Seuss and politics

This is an interesting article on Dr. Seuss and politics including political cartoons he drew during WWII.

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20190301-the-surprisingly-radical-politics-of-d...

On the flip side, there's been a lot of negative talk about Seuss from librarians recently, referencing this:

USA Today: Dr. Seuss Books Like Horton Hears a Who! Branded Racist and Problematic in New Study
https://people.com/books/dr-seuss-books-racist-problematic/

NPR: Dr. Seuss Books Can Be Racist, But Students Keep Reading Them
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/02/26/695966537/classic-books-are-f...

SLJ: New Study Published on Racism and Dr. Seuss
https://www.slj.com/?detailStory=new-study-published-on-racism-and-dr-seuss

My view? Dr. Seuss is worlds ahead of many of the authors that get trotted out in these discussions. He was a comedic genius. He's beloved for a reason. And for the same reason he's never been successfully copied. The examples generally cited as racist—And To Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street and If I ran the Zoo—are minor (13 and 27 in LT?). A parent can explain them(1) or leave them to the side, where, mostly, they are anyway.

1. This is what we did. My son is exquisitely aware of racist portrayals in literature, in part because we talk about it. Children get stuff, if you explain it to them. I can't imagine how much poorer his life would be without three of the current no-nos—Tintin, Asterix and Seuss. And do the people who insist on books published in the last few years actually read them?

The Sneeches is the funniest take on racism that I have ever seen.

Back when our kids were small I was at my sister's and between the two of us we recited Fox in Sox all the way through (to Mom's dropped jaw).

Back in the early 60's my father's rule was that he would buy us any book we wanted once we had checked that the library didn't have it. Exception: any Seuss book we didn't yet own was snapped up on sight. I was raised on Seuss, my kids were raised on Seuss, we passed most of the books on to younger parents when our youngest was in high school.

He is great because he is so good at recognizing how people really are and picturing it back without being nasty. These days I'm more likely to reread You're only old once! A book for Obsolete Children than the classic Seuss we held on to, but my life would have been much poorer without him.

We can't expect books written in the past to fit all of today's cultural rules. They were commentary on a different culture. If we ban all mention of past mistakes, we are much more likely to repeat those mistakes.

There are good modern children's books, but very few are as much fun as Seuss. Which, of course, is why he is being put down. If you can't make yourself his equal by being as good as he is, just tear him down so you can call yourself better.

This comes out every year around the time of Seuss's birthday.

Six of Dr. Seuss' books will no longer be published.

And now these six books by Dr. Seuss are banned on eBay as "offensive material".

Really?

I thought people who read books decried censorship.

The publisher of Dr Seuss books decided to stop publishing a few of them. Publishers decide to stop publishing books every day. That's the free market.

Ebay is reviewing listings of the now out-of-print books on their site because the books were going for for very, very high prices. They're not banned. Even if they are eventually permanently removed for being offensive content, if a publisher of a book says that the book is offensive I think that's a pretty open-and-shut case. Not censorship.

I understand why some of the racist images are troublesome. What I don't understand is why the publishers just excise the illustration (apparently there is only 1 or 2 per book), rewrite the page if necessary, and save the book.

They didn't ban Mary Poppins because of an entire chapter that was racist. They rewrote the chapter. Problem solved.

>8 MerryMary:

what I don't understand is why the publishers just excise the illustration (apparently there is only 1 or 2 per book), rewrite the page if necessary, and save the book.

That may not be legally possible, depending on contract terms, etc.

Most likely because the books they are discontinuing are not popular. They have dozens of other books that make them tons of money, whereas the P. L. Travers estate pretty much only has the Mary Poppins series (because her other books are no longer published).

>8 MerryMary: I didn't realize that Mary Poppins was racist. I don't think I ever read the book.
Wow! The things one discovers!

>8 MerryMary:

I checked, and the works are still under copyright. It seems highly unlikely that Geisel's estate or literary executors would allow the books to be tampered with in the way you suggest.

>7 norabelle414: It is not the publisher who made the decision. It is Dr. Seuss Enterprises. They control the rights.

https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/books-nix-books-dr-seuss-works-ha...

Re E-bay.... a man walked into a local library and asked to purchase a membership (this is allowed for those who do NOT live in the library's community). He then checked out the Seuss books that the publisher has now stopped publishing. Within a day there was the library's book (complete with the library's stamp!) on E-bay. Reported to police.

>11 krazy4katz: Travers was not racist over all, but one chapter had Mary and the children traveling around the world with a magic compass. The people they met on that adventure were *extremely* stereotypical. Eskimos, black jungle people, Asian coolie-types, etc. It was rewritten with animals. The only one I remember is a polar bear instead of the Eskimos.

I guess it is also important to remember the context with respect to when it was written. So long ago, people didn't recognize anyone except the stereotypes. The world was a smaller place. Now we have so many ways to educate ourselves. It helps make the Seuss decision more understandable. Those books were written for an era when no one knew about anyone outside their cultural/ethnic group. That is not true anymore.

I think the decision by the publishers or his estate to discontinue their publication is the right one. They contain disgusting images, as do many of his political cartoons and advertising work.

Good arguments are made that even though these images are in his work, Seuss is a product of his time, but he later recognized the negativity he was promoting. He evolved and agreed to make some changes to his books in republication, including taking out the yellow color of the character in "And To Think I Saw It On Mulberry Street" and changing some of the language, so I don't know why it has been reprinted in the original version. That's a positive and something I would think the estate would agree to.

The estate owns the copyrights and it is their call. I think a better approach would be to continue to publish the books in their original form; however, I would highlight the offensive language or picture and place an additional page adjacent to it explaining why it is offensive, and how it reflected the prejudices of that era.