Oh my God, you’re right! Here’s the cover.
Useless trivia: the cover picture of “Mr. Dog” is a homage by the book’s illustrator, Garth Williams, to Van Gough’s “Self Portrait.”
Actually, casual references to tobacco and alcohol in children’s literature were seen as no big deal until fairly recently.
Close: Calormenes. 
Roald Dahl is the worst offender this way…
That freaked me out also - not the least because Pip was far more interesting as a character.
In a later book a woman’s suffragette army invades Oz. I think a lot of it was actually social satire. I think not being able to bludgeon kids over the head with it made the books better.
They’d have to take our copy of that book from my cold dead hands. Mr. Dog also adopted a boy, (no attempt to contact the parents). Mr. Peabody was not first in this regard.
Voyager writes:
> Not just them - Howard Garis and his wife wrote the Bobbsey Twins, Tom Swift,
> Uncle Wiggly and a host of others.
The Bobbsey Twins, the Tom Swift, and other books in the series established by the Stratemeyer Syndicate were written by many people. (The Uncle Wiggly books weren’t part of this syndicate and were written just by Garis.) The Wikipedia entry for the syndicate tries to establish which books were written by which people. You’ll need to click the links for the separate series:
robardin writes:
> La crème de la weird to me, though, was the second book in the Oz series.
The Oz books are full of weirdness. That’s what makes them fascinating. In any case, I find all the comments about how weird old children’s books are to be strange in itself. Children love strangeness. Why would someone try to prevent children from growing up not knowing about weirdness?
That’s because casual references to tobacco and alcohol were seen as no big deal in real life- people smoked and drank a lot back in the old days. Until it was digitally removed a few years ago, the picture of Clement Hurd on the back of Goodnight Moon showed him smoking a cigarette.
I love the bit in George and Martha (George and Martha are both hippopatomussess… hippopottami… hipp… more than one hippopotamus) where Martha’s all, “George, damn it, quit looking through the window when I’m taking a bath!”
Not really weird per se, but I always thought Sterling North in Rascal was left alone a little too much. His mother was dead and it didn’t seem like his father was around all that much. Am I remembering this correctly?
I don’t know if this was bothersome or, since I liked the idea, sort of alluring. Wikipedia describes North’s book is a prose poem to adolescent angst, which is why, when I read it, I thought I might like to try a little solitude and self-sufficiency in the woods too.
I prefer the unretouched versions as they make great conversation starters for me and the kids.
My 7 year-old was horrified over the conclusion of a tale in an old book called “The Story Road” where this little pig with a straight tail was forced by her sow of a mother to sit for hours in the hot sun with her mud-soaked tail wrapped around a stick. Poor pig. Evidently she was an embarrassment to her mother and wouldn’t be allowed to go to an apple eating party if her tail wasn’t nice and curly like those of her piggy sisters. All the other barnyard community stopped by to visit and feel sorry for her although no one was in a position to help the mistreated piglet. At the end, she’s delighted with her new curly tail. She struts happily around the apple eating party showing off her classy ass-do.
The moral being: No pain, no gain…mother knows best…whatever. Of course, we were expecting a different moral.
Like I said, my son was horrified. “What kind of mother does that?! Why can’t she just go to the stupid party with her normal tail?!” From which rose the sort of conversation no new age, politically correct kiddie lit (I don’t care how good) will ever induce.
I really resent the current condescending trend toward censorship of classic children’s literature. Even if the parents aren’t as smart as they used to be (due largely to a couple generations on a diet of dumbed down youth literature) the kids are smart enough to note the contrasts between the way things used to be and the way they are now.
The Strong Museum of Play in Rochester New York has an excellent exhibit of children’s literature through the ages and I was struck by the side-by-side excerpts from a Nancy Drew book pre and post re-edit. Granted, the point of this particular part of the exhibit was to illustrate the ‘ahem’ change in the depth and quality of writing for children over the years, but I was alarmed.
This article sums up the 1950 re-edit nicely:
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/020799/fea_nancydrew.shtml
Great, so in an attempt to treat us like imbeciles they have actually made us into imbeciles.
I didn’t find it to be all that disturbing. I do find that the ending of Peter and Wendy was a lot sadder than the Disney production. It was also a bit more violent than other versions of the story I grew accustomed to. The Lost Boys slaughtered all but two of the pirates.
Treasure Island might not be considered weird but it has levels of violence that might be unacceptable to todays audience. When the mutineers led by Silver attacked the stockade on the island Jim Hawkins, who might have been 12 or 13, went out armed with a cutlass with the intent of killing someone. Later he has occasion to utter my favorite phrase from the book.
So we’ve got Jim Hawkins wielding two guns John Woo style threating to blow some dudes brains out, and they he kills Mr. Hands. It doesn’t sound all that unusual but it’s only strange because this is a children’s book featuring serious violence, and gun violence at that, done by a pre-teen/teen.
Marc
I can’t believe no one has mentioned Little Black Sambo, one of my favorite Little Golden Books from when I was a kid - a stereotypically black boy with brightly colored lips, etc. He gets run in circles around a tree by some hungry tigers and turned into a puddle of butter. I think we’d find that a tad inappropriate today.
I also find the Grimm stories grim, including The Little Match Girl, who freezes to death. My parents didn’t read that one to me, but I discovered it in later years. Didn’t read it to my kids, either. xo, C.
Despite his name, Little Black Sambo lived in India, not Africa. A number of authors have redone the story in a modern setting to remove the racial stereotypes that are attached to the “Sambo” name- for example, Sam and the Tigers.
The Little Match Girl is most comonly encountered as a H.C. Andersen story, though there may be a Grimm tale that is similar. I loved it as a child. What was wrong with it?
Didn’t LBS trick the tigers into running round the tree? And wasn’t it them that turned into butter, not the boy? That’s how I remember it, anyway.
nitpick - The Little Match Girl was written by Hans Anderson.
In the original Snow White, not the Disney version, the wicked queen was featured at the wedding of SW and the prince. She had to dance strapped into red hot metal shoes.
In the original Cinderella, in order to get the glass slipper to fit, the stepsisters cut off their toes and heels (respectively). The Prince is alerted to the deception by a singing bird that tells him to look at floor of the coach, which is getting covered with blood.
I loved that.
I tend to raise my eyebrow at the part of Make Way for Ducklings where Mr. Mallard leaves his wife and newborn kids to “go explore up river for a week”. Dude was dipping his beak in another nest somewhere.
I can’t speak for CC, but the little girl dies! What’s not wrong with that?
…Cause he couldn’t notice on his own that the uggos were missing portions of their feet? Also, didn’t he look at Cinderellas FACE?! I mean, whether or not they fit in the damn shoe, he could easily see that they looked NOTHING like the girl he danced with.
But… it was the tigers that turned into butter! Wasn’t it?
I’m practically certain it was the tigers that turned into butter.
