quite some time
“Which really says something as Seuss was an absolute tyrant about his drawings”
Does it? He also changed his way, drawing many anti-racist cartoons later on. Do you think when he changed his ways maybe, just fucking MAYBE, he ALLOWED that the skin colour be changed? Jesus fucking christ, some people are too stupid to live.
to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.
Mine too. I am curious if the Chinese man was the only yellow person in the previous version. None of the people have any “color” in the version we have.I don’t see a problem with the character (if we can call him that; there’s literally one image of him). He’s in a big parade of people that the child character keeps adding to in his imagination. There are giraffes, a plane, a brass band, a man in a small house, a man with a really long beard, and many more. He’s not the butt of any jokes or given incomprehensible dialogue or anything like that. He’s just a man in traditional Chinese dress eating with chopsticks. This seems like a pretty low bar for offensiveness.
Someone pointed out in another comment that Seuss changed it in the 70s. So that would’ve been about 40 years after he originally wrote it. I wonder what he would have done in another 40 years.
https://www.masslive.com/entertainment/2017/10/dr_seuss_mural_reflects_theodo_1.html
I admit we’ve been thinking about this as well. Suess and PD Eastman did a brilliant picture dictionary for beginning readers. There are only 2 entries for any kind of ethnicity, Eskimo and Indian, and the pictures are stereotyped but basically just very simplified illustrations of people just standing. The kind of bare-bones a kid would draw if you asked. Furry parka and boots, war bonnet and buckskin trousers.Is that offensive? I know these are representations of people but in real-life it’s a lot more complicated and diverse. I guess I’ve been wondering how to start the conversation?
I dunno. I’d maybe say those are more historical depictions? Native Americans did once commonly dress like that, but don’t anymore. I know with depictions of Native Americans we’ve mentioned that. We’ve also talked about the US history and some of what happened to Native Americans (that’s obviously age-dependent).My thought is that various depictions make a difference and they can understand that these individuals aren’t just what you see in books and movies. The “Indians” in Peter Pan and the Chinese man Mulberry Street won’t be all the kids know about these groups of people, right? I think kids are also pretty good at separating real from make-believe even without us pointing it out.
I’d maybe say those are more historical depictions? Native Americans
did once commonly dress like that, but don’t anymore.That’s a good idea, thanks.
I actually own 3 of those books (Mulberry Street and McElligot’s Pool I bought recently, If I ran the Zoo is one from my childhood collection). My wife was wondering why they didn’t just edit those books. Looking them over, Zoo just has one or two fairly racist depictions but nothing in the text which would be easier to edit. Pool just refers to Eskimo Fish which is also easily edited (I call them arctic fish when I read to my son). Mulberry Street unfortunately has both and the “Chinese Man with Chopsticks” is part of the rhyming scheme which also makes it difficult.Reading these books to my son, Mulberry Street was a real surprise on first read. I did not remember the issues this book had. I also thought it was about using your imagination which the moral actually discorages. I regret buying that one. Zoo also was a sad surprise when I was reading it and just quickly skipped over the fairly racist Chinese illustration. On the other hand, McElligot’s Pool is a solid book and I’m saddened that it won’t be published anymore. It has a nice message of using your imagination and keep dreaming even if someone call you a fool (which the farmer does at the beginning). The idea of fishing for these wondrous creatures is a little wrong (I really hope he’s a catch and release fisherman) and god knows what he’d do if he really caught a whale but the implications are easily ignored, especially at my son’s age.
Given how much control Seuss exercised over his work (as his estate continues to do), it’s quite possible that the publishers are not allowed to edit them. When they enter the public domain maybe versions with the offensive illustrations removed will enter circulation – assuming anyone is interested. That’s the bigger issue for me – there are tens of thousands of children’s books about imagination and self-respect that don’t have racist illustrations to remove.
That is a possibility. As for the thousands of children’s books, that very true. I was hoping to share some I remember enjoying as a young kid and saddened by the racism that I did not remember being present. I wish there was a content warning (at least in the book description) for some of these books, like Disney has done for D+. That said, there are a number of great Seuss books that are without problematic content which thankfully is most of the books I own (all being from my childhood collection). Also, some of the other old books from either my wife or my collection are pretty rough to read. Sand Cake is about a dad tricking his son my making a cake out of sand that he’s going to make his son eat. The son comes up with a smart solution but it really did seem like the dad was going to make his son eat a bucket’s worth of sand otherwise. Thankfully based on internet lists and recommendation I have found a number of good books (some old and some new) to read him instead. Also if anyone is reading this post and is interested in a good book about Firefighters, I highly recommend “Big Frank’s Fire Truck”.
“Sand Cake is about a dad tricking his son my making a cake out of sand that he’s going to make his son eat.”I honestly don’t even know where to begin with this comment. Hoo boy
However, there is precedent for taking Dr. Seuss’s work and remixing it. Dr. Seuss’s Book of Color is entirely made up of illustrations from several Dr. Seuss books (Green Eggs and Ham, Fox in Socks, Cat in the Hat, among others) but with new text and alternate colors. I do think with the 6 books being discontinued, there’s an opportunity to repackage them as an educational resource if you want to have a serious conversation about race, diversity, and inclusivity.
Why edit it though? Why change the original text and artwork at all? Imo altering it would be dishonest. Better for them to become historical novelties like any other old-timey racist media. Does the writing, story, art, really hold that much value (besides nostalgia) that we should continue publishing copies while washing away the racism of the original work as if it were never there? Is “use your imagination and keep dreaming” really that unique a message and does the story really deliver it in a way that’s just that good? I haven’t read it, but I can’t imagine. There are so many better children’s books than Dr. Seuss, and plenty of his other material will continue being published, none of the major classics are on that list and personally I hadn’t even heard of the Zoo one before. We can definitely afford to lose the ones that are outright trash and expending any energy to sanitize them of their racist imagery and ideas would be as wrong a choice as to continue publishing them as is
Hey, maybe you can purchase the rights and make them your way.
There’s also that letter where he casually called Josephine Baker the n-word. Yes, that’s real.
Weirder was that the letter included a naked picture of him. You could see it all. His framdrazzle! His lamfazzle! His humdrizzile with spots! His rumfoozle! His windoogle! Everything, lots!
That is truly disturbing, especially the spots thing, but have a star anyway.
OK, OK, you’ve won the internet today.
That description is somehow worse than seeing the actual picture would have been. Well done.
I’m not sure who’s making up what right now, and I’m not about to Google it.
That’s…an awful lot of parts.
Have a star upon thar.
Dr. Seuss compared Josephine Baker t0 Ted Nugent?!? THAT MONSTER!
I’d say that about 80% of conservatives were today years old when they learned of Seuss books other than Grinch/Green Eggs/Cat in the Hat.
It’s simply not necessary to preserve as a readily accessible part of the canon every single part of a significant artist’s canon. We’re all actually better off if nobody’s local “Shakespeare in the Park” wastes everybody’s time with “Timon of Athens” or “Two Gentlemen of Verona”.
Odd that you chose those two. I would have thought that “Othello” and “The Merchant of Venice” would have been the ones thought worth dismissing.
How about performing “Titus Andronicus” at dinner theater?
Can I still buy “Horton Stops the Steal”? How about “And to Think I Saw It on a Qanon Site”?
Sadly, unavailable titles also include “Wilber Whacks A Wop” and “The Tough Coughs As He Ploughs A Ho”.
Herbert The Pervert Likes Sherbet
Oddly enough, I have a orange and white cat named Sherbert. He is offended by that title, and would like to learn more.
Hop On Mom
The way the right has gobbled this story about private enterprise up is predictably absurd, but I will say I don’t love the lack of nuance in some of these articles. Seuss/Geisel was a pretty radical progressive for his time. One of the reasons the estate is doing this is because Seuss himself apologized for his offensive caricatures and the estate/family believes a move like this would’ve been something he supported.Instead most of the articles, including this one, have a “Your fave is problematic” vibe rather than acknowledging that Seuss grew, acknowledged that he had drawn some offensive things, and that the estate is acting in his spirit. It of course also neglects to mention that many of his books were explicitly anti-fascist and anti-racist – this doesn’t absolve him of his offensive depictions by any means, but it’s important context!It’s frustrating for two reasons: the general lack of nuance or research; the fact that articles in that vein just pour gas on the fire for the ridiculous right-wing takes.
The Sneetches and Yertle the Turtle come to mind for Seuss books that were explicitly anti-racist and anti-fascist respectively. And I think that Seuss himself even said that Yertle was supposed to be an allegory for Nazi Germany.
Yeah those were the two that popped to mind, plus the Butter Battle Book which is absolutely incredible in how it deals with the Cold War and differences of culture.
I read If I Ran the Zoo to my kid about 5 – 6 years ago once.Once.I’m happy that If I Ran the Circus is ok. I love that one. The only gripe I have is with Morris McGurk exploiting his employees. “My workers love work, they say work us, please work us!”
It might be a good thing it would prepare him for working for Bezos once he becomes the country’s only employer
For the record I have two copiers of Mulberry Street. It’s my favorite Seuss book, and I won’t be getting rid of them anytime soon.That said, this is just the beginning of the war on Seuss. I see The Cat In The Hat is on that hitlist (I always thought the Cat was a caricature of a creepy pervert, and the PBS series hasn’t changed my opinion-what parent lets their children go away with a stranger without seeing this person first?), but wait until people find out about The Seven Lady Godivas, with all of the women in the nude!And then the pre-1948 Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons. Seuss and P.D.Eastman (Go Dog Go!) wrote several of the shorts during the Leon Schlesinger era, and Seuss himself created Private Snafu, and wrote most of the stories along with Eastman.
When did the parents “let” the children go with the Cat? Doesn’t he show up when “their mother is out”?
I’m referring to the PBS TV series. Whenever the Cat suggests they go somewhere, the kids always run inside the house to ask permission. Rather than going outside to see who the Cat is, the mothers (in the series, Sally and Nick are best friends, not siblings) just go along with the kids’ request and send them on their way.The show is very different from the book. Sally’s brother from the book, Conrad, is not in the show, so Sally is perhaps an only child. Fish arrives with Cat and joins them on their adventures.The show is called “The Cat In The Hat Knows A lot About That!” Check it out.
Pre-2000s parenting
‘latchkey kids’ are treated as if they’ve fallen prey to predators in vans these days, though. i was trusted to stay home alone from like eleven yrs old onward, and i thought it was a great compliment re: my responsibility and maturity. it was a sign i could be trusted.
now, i imagine you could lose custody of your children over such ‘neglect’.
I grew up with Mulberry Street, but I don’t think I ever read Zoo. The chopsticks bit doesn’t seem nearly as bad as the depiction of Africans in that link.
Are you Chinese?
I imagine they’re a member of the book-buying public, which makes their opinion valid, as anyone’s opinions are.
I’m not interested in the “validity” of his opinion. I’m interested in whether his opinion is relevant to the issue at hand, and whether it seems bad to a non-Chinese person isn’t relevant. If it makes Chinese people feel demeaned to see themselves depicted in that way, and if it normalizes the othering of Chinese people in general, that’s what matters
Thing is though, you don’t get to decide whether someone else’s opinion is ‘relevant’ or not. When it comes to the availability of literature, that affects all of us. This book normalizing the othering of a group of people is an opinion/perspective you’re speaking as if it’s inarguable fact we must admit as such. That’s frightening. Knee-jerk censorship is frightening. Literally anyone can say anything is personally offensive to them, and if no one is allowed anything but unquestioning obedience to that…to not see the potential for horrific consequences there is disingenuous on your part.
Of course I get to decide what is relevant to me, just like you get to decide what is relevant to you. When it comes to racism and white supremacy, it affects all of us, but it affects some of us more than others, and if you think that having this “literature” available to all of us is more pressing than allowing Asian and Chinese children to exist without being smacked in the face with racist stereotypes at storytime in kindergarten, then your opinion is the reason that this company decided to take the book out of print. They can’t trust that people like you won’t continue sharing this with children and promoting this stereotype. That’s frightening. Knee-jerk defense of white supremacy at any cost is frightening.Also: “and if no one is allowed anything but unquestioning obedience to that…to not see the potential for horrific consequences there is disingenuous on your part.” Hysterical much? Who asked you for unquestioning obedience? Or obedience at all? And what “horrific consequences” can you foresee from a private company deciding on its own not produce something anymore? Were there horrific consequences with PepsiCo stopped making Crystal Pepsi?
Oh look, a wall of text rage i’m not gonna read. Cool.
lol Okay, none of it was rage, and I know reading is hard for some folks, but I understand it’s way easier to maintain an illogical position when you don’t listen to anyone else.
awwwww, noooo, come back, i wanna play! your illiteracy jokes and use of terms like ‘hysterical’ make you sound super mature and open-minded!
i also really wanna know how one can possibly garble ‘censorship should give everyone pause’ into ‘yOu’Re ExCuSiNg WhItE sUpReMaCy’ in your head. like, how exactly does that process even work?
I didn’t go anywhere. Please calm down.And I didn’t say you were excusing white supremacy. I said you were defending it. Because when a private company decided to stop producing a white supremacist product, you cried foul. You said I was presenting that this was a white supremacist work as an “inarguable fact.” I wasn’t, but let’s say I was. Are you attempting to argue that it is not a white supremacist product? Are you attempting to argue that these images aren’t racist and damaging to the minority groups they purport to represent and to society as a whole? Otherwise, if it’s just about “knee-jerk” censorship, what about this move by the Seuss trust says either “knee-jerk” or “censorship” to you?
Apparently sarcasm is hard to read too, eh?
It definitely can be in this medium, for sure! So if you’re interested in having a real conversation about this I’m totally up for it, but my willingness to hear you has to be met with your willingness to communicate, so whenever you want to answer the questions I asked for clarification of your position, I’ll be all ears.
Goddamn you’re a tool
Siding with the guy defending racist caricatures, eh? Interesting.
I mean you came into this post to do whatever you’re doing here
Ironic, using a “funnee” gif of a person of color to derail a thread about racism
Said the guy who came in here to leave pissy gifs in the middle of people defending racism
Double down and be glib I guess
Ah yes, very erudite. Funny how someone was calling me shallow in another post.
I’m just saying, you’ve had bizarre meltdowns in two different posts over white men being criticized for racism. It’s almost like that bothers you on some level.
Also, this is a very 4chan-esque style of posting. Do you spend a lot of time there?
Hm. Non-denial denial.
literally everyone here fucking despises you, and for good reason. ever ask yourself why? or do you think it’s all ‘them’?
I think I’m not particularly interested in the opinions of the guy who’s really mad in defense of racism
And yet you keep taking it. Why’s that?
If you really want to keep this up, you might try updating your gif folder. It doesn’t seem like it’s been touched since about 2015 or so.
See what I mean? This is just tired. Low energy.
This suggests you’re laughing, but I don’t think you’re having a good time.
Oh, please don’t bring David Mitchell into this…
Oh, you seem plenty interested. And not in my opinion alone, but the 99.9% of other people here who, again, absolutely loathe you.
This is such a typical bullying tactic. I’m very sorry you’re so upset about your Dr. Seuss books.
And you’re on the side of yet another racist! What a shock.
Again, you ought to ask yourself why you feel so ‘bullied’ here. You can duck and dodge all you want, but you can’t deny my point, which is that everyone here despises you.
Nah. It’s the oldest bully tactic in the world, to try to isolate and gaslight when you only speak for yourself. And you know, if I’m hated by racist, sexist assholes, I feel like I’m probably living right.
poke around for five minutes on this site and you’ll easily disprove this fantasy delusion that i’m only speaking for ‘myself’ when it comes to your rep here.
but hey, it’s all ‘them’, right? they’re all racist and sexist and it’s just ‘you’ who’s pure. lol.
It’s hilarious how many of you guys live in this rarified atmosphere where everything in your life has been targeted to straight white men and you literally can’t handle anyone pointing out that huge chunks of the world looks at things from a completely different perspective
Had to jump in on that one, huh? Hit dogs holler and all that.
doesn’t seem like you can handle that everyone here hates you, since you can’t even face it.
not straight, but thanks for playing.
Imagine having the ego to speak for an entire website, or thinking that’s any kind of valid reason to not speak up about racismAnd I never said you were straight but good job reading I guess?
Oh, so you’re on team “racist Dr. Seuss books actually aren’t racist” now?
And another misogynistic slur! You really know how to let your hatred out when you want to, don’t you?
I love that it didn’t even occur to you. Have you thought about why you’re so quick to consider calling someone a woman an insult?
the evidence abounds, the two things have nothing to do with each other, and you literally did. anything else, or are you done embarrassing yourself for the next few minutes?
And your entire argument is “yuh huh!” Your manufactured authority is not at all interesting.
and yet you keep replying.
So do you, boo! Nobody’s making you stay here.
true, but i’m sure many more would rejoice if you stopped posting forever, lol.
I’d love it if everyone on this site who so glibly defended racism and got pissy and verbally abusive when they got called on it stopped posting. We can’t have everything.
i know, it’s all of ‘them’ that are wrong, never you.
damn, i wish i had your superpowers of denial, must be nice.
Uh huh. And all those people who are offended by racism must be wrong because you’re right, huh?
He did, in fact, keep this going for days. Beautiful. Even vivisected his whole shtick for it, in response to blatant shitposting. Bravo.
‘everyone who disagrees with me on even the slightest point is clearly a monstrous racist’
do you even have room to move about freely in whatever sad little basement you dwell in, what with all the plentiful strawmen?
It’s fun when you make up arguments nobody said because facts and logic aren’t in your favor, huh? And I’m the one making up strawmen.
it’s clearly quite fun, since that’s exactly what you’re doing. projection’s a hoot!
I can’t even tell which part of my comment this is referring to. You’re getting lazy, kid. But thanks for confirming that you’re making up arguments no one said.
more projection.
Keep telling yourself that, son
i’m not your son. and i’d bet anything i’m older than you.
Ok boomer
more like older millennial, but sure
Well then, way to disprove all the stereotypes about millenials being open-minded and progressive!
if your ‘approach’ is what’s called ‘open minded’, then i’ll keep my own mind closed, thanks.
Of course you will
Nope. But it’s clearly a human being, whereas the kids cited in the linked post are right that the Africans look like some of Seuss’ non-human creatures.
Okay, but whether it seems “as bad” to you isn’t really relevant, is it? How does it make Chinese people feel to see themselves depicted like that?
I can’t say for sure, but I place a high subjective probability on them not being as bothered as black people would be by the depiction of Africans. And I’d invite you to click the link to see the pictures for yourself.
You should have just left it at “I’m not sure,” because you have no fucking clue. And I’ve seen the pictures, thanks.
And while we’re at it, I don’t think that nanny Mary Poppins in the Travers books (and the film made of the first) is a very responsible guardian. She can hang out with her chimney sweep friend Bert on her own time! And teaching kids that medicine goes down better with sugar is likely to aid both drug and sugar addictions.
Well, you’re a lot of fun. Can I leave my kids with you?
There is a book out there called “Is the Cat in the Hat Black” which argues that the character was built on elements of blackface minstralsy. It also argues against pulling or bowdlerizing problematic books in favor of using them as learning tools about the issues of the past when paired with more authentic representations.
“That said, this is just the beginning of the war on Seuss.”War . . . by whom? This is the Dr. Seuss Enterprises deciding that some of their own properties no longer reflect the original spirit of the original artist. Indeed, Geisel himself was apologetic for some of his earlier work. Basically, you’re saying that an artist should have no control over their own work . . . if it offends you that they do so. Or are you merely championing racist caricatures?
Your last paragraph is one big strawman. They said nothing of the kind on either count.
“Your last paragraph is one big strawman. They said nothing of the kind on either count.”IMD3 appears to be upset/outraged that the Dr. Seuss catalog is being changed and that this is the start of a War On Seuss. My point is that this is Seuss Enterprises exercising editorial control over their own properties. To object to that is to object either 1) to editorial control of their own properties; or 2) to the stated intent of that editorial control, which was to remove racist caricatures.
OR there’s another reason to object to such decisions that you’re inclined not to consider. You say ‘racist caricatures’ as if it’s literally impossible for someone to have an opinion on that that isn’t your own opinion. We don’t know because you’re assuming intentions and then claiming those could be the ONLY intentions. You’re assigning unpleasant motivations to someone based on your own perspective of the situation alone. You’re assuming to know the mind of a stranger. Fact is, they didn’t vouch for the opinions you’re pinning on them in text. Strawmen. ‘Appears to be’ isn’t the same as written statement. Pedantry or not, that’s how strawmen work.
Outrage trolls . . . gee, my favorite. You’re right. There are many possible reasons that I didn’t consider. I tried to stick to the rational interpretation within the general context of the conversation. Please feel free to list the thousands of rational possible interpretations, motivations, and opinions that I failed to consider. That being said, are you just going to shout “strawman” over and over again, or do you actually have something to contribute to the actual discussion?
Again you’re deciding what the ‘rational’ interpretation would be, based only upon your own perspective and personal bias. Feel free to dismiss me as an ‘outrage troll’, but there’s plenty of folks out there concerned about knee-jerk censorship as a reaction to internet mob pressure. How irrational! Voice sensible concerns about the potential for serious consequences re: such responses, be called an ‘outrage troll’. Not sure any movement could be considered valid if this is the response to mild dissent.
You’re unable to face that all you’re bringing out is strawmen and biased interpretations. You’ll get angry at me for that and try to dismiss me with ad hominem rage, but it doesn’t change that it’s true. So again, either you can try to address the points I’m raising, or pretend I’m not making any.
“Again you’re deciding what the ‘rational’ interpretation would be, based only upon your own perspective and personal bias.”. . . and on a few decades 0f experience with interactions in this society. From your statements, you seem to assume that the rest of us were raised in Skinner boxes. I invited you to suggest the alternatives I failed to consider, but you’ve largely declined.Is this simply about you having concerns about knee-jerk censorship as a reaction to internet mob pressure? Then say so . . . but you can’t even do that. You can only commit to saying that “there’s plenty of folks out there” with such concerns. Which is my point about your role as an outrage troll: you add nothing to the discussion except for scolding people about how they conduct the discussion.
Make sure your kids consume a healthy diet, including their recommended daily serving of racism.
I didn’t say the artist should have no control over his/her own work. What I’m saying is that certain groups looking for targets to satisfy their own agendas or have nothing better to do with their time will now look at making Dr. Seuss their next punching bag, despite the fact that Seuss Enterprises chose to discontinue certain books on its own.Heck, my sister wrote a book that describes some of the economic and racial hardships our family went through. Why would I want to censor that?
“ What I’m saying is that certain groups looking for targets to satisfy their own agendas or have nothing better to do with their time will now look at making Dr. Seuss their next punching bag, despite the fact that Seuss Enterprises chose to discontinue certain books on its own.”Agreed. My concern here is the degree to which that sort of agenda is often imputed to government action or to a shadowy cabal of Whoever Is In Control.
Speaking of Looney Tunes, there are plenty of examples are racist stereotypes in those cartoons, and in Tom and Jerry, and other cartoons. They just stopped showing those episodes (or in the case of Tom and Jerry, replaced the “mammy”-accented woman with a… heavy Scottish brogue?). Point is, not one really batted an eye at getting rid of some offensive episodes of something and keeping the rest. You can’t see the Tortoise racing Bugs shoot himself in the head anymore either. But you can still see plenty of Bugs Bunny.
So long as we can still slap around that asshole Marvin K. Mooney, I’m good.
If I Ran the Zoo is one of my favorites. I love Dr. Seuss.
It’s also the apparent origin of the word “nerd”, although it was a name of a weird creature rather than in the sense of a socially awkward person.
What a shame. ‘On beyond Zebra’ was pretty mind expanding for me. Maybe they could put them in an R rated anthology of something.
As a counterpunch, the right-wing media is insisting that The Lorax, with its message of environmental protection at the expense of the small, independent business-Onceler, also be cancelled to avoid partisanship.
Yeah, so years back the offending chapter in a Mary Poppins book was excised and rewritten – rewritten badly, in my opinion, but the caricatures of the people in that particular chapter were awful.But – I think that’s not the solution. Nor is pulling the Seuss books from publication. (Has my copy of Mulberry Street just quadrupled in value?) I think the only thing needed in these cases is a warning label of some kind. Something to say “this was a long time ago, and some people thought it was okay”. I think it’s important to preserve the way things were actually written. The edition of Huckleberry Finn that replaces the N word with “slave”? Sorry, “slave’ is not what the characters are saying. If it was, they would have said it. Still, it’s going to be fun to watch the anti-cancel-culture trumplicans tie themselves up on this, trying to figure out who to cancel for this latest cancelling. They can’t see irony, ever, can they?
So… I have this question: What is NOT a stereotypical image of, say, an Asian person? Do they not eat rice with chopsticks? Should they be depicted eating European dishes with a fork?
There is a big double bind here: if a minority is depicted in stereotypical ways and doing stereotypical things commonly associated with that group, then progressivism dismisses this as racism in even its mildest forms, but if a minority is NOT depicted in stereotypical ways or doing stereotypical things, then the person making the depiction is liable to be accused by the progressives of ‘white-washing’ the minority and not taking into account their unique culture and experience. This has the terrible paradox of people outside of the progressive avoiding any form of minority representation altogether and for this entire representation to thus end up being wholly controlled by the progressives: ‘’Value the perspectives and hear minority voices, unless of course those voices happen to be conservative or for any reason object to what we’re doing.’’
In general, alarm bells should be ringing in your head when an ideological movement seeks to assiduously censor and erase past culture no matter what reason or motivation they bring forth in doing this.
Dude, I’m ready to star anyone pointing out progressives being full of shit on issues of bigotry and respect, but you are very much full of shit yourself. Ethnic stereotypes are certainly a thing, and they can be deployed in ways that range from: (1) a reasonably accurate representation of reality (in a specific time and place!), to (2) a promotion of neutral or even positive generalizations (which, unless done with a tongue planted obviously in cheek, can still have negative repercussions), to (3) the careless deployment of false or misleading clichés, including exagerrated physical characteristics, to distinguish an ethnic group from “normal” people (which amounts to soft dehumanization), to (4) an outright attack on that group (see Geisel’s cartoon depicting Japanese-Americans as the “Honorable 5th Column”).A Chinese person with yellow skin dressed in a manner that almost no contemporary Chinese person would dress qualifies as (3), regardless of the chopsticks, the rice, and the use of an ethnonym that was not then considered a slur. I’d rate it a soft (3); the depiction of sub-Saharan Africans – which you overlook – would be a hard (3).And this isn’t progressives actively doing anything, it’s the private entity that owns the rights to Geisel’s work deciding what they will and will continue to publish based on, if I’m being cynical, the feel of a finger they’ve stuck out in the political winds. Progressives are left to nod approvingly out of reflex.
Yeah, gotta love when conservatives shit themselves over something a private company decides to do to their own product. It of course is still blamed on whatever Democratic politician is convenient.
Dude, I’m ready to star anyone pointing out progressives being full of shit on issues of bigotry and respect Seems awfully weird to start trying to school somebody on prejudice with a statement like this. A prejudiced statement.
Damn it, I should’ve said Han Chinese! There are plenty of people in China who are not Han and plenty of people outside China who are. Rookie mistake on my part.Also, the point of bringing up the 5th column cartoon was to show that one need not hate an ethnic group to stereotype it. Geisel actively hated the Japanese in 1942; he did not hate the Han Chinese in 1937. But neither did he think of them the same way back then as he did in 1978, when he revised And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street to remove that character’s pigtail and yellow skin (and change his description to “A Chinese man”). After the revision he quipped that “now he looks like an Irishman” – by all means, make of that what you will.
In fairness, it can reasonably be claimed that ALL Americans hated the Japanese in 1942 considering we were at war with them over the Pearl Harbor sneak attack. Seuss was no more or less racist than any of his contemporaries and probably less so considering the extremely liberal messages of his books. Just ask the Sneetches what he thought about the very concept of racial discrimination. He even dedicated “Horton Hears a Who” to a Japanese friend after the war.
I don’t know why you need to defend him on this. I didn’t bring up his wartime bigotry against Japanese people as an attack on him. I thought its existence an uncontroversial fact (I’ve certainly known about it for many years) before your defense, and I consider it, frankly, unremarkable for a white American who was an adult in 1941-45. Hell, those cartoons came out in a liberal newspaper. The only reason I brought it up was to contrast it to his attitude towards Han Chinese people and to illustrate the point that ethnic stereotyping can manifest itself in a variety of ways, some more harmful than others.But since you did defend him on this, I will address that defense: bullshit. First, Geisel didn’t just direct his hatred towards Japanese people in Japan, he also directed it at Japanese-Americans, who were facing internment. 2nd, there were Americans who knew better, and he wasn’t on that list.One those cartoons attacked a pacifist minister (I’m not saying the minister knew better than Geisel; to be a pacifist after Pearl Harbor was to be a different sort of wrong). Here’s a link:https://apjjf.org/data/5063_-_4_(act)2.JPGWhen some readers (who did know better) wrote in to protest (“It’s OK to remember Pearl Harbor; why not remember our war aims, too?”), this was his reply:In response to the letters defending John Haynes Holmes…sure, I believe in love, brotherhood and a cooing white pigeon on every man’s roof. I even think it’s nice to have pacifists and strawberry festivals…in between wars.But right now, when the Japs are planting their hatchets in our skulls, it seems like a hell of a time for us to smile and warble “Brothers!” It is a rather flabby battlecry.If we want to win, we’ve got to kill Japs, whether it depressed John Haynes Holmes or not. We can get palsy-walsy afterward with those that are left.You can like someone’s work even if they did something you think is indefensible.
Whoa, cool your jets there Sylvester McMonkey McBean- I was responding specifically to this statement YOU made in your comment: Geisel actively hated the Japanese in 1942Unless you lived through WWII in America I would suspect it’s difficult for any of us to have a good understanding of how Americans felt about Japan, Japanese people or post-war reconstruction. Considering the (liberal) government was demonizing and literally interning Japanese-Americans, it’s ludicrous to expect Seuss to NOT engage in ethnic stereotyping. Frankly, it’s ridiculous to apply modern 21st century standards to anyone from that era which I think is the main problem here. We’ve been discussing the racist works of classic authors like Mark Twain, Faulkner, Shakespeare and others for decades and it doesn’t change the value or worth of their work. If there’s concern about these works being offensive, it’s completely fair to suggest the publisher include the same sort of warning that Disney+ has been using: this work includes depictions that were considered acceptable at the time but are now often considered offensive so watch at your own risk. That’s the historian-approved way to deal with outdated-yet-historically-important things. Don’t erase history, put it in context. Meanwhile, don’t try to tell me that the man who created the most blatantly obvious anti-racist lesson for children I’ve ever seen (The Sneetches) was an unrepentant racist by today’s standards. No one’s saying he was a saint – they’re saying his books are good, worthwhile and enjoyed by generations of children. If you want a warning about outdated attitudes on the books, by all means lobby to have that added. But don’t sit there telling me that McElligot’s Pool is inherently racist because he drew a picture of an ‘Eskimo fish’ instead of the currently acceptable ‘Inuit fish’. That’s what those people were called at the time! Melville did the same thing and are we to burn our copies of Moby Dick? Hardly. The only reason people are getting their panties in a bunch are because Seuss is relatively contemporary. Melville is comfortably in that ‘long ago’ area where it’s assumed that attitudes have changed. Seuss was producing things well into the 1970’s and a lot of people want to forget just how racist the country was (and still is) within living memory.
Did you even bother to fucking read the comment you replied to before utilizing it as an opportunity to soapbox?
Oh I’m sorry – I thought you were trying to have a rational discussion. Now I realize you’re just a troll. I’ll block you now and offer my apologies to the rest of the commenters for feeding you.
Fuck me, what an egocentric little shit I managed to reel in. Someone better take a photo before I release you back in the sewer.
Oh, and I just remembered that he was in the grays when I first replied to him! Sure thing, sugartaint, you go and tell everybody what a mean cultural Marxist I’ve been.
Ah, so he changed the image and text on his own. That’s interesting. Thanks for the information.
“Chinaman” is considered a slur regardless of the rest of it.
nm
In my chinese language class in college, one of the other guys in the class was stumbling for how to refer to chinese people, and he actually just blurted out “chinaman.” he didn’t mean any offense by it and it was actually hilarious how you could watch his face melt at hearing what he just said. I think he just got caught in that mental space in between languages when you’re fumbling for something familiar. Good luck for him that this was 20 years ago, otherwise someone would probably be picketing outside his house.
Want to hear what happened to me in Intro to Swahili?
I would, but, you know, if you don’t wanna get into it… hakuna matata
And you know, some Jews actually are accountants!
There was a Christian Bale movie from 2002 called “Equilibrium” which featured a fascist government basically dolling up any excuse it can to rid the world of art and the result is basically a bunch of robot people incapable of thinking for themselves… and gun-fu. How about 2001’s Ghost World? Do we bury and pretend this our racist history never happened or throw it up for display and actually make a point out of it? Which route wields more “education”? Simply pretending that the past didn’t exist or embracing that we’re a shit full of fuck species and actually having a detailed conversation about the historical context of why things were the way they were. My high school taught us about Seuss’s history and the racist caricature and the context of WW2’s tensions. Isn’t that a better lesson than just burying one’s head in the sand? Also, why are we so… slow at this? If we were going to cancel Seuss, why is it obvious… now? It’s 2021, you’re telling me it took THIS long to figure out that Mulberry Street is racist? Really? So who do we blame on that front, clearly the publishers were okay with milking Seuss until cultural saturation got to the point where the seemingly invisible is clear as day. Fuck those people for capitalizing on this shit
I watched my DVD of Equilibrium way too many times as a teenager, but its still hilarious to me that you pulled that as your first example instead of one of the classic works it is extremely derivative of like say, Fahrenheit 451.Also, I don’t think Ghost World really holds up here as an example. In that the racist chicken logo has been buried in the past, and the idea of using it as found art to shine a light on that uncomfortable past in the context of an art exhibit has some merit. In the case of these Seuss books, they have been sold and circulated among the general public for decades well after someone should have probably thought better of it, and even if they stop selling them now there will still be thousands of copies in circulation for the foreseeable future. And I doubt they are going to be scrubbed from discussions of Seuss in an academic context. This just means that when a random parent goes to buy a book because it has “Dr. Seuss” on it there will be less chance of them getting one with offensive images or words.BTW, I wish I went to your high school. The idea of a nuanced discussion about Dr. Seuss’ work in the context of World War II sounds wonderful considering my high school couldn’t even get into nuanced discussion of even the most historically and culturally significant authors in the “canon,” and World War II was reduced to the same basic facts that were taught year after to year because no one retained anything and we had standardized tests that the dumb-dumbs needed to pass.
Folks who are mad should let the Seuss estate know they’re angry about cancel culture by not buying anything put out by the Seuss estate!
Folks who are mad about people attempting to remedy racism don’t read books anyway.
Sure, but they’re all for buying books that they won’t read to own the libs!
I’ve never even heard of these books so I can’t imagine the general public will miss them that much.
If I Ran the Zoo and To Think What I Saw on Mulberry Street are both decently popular. Not on the level of The Cat in the Hat or Green Eggs and Ham, but they were some of the more famous B-tier Seuss books. And Mulberry Street is noteworthy for being Seuss’ first published book.Not defending the backlash necessarily, but these probably do have a fanbase, and the racism is pretty incidental to some of these, so there are reasons to like these that are perfectly legitimate.That being said, most of the people complaining about this are totally just politically grandstanding.
I love how I often come into these conversations conditioned to say it’s a lot about nothing, and then I look at the pictures and go “say, that’s…pretty terrible”ah progress
Let ‘em go. Suess doesn’t have to be a hero. The Lorax nonetheless remains essential reading for all ages, now more than ever.
The Sneetches is also probably one of the best stories that I’ve seen about intolerance aimed at that demographic. It’s a great introduction for young kids about the pointlessness and stupidity of hatred and bigotry.
Yep. A person can progress and, to an extent and for a while, society with them. Suess is a pretty good model of that. I’m not showing my kids racist pictures until they’re old enough to really, really, talk about them (no Mulberry, no Dumbo), but I’m not removing worthy, valuable material from their bookshelves just because the author had social biases several decades ago.
“Out of date tools for teaching children no longer being published. More as this story develops…sorry, I’m being told that’s the entire story.”
Gotta love how right wingers are responding to this by giving the estate more money because they think they’re about to be burned and that someone banned all Dr. Seuss. There’s no way they heard of these books before this week. I sure hadn’t. Also out of print mass produced books are still pretty easy to find.
someone said it better.
I mean, if you’re gonna cancel children’s books for racist imagery… shouldn’t Curious George have been first in the barrel? The entire origin of Curious George is white paternalism. It’s obviously taken a different form today, but the original books seem HORRIBLY racist. There’s an African prince who literally tries to bleach his skin so he can marry an European princess. The Man in the Yellow Hat goes to Africa and kidnaps a monkey and takes him back to America and teaches him to live in a house and in “civilized” society. It’s not particularly subtle.
That said, the theme song to the PBS show absolutely slaps and it’s the only thing that got my kids attention between the ages of 2 and 3.
Curious George Explores The Cotton Patch
Curious George Is The White Man’s Burden
Who’s favorite book is The Cat Quizzer anyway?
Just stop publishing them, don’t make a fuss, say low sales if anyone asks. not fuss.
Just make one potatohead toy. just claim low toy sales and price reduction of one package. put all mr and mrs parts in the boxJust stop using Cherokee model name at next or better the last remodle. had they not gone back to Cherokee name after the Liberty. Dump the Grand Cherokee name when the new 3 row-er comes out. Just claim new model rebranding.
Less fuss same outcomes. don’t give the wackadoodles on the far right ammo.