We are hearing a lot lately about censoring and shutting down icons of our culture. Dr Seuss, Mr Potatohead, and others are now deemed offensive, racist, what have you, and are being consigned to the cultural waste bin. In the Netherlands, there is a massive drive to remove Black Piet from the public consciousness. Black Piet is a mythical sidekick of the Dutch version of Santa Claus (Sinterklaas). The story of these two characters is long, but many in the Netherlands today consider Black Piet to be offensive, and so they want him removed as a cultural icon.
I must confess that this post has been several days in the making. My memories of Dr Seuss in my childhood are dim, but in doing my due diligence and checking into it, I have reconsidered some of what I originally had written down in the draft of this post. Now I do recall the images of the Africans and the Chinese in Dr Seuss, and I am appalled. True, this was published many decades before, and in those days, images like those could pass muster and be published with no thought of how blacks and Asians might receive them. That is not true today, and thus, we have our controversy.
I am reminded of research I did about twenty years ago when I was writing my book, The Story of Papiamentu-A study in slavery and language. Papiamentu is the creole language spoken by residents of Curaรงao, Aruba, and Bonaire. It is a Spanish-based creole with influences of Dutch, Portuguese- and African influences as well. It is a by-product of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
In my research, I came across the mythical figure of Kompa Nanzi the Spider, a trickster popular in children's stories in the region. There are variations of Kompa Nanzi in other parts of the Caribbean, Africa, and the Americas in general. In many of the variations, the trickster is a spider. In others, it is a different animal. In the United States, there were the tales of Uncle Remus and Brer Rabbit, stories collected and documented by Joel Chandler Harris, a white journalist in Georgia who had worked as a teenager on a plantation during the time of slavery and recalled the tales told by the slaves. In these stories, Brer Rabbit was the trickster, like Kompa Nanzi, a sly character who survived by his wits.
At this point, I will simply cross-post what I wrote in 2007.
https://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2007/05/papiamentu-kompa-nanzi-and-brer-rabbit.html
See the similarities? When we erased Uncle Remus, Brer Rabbit, Brer Bear, and all the rest of the figures from those stories, we erased a part of our cultural history-for both blacks and whites. Successive generations of children have been deprived of those stories. The purpose of bringing these characters to life for Joel Chandler Harris was not to ridicule anybody. Harris served a great purpose in attempting to preserve part of our cultural history. Those stories evolved from the spider stories that originated in Africa and took on a new meaning in the Americas during the time of slavery. That is how the trickster was able to outwit larger, stronger adversaries and survive. The secret message was outwitting the white master. Unfortunately, the tales fell victim to the madness of the 1960s. Today, that madness is back with a vengeance, notwithstanding some valid objections as to the Dr Seuss images, which I have outlined.
Personally, I could care less about Dr Seuss and Mr Potatohead. They were never anything important to me. If some feel they are offensive, the topic should be open for discussion, and future images in Dr Seuss books can be altered to eliminate any stereotypes, and yes, the images of Africans and Chinese, in particular, are stereotyped and clearly designed to draw mocking laughter. They are offensive, and it is unfortunate that in the past, they were published without protest. In my view, those images could be removed while keeping that which was innocent and useful for children.
Given that, I still feel we need to proceed with caution when it comes to making things disappear from our consciousness and our culture. Or can you say, "Cancel culture"?
The Nazis engaged in their own version of Cancel Culture. There was that infamous night in 1933 when university students and Nazis removed books from libraries and burned them in a grand display. Many of the authors of those books were Jewish. You think that can't happen today? In our universities, there is already a drive to stop teaching the works of writers who happened to be white, like Shakespeare, and replace them with "writers of color". Certainly, there are works from non-whites that are worthy of study (may I suggest Shelby Steele, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Thomas Sowell?), but to stop teaching recognized great works because they were produced by white males strikes me as going too far.
Along the same vein, it's one thing to tear down a statue of a Confederate soldier. It's another when we start to tear down statues of Abraham Lincoln, but that's where we are today. And if we don't stop and think about where we are going, who knows what we will be tearing down or destroying ten years from now. If you want to remove stereotyped cartoon images of certain ethnic groups from Dr Seuss books, I am with you. If you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, that's different.
We are treading in dangerous waters. Who is going to decide that something is offensive and needs to be removed or erased? Will it be a president? Will it be some governmental agency headed by some political appointee? Will it be Congress? Will it be a judge? Will it be some pressure group?
Who decides all this?
I wish that people who write about this topic would take the time to at least look up the basics.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Dr. Seuss, it's the publisher that made that decision. They hold the rights to the books and have decided not to publish some of the ones that are racially problematic anymore. That's their right, unless you think that publishers should be forced to publish certain books.
As for the "Potato Head" thing, this one's even less of an issue. They're branding ALL of their products "Potato Head" and you can still buy both a "Mr. Potato Head" and a "Mrs. Potato Head." The product isn't going anywhere.
In that light, comparing this to what the Nazis did is really horrible and disingenuous.
But this seems to be par for the course in "conservative" media:
1. Misunderstand what's happening.
2. Don't bother learning what's actually happening.
3. Get mad at something that isn't happening.
The big irony, of course, is that most of the people complaining about "cancel culture" are the same ones who were up in arms about Colin Kaepernick, the Dixie Chicks, etc.
You are absolutely correct that the producers of Dr Seuss made the decision themselves. They engaged in self-censorship. I think I made it clear that in the case of the Dr Seuss illustrations of Africans and Chinese, I agree with the decision to remove those images.
ReplyDeleteSelf-censorship was not the case with Uncle Remus back in the 60s. And maybe the Nazis were an exaggerated comparison. (As far as I know, nobody was arrested on the night of the book burnings; that was done at other times, both before and after.) But they made certain parts of German culture disappear, didn't they?
As For Kaepernick and the Dixie Chicks, they are free to kneel, criticize their country or whatever. I am free to criticize that, and you are free to criticize me. I am free to stay away from the NFL and not buy Dixie Chick songs. But when someone comes along and makes our comments disappear or removes us from the discussion, that is a problem. That is what Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and others are doing. What would you say if Facebook took me down because I wrote something critical of Kaepernick? Would you be ok with that? Those things are happening.
If Facebook did that, I would think it's a lousy thing to do.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Facebook isn't the government. It's a private company and can set its own rules.
It's like a bar threatening to kick you out if you keep saying something out loud that the bartender doesn't want to hear. They don't have to keep serving you. (Although people need to realize that when it comes to social media, you're not the customer. You're the product. That's probably true of blog sites like this as well.)
From my understanding though, the stuff that Facebook is taking down is stuff that's plain false that has caused actual harm. You know, like the banning of screaming "fire" in a crowded movie theater. I mean, look at Trump. His continued complaining of a supposedly fraudulent election led to some real harm. It's a good thing that they dropped him.
I just wish that we can measure our outrage about things. The whole Potato Head thing is a perfect example. I'm friends with quite a few transgender people. Literally none of them gave a flip about whether it's Mr. or Mrs. Potato Head. Did the company make this change (which is barely a change at all) as a cynical attempt to draw attention and make sales? Could be. Either way, it's crazy that this kind of nonsense makes the news - liberal or conservative. The problem though is that transgender people already have a tough enough of a time, now people are going to use this as one more way to criticize them for "taking things too far" even though they had nothing to do with it.
The Mr Potatohead issue is absurd. I'm glad you pointed out that most transgender people you know (You know quite a few"?) also think it's ridiculous, but they should speak out against their "leaders" who make stinks like this.
ReplyDeleteYou may not be aware, but it has come out that Mark Zuckerberg and other social media giants have consulted with European political leaders, like Angela Merkel, to suppress certain speech. I am not talking about fire in a theater, racial epithets, or that Trump had the election stolen from him, but criticism of Europe's immigration problems or the dangers of extremist Islam.
The problem is that social media has gained so much control over our communication that they are as strong as the government now when it comes to speech. The only thing they can't do is arrest us. Kind of like the invention of gunpowder.
I think that the issues over extremist Islam and immigration are tricky because they tend to attract the racists/bigots/xenophobes. That's not to say that everyone who expresses concern about these things is a racist/bigot/etc, but it can be a Trojan Horse where they sneak in.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what the answer is. Social media has the power that it does because people participate in it. If we all stopped, that would be the end of it. But that doesn't seem likely to happen.
And yes, I know people who are transgender and even a handful of people who identify as nonbinary. I have to admit, the nonbinary seemed pretty crazy to me when I first heard about it, but the more I listened and look into the actual science of it, the more I realized that maybe our world isn't as simple as the male/female dichotomy that we want it to be. (Turns out that various societies throughout the world have had the concept of nonbinary people, so it's really only "new" to us.)
But my point about Mr. Potato Head is that I don't know of a single transgender person (or "leader") who complained about it. From what I can tell, the company just made a slight alteration to their branding and then right-wing media invented a narrative about it happening because transgender activists were demanding it. But who are these transgender activists who were demanding it? (I recall recently there was supposedly a "controversy" about the gender of Santa Claus, but as far as I could tell, it was a made-up right-wing story.)
Maybe if you turn over enough rocks, you'll find some who wanted the change, but you can find people who still think Elvis is alive the same way.
The point is, the next time we hear that people are supposedly outraged over something, we should check and see if there actually are any. Near as I can tell, the only real outrage is people getting mad about a thing that isn't happening.
"I think that the issues over extremist Islam and immigration are tricky because they tend to attract the racists/bigots/xenophobes. That's not to say that everyone who expresses concern about these things is a racist/bigot/etc, but it can be a Trojan Horse where they sneak in."
ReplyDeleteGood point, and it is something I need to be careful about because while I have always been pro-immigration (I'm married to one), I oppose open borders, illegal immigration and especially what's happening in Europe. I consider Islam a dangerous threat, but I don't want to target Muslims as people. And I absolutely am against attacking mosques. Nonetheless, I am considered as being anti-Muslim in general. It's the price to be paid for refusing to be silent.
Nor do I consider myself to be homophobic. I have grown a lot in that regard since I was a kid and teenager in the 50s. I recall when gays had to live in the closet, and I'm glad they get more acceptance now. I do not want gays harassed or discriminated against, and I consider it normal that a small % of the population is gay. That's fine.
What I do object to is teaching little kids about how great the transgender lifestyle is because it is not. To have transgenders come into schools and promote their lifestyle is flat out wrong.
Now that science is capable of changing one's gender, I will accept it once the operation is performed. Just because someone like Bruce Jenner lets his hair grow and puts on women's clothes does not make him a woman no matter how he feels about himself. I say this because it is my understanding he has not had the operation. So should anyone be publicly castigated for feeling this way? Are teachers who feel this way to be fired? Should politicians who feel this way be forced to resign?
I hear what you're saying, and I wonder if you're amenable to learning a bit more about this subject.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the transgender issue, the first thing that I had to learn is that there is biological sex and then there is gender, and while they usually match up, they often don't. Yes, Caitlin Jenner can't make herself biologically a man no matter what. But nobody is saying that she is one.
Gender is a social construct that we impose on people based on their sexuality. I know a lot of people balk at this, but there are societies throughout the world that have had more than one gender and even multiple pronouns to reflect this. (And let's set aside that even when it comes to biology, there are other results than just the XX and XY variations.) If different societies have different notions of what gender is, then I don't know how we can argue that it's NOT a social construct.
For me, the thing that really made me rethink the situation is this one important thing:
Transgender people have one of the highest risk of suicide in our society. Do you know what the one thing is that brings their risk down to pretty much the same as everyone else's? Acceptance from at least one adult in their life.
Forgive me if this sounds very hippy-dippy, but if we want to be a society that's driven by love and caring for our fellow human beings, this needs to be in the forefront of our minds.
I don't really fear anyone "promoting" the "transgender lifestyle". I don't think that anybody is doing that. They are promoting acceptance though, which I'm good with. But even if they were saying, "Hey! All the cool kids have changed their gender!" I don't think anybody is going to feel about their gender identity in a different way.
Think about it. There are people who are transgender even though everybody in their family rejects them, they're at high-risk for being physically attacked, and finding relationships is extra difficult on them. That pretty much tells us that they feel the way they feel no matter what. Nothing can force them to conform their gender identity to their biological sex.
It's just like the people who thought that having gay parents would make kids gay, as though straight parents always produce straight kids.
In other words, you can't make anyone be transgender. You can definitely make them more willing to be open about who they are, which might make it seem like there are more of them out there.
I think that erring on the side of kindness, acceptance, and love is never a bad starting place.
Caitlin Jenner aka Bruce Jenner was born a man and now identifies as a woman. As far as I know, there has been no surgery.
ReplyDeleteAs for how many genders there are, I recognize two-male and female. Yes, there are a tiny group of people born with both sex organs. I forget the exact word for them. As far as those who identify themselves with the other sex, I still feel compassion for them. Whether it is a matter of hormones, genes or psychological issues, they have the same rights as others and should be treated with compassion, but it is not normal. If transgenders have high suicide rates, I would say it is due to a combination of the issues they deal with.
Today, especially in academia, this whole transgender thing is being treated as a fad, and I think that is dangerous. To say that there are 50+ genders based on what people consider themselves to be is lunacy. Bringing transgenders into elementary schools to expose them to children at such a young age is irresponsible. I would favor having children be slowly and gradually informed that there are transgenders etc.