The Cancellation Of Dr. Seuss Should Disturb You, Because You're Next
By: johnddavidson (The Federalist)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Dr. Seuss has been cancelled. Some of his work has been deemed racist, and we can’t have that. On Tuesday, the entity that oversees the estate of Theodor Seuss Geisel announced it would no longer publish six of Geisel’s books because they “portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong.”
Among the works now deemed unfit for children are Geisel’s first book under the pen name Dr. Seuss, “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” published in 1937, and the much-beloved, “If I Ran the Zoo,” published in 1950. The former depicts a “Chinaman” character and the latter shows two men from “the African island of Yerka” in native garb.
He was also a man of his era. Later in life, he regretted some of his political work during the war that stereotyped Japanese Americans, which, as jarring as it might seem today, nevertheless reflected attitudes that were commonplace at the time.
But context and nuance don’t factor into the inexorable logic of the woke left, which flattens and refashions the past into a weapon for the culture wars of the present. What’s important to understand is that this isn’t simply about banning six Dr. Seuss books. All of Geisel’s work is, in the judgment of left-wing academia, an exercise in “White supremacy, paternalism, conformity, and assimilation.” It might be easy for conservatives to laugh that off as nonsense, but they shouldn’t, because this isn’t really even about Geisel.
The Left Is Carrying Out a Cultural Revolution
To grasp how a man known as much for his messages of tolerance as for his artistic genius could be canceled for racism, you have to understand what’s actually happening here. The left’s war on the past, on long-dead authors like Geisel, isn’t really about the past, it’s about the future. It’s about who gets to rule, and under what terms.
Children and students were encouraged by the communist government to inform on their parents and elders, to shame and condemn them in public. The guilty were forced to recant in “struggle sessions,” during which they were mocked and humiliated, sometimes tortured, sometimes murdered. Before it was over, millions were dead.
We’re obviously not there yet, but the woke revolutionaries who now run our elite institutions and exert outsized influence in the corridors of power are following this same pattern.
First, they come for the monuments, destroying the icons of the past and re-writing history to turn even our national heroes and Founding Fathers into enemies. The animating ethos of the mobs pulling down Confederate statues is the same as The New York Times editors who gave us the 1619 Project. And because there is no limiting principle to iconoclasm, they have moved on from Confederates.
Then they come for the books, destroying any ideas or literature that challenges their ideology—like Ryan Anderson’s 2018 book on the dangers of transgenderism, which Amazon summarily canceled last month. Even seemingly unobjectionable books can be targeted, if not for their content then for the race of their author. Just ask Jeanine Cummins, whose novel “American Dirt” drew the ire of the left last year simply because Cummins, who is white, wrote a book about Mexican drug cartels. The list goes on and on.
So much for statues and books. At some point, the left will come for actual people, because the ideology of revolution demands that dissent—and therefore dissidents—be silenced, by force if necessary.
If you think that’s an exaggeration, recall what happened all across the country last summer when Black Lives Matter “protesters” took to the streets. They didn’t just march and chant, they rioted. They attacked businesses, destroyed entire city blocks, and carried out a campaign of intimidation, harassing, and in some cases attacking random people if they didn’t kneel and repeat the slogans of the revolution. Dozens of people lost their lives in the chaos and violence that ensued.
So forget about Dr. Seuss. Forget about the statues and the books. Those things are just the beginning. It could easily get much worse. The woke revolutionaries of the left can’t be bargained with or appeased. They believe this is a zero-sum game, that one side will win and one side will lose. And they’re right.
John Daniel Davidson
Tags
Who is online
25 visitors
Has anyone read "The Sneetches and Other Stories?"
It is a book that has a moral lesson: that we are all basically the same.
Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches-
Had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches-Had none upon thars.
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small.
You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.
But, because they had stars, all the Star-Belly Sneetches
Would brag, “We’re the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches.
With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they’d snort
“We’ll have nothing to do with the Plain-Belly sort!”
And whenever they met some, when they were out walking,
They’d hike right on past them without even talking.
When the Star-Belly children went out to play ball,
Could a Plain- Belly get in the game…? Not at all.
You only could play if your bellies had stars
And the Plain-Belly children had none upon thars.
When the Star-Belly Sneetches had frankfurter roasts
Or picnics or parties or marshmallow toasts,
They never invited the Plain-Belly Sneetches.
They left them out cold, in the dark of the beaches.
They kept them away. Never let them come near.
And that’s how they treated them year after year.
Then ONE day, seems…while the Plain-Belly Sneetches
Were moping and doping alone on the beaches,
Just sitting there wishing their bellies had stars…
A stranger zipped up in the strangest of cars!
“ My friends,” he announced in a voice clear and keen,
“My name is Sylvester McMonkey McBean.
And I’ve heard of your troubles. I’ve heard you’re unhappy.
But I can fix that. I’m the Fix-it-Up Chappie.
I’ve come here to help you. I have what you need.
And my prices are low. And I work at great speed.
And my work is one hundred per cent guaranteed!
Then, quickly Sylvester McMonkey McBean
Put together a very peculiar machine.
And he said, “You want stars like a Star-Belly Sneetch…?
My friends, you can have them for three dollars each!”
“Just pay me your money and hop right aboard!”
So they clambered inside. Then the big machine roared
And it klonked. And it bonked. And it jerked. And it berked
And it bopped them about. But the thing really worked!
When the Plain-Belly Sneetches popped out, they had stars!
They actually did. They had stars upon thars!
Then they yelled at the ones who had stars at the start,
“We’re exactly like you! You can’t tell us apart.
We’re all just the same, now, you snooty old smarties!
And now we can go to your frankfurter parties.”
“Good grief!” groaned the ones who had stars at the first.
“We’re still the best Sneetches and they are the worst.
But, now, how in the world will we know,” they all frowned,
“If which kind is what, or the other way round?”
Then came McBean with a very sly wink.
And he said, “Things are not quite as bad as you think.
So you don’t know who’s who. That is perfectly true.
But come with me, friends. Do you know what I’ll do?
I’ll make you, again, the best Sneetches on beaches
And all it will cost you is ten dollars eaches.”
“Belly stars are no longer in style,” said McBean.
“What you need is a trip through my Star-off Machine.
This wondrous contraption will take off your stars
So you won’t look like Sneetches who have them on thars.”
And that handy machine Working very precisely
Removed all the stars from their tummies quite nicely.
Then, with snoots in the air, they paraded about
And they opened their beaks and they let out a shout,
“We know who is who! Now there isn’t a doubt.
The best kind of Sneetches are Sneetches without!”
Then, of course, those with stars all got frightfully mad.
To be wearing a star now was frightfully bad.
Then, of course, old Sylvester McMonkey McBean
Invited them into his star-off machine.
Then, of course from THEN on, as you probably guess,
Things really got into a horrible mess.
All the rest of that day, on those wild screaming beaches,
The fix-it-up Chappie kept fixing up Sneetches.
Off again! On Again! In again! Out again!
Through the machines they raced round and about again,
Changing their stars every minute or two.
They kept paying money. They kept running through
Until neither the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
Whether this one was that one…or that one was this one
Or which one was what one …or what one was who.
Then, when every last cent
Of their money was spent,
The Fix-it-Up Chappie packed up
And he went.
And he laughed as he drove
In his car up the beach,
“They never will learn.
No. You can’t teach a Sneetch!”
But McBean was quite wrong. I’m quite happy to say
That the Sneetches got really quite smart on that day,
The day they decided that Sneetches are Sneetches
And no kind of Sneetch is the best on the beaches
That day, all the Sneetches forgot about stars
And whether they had one, or not, upon thars.
http://www.csun.edu/~sm60012/GRCS-Files/Final%20Projects/The%20Sneetches.htm
no thanks.
No?
Here is the great & glorious Obama touting it:
Thats fine. I just find Dr Seuss boring.
So do I, but that's different than falsely claiming the liberal children's writer is a "racist."
What makes him a 'liberal children's writer'?
i believe that in today's world a lot of his early process could be defined as racist. In the years before WWII he frequently wrote and drew about those "Japs" including animalistic characteristics in the drawings. However in his later years he changed his approach and actively worked for inclusion and equality, case in point post 1 and the Sneetches.
Like most people, they change their beliefs over time and tend to mellow and become more accepting. (but unfortunately not all).
This is one of the images that caused the book it was in to be terminated for future printings.
The image depicts African people with ape like features. I don't think it belongs in a children's book.
The only place it may belong is in a white supremacist facebook page.
There is nothing wrong with the Dr Seuss company deciding to end any future issues of this book. If you already have the book, you can stare at the image every day if you like. No one is going to break down your door and take it from you.
Those are supposed to be African people?
The only place it may belong is in a white supremacist facebook page.
White Supremacist? The new buzzword.
There is nothing wrong with the Dr Seuss company deciding to end any future issues of this book.
There is a lot wrong with it and if anyone can't see it is destined to as they say "repeat history."
You dont have a leg to stand on but you are going to hobble along anyway.
An argument defending this type of censorship might be better.
Vic,
This isn't censorship. That is forced upon you. The Dr. Seuss estate decided on their own to yank the 5 books. That is a personal decision.
It's not as if there was a boycott of Suess, if the flaky family wants to stop reissuing old books, so be it.
there are currently 802 copies of "If I ran the zoo" available on EBay, from $4.99 (bid) to $2,000.00.
Capitalism at it's finest.
On Amazon you can still get the rest of the series from between $5.99 to $29.00.
Perrie,
The only times I ever read any of Dr Seuss' books is when I read them to my grand kids. I didn't see anything offensive in them plus I offered a book in Post 1 which used a moral that we are all the same. Putting that aside, censorship is censorship regardless of who does it. There is no idea we should censor. If I can go get the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf, surely I can get a children's book written by an old fashioned liberal. The Dr Seuss estate is simply submitting to cancel culture. I can't prove it, but I'm sure there was a little progressive pressure behind the scenes. You may note that Joe Biden followed the lead.
Give us an example.
Yes, those used book prices will rise. I heard somewhere that all of this has generated public interest in the five books. None of that has much to do with this leftist push to cancel books, people and US history.
And a cursory look at the internet indicates it is almost always the religious right and conservatives
that instigates book banning based on
what they deem to be offensive content about sexuality, religion, history or social issues.
The top 10 opposed books every year starting with 2019,
we will have to wait and see if your beloved 1619 makes the 2020 list.
I guess the key word is instigates. The left gets it done!
It's not censorship when his family made this decision.
Explain specifically exactly what "cancel culture" is.
"I can't prove it, but I'm sure there was a little progressive pressure behind the scenes."
You can't prove it but you're sure?
OKAY?
"I guess the key word is instigates. The left gets it done!"
What do you mean?
Explain in detail.
Oh but it is. You see, progressives like to tell us that as long as the congress doesn't make a law restricting freedom of thought or speech, that it's perfectly ok to pressure corporations to do it for them. These are the same people who staged protests at Berkeley U in the 60's, demanding free speech!
Mario Savio, facing camera foreground, leader of the so-called Free Speech Movement at the University of California, gathered a crowd of some 3,000 students in front of Sproul Hall on the Berkeley campus on Dec. 2, 1964. The Berkeley Free Speech Movement refers to a group of college students who, during the 1960s, challenged many campus regulations limiting their free-speech rights. Savio, 21, told the crowd that sit-in demonstrators planned to occupy the second floor of Sproul Hall until the administration dropped disciplinary action against four free speech leaders. (AP Photo, used with permission from The Associated Press)
No, it isn't.
Which progressives? Who is pressuring corporations to do what for them?
How can anyone restrict 'freedom of thought'?
You can prove nothing you're saying.
What does what happened at Berkeley in 1964 have to do with ANYTHING?
So, these people from are wrong? They have a list of hundreds of liberal companies they are trying to pressure with boycotts.
It's called hypocrisy
Let me know when that takes off.
You made the call it wasn't okay when liberals do it. So, now you are either deflecting or moving the goal posts? It's either okay or it's not.
It seems that only the progressives are successful at it. I appreciate the link, but that call to arms isn't in the same universe with what cancel culture is subjecting this country to. So I'm afraid it's what someone famous would call a false equivalency.
And as I think of her, how come the Governor of Virginia hasn't been cancelled?
"It's called hypocrisy"
So nothing
That wasn't the case a generation ago when gays stayed in the closet and blacks stayed on their side of town... Now it's racists that need to stay in the closet. They just don't want to do it without a wailing and gnashing of teeth. I know it's so unfair to the racists.
Ahh so moving the goal posts then. Got it!
I don't agree. I think it depicts African people with African people-like features.
I've also seen the page from this book that has the east asian people. Again, I think the drawing is fine. They're asian. That's what asian people look like. The problem I see with that page is that in the text, Seuss actually makes mention of the eyes in a way that arguably kind of other-izes them. On the other hand, the idea that the world is filled with different looking people and animals is sort of a theme in the book. I think we could choose to be bothered by it or not. I don't have the sense he was trying to demean asians and I think we should consider the author's intent.
Also, it's probably fair to observe that America was somewhat less racially diverse in 1950. Both Seuss and his audience were mostly of European descent at the time. It's not automatically wrong to observe the differences in the appearance of people from far corners of the world. It becomes a problem when those differences are used to disrespect people.
Is this the most noble and respectful way these Africans could have been depicted? Of course not. But then the rest of the book is filled with ridiculous looking white people and nobody has a problem with that. Why? Because it's a kids' book and the characters are supposed to look silly.
That is an interesting comment. The two groups you used are small segments of society, but I do agree there was an enormous sea change in this country within the span of about 20 -30 years. I used a similar example about the south west a few months ago. I said that historically it was the cowboy who was feared by various people in the southwest. Today it is the migrant who is feared by the local domesticated population. There is no question about it. I guess we can give academia the credit/blame for the 100% reversal of social norms.
What is this culture war that alleged conservatives keep going on and on about?
What are all of these dog whistles the left alleges conservatives keep going on about?
It's about modern progressives and their goals of a perfect society. Example to be found in 1984. That's it right there!
Well damn them for wanting a perfect society.
Okay?
What rock did you just crawl out from under?
You can keep saying that but 1984 has come and gone a long time ago...
No rock. Just curious about the dog whistles you and yours always say conservatives are sending, but they somehow seem to only be heard from the left.
st curious about the dog whistles you and yours always say conservatives are sending, but they somehow seem to only be heard from the left.
I'm waiting for the claim that his books create some sort of Nazi symbol if arranged chronologically.
I have, many times, it's one of my favorites.
Two things about this seed. One, I disagree with the estate deciding to stop publishing certain Dr. Seuss books, it seems ill thought out. Perhaps a notation in the back that detailed Geisel's true character and feeling about race would be a better option.
Second, this is not about banning books, no one is banning these books, a private company that oversees the publication of his works has decided not to continue printing certain books, that is not a ban. This Federalist author is a total dip shit trying to connect that to China's communist crackdown under Mao.
And when he claims "All of Geisel’s work is, in the judgment of left-wing academia, an exercise in “White supremacy, paternalism, conformity, and assimilation.” Who the fuck is he quoting? He gives no attribution, just puts words in the mouths of those he disagrees with which frankly is no better than the supposed "cancel" culture. And then he goes on to claim this decision by a private estate is equivalent to tearing down confederate monuments, what a load of horse shit. Then this total moron claims private companies no longer carrying certain books is "digital book burning" even though none of those books have been banned and are still readily available. Trying to force private companies to carry something they find offensive is beyond the pale. I've no doubt any Christian owned publishers would be screaming to high heaven if they were forced to publish "Fifty Shades" or other books they consider pornographic or harmful. Each publisher and book seller gets to determine their own inventories and can choose what they publish or sell, there is nothing wrong with that. Now, if a publisher or seller was refusing to sell the books they offer to others to Christians or gays or any other protected group simply because they were Christian or gay, then they would be breaking the law. If they were trying to force others to ban the sales of books and trying to get the books banned on a federal or State level, that would be breaking the law. But of course none of that is happening here, yet this dip shit is trying to claim it's just a matter of time from an estate publisher choosing not to print some of their books to millions dead in communist China. Just shows what kind of ridiculous pieces of shit some brainless conservatives are, especially those who write for The Federalist.
This is yet just another 'I'm a victim' 'I'm repressed' 'the left is taking away all our rights' opinion pieces.
I totally agree with your first point and I can understand your reasoning on the second point. The Catholic Church has banned books and films ( I even once had a girlfriend I thought they might ban), but those bans only had an influence over Catholics. They never held publishing or distribution power.
The comparison to Communist China is a bit much.
Btw, I just checked and this book is NOT being removed. This is the list of books being removed:
"And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street," “McElligot’s Pool,” “On Beyond Zebra!,” “Scrambled Eggs Super!,” and “The Cat’s Quizzer.”
So once again, much ado about ABSOLUTELY NOTHING?
Of course not. That one was a story that celebrated that we were all equal. Just think, he is the same writer!
This is the list of books being removed:
"And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street," “McElligot’s Pool,” “On Beyond Zebra!,” “Scrambled Eggs Super!,” and “The Cat’s Quizzer.”
The ones with the illustrations that are now found offensive.
In his day he helped develop an interest in reading for young children.
He is also the same writer who did this art work:
Yes, he did and that is why most of his collection is still intact. He was a person who evolved because he had some very bigoted POV's at one time, too. This is just part of that evolution.
Oh, the 5th Column. That's not a good message there.
So when we look at him in total, what is the verdict?
Dr Seuss is great.
This article has more squirrels in it than FOX had on the subject yesterday.
Could you go into more detail? Your comment is rather vague and ambiguous.
The article does that for you ... read it.
I did read it....I wanted your reasons for criticizing the article
Even now some elements of the far left seem intent upon finding and outing the most vocal of the dissenters, publically shaming them, and seeking to reeducate them.
1984 does indeed seem to be upon us.
No one on the left said anything, this was internal decision by the publishing company.
And Greg, I know for an absolute fact that you have never read 1984 so stop trying to pretend like you know what it is about.
I did read it. Did you read it? Isn't this work of fiction becoming today's reality.
Tell it to Liz Cheney, I hear it's 1984 in Wyoming.
I'd like to raise a bar here ... get my 'jab' this Sunday ... YAY!
Good to see you also, this joint could use more humor.
Seuss isn't cancelled (he wrote and illustrated over 60 titles) and the decision on retiring 6 titles was done by the Seuss company. Oh the fake outrage!
I know, god forbid his estate and publishing company decide to make a business decision and protect their image/reputation.
As I have been more frequently saying to conservatives, it’s called the free market motherfuckers.
Dr, Seuss isn’t canceled dumbass, they are just pulling 6 of the books for having racist caricatures or Asian and Black people. You can still go out an buy any of his dozens of other books still in print.
Because the political right is all about grievance, generally white grievance, we unfortunately have years and years of this "outrage" nonsense in front of us. Who are the snowflakes actually?
Dr Seuss estate is ending publication of these six books, voluntarily, because after YEARS of listening to both sides on the issue of whether it is ok to have racial caricatures in children's books, the Dr Seuss company decided not to print a FEW of them anymore.
The political right is falling deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of perpetual cultural outrage. It is dead end fated only to annoy everyone in America for years and years to come.
I have never read the books in question, honestly never really read a lot of Dr. Seuss in the first place, but it seems like they could also just redraw the images in question to you know, not be racist.
And yeah, I see conservatives losing their shit anytime a company or an individual decides to go with the market winds and make sure their products aren’t offensive to the larger consumer base.
This is peak projection...
I suppose they could, but the books were both written and illustrated by Geisel.
Meh, just tossing an idea out there. I honestly couldn’t care less, I just know that like John said this is gonna be a daily thing for conservatives for awhile, acting like every tiny insignificant thing is prelude to the end of the world.
Yep. I imagine next year they will reach fever pitch.
Lying and touting a company decision as some leftist plot to take over the world...
It's a internal company decision and I don't read Dr Seuss anymore so my overall rating is "Don't care"
Thank you freefaller. At least I am not the only one who actually doesn't freak out over nothing. There is no censorship here. No one pressured them.
You mean all these book removals happening now are a coincidence? I've been around for 68 years and I don't recall books being censored of people being cancelled or statues being toppled, police being demonized and the military being purged. It's just all a coincidence?
You are correct Vic, this is no coincidence. It is time.
Now, Society is the pressure pushing back.
trump and his conservatives have pushed the flood gates open by push too hard to close it and the door has just sprung open in response.
With time it will find its new place to rest.
You and those who share your views are not American society. The intolerance of campus life will never be the norm.
Good then I own NO taxes !
LMAO
Excuse me?
So who do you deem 'American society'?
Sorry Vic but if you don't remember then you haven't been paying attention. Here are some examples of books that have been censored (or attempted) and when
- The Great Gatsby 1987
- The Catcher in the Rye (30 separate times between 1960 - 2001)
- The Grapes of Wrath (13 times between 1939 - 1993)
- To Kill a Mockingbird (14 times between 1997 - 2009)
- The Colour Purple (14 times between 1984 - 2008)
This is only a small sampling of the many listed here and does not include the many local actions/burnings that have undoubtedly happened in the past 68 years
NT's minority and America's majority.
Texas prisons ban The Color Purple and Monty Python – but Mein Kampf is fine
That's funny, I have no problem getting any of those well known & widely read books!
Then why should we the majority think like the you minority does ?
If you are in prison, you should lose your right to vote as well.
Vic I have been around for 60 years, and I have seen changes both good and bad over them. Life is not stagnant, and long before people called it "cancel culture" there were other words for it.
As an educator, I saw books come and go, due to changes in time. Most of the time, it was voluntary.
This is a voluntary action.
This is what the Suess people had to say about it:
So, here are some of the images that people found offensive:
My sister-in-law and my two cousins find this very offensive. It is a nasty stereotype of Asians. These 5 books have many such images. It's not like the whole collection is going, but that we are considering how the children these are affecting might feel.
No problem you can get the Dr Seuss books as well.
amazon.com/If-Ran-Zoo-Classic-Seuss-ebook/dp/B00ESF29CA
amazon.com/Think-That-Saw-Mulberry-Street/dp/0394844947
EBay is loving this and trying to cash in on the discontinued books.
Kinda like when an artist dies and their work is worth more eh ?
No surprise here.
Perrie, with all do respect to you as an educator, I must ask what you think of the story in Post 1?
As far as your family members finding it offensive, I have to ask if any of them are Asians? If Asian Americans got together and objected to that picture, I would be all in favor of having the picture removed. There shouldn't be anyone else speaking for them' least of all whites Americans.
You mean a high priced used edition.
sorted by price + delivery: low to high
Like new, huh?
Should I buy it and try to flip like in a hot real estate market?
Your choice. I buy used books myself, not to sell but to read.
Are you going to deflect all day long?
How about you? Where is your argument?
I never do. I only order new books.
No it’s not a coincidence, people have finally decided that “the way things are/were” aren’t good enough.
And what books are being “censored”? I get the feeling that you think that word means something other than what it means. I bet that you are once again confusing censorship with free market capitalism.
Honestly, I have never seen that story before. Of the 5 books removed only the Mulbury one is actually really known by most educators. That book does have racist images.
And yes my family members are Asian of which 2 are educators like myself. They have written the Suess family about these images. But bottom line is that this decision was not made by anyone but the family and therefore, it is only their business.
Some of the books I read when I was younger are no longer being published. Used books in good condition are fine with me.
In fact I've order one use book in particular that is no longer published for some of my family members and friends.
They enjoyed the book, used or not.
What is funny is some of these books I have never even heard of.
Obscure.
No thoughts on what that story means to young children?
And yes my family members are Asian of which 2 are educators like myself.
Then they have the right to complain.
They have written the Suess family about these images.
As I'm sure have many others, thus the decision by the Suess family. It's not hard to fathom how these things happen.
But bottom line is that this decision was not made by anyone but the family and therefore, it is only their business.
I say it's part of a movement.
This past year I ordered a book on Lincoln from Amazon. I evidently clicked on used accidently. When I got it and saw it's condition I tossed it right in the waste basket.
What movement?
Socialists tend to want to pay people more money to do less work, and capitalists tend to want to provide better products at better prices.
The modern progressive movement
Outline in detail for us what specifically that movement is
A movement made up in their hive mind to try to bullshit the masses into believing the left is out to destroy lives...
I've done enough educating today. If you don't know anything about the left in the era of the left, nothing I say could help.
Without seeing the images no I don't have a context to connect it to. Remember a picture is worth a thousand words.
We only know what the family has said. Anything else is supposition.
Again supposition. You might want to read this article:
No. You haven't. You obviously know nothing of the 'left'.
"I've done enough educating today. If you don't know anything about the left in the era of the left, nothing I say could help."
So no answer. Got it!
[deleted]
see if you can flip these drawings by Seuss
Did Dr. Seuss Draw Racist Cartoons? | Snopes.com
Vic, you seem to think that anything at all should be available because it already exists. Times change.
I created an article yesterday, that absolutely no one responded to, and there is nothing I can do about that, but is an example of what needed to change.
In 1910 it was perfectly normal, evidently, for Robert Peary to be criticized for bringing a Negro with him on his expedition to the North Pole, and for the Negro to not have counted as a person who reached the North Pole, simply because Negroes didnt count.
Times change. The Peary story has become an unfortunate anachronism. Same with the cartoons Seuss drew to illustrate advertising and to illustrate his childrens books.
You dont seem to want times to change. Why is that?
Whether you remember it or not, I provided the complete text. It was a story of creatures which were basically the same except some had stars on their bodies. The ones with the stars were thought to be special. The story proved that they were not. They were simply the same as all the others. I thought you might comment on that.
We only know what the family has said. Anything else is supposition.
You told us that members of your family contacted them - that much is not supposition.
I prefer a new book as well. Who doesn't ?
Unfortunately as I said I have a couple of books from long ago that are no longer in print. If I want to give them to others it has to be used. To me that's better than No book.
John, never feel bad about nobody responding. If it makes the front page, people have read it. That is what counts.
As far as your story goes, you may have a point. As far as I ever knew - Robert Peary was alone. So you see that story of yours was a real history lesson.
Yes you do need to watch what you're buying. When I get any used book I make sure its from a reputable source and that it says the book is in good to excellent condition.
Like when buying anything we need to protect ourselves from unscupulas ass-holes.
Personally I've had good luck with used books. I did get one one time that had been written in it some that I wasn't too thrilled with though.
But when that is the only way to get a old specific book that's no longer being published it's still better than nothing.
I have one in mind like that - It's a book I had as a boy - Bruce Catton's Civil War. It's going for all kinds of money!
Still I wouldn't break down and buy it.
I have had plenty of seeds and articles that didnt get any comments, but I wanted to work this one into a discussion.
I suppose, like everything else, it comes down to how badly we want something.
I saw the title yesterday, I was so busy I never got to read it. If I had I may have acknowledged my surprise on that one. It was a good find, John.
and that is of course is your right.
Thankfully the books I'm talking me buying weren't much if any more expensive than the new book was many years ago.
I did find this:
Bruce Catton's Civil War: Boxed 3 Volume Set Paperback – January 1, 2001
$145.99
amazon.com/Bruce-Cattons-Civil-War-Boxed/dp/1898800227
So True Vic.
He had battle maps for every battle that were totally unique. Sid Meyer evidently had the same book as a child. He based his figures in his famous PC game Civilization on Catton's miniature troop formations on the map pages.
I read it, and I responded. You telling me what the images are is not a help. Me telling you that he drew anti-Japanese cartoons would not suffice that he did. Seeing them would. They were really awful. I will wait to post them.
In the meanwhile, I will see if I can find images from that book.
Though I fail to see the humour in your statement I am happy you were able to get ahold of these literary works, I have been similarly blessed as well. However for whatever reason your response avoids addressing the fact that during your 68 years many, many books have been banned (or attempted) and that your lack of awareness only indicates you weren't paying attention (or possibly viewing the past through rose coloured glasses)
What folks comprise this minority and majority?
Agreed. Adding to your point:
I doubt Geisel (Dr. Seuss) intended to be offensive or bigoted. Chances are good that he saw nothing at all wrong with the illustrations (being a product of his times). But since times change, what was offensive in the past might not be now (language, sex, nudity, etc.) but what was perfectly normal in the past (e.g. racial/ethnic bigotry, homophobia, etc.) does not work with modern mores and values.
Evolution keeps happening and there is nothing an individual can do to stop it.
George Orwell:
"But the chief danger to freedom of thought and speech at this moment is not the direct interference of the M.O.I. or any official body. If publishers and editors exert themselves to keep certain topics out of print, it is not because they are frightened of prosecution but because they are frightened of public opinion. In this country, intellectual cowardice is the worst enemy a writer or journalist has to face, and that fact does not seem to me to have had the discussion it deserves..
. The sinister fact about literary censorship in England is that it is largely voluntary. Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban"
Yup voluntary and in total sync with what the left wants and in America it is in sync with what the ruling class wants, but can't do by itself under the Constitution. So they have got around the Constitution.
The outrage was soooo predictable.
Oh darn ... now Ted Cruz won't have anything to read to a yawning audience.
All i can do is shake my head and sigh , as the social justice warriors castigate and cry , because for this to actually work they have to have co-operation and people to comply
co-operation and to comply? i shall smile and wink and say , " no, not I."
Our little geniuses have to react to everything (perceived or real) that might offend others.
you saw what i did there in the style of the good Dr himself.
Yes I did.
May I respond in the style of Mr Orwell?
Freedom is censorship.
I will respond with an something grandpa mac, a boston bred , new england herring choker once told me .
in this life one will find out that they will sometimes have to censor or sort out the shit , from the shinola , You have the freedom to decide which is which, so know whats shit , and whats shinola .
That is a very popular saying in other sections of Boston these days.
LOL , kinda like trying to polish a turd , or pick a turd up by the clean end? yes I have been introducing some of those sayings to wyoming.
In Somerville it was always "when the going gets tough, the tough get going." It was unending. If only they could see the old neighborhood now! These days it's part of Ayanna Pressley's district !!!
"you saw what i did there in the style of the good Dr himself."
Don't quit your day job.
LMAO, i do this for free, you get what you pay for.
Well I want my money back!
Ok the refund for zero dollars paid is still zero dollars coming back to you.
What are we going to be offended with today?
How can we ever discuss anything or learn from it if no one has a chance to see the book for themselves?
The publisher has the right to not publish any more copies of the book. If people really want to see these books copies will still exist. If another publisher wants to buy the rights, they could and publish away.
Personally I wish people could put things in perspective. Evaluate the book based on the time in which it was written. But people nowadays seem to not be able to do this, and a publisher is a business that will naturally take actions to preserve its market share. If they deem these products bad for business, it is their right to make changes (including not publishing new copies).
It will be interesting to see if Blazing Saddles is removed from circulation.
I don't think I suggested they didn't have the right. I can still think it's dumb, or even just unnecessary.
I think works like these are historically valuable. That alone, makes them worthy of publishing.
But I also think we should be able to debate and discuss whether or not a perceived problem is actually a problem. It might not be. These days, it's hard to have that discussion because if it you don't agree with the offended party, they automatically say you support racism or whatever else it is they are concerned about. True discussion is chilled. That's a shame because we see many examples of people being publicly offended by something, only to find out later they didn't understand the thing that offended them, and maybe they needn't have been offended at all.
I did not see you suggesting they do not have the right. My opening statement was intended to serve as a foundation for my point.
My point, however, is that they do have the right to do what is right for their business. So I cannot fault them for that. But I do go on to state that the fault (if any) lies with the consumers who seem to not be able to put things in perspective.
Bottom line, historically valuable, culturally relevant, etc. artifacts that are owned by businesses will be affected by the consumers. So if consumers no longer can handle seeing an ancient stereotype of a Chinese worker then the supplier will accommodate because businesses care about shareholder equity far more than preserving historical awareness of our cultural history.
Try a public library. They should have all 63 books.
I would suspect that these five books will only be available for scholarly study at the library from now on.
For now. Give it a few days.
. . .
Nevermind. You don't have that long.
Local libraries begin removal of controversial Dr. Seuss books