5 ms·

This newfound moral outrage is hilarious. President Obama praised and recommended Dr. Seuss books in an official press release as recently as 2015, his last yea

This newfound moral outrage is hilarious. President Obama praised and recommended Dr. Seuss books in an official press release as recently as 2015, his last year as president. Now they are suddenly "outrageous and unacceptable".

nawgz 6y ago
I don’t think I used that quote, implied Dr Seuss doesn’t have all time classics without ethical issues, nor acted morally outraged. I did ask a question. “Hilarious” how you missed that.
- skyde 6y ago
  if you associate Black people with literal monkeys you are the one that is racist. All the book is explicitly saying is that it would be a good idea to hire a person of African origin to work at the zoo. This have some logic to it in a child mind because they could assume they would know best how to take care of those animals. It's obviously a caricature but nowhere does it say African people are animals or monkey. This is all originating from your own racism.
  - nawgz 6y ago
    > If you associate Black people with literal monkeys you are the one that is racist Man, isn't it just fantastic how easily you make my point for me. This is also the viewpoint that Dr Seuss' publishers imagined the public at large would hold, so accordingly they have ceased to publish a book that represents "Africans" with this picture: https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/content/DrSuess_Board_2.png https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/content/DrSuess_Board_2.png So, now you see the issue yes? Article I pulled the image from: https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/post/six-dr.-seuss-books-will-no-longer-be-published-due-to-racist-images https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/post/six-dr.-seuss-books-will-no... Edit: I am unable to respond directly. The Africans are the monkeys holding the rod in that picture, that is the entire point of this whole "ceasing publication" business
    - skyde 6y ago
      Where do you see African in this picture all I see is imaginary animals. also link to full page https://blogs.slj.com/afuse8production/files/2014/09/IfRanZoo1-500x350.png https://blogs.slj.com/afuse8production/files/2014/09/IfRanZo... nothing in the text mention the monkey are actual people! Are you going to say the cat in the hat is offensive for people with Cleft lip ?
      - nawgz 6y ago
        The monkeys in that picture were the picture representation of the "Africans" in that book. Your ridiculous deflection is saddening. You yourself stated the criteria the publisher made their decision under, and now you will act like you have not said it Edit: the very image you linked shows "the African island of Yerka", where they're retrieving the bird from, and you expect me to believe you can't see the implication that the monkeys in skirts holding the shaped bar the bird resides on are the African residents of that island?
        skyde 6y ago
        Did you read the book? I just did and did not find the page where it refer to an African Man. I might be wrong or it already got modified in recent copy of the book.
AshWolfy 6y ago
They didnt discontinue all his books, just a couple of older, obscure books, his classics will continue to be read and enjoyed
- NeverFade 6y ago
  One of the books they banned, "And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street", was Dr. Seuss's breakthrough work, and certainly not "obscure". Another, "If I Ran the Zoo", is widely considered among his best. These are both very much among his classics.
  - AshWolfy 6y ago
    thats just revisionism, i dont remember either of them, and ive never seen anyone reference them until these past few days. after the controversy is over, nobody will miss them
    - NeverFade 6y ago
      No, revisionism is pretending canonical books like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_to_Think_That_I_Saw_It_on_Mulberry_Street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_to_Think_That_I_Saw_It_on_... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Ran_the_Zoo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Ran_the_Zoo are not important just because you don't remember them. Nobody will miss these books because they have been erased. Nobody missed banned books in the USSR either.
      - nawgz 6y ago
        How are you acting as if a publisher ceasing to generate material that it wishes to ethically distance itself from, executed as a perfectly legal maneuver by a private corporation, is in any way analogous to the USSR's centralized government banning books? I'm sure some people will miss these books, but for those people they can go ahead and find a collector's copy on a marketplace, use a library which has them, find some other private holder, or use the internet to enjoy them in whatever capacity. This is because these books are not banned by a centralized government, but instead have been selected to cease publication by a private corporation.

nawgz 6y ago

I don’t think I used that quote, implied Dr Seuss doesn’t have all time classics without ethical issues, nor acted morally outraged. I did ask a question. “Hilarious” how you missed that.

skyde 6y ago
if you associate Black people with literal monkeys you are the one that is racist. All the book is explicitly saying is that it would be a good idea to hire a person of African origin to work at the zoo. This have some logic to it in a child mind because they could assume they would know best how to take care of those animals. It's obviously a caricature but nowhere does it say African people are animals or monkey. This is all originating from your own racism.
- nawgz 6y ago
  > If you associate Black people with literal monkeys you are the one that is racist Man, isn't it just fantastic how easily you make my point for me. This is also the viewpoint that Dr Seuss' publishers imagined the public at large would hold, so accordingly they have ceased to publish a book that represents "Africans" with this picture: https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/content/DrSuess_Board_2.png https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/content/DrSuess_Board_2.png So, now you see the issue yes? Article I pulled the image from: https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/post/six-dr.-seuss-books-will-no-longer-be-published-due-to-racist-images https://www.cbc.ca/kidsnews/post/six-dr.-seuss-books-will-no... Edit: I am unable to respond directly. The Africans are the monkeys holding the rod in that picture, that is the entire point of this whole "ceasing publication" business
  - skyde 6y ago
    Where do you see African in this picture all I see is imaginary animals. also link to full page https://blogs.slj.com/afuse8production/files/2014/09/IfRanZoo1-500x350.png https://blogs.slj.com/afuse8production/files/2014/09/IfRanZo... nothing in the text mention the monkey are actual people! Are you going to say the cat in the hat is offensive for people with Cleft lip ?
    - nawgz 6y ago
      The monkeys in that picture were the picture representation of the "Africans" in that book. Your ridiculous deflection is saddening. You yourself stated the criteria the publisher made their decision under, and now you will act like you have not said it Edit: the very image you linked shows "the African island of Yerka", where they're retrieving the bird from, and you expect me to believe you can't see the implication that the monkeys in skirts holding the shaped bar the bird resides on are the African residents of that island?
      - skyde 6y ago
        Did you read the book? I just did and did not find the page where it refer to an African Man. I might be wrong or it already got modified in recent copy of the book.

AshWolfy 6y ago

They didnt discontinue all his books, just a couple of older, obscure books, his classics will continue to be read and enjoyed

NeverFade 6y ago
One of the books they banned, "And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street", was Dr. Seuss's breakthrough work, and certainly not "obscure". Another, "If I Ran the Zoo", is widely considered among his best. These are both very much among his classics.
- AshWolfy 6y ago
  thats just revisionism, i dont remember either of them, and ive never seen anyone reference them until these past few days. after the controversy is over, nobody will miss them
  - NeverFade 6y ago
    No, revisionism is pretending canonical books like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_to_Think_That_I_Saw_It_on_Mulberry_Street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_to_Think_That_I_Saw_It_on_... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Ran_the_Zoo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Ran_the_Zoo are not important just because you don't remember them. Nobody will miss these books because they have been erased. Nobody missed banned books in the USSR either.
    - nawgz 6y ago
      How are you acting as if a publisher ceasing to generate material that it wishes to ethically distance itself from, executed as a perfectly legal maneuver by a private corporation, is in any way analogous to the USSR's centralized government banning books? I'm sure some people will miss these books, but for those people they can go ahead and find a collector's copy on a marketplace, use a library which has them, find some other private holder, or use the internet to enjoy them in whatever capacity. This is because these books are not banned by a centralized government, but instead have been selected to cease publication by a private corporation.