Archive for the ‘racism’ Category

Ex Situ: The Grinch and Racial Suicide

December 22, 2008

grinch_bar

Joe Crawford from ArtLung sent in this link to a post from Undercover Black Man, which itself links to a seasonal over-analyzation at Lawrence Auster’s View from the Right blog.

Here’s Mr. Auster’s entire article:

As I type, I’m glancing at some grotesque thing on ABC, about the Grinch and Christmas, in which humans interact in brotherhood with a variety of monstrous looking other species, and a little girl has a tender relationship with an unsettlingly hideous but sensitive and kind-hearted being called the Grinch, and everyone loves each other. This is not our society celebrating the beautiful holiday of Christmas. This is the Liberal Controllers of our society carefully teaching children an unnatural and dangerous lie that they would never believe unless they were carefully taught. How many whites will militate against vitally necessary immigration restrictions in the decades to come, how many young white females will be raped and murdered by nonwhites in the decades to come, because of the message of trusting and loving racial aliens that programs like this implant in them?

As an holiday bonus, one can click the link below to read an additional Who-sized comment about the Shrek movies.

Undercover Black Man: Lawrence Auster has a Question
> Catena Ex Situ

Discriminatory Segregationism in A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving

November 25, 2008

peanuts_bar

We are thankful here at J. Cart. Overanal.: thankful that a picture is worth a thousand words.

Take, exempli gratia, this still from A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving (1973 C.E.):

A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving

Two immediate items of note:

  1. Linus Van Pelt, acting in his customary role as spiritual leader, is sitting at the head of the table.
  2. Franklin, the sole African-American member of the Peanuts ensemble, is sitting all by himself on one side of the table.

Here is a passable video of the sequence, including a nightmarish Guaraldi-seasoned tête-à-tête between Snoopy and a beach chair:

The scene in question is, in fact, somewhat questionable itself: the numbers of chairs and servings fluctuate throughout, giving the meal a disorientating Kubrickian quality. This produces in the scene a sense of unease and tension which reflects the viewers’ discomfort at the casual racism on display. Indeed, Franklin is seated in the malicious beach chair, which humiliatingly places him at an eye level below that of the others.

Though this segregation is not limited to racial issues only: Marcie, though eccentric and possessing of an ambiguous sexuality, is caucasian enough to be allowed to remain close to the rest, but is still seated at the end towards the left side of the table. Linus chooses to seat Marcie as far away from himself as possible, separated from the larger group by the dog. Indeed, the beagle is deemed a more fit companion than any heterodox humans. (Though, perhaps Snoopy is allowed to sit with the elite in due respect for his cooking prowess. It is also noted that Snoopy, in an act of defiant compassion, serves Marcie and Franklin first.) Furthermore, to extrapolate, the only characters exempted which could reasonably join the table next are the obsessive-compulsive Schroeder, the filthy Pig Pen, or the unloved and sadistic Lucy, who, if arriving late, would be forced to sit in one of the chairs next to Franklin and Marcie. Thus, the entire left side of the table would be relegated to odd, unhygienic misfits and belligerent, racial outcasts.

The characters are not evil: Peppermint Patty shows genuine remorse for embarrassing and bullying Charlie Brown, and Linus is often a beacon of compassion and temperance. But the point is made: the virus of casual discrimination is insidious and unaware, and can manifest itself at an early age.

Nota bene: this troubling issue uncovered via Super Punch >Catena Ex Situ

Mini-Analyzations

September 29, 2008

  • I don’t know if others have noticed, but Pepe Le Pew is a glaringly insulting portrayal of the French people and all things Gallic. The cartoon relies on the stereotype that the French don’t bathe, hence Le Pew being a skunk, a rather malodorous animal. (Some people might think that the cartoons portrayal of the French as oversexed is a stereotype but, as anyone who has been to France knows, this is an astonishingly real picture of the French.) He speaks with a funny accent, too! It is completely galling! Could it get any worse? At least there was never an episode of Pepe capitulating to the Nazis. Vive l’amour!
    -Contributed by Mark C.
  • Brendan S. mentions several characters seen in the feature Who Framed Roger Rabbit? that were created after 1947, the year the film takes place. I read an interview with the filmmakers where they stated their excuse for this was that these characters were hanging around Toon Town in that year until they were “discovered” a few years later by the studios, as if they really existed and shared the same legends as live action movie stars. A bit of dramatic license. I think a bigger problem is the glaring lack of Tom and Jerry in the film. I guess they couldn’t get the rights to these characters.
    -Contributed by Mark C.
  • Is it just me, or does Panthro of the Thundercats seem like a feline representation of a black man?  It’s interesting to me that even when human protagonists are replaced with somewhat more bestial protagonists, that animation directors would feel the need to express racial diversity.  If you ask me, Thundercats was already demonstrating diversity by depicting feline humanoids, which have been grossly under-represented on television and elsewhere.  (I mean, just because they don’t exist doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be represented, right?)
    -Contributed by YHN

Ex Situ: Freeing the Elephants

September 21, 2008

There’s a delightful article by Adam Gopnik in the latest (September 22, 2008) issue of The New Yorker about some controversies surrounding the Babar series. Here’s a clip:

In the past few decades, a series of critics on the left, most notably the Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman, have indicted Babar in the course of a surprisingly resilient and hydra-headed argument about the uses of imagery and the subtleties of imperialist propaganda. Babar, such interpreters have insisted, is an allegory of French colonization, as seen by the complacent colonizers: the naked African natives, represented by the “good” elephants, are brought to the imperial capital, acculturated, and then sent back to their homeland on a civilizing mission. The elephants that have assimilated to the ways of the metropolis dominate those which have not.

Fascinating. As is the rest of the article, which among other things touches on: a wholly different controversy regarding the fate of Babar’s mother, the occupations of animals, nationalistic representations of order and disorder in children’s literature, and Matisse.

Freeing the Elephants >Catena Ex Situ

From the archives: Love in the Time of Exosquad

May 17, 2008

The following was contributed by Jennifer.

Regarding Exosquad, one thing that I am surprised hasn’t been touched on is the relationships between the Terrans and the Neos on a personal level, mainly Nara Burns and Marsala. Marsala, being a Neo Sapien, is completely sexless (although he appears male and is referred to as a male), and was created at least 30 years before Nara was born. This creates obvious problems.

Although he is nearly emotionless at the beginning of the series, he acquires human traits as he is assimilated into the Terran way of life. He evolves. He begins to care about Nara, even though he feels no need to show it because he doesn’t understand how. From the first time Marsala shows any kindness to her (giving her his oxygen mask in a very early episode), Nara is extremely attached. Unlike his confusion, she knows exactly how she feels about him. In the final episode, she tries to tell him that she loves him, but he gently reminds her that he cannot be a part of her life. She’s devastated.

What this symbolizes: It shows a message of love, in simple terms. Love can happen to anyone, even if it’s not for the best. But, the events and people surrounding them illustrate pure racial prejudice–on both sides, art imitating life. Nara is sharply criticized, even scolded, for her friendship with Marsala (by her own brother!). Marsala is nearly killed by an enraged Phaeton when he sees Marsala trying to protect Nara instead of fighting for himself. This shows how deep the hatred between Terrans and Neo Sapiens runs, in contrast to the love that they could feel, should they like to try.

The following was contributed by VanFossen.

The treatment of Neo/Terran relationships is in Exosquad quite complex all around, but the relationship between Nara and Marsala demonstrates man’s natural fear and dislike for those different from himself (something that is at the root of much racism) and the hatred of those deemed the enemy.

While the Neos were unable to engage in sexual relations and reproduce, I believe this was actually based on brain chemistry and not physiology. Neos came in both sexes and were generally very well endowed. Most certainly, the female Neos could engage in sex, though they were rendered unable to reproduce and quite possibly had little to no sex drive due to brain alterations. And those who created the Neos would certainly not want these big, powerful males to be sexually active, so they were also chemically altered to remove sex drive and the ability to become aroused. This certainly did not mean they were unable to love.

I don’t believe that Neos were an unemotional lot. In fact they were often quite emotional, especially when angered. Lydia quite obviously loved Phaeton and remained loyal until she realized how insane he had become. And in his way, Phaeton loved her–she was the only member of his elite followers that he did not clone, because he trusted her so and could not think of destroying her (until madness won out). Marsala had seen much in his forty years and probably preferred to keep his relations with Terrans formal, but Nara’s beauty and kindness captured his heart. He truly cared for Nara, but realized that he could not give her what he knew to be the most important thing to her live: family. Because he felt he could not be a complete man in her life (physically as well as emotionally), and give her children, he bowed out as gracefully (and quickly) as he could, denying himself her love. What I find surprising is that he couldn’t see that Nara was now something other than human, herself. Genetically altered by injection, she was changing and would probably never be a candidate for a normal lifestyle with husband and children. Perhaps his own pain and feelings of inadaquacy blinded him to her real need of him when he left her on Venus. I like to think that this relationship would have been resolved in the unaired final season. Nara’s developing ability to restore and regenerate might even have been able to alter Marsala’s brain chemistry and make him potent.

Ex Situ: Bugs Bunny, Greatest Banned Player Ever

May 14, 2008

We usually don’t like to post two Ex Sitibus in a row, but several readers sent this one in (thanks!), and it is too good to delay. Derek Zumsteg has written an exhaustively detailed account of the famous Gas House Gorillas vs. Tea Totallers baseball game of 1946 which was featured in the short film “Baseball Bugs.” (For reference, the fermentable Cartoon Brew has posted a video of the film.) Here are two short excerpts:

We next learn that Bunny has taken the lead, 96-95. This means that at some point during the game, the official scorer ruled at least one of the Gorillas’ runs invalid, as we had previously established that they had scored 96 runs when Bunny took over for the Teatotallers. The cause and resolution of the disputed run is not documented in available footage.

Consider that given fifteen outs, Bunny scored 96 times. His RC/27 would be 173. Now of course Bunny could not always face a team so ill-equipped to deal with his high-percentage take-all-four-bases running style and bean-all-nine-fielders hitting ability, but even dramatic penalties placed on him would still make him the greatest offensive player of all time.

Bugs Bunny, Greatest Banned Player Ever >Catena Ex Situ

Evil Mickey Mouse

March 30, 2008

mickey_bar.jpg

Contributed by TOONWRITER. 

mickey.jpgEverybody knows Mickey Mouse to be the icon of purity and wholesomeness. However, Mickey was (one of) the most evil characters of his time, circa 1927-1932 (As compared to Harman/Ising’s Bosko, Iwerk’s Flip the Frog, and Lantz’s (formally Disney’s) Oswald the Lucky Rabbit). Disney’s most well-known representative was abusive to animals, abusive to women, vulgar, and racist. Sighting his first cartoon, (Plane Crazy), as well as Floyd Goddferdson’s newspaper comic strip (Disney’s Mickey Mouse) Mickey, in an attempt to recreate Col. Lindbergh’s transcontinental flight, makes his own plane. For the motor to spin the propeller, he twists up a wiener dog. Attempting to take off, he taxis around, chasing animals. He chases three animals towards a tree: a goat, a chicken, and a pig. His plane causes the goat to run into the chicken, who in turn, runs into the pig, literally. All three animals run through each other, becoming a new hybrid of farm stock.

Fine, that is not too bad, you say. In Mickey’s next film, Gallopin’ Gaucho, Mickey lives in Mexico, and spends most of his time frequenting a bar where Minnie works. In this cartoon, he vulgarly spits, drinks alcohol (ale, in fact), slaps Minnie’s rear end.

In his third film (first film with sound), Steamboat Willie, we find Mickey trying his hand at working on a steamboat. In the original version (that Disney has been trying to repress from the public), once the music begins (a goat eats sheet music) Mickey starts playing animals as musical instruments. This goes beyond animal cruelty. Mickey swings a cat by its tail and throws it off the boat. He then finds a several baby pigs suckling on their mama. He picks up the mama pig and forcefully shakes off all but one of her babies. He then kicks the last baby off the mama pig and begins to squeeze her teats as if she were an accordion!

In The Little Orphanage (1931), Mickey and his pals put on a play for the children: “Uncle Tom’s Cabana.” If this is not racist enough, the characters try to repair a generator which explodes and puts them in blackface.

In Floyd Goddferdson’s newspaper comic strip (Walt Disney’s Mickey Mouse), Goddferdson takes us on a several-month run of a newspaper-version of Plane Crazy. I already cited the dog/engine and farm animal incident, but Goddferdson shows us how Mickey copes in the jungle. After crash landing, we find Mickey cursing (represented by symbols), dealing with racistly-depicted natives with enormous lips, shrunken heads, and a dialogue consisting of “Oogle Moogle Noogle,” etc.

Finally, I cite the first Mickey Mouse Club. Not the show with Cubby and Annette, but the Saturday cartoons the theatres ran. Walt, himself, recorded the theme song, “Minnie’s Yoo-hoo.” In this song, the voice tells of a girl he has in the barn and uses animal sounds as sexual innuendoes. This song can be found on one of Disney’s CDs.