Roald Dahl's Charlie and the Bowdlerising Factory

[Tessa K]

Well, we fundamentally disagree.

You think if a child is constantly hearing racist comments, fiction will reinforce those views.

I think if a child is constantly hearing racist comments, fiction can break the child free from those views because it creates new societies for the child to inhabit.

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

Maybe we should ask a POC rather than making assumptions

[monkey]

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

That sounds useful. What's the right amount of of racism for a 8 year old black kid to encounter in their books for this effect to work? Do we need more racism?

Maybe we should ask a POC rather than making assumptions

I have got the impression from reading what POC have to say on things like this that positive role models are preferred to casual racism.

[jimbob]

Well, we fundamentally disagree.

You think if a child is constantly hearing racist comments, fiction will reinforce those views.

I think if a child is constantly hearing racist comments, fiction can break the child free from those views because it creates new societies for the child to inhabit.

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

Alternatively it could be as described by the people in EPD's links.

The is reasonable evidence that official approval or disapproval of acts or lifestyles has an impact on the attitudes of people who are not actively campaigning on them. Kids who come across bigotry aimed at them are just as likely to appreciate a place where it isn't as to somehow develop Inner strength from bullies getting more ammunition against them.

You could make the same argument that you are making for keeping background bigotry in books in favour of page 3, or showing Bernard Manning and Jim Davidson on primetime TV.

The culture warriors are against removing it in part because it provides cover for their views.

[jaap]

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

"What doesn't kill you makes you stronger", so let's keep making our kids' lives miserable.
I don't think that is a good argument.

[lpm]

You're all reacting like Dahl etc is packed with bigotry. Which is nonsense. Anyone got examples of what they want removed?

[Tessa K]

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

"What doesn't kill you makes you stronger", so let's keep making our kids' lives miserable.
I don't think that is a good argument.

What doesn't kill you can leave you scarred, damaged and fearful.

[monkey]

You're all reacting like Dahl etc is packed with bigotry. Which is nonsense. Anyone got examples of what they want removed?

I thought we'd moved on to talking more generally.

I'm just going to go and punch a kid in the face, so when they're grown up they know what it'll feel like to be punched in the face by someone who learnt it's sometimes ok to punch people in the face when they were a kid.

[dyqik]

And when a black child reads the protagonist using racist words, innate sense of right and wrong is strong enough for the child to react against the protagonist and gain a stronger sense of self and reinforced sense of right and wrong.

"What doesn't kill you makes you stronger", so let's keep making our kids' lives miserable.
I don't think that is a good argument.

What doesn't kill you can leave you scarred, damaged and fearful.

Even just being forced to go through preparations for harms that might possibly kill you can do terrible damage. e.g. PTSD and other harms experienced by US school children due to active shooter drills in schools.

[lpm]

Lol. You've all gone silly.

Fiction is about empathy. Protagonists in children's books are underdogs, orphans, the weak finding strength, escapees from adult control...

[Tessa K]

Lol. You've all gone silly.

Fiction is about empathy. Protagonists in children's books are underdogs, orphans, the weak finding strength, escapees from adult control...

It's not just about the protagonists, is it? That's very simplistic.

[dyqik]

Lol. You've all gone silly.

Fiction is about empathy. Protagonists in children's books are underdogs, orphans, the weak finding strength, escapees from adult control...

It's not just about the protagonists, is it? That's very simplistic.

Yes, ridiculously so. LPM might want to find out why "fridging" in films and stories is so problematic.

[lpm]

Sorry, I'm still giggling at the idea children's fiction is so racist it leaves kids with PTSD.

[dyqik]

Sorry, I'm still giggling at the idea children's fiction is so racist it leaves kids with PTSD.

Clearly you aren't here for a rational discussion then, since no one mentioned that.

[lpm]

Someone did, here viewtopic.php?p=144163#p144163

Some other moron compared it to being punched in the face, here viewtopic.php?p=144160#p144160

Another idiot thinks children's fiction makes our kids' lives miserable, here viewtopic.php?p=144153#p144153

What I want to know is, what the hell kind of childrens books are you lot thinking of?

[dyqik]

Someone did, here viewtopic.php?p=144163#p144163

You don't read so good, do you? Because that post does not say what you claim it does.

In fact, you've made up your claim out of whole cloth, and are just lying because your crap argument isn't getting any traction.

[monkey]

Some other moron compared it to being punched in the face, here viewtopic.php?p=144160#p144160

Don't call me a moron (or anyone else for that matter).

And I'm pretty sure you know what an analogy is and how they work.

[lpm]

Someone did, here viewtopic.php?p=144163#p144163

You don't read so good, do you? Because that post does not say what you claim it does.

In fact, you've made up your claim out of whole cloth, and are just lying because your crap argument isn't getting any traction.

Come on, put up or shut up. Name a children's book that is so terrible it will give PTSD, is analogous to a punch in the face or makes childrens lives miserable.

Or stop being so silly and actually address the topic at hand:

- childrens books are often about the powerless against the strong
- they build empathy with the downtrodden
- minorities, the bullied and the unhappy in particular identify with the characters who reflect their lives
- there's legacy racism in old books that are fading away
- there's the occasional odd word or unthinking comment in more recent books
- representation is important and is a feature of a lot of current publishing
- the default white male annoys children and turns them into activists. It does not make them spineless because the heroes they are reading about are never spineless

[dyqik]

Someone did, here viewtopic.php?p=144163#p144163

You don't read so good, do you? Because that post does not say what you claim it does.

In fact, you've made up your claim out of whole cloth, and are just lying because your crap argument isn't getting any traction.

Come on, put up or shut up. Name a children's book that is so terrible it will give PTSD.

I'm bored of your lies now.

[lpm]

You made the analogy. There's a whole bunch of you presenting the argument that some books are so bad it's analogous to a punch in the face.

I'm simply asking you to suggest one book that is even remotely like that.

[dyqik]

You made the analogy. There's a whole bunch of you presenting the argument that some books are so bad it's analogous to a punch in the face.

I didn't make an analogy. Do you understand what the letters "e.g." signify? Where do you see mention of books in my post?

[monkey]

You made the analogy. There's a whole bunch of you presenting the argument that some books are so bad it's analogous to a punch in the face.

I didn't make an analogy.

Yeah, that was me.

And the analogy wasn't about the books.

[jimbob]

<Snip>

Or stop being so silly and actually address the topic at hand:

- childrens books are often about the powerless against the strong
- they build empathy with the downtrodden
- minorities, the bullied and the unhappy in particular identify with the characters who reflect their lives
- there's legacy racism in old books that are fading away
- there's the occasional odd word or unthinking comment in more recent books
- representation is important and is a feature of a lot of current publishing
- the default white male annoys children and turns them into activists. It does not make them spineless because the heroes they are reading about are never spineless

- childrens books are often about the powerless against the strong
- they build empathy with the downtrodden

And when the unstated assumptions in the story actually have a genuinely downtrodden group painted as antagonists, possibly playing into historic antisemitic or racist tropes? How does that build empathy?

- minorities, the bullied and the unhappy in particular identify with the characters who reflect their lives
- there's legacy racism in old books that are fading away

so why not remove bits of legacy racism that does nothing for the story, but just makes the book a bit hurtful?

- there's the occasional odd word or unthinking comment in more recent books
- representation is important and is a feature of a lot of current publishing
- the default white male annoys children and turns them into activists. It does not make them spineless because the heroes they are reading about are never spineless

There's a difference between a lack of positive role models and a surfit of negative ones.

[lpm]

No examples, jimbob?

I don't think you can remove racism from the colonial books like Rider Haggard or similar jingoistic books from that era. They have faded away already. Willard Price is an interesting example - a left wing progressive writer who in our era is racist. Not sure if that series has gone yet.

There are plenty of books, on the other hand, that are perfectly fine once a single word is removed, as I suggested for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Big Six.

Please say which books you are thinking of with a surfit of negative role models.

[jimbob]

No examples, jimbob?

I don't think you can remove racism from the colonial books like Rider Haggard or similar jingoistic books from that era. They have faded away already. Willard Price is an interesting example - a left wing progressive writer who in our era is racist. Not sure if that series has gone yet.

There are plenty of books, on the other hand, that are perfectly fine once a single word is removed, as I suggested for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Big Six.

Please say which books you are thinking of with a surfit of negative role models.

.

I thought you were arguing against removing those individual words.

And whilst Willard Price might have been progressive once, the whole story is full of a paternalistic attitude to non whites. I don't think there's much left if you remove that.

[Tessa K]

No examples, jimbob?

I don't think you can remove racism from the colonial books like Rider Haggard or similar jingoistic books from that era. They have faded away already. Willard Price is an interesting example - a left wing progressive writer who in our era is racist. Not sure if that series has gone yet.

There are plenty of books, on the other hand, that are perfectly fine once a single word is removed, as I suggested for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Big Six.

Please say which books you are thinking of with a surfit of negative role models.

.

I thought you were arguing against removing those individual words.

And whilst Willard Price might have been progressive once, the whole story is full of a paternalistic attitude to non whites. I don't think there's much left if you remove that.

I remember Willard Price but all I remember is that two boys had adventures with animals (it was a very long time ago). I've heard since that they were racist and can't help wondering what values I absorbed unconsciously as a child. My parents had no idea what I was reading but they wouldn't have objected.