The Dr. Seuss issue

[issybird]

Some of the oeuvre, as well as at least two of the books in question, have been available as ebooks, so I figure it’s news.

My own feeling is that five of the six books won’t be missed. Four of them have had negligible sales in any case. But I do think it’s a shame that And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street will no longer be published. It’s a landmark in children’s literature and it’s really good, as well. A lot more going on there than just the language. The others are no loss. The reality is that Dr. Seuss wrote a lot of pretty terrible books as well as the great ones. Scholars, obviously, will be able to access and discuss the book at will.

The rights holder is entitled to publish or not, as it will. Books are pulled all the time for all sorts of reasons and in this case, I suspect it was only the Seuss name that kept them in print. At least to an extent, this smacks of a marketing ploy; they could have been pulled silently and it would have been the tree falling in the forest. Even Mulberry Street sold only about 5,000 copies a year. Certainly, it’s an economic decision as well as a moral one; I can’t see this hurting the bottom line and it will probably help it. Longterm, it protects the brand. And there are a lot of great picture books out there. Kids won’t be deprived.

What do you think? I’ll ask upfront that people avoid fighting words and phrases, you know what they are, and going partisan.

Finally, just for fun, I’m curious about people’s favorite Seuss books. My own is One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish, followed by Horton Hatches the Egg which would win in the older kids division.

[JSWolf]

What is it in And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street that is considered to be the problem?

The Muppet Show has recently been added to Disney+ and 18 episodes have disclaimers for possibly offensive content.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Muppets/com...ent_advisories

[khalleron]

[QUOTE=JSWolf;4099392]What is it in And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street that is considered to be the problem?


I believe it's seeing a Chinese man eating with sticks.

As though a Chinese person (or chopsticks) is something to be marveled at.

[JSWolf]

[QUOTE=khalleron;4099395]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

What is it in And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street that is considered to be the problem?


I believe it's seeing a Chinese man eating with sticks.

As though a Chinese person (or chopsticks) is something to be marveled at.

How is that racist? It's not even offensive.

I would think calling Thing 1 and Thing 2 things in The Cat in the Hat would be more an issue.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by khalleron

I believe it's seeing a Chinese man eating with sticks.

As though a Chinese person (or chopsticks) is something to be marveled at.

I know. I do think it’s the kind of thing a child of color shouldn’t be confronted with, while it could be a teaching moment for a white kid. But that doesn’t fix the first.

The irony, of course, is that for today’s kid, seeing an Asian man or absolutely anyone eating with chopsticks would be no big deal, but it would be amazing most places to see a horse and wagon on your way home from school. And that’s aside from getting home from school on your own. A different world entirely.

[Lynx-lynx]

The annual sales figures mentioned in the OP, are they world sales figures or just one country? The books were translated into many languages, and the figures may reflect differently in English speaking countries as well as non English. In any event it's not clear how many countries sales are included in that figure.

I am appalled by book publishers in one country determining what readers in other countries may consider unpalatable (I refer specifically to the Suess books). The US, in this case, does not dictate my reading list, or the reasons that I read a book.

As to the Muppets, another recent venture into peculiar censorship, I recently watched again some of the allegedly offensive skits and wonder why some person or other has gotten their knickers in a knot- they've succeeded in bringing to life those skits ensuring their continuing perpetuity. (As most banned material is retained in perpetuity for curiosity factor if nothing else)

[Lynx-lynx]

And while they're at it ban all books, skits, movies etc that depict red haired freckled kids and adults in a poor light.

(Now wonder if my comment is for real, and why shouldn't it be, every other category falls into realms of material to be excluded)

(Yes, ridiculous)

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

And while they're at it ban all books, skits, movies etc that depict red haired freckled kids and adults in a poor light.

(Now wonder if my comment is for real, and why shouldn't it be, every other category falls into realms of material to be excluded)

(Yes, ridiculous)

Nothing's been banned. The publisher was not involved, nor was 'cancel culture'. The Seuss estate choose to withdraw the books, as has been stated.

The Mulberry Street book had previously undergone editing (the Chinese man was originally a 'Chinaman'). It may be undergoing re-editing now, for all we know.

Times change. Don't get your own 'knickers in a knot' over it.

[JSWolf]

The problem (as I see it) is some things that are either minor or not rally offensive get made a big deal of when some things that are more of an issue go without anyone saying anything about them. King Solomon's Mine by H. Rider Haggard is a terrible book because of all the racism in it. Yet it was made into a movie. Who's Body by Dorothy L. Sayers I didn't like because of the antisemitism. Sometimes these thing stand out and you cannot help noticing and other times it's so minor you don't notice or it really is nothing and someone is making a deal out of it.

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by khalleron

Nothing's been banned. The publisher was not involved, nor was 'cancel culture'. The Seuss estate choose to withdraw the books, as has been stated.

The Mulberry Street book had previously undergone editing (the Chinese man was originally a 'Chinaman'). It may be undergoing re-editing now, for all we know.

Times change. Don't get your own 'knickers in a knot' over it.

Tch tch I'm saying ban all the books I described

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The problem (as I see it) is some things that are either minor or not rally offensive get made a big deal of when some things that are more of an issue go without anyone saying anything about them. King Solomon's Mine by H. Rider Haggard is a terrible book because of all the racism in it. Yet it was made into a movie. Who's Body by Dorothy L. Sayers I didn't like because of the antisemitism. Sometimes these thing stand out and you cannot help noticing and other times it's so minor you don't notice or it really is nothing and someone is making a deal out of it.

I read the language in these books as being pertinent to the time and place of the author, and the author's ideas of setting. What concerns me is if someone tries to inform me that in their opinion x book or author is racist, anti whatever religion or whatever, explicit language and sex, because they have used sentiments common to the day. I can make.my own mind up about such things and don't want a nanny state intervening.



One book that surely comes to mind for all of us is Lady Chatterley's Lover, censored until it wasn't.

.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Who's Body by Dorothy L. Sayers I didn't like because of the antisemitism.

She portrayed Jews as better to their loved ones than Christians, despite her romantic disaster that proved a contrary example. As for the wise butler character, in that book, "his lordship and me have never held with being narrow-minded. . . a good Jew can be a good man, that’s what I’ve always said." And that's how decent gentiles talked back then.

Originally Posted by issybird

But I do think it’s a shame that And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street will no longer be published. It’s a landmark in children’s literature and it’s really good, as well.

I just cheked, and my local library system has 21 of 22 copies spoken for -- either out, or being transferred to someone who wants it at another branch. I hope, and expect, they will now send worn copies out for rebinding.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The problem (as I see it) is some things that are either minor or not rally offensive get made a big deal of when some things that are more of an issue go without anyone saying anything about them. King Solomon's Mine by H. Rider Haggard is a terrible book because of all the racism in it. Yet it was made into a movie. Who's Body by Dorothy L. Sayers I didn't like because of the antisemitism. Sometimes these thing stand out and you cannot help noticing and other times it's so minor you don't notice or it really is nothing and someone is making a deal out of it.

King Solomon's Mines* and Whose Body are both books aimed at adults, whereas the Seuss books are aimed at children.

Also, there's no shadowy Cabal banning anything. I don't think there was even an uproar on Twitter. The Seuss estate decided, on their own, to withdraw books that weren't big sellers anyway. I'm a little sad. But realistically, I likely never would have read the books again anyway.

*And I disagree with your assessment of King Solomon's Mines. The whole colonial mindset could be called racist, I guess. But for its time, it was fairly progressive.

Out of curiosity, have you read the book?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

I read the language in these books as being pertinent to the time and place of the author, and the author's ideas of setting. What concerns me is if someone tries to inform me that in their opinion x book or author is racist, anti whatever religion or whatever, explicit language and sex, because they have used sentiments common to the day. I can make.my own mind up about such things and don't want a nanny state intervening.



One book that surely comes to mind for all of us is Lady Chatterley's Lover, censored until it wasn't.

.

What we have to do is separate the language of the times from racism/antisemitism/etc. Because what is racism/antisemitism/etc. is not always because of the language of the times.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

King Solomon's Mines* and Whose Body are both books aimed at adults, whereas the Seuss books are aimed at children.

Exactly. You have to be concerned about the subliminal effect on children, who can’t bring analytical skills to a text but take it as written. At least picture books have to be vetted by adults before they get to children, but I’ll repeat, what can be a teaching moment for a white kid might be deeply troubling for a child of color. And if it’s not a teaching moment for a white kid, it can only help create/augment nascent prejudices.