Some Dr.Seuss books taken down

[PityOnU]

For any inverse-snowflakes who are shooketh that these will no longer be published:

This was not government regulation or mandate. This was a private company in a capitalist system looking at revenue from these particular books and comparing it to the potential for lost profit through damage to the brand. They came to the determination that the latter was greater than the former. This being the case, one of two things is true:

1. These books are still somewhat popular, but a significant majority of people would object to the imagery, making the brand out of sync with societal norms and probably unable to sell to a large audience.
   
   
2. These books aren't particularly popular, making the very small fraction of people who would be "offended" by the imagery worth more than the loss of sales.

Considering that "Cat in the Hat" was considered to have similar imagery but will still be printed, my guess is it was #2.

If you are still raging with a free speech justice boner, I encourage you to approach the publisher and make an offer for the publishing rights.

Beyond this, taking books out of circulation will require us to write new ones. This is stimulating the economy and creating good paying jobs for modern children's book authors. Why are you so against a healthy job market? "If I Ran The Zoo" was published 70 years ago - pay someone to draw some new pictures, damnit.

 

[chrisrlink]

some of these i didn't know even existed just goes to show you the tolerance in the past is no where near it is today i bet pretty much all trump supporters are fuming

 

[Jayro]

I hate censorship in every form of it's existence.

 

[FAST6191]

For any inverse-snowflakes who are shooketh that these will no longer be published:

This was not government regulation or mandate. This was a private company in a capitalist system looking at revenue from these particular books and comparing it to the potential for lost profit through damage to the brand. They came to the determination that the latter was greater than the former. This being the case, one of two things is true:

1. These books are still somewhat popular, but a significant majority of people would object to the imagery, making the brand out of sync with societal norms and probably unable to sell to a large audience.
   
   
2. These books aren't particularly popular, making the very small fraction of people who would be "offended" by the imagery worth more than the loss of sales.

Considering that "Cat in the Hat" was considered to have similar imagery but will still be printed, my guess is it was #2.

If you are still raging with a free speech justice boner, I encourage you to approach the publisher and make an offer for the publishing rights.

Beyond this, taking books out of circulation will require us to write new ones. This is stimulating the economy and creating good paying jobs for modern children's book authors. Why are you so against a healthy job market? "If I Ran The Zoo" was published 70 years ago - pay someone to draw some new pictures, damnit.

Ah the old censorship is only censorship when the government (or maybe religion acting as de facto government) does it line. Do we have to do this one again?

Majority? Seems like something that you would have to qualify there. Most times we look at things like this others would claim a vocal minority, and companies thinking twitter = the population at large, which is also a claim but eh.

Equally I am still at a loss as to what was so offensive about it as to deem this sort of thing necessary.

The profits of creative destruction? Are you the villain from the fifth element?

I don't feel like my suggestions were that problematic and I even said that I didn't agree with them stopping production. What I explained are possible ways they could have gone about doing this that would have either been seen better by most or possibly avoided the most controversy. My suggestions do not mean endorsement.

Do we care about avoiding controversy as a general concept? I can understand why the business would possibly want to.

 

[PityOnU]

Ah the old censorship is only censorship when the government (or maybe religion acting as de facto government) does it line. Do we have to do this one again?

Are you arguing that publishers have a sacred duty to publish all books forever? You have a very high expectation of publishers.

 

[FAST6191]

Are you arguing that publishers have a sacred duty to publish all books forever? You have a very high expectation of publishers.

Not at all. Questioning their rationales, motives, logic and actions however is well within the remit of others though.

 

[PityOnU]

Not at all. Questioning their rationales, motives, logic and actions however is well within the remit of others though.

Lol, fair enough. Have fun questioning!

 

[Xzi]

Suess was a very different man at the end of his career than he was at the beginning of it. I think he himself would be fine with these particular books being pulled from publication, if not being in full support of it. Spare me the faux-outrage over the possibility that all records of these books existing are suddenly and simultaneously going to disappear.

 

[DarkCoffe64]

You'd think in the internet era, with all the shit you see online everyday, that like most would've grown a backbone or numb towards this kinda stuff. Or just, y'know, understand it was a product of the times.
Bah.

 

[yuyuyup]

I'm gonna write a bunch of racist books, pull em from the shelves, and make a zillion bucks whining about how cancel culture can't take a joke

 

[nine0nine]

meeh, I can see why this is happening, the depictions of racial stereotypes goes against the grain these days but I don't agree with it. I was (accidently) reading an article on Dr Seuss a while back that suggested all his books should be removed from schools due to these images and the fact the Doc wrote a blackface play way back.

I wonder Would Nintendo be have been able to create Mario in 2021 without some PC activist chastising them for stereotyping Italians?

 

[Julie_Pilgrim]

meeh, I can see why this is happening, the depictions of racial stereotypes goes against the grain these days but I don't agree with it. I was (accidently) reading an article on Dr Seuss a while back that suggested all his books should be removed from schools due to these images and the fact the Doc wrote a blackface play way back.

I wonder Would Nintendo be have been able to create Mario in 2021 without some PC activist chastising them for stereotyping Italians?

Considering the fact no one has said that about mario today, I'm guessing the answer is yes

 

[Xzi]

You'd think in the internet era, with all the shit you see online everyday, that like most would've grown a backbone or numb towards this kinda stuff. Or just, y'know, understand it was a product of the times.
Bah.

People do understand that these books were a product of their time, which is why they weren't selling and the publisher unilaterally decided to pull them. The "I collect racist memorabilia" demographic apparently isn't a large enough economic force to keep products and media from the 50s/60s in high demand.

 

[Seliph]

I don't particularly care since you can read these books pretty easily online and it was the publisher's decision anyway. I can understand why they wouldn't feel great about it.

I honestly don't think people really cared about these books anyways until false outrage was generated by conservative media pundits about their publisher deciding to pull them. Looking at Google Trends basically confirms this.

Publishers pull books all the time, there are so many more important things to worry about than this.

 

[MadonnaProject]

Heaven forbid we say japanese and chinese have eyes a certain way. Heaven forbid we say african tribes might have certain features. Afterall, we live in a day and age where facts are just not acceptable.

 

[Seliph]

Heaven forbid we say japanese and chinese have eyes a certain way. Heaven forbid we say african tribes might have certain features. Afterall, we live in a day and age where facts are just not acceptable.

Cringe. You know those depictions are based on racist caricatures, stop being obtuse.

 

[Julie_Pilgrim]

Heaven forbid we say japanese and chinese have eyes a certain way. Heaven forbid we say african tribes might have certain features. Afterall, we live in a day and age where facts are just not acceptable.

Have you ever seen an actual black or Asian person?

 

[MadonnaProject]

Have you ever seen an actual black or Asian person?

I am actually biracial. Asian & African. You, however sound like what we like to call a "typical white guy". Talking down to people, out your arse. Without having a clue.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Cringe. You know those depictions are based on racist caricatures, stop being obtuse.

Caricatures are often exaggerated, its what makes them "caricatures". This applies to all races. Look at popeye, or any other cartoon. In fact it also applies to animals. If you find it cringe thats on you. People who are grown up, tend to develop thicker skin and realise there's real problems to life.

 

[Julie_Pilgrim]

I am actually biracial. Asian & African. You, however sound like what we like to call a "typical white guy". Talking down to people, out your arse. Without having a clue.

Last I checked, this wasn't white

 

[Louse]

Heaven forbid we say japanese and chinese have eyes a certain way. Heaven forbid we say african tribes might have certain features. Afterall, we live in a day and age where facts are just not acceptable.

While I'm all for a censor-less landscape for art and discourse, children's entertainment should be regulated to protect our young impressionable minds. Kids don't have the skills yet to separate a racist stereotype from very useful life lesson.

Leaving this content in is just kinda bad, at least in its current state. It would just cause more people to get the wrong idea about people that they don't know. We don't need more of you.

I am actually biracial. Asian & African. You, however sound like what we like to call a "typical white guy". Talking down to people, out your arse. Without having a clue.

sure™