“Planting the seeds for a generation of racists”? Isn’t that more than a bit extreme? In fact, I’d say that’s every bit as ridiculous (and melodramatic) as saying the original cartoons will turn little kids into racists.
frankd6:
Not that I disagree with you, but is that the only possible reason why CN might want to edit out certain images in its cartoons? It seems a lot of you are forgetting that it’s not just white kids watching these things. Do you think black kids get a kick out of watching black folks depicted in dehumanizing ways? What about Asian kids? Do you think they’d find all those slanty-eyed references amusing? What about the Native Americans?
I saw the same cartoons you all did growing up, and no, the images did not scar me for life. But I can’t see myself getting riled up because someone decided to “enlighten” some cartoons with a few changes, either.
Okay, fine. Every day is a classroom for children. Do they have to learn about racism every minute of the day, or is it okay for them to occasionally watch a cartoon that isn’t an object lesson in how much people suck?
Yeah, because I’m not feeling the Flame of Righteous Justice over what those butchers at the Cartoon Network have done to Tom & Jerry, I’m just like a homophobe. Tell me, Lib, does that remark have any actual bearing on anything being said in this thread, or was the Poor Debating wearhouse having a sale on that brand of strawman?
We? We who, Lib? You’re the only one advocating that, near as I can tell. Airman, who is normally a pretty sharp guy, thinks they should be showing “Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips” unedited during their afternoon broadcast. Mr B., who’s about as sharp as a butter knife, seems to agree with him. So who exactly do you mean by “we”, Lib?
At any rate, let’s assume that you do, indeed, speak for the masses here. It’s still a stupid suggestion. Cartoon Network does make new cartoons. Lots of 'em. Samurai Jack, Powerpuff Girls, Justice League, Teen Titans, just to name a few. You know why they show old cartoons? Because people want to see them. You know why they edit their cartoons? Because people don’t want to see racist imagery in their Saturday morning cartoons. It’s called responding to the demands of the market. And precisely why do I have to explain this to someone named Libertarian, anyway? They own the network. They own the rights to the cartoons. Where the fuck do you get off telling them what they may or may not do with their property?
Chuckle. Now who is being revisionist? Did you read the same OP I did? Let’s got go to the tape.
I looked for any mention of “new” cartoons in the subsequent posts and found only one reference. By you. Just you. Unless you’re the queen, you ain’t a “we”. Everyone else, such as the OP itself, is suggesting that the Cartoon Network should broadcast racist cartoons. They don’t want new ones, ya idiot. Airman and others want the old ones unedited.
You can’t have it both ways, Lib. You can’t argue that the Cartoon Network should air the old, unedited cartoons and then claim that you are not arguing for the broadcast of said toons. Now go take a nap and try to decide what the Hell your position is before you post again.
You ain’t too bright, are you, Larry? You got it backwards. I’m not arguing that Thomas Bowdler’s versions should be the only ones available, I’m arguing that no one can tell the late Mr. Bowdler that he can’t publish his edited versions.
A bowdlerized version of an original work shares the same first ammendment protection as the original work. Is this a hard concept to grasp?
Warner Brothers has several versions of the cartoons in question. It would be a violation of freedom of speech to insist that Cartoon Network can only air one version (the original).
Whilst we are comparing candlepower, Monkey With A Gun, I should like to point out that the Cartoon Network acquired the exclusive U.S. broadcast rights to the entire run of Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies in 2000.
If someone wants to show the original cartoons in non-kiddie context, they’re entirely out of luck, because The Cartoon Network is sitting on them.
Y’know, I’m really racking my brain here, but I’m coming up at a loss. Does anyone here know of a kid who regularly watches Cartoon Network?
If I remember right, and I think I do, most kids watch Fox Kids (Fox channel between 3-6 PM weekdays, 6-noon weekends) or sometimes Nickolodean if they have cable. Cartoon Network just re-runs old cartoons, which most children find piss-boring. I know I wasn’t into 40 year old cartoons when I was a kid.
For instance, in a segment above I mentioned a collection of Daffy Duck bits from a looooooong time ago. I thought they sucked, and only watched them when there wasn’t anything on TV. As accommodating as kid’s TV was back then (and I can only imagine what it’s like now) that meant almost never.
So why are we even debating their effect on kids, when it’s so obvious that we’re the only ones watching them?
I was, and I suspect that most (if not all) of the posters in this thread were introduced to Looney Toons long after their original theatrical premieres.
Scintillating, purely glorious. And I’m sure not a one of them brushes up against your cool buzz, right? You sound like you watch Cartoon Network a lot, when you’re not avoiding reality outright. (BTW: what is your explanation for Chemical X, a central theme in the Powerpuff Girls?)
Yes, and we want to see them in their entirety, or not at all. And I hope you have a cite for public opinion driving Cartoon Network’s, Warner Brothers’ and Hanna Barbera’s decisions to cut these toons. Sounds more like sphincterlation to me.
Let me guess, Miller: you grew up on Ren and Stimpy, right? Did you ever notice the subtext when you were staring raptly, feet warmly ensconced in the skid-bottom pads of your bunny suit? I’ll bet not.
And I don’t seem to recall you beating your chest about Snow White and the Seven Dwarves – I guess Little People don’t quite make up a large enough group for you, huh? I don’t remember your howling about the racist characterizations of Arabs in Aladdin. Now that was a buzzkill, having to 'splain to my little nephew why Arabs – scary dark guys with hooked noses – “will cut off your ear if they don’t like your face” in 1992. Oh, wait, let’s not forget the jive-talking and the barrio-slang hyenas (a street gang?) in The Lion King. So should all that be cut?
I’m sure you remember the early Beavis and Butt-Head episodes. Many of them were shown once and never aired again because of the subject matter, not cut to pieces and resold as the originals.
There will always be imagery in our art, that’s what it’s all about. It should be left intact or not shown at all.
You know, you guys have really made me see the light. Censorship is good. With that in mind, let’s go whole hog and take out ALL of the offensive images.
First, Wile E. Coyote. He makes fun of retarded people, because he can’t possibly be making full use of his faculties if he thinks he can catch the Road Runner. That’s not even to mention the delusions of grandeur. Genius, indeed. He offends me, so he’s gone.
Next, Daffy Duck. He makes fun of people with speech impediments. In addition, not only is he in the minority as a talking duck, but he’s BLACK! Alas, poor Daffy, you’re history, because you offend my sensibilities as a maligned minority oppressed by the Man.
Next, Elmer Fudd. Once again, he has a speech impediment. But he’s white, and we can make fun of Whitey, so he stays, even though he’s a ruthless, bloodthirsty gun-rights Bambi killer that talks funny.
Who’s next? Ah, Jerry. He is representative of the sedentary lifestyle. He eats everything in sight, and by doing so he presents a bad role model for children, especially the ones that sue McDonald’s for their weight problem. You’re out, Jerry, you fat bastard.
Next? Tom. Why? Because he’s a bully. He picks on the little guy. We can’t have kids thinking that anything like that happens in real life or anything, so he’s gone, with the hope that he can rehabilitate himself into a good, positive member of society.
Bugs? Gone. He’s a transvestite. We mustn’t show our kids anything sexual, lest they figure it out for themselves. Then again, maybe we should show a male who dresses in women’s clothes and kisses men virtually indiscriminately. That’s acceptable now, even for young children. So, I guess he stays.
So, shall I go on, or do I have to continue proving how FUCKING STUPID it is to censor a stupid fucking cartoon?
So you understood the references to Flight of the Valkyries, and Barber of Seville? I’m impressed, and those are the newer, less obscure references.
Okay, I’ll drop it. Color me corrected.
But can’t we agree that they should at least allow them to air later in the evening?
BTW, I saw an interesting study awhile ago, which suggested that the whole problem is totally exaggerated (at least as far as children are concerned). A group of children were shown a clip of T&J, where a black woman chases Tom out of the house with a broom. Now, the obvious conclusion to children 40 years ago was that this was a housekeeper. The conclusion today? That she owned the house.
Now, this struck as true to me, because I remembered a bit I saw as a child, a bit which was mentioned earlier in this very thread. When Jerry got the black face and what looked like flower petals around his head, I assumed it was a reference to sunflowers. The thought of black people never occurred to me, and while I don’t know for sure, I don’t think it occurred to the black child I was watching it with either (I think I saw that with him, but it admittedly could’ve been something else).
They’d just have to wait until the contract expires and aquire the rights then, as the Cartoon Network waited until Warner Brother’s deals with the WB network, Nickelodean, and ABC expired. Cartoon Network does not have the power to alter the originals or to prevent the originals from becoming available to the public in the form of videotapes, DVDs, or posted in entirety on websites. They have the TV rights. Just the TV rights. It’s not as if they have a stranglehold on the entire franchise.
Additionally, there is nothing preventing someone from buying out the Cartoon Network’s TV rights and then showing the toons in whatever version they damn well want. I’m not sure what it would cost, but if you waved enough money under the noses of the CN execs, I’m sure y’all could buy the rights. Maybe you and Airman should put together a bake sale.
I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Yes, I believe that some cartoons could be shown intact and some need to be shown in context. But in talking to industry insiders, the reason CN is doing it is not because of political correctness or fear of offending anybody specific. The reason they do it is because of fear of an organized boycott that could generate too much negative publicity for the type of network they want to be. They’re trying to be a network for kids and they don’t want the additional baggage of having to justify their content any more than they have to.
People, these cartoons are the property of another, and they can do with them as they will. As for being PC, yes they are, they can be sued by any number of groups as a sign of protest. CN is a money maker, they own the material, no royalties to pay, and a guarranteed audience. Any parent in America can let their child watch CN and be assured that the child will not see something offensive to somebody, who has access to an attorney. I would love to see the cartoons I grew up with, but I know that it isn’t going to happen. I was also heartbroken to find out I could not buy a pair of Converse Coaches. Get over it…Great thread AIRMAN DOORS USAF
I honestly don’t have the slightest idea what you’re raving about. What the hell is “cool buzz”? Why does Chemical X need explaining? What the fuck does any of that have to do with censoring Tom and Jerry?
Then turn off the fucking TV, numbnuts, and you won’t be seeing them “at all”. Me, I’m perfectly happy watching the bits of these cartoons that aren’t racially offensive. Jesus, they cut one fucking sight gag from a second tier cartoon franchise, and you’re acting like they’ve gone after the Mona Lisa with a can of turpentine.
Well, I was in highschool during the heyday of Ren and Stimpy, and was never a big fan. As for subtext, I assume you mean the implications that they were a gay couple. Yeah, I picked up on that pretty quickly from the handful of episodes I saw. Again, the correlation between your posts and any sort of objective reality is unclear.
My earlier comment about you being as sharp as a butter knife was clearly too generous. I’ve seen bowling balls with better points than you’ve got. None of your examples here make any kind of sense at all. It’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. not Snow White and the Seven Midgets. Happy, Sneezy, and the gang aren’t people with pituitary problems, they’re mythical fairy creatures, and their portrayal in the movie, unlike the blackface jokes in T&J cartoons, is not intended to be offensive to anyone.
There aren’t any racist generalizations in Aladdin. All the characters are Arabs, and aside from a tendency to burst into song in unlikely situations, none of them share any broad character traits. Although I like how you’re such a ham-handed and inept writer that you just managed to paint yourself as a racist in the sentence, “Now that was a buzzkill, having to 'splain to my little nephew why Arabs – scary dark guys with hooked noses – “will cut off your ear if they don’t like your face” in 1992.” Must have been a lot of work, explaining that to your nephew, since the movie didn’t portray Arabs as scary, hook-nosed, or particularly dark-skinned. Hell, as I recall, they even changed that lyric before releasing the movie.
I’m not even going to bother with The Lion King. I barely remember the damn thing. Unless you’ve got a cite for them talking in barrio-slang, I’m just going to assume this is your typical delusionary rambling.
Yeah, because you can’t edit out the offensive content and still have any sort of a coherent whole. Same reason they don’t bother trying to edit “Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips.” I got no doubt in my mind that if MTV could have edited the cartoons and re-aired them, they would have done it in a heartbeat. How does that remotely apply to editing out a few offensive jokes in an otherwise harmless cartoon? Oh, right, forgot who I was addressing. It doesn’t apply at all, of course.
Weird with Words: Of course I didn’t understand them. I didn’t need to know about Richard Wagner to enjoy Bugs Bunny in a platemail bikini. However, as I grew up and started to understand the references, my enjoyment of the cartoons deepened. Similarly, when I saw the unedited versions of the cartoons being discussed, I enjoyed them despite not understanding the racist intent. As I grew older, and became aware of the context surrounding the images, I found my enjoyment vastly decreasing, because the mean-spirited racist jibes soured the otherwise relatively innocent fun.
At any rate, I wouldn’t have a problem with the cartoons being aired unedited later in the evening. Cartoon Network has a show that does a pretty good job of putting classic cartoons in their historical context (forget what they call it, though). I’d be keenly interested in them tackling the more problematical cartoons from the Warner vaults.
Personally, I find it baffling that people want the original racist versions of these cartoons. If one of my favorite shows happened to contain racist content, I would personally feel that editing that shit out would make it better. (Unless the racism was an integral part of the work… like Huckleberry Finn. I don’t see how editing out a blackface gag compromises the integrity of the cartoon.)
We’re not calling for more cartoons to be censored.
We’re calling for you and your off-sider to stop bleating when CN makes a business decision to edit images that are blatantly offensive to minorities – shit many people don’t want to see on Saturday morning.
If and when CN decides to go totally nuts on censoring cartoons as in your examples, well maybe you’ll garner a shoulder to cry on. Until then, stop your snivelling and wake up to the fact that some WB cartoons are plain unpalatable to a wider audience.
Okay, every kid isn’t as smart as you guys were. When I was a kid watching Alladin in the theaters and I heard “Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face” I literally thought “Wow! Arabs are mean!” And I there are plenty of kids as dumb as I was.