If I Ran the Zoo

CONTROVERSY OVER DR. SEUSS
CALLS FOR BALANCE, PROPORTION

In this day when pop culture has embraced a rainbow of gender identities and sexual tastes, it’s hard to believe that there was once a time when people were shocked at salacious remarks and indiscreet behavior on television.

Does anyone remember Terry Rakolta (an in-law of Mitt Romney), who mounted a national boycott against the raunchy 1980s sitcom, “Married…with Children”?

In that bygone era, anyone disturbed by broadcast smut — no matter how deeply offended they might be — was met with the dismissive remark…

“Well, you don’t have to watch it, you know. Just change the channel!”

And if they objected…

“But this stuff is so pervasive on TV, children can’t help stumbling onto it.”

…the standard rejoinder was…

“It’s up to you to monitor what your children see. Besides, kids aren’t as impressionable as all that. They won’t be destroyed by an off-color joke or a little glimpse of tushie.”

…which inevitably led to the elevated pronouncement…

“One person’s moral values shouldn’t impinge upon someone else’s artistic freedom.”

Ah…such an innocent time that was.

Today, race and ethnicity vie with sex as the primary field of social controversy (there are too many genders to keep track of, anyway). A verbal expression, or an image, or even just a vague implication will raise all kinds of hackles if it’s deemed culturally insensitive or suggestive of prejudice.

As for the sanctity of artistic freedom? Well, that’s gone by the wayside. The subtlest, most ephemeral, most abstract ethnic allusion — real or imagined — can bring down the meat clever of Cancel Culture.

By now, everyone has heard of the fuss over certain Dr. Seuss children’s books. Dr. Seuss Enterprises, the organization that administers the creative legacy of the late Theodore Geisel (the famous author-illustrator’s real name), is dropping six volumes from the official Seuss canon:

And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street
If I Ran the Zoo
McElligot’s Pool
On Beyond Zebra!
Scrambled Eggs Super!
The Cat’s Quizzer

That announcement was timed to Geisel’s birthday, which has been observed for several years with special programs to encourage children to read. The reason given?…

“These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong.”

I used to read Dr. Seuss books to my kids when they were little, though I can’t recall having any of these particular volumes. Maybe most of them came along later.

Anyhow, my son and daughter were more into “The Cat in the Hat.” I think they were rather intrigued by the mayhem caused by Thing 1 and Thing 2.

But among the banned titles, at least one — If I Ran the Zoo — has gained the status of a business cliché. Numerous times I’ve heard someone proclaim how differently things would be done in a company “if I ran the zoo.”

With all the hubbub unfolding, I checked out some of the Dr. Seuss images deemed offensive. And there’s no denying the stereotypical images of Black and Asian characters. Not that figures assumed to be White are treated with much greater dignity. Nevertheless, the complaints are valid.

There’s been a lot of generalizing throughout this controversy. Geisel has been called a flat-out “racist,” and his works aimed at children have gotten all rolled in together with his earlier political cartoons and advertising illustrations — which did, indeed, reflect the casual racism of his time. I think, however, that it’s necessary to separate these various creative categories.

Especially as regards his World War II propaganda drawings that trafficked in Oriental clichés so as to put a repulsive face on the Japanese enemy.

Offensive? Perhaps. But America was hardly alone in its use of racial stereotypes.

The Nazis raised Master Race imagery to the level of a high art, with grim anti-Semitic visuals providing a counterpoint. In the Pacific Theater, Imperial propaganda put forth Japanese militarism as a stand against White rapacity (as suggested by this Japanese representation of Franklin Roosevelt on the left).

We should maintain some perspective about Geisel’s wartime output. Consider, for instance, these two caricatures below. Does the (European) Hitler fare much better than the (Asian) Tojo in satiric representation?

Admittedly, Theodore Geisel wasn’t always able to transcend ethnocentric tendencies in his kidlit work. At the same time, his books often focused specifically on themes of inclusiveness and the embracing of differences. One thinks of Horton Hears a Who, which stresses the fundamental “humanity” of the Whoville inhabitants, even though they’re too minute to be seen…

“A person’s a person, no matter how small.”

No doubt, the times and the standards of acceptability have changed.

It’s not hard for an old White guy like me to appreciate that Black or Asian people would be put off by the more questionable race-suggestive details in Dr. Seuss books. Despite the eagerness of Geisel’s defenders to tag this controversy as political correctness run amok, the images are there, and they are pretty insulting.

But in fairness, one has to ask…

Do people of color never say anything disparaging about Whites?

Are all non-White artists and cartoonists so high-minded as to never distort the features of Caucasian characters?

And don’t give me any blather about how only Whites can be racists because they have all the power. As Dr. Seuss might have put it…

A racist’s a racist, no matter —
well, no matter how their skin is toned.

(Forgive me. The poetry doesn’t work, but you get the point.)

The Dr. Seuss controversy takes us back to that elevated pronouncement made by defenders of 1980s TV smut…

“One person’s moral values shouldn’t impinge upon someone else’s artistic freedom.”

That might have been too smugly condescending a dismissal of Terry Rakolta and other objectors at the time. But the TV defenders weren’t entirely wrong. There was a principle involved.

Granted, the principle isn’t clear-cut or easy to defend. We’ve been grappling with its many intricacies and contradictions ever since the First Amendment was added to our Constitution. It remains a central concern of basic liberty. And I don’t see an answer to our moral dilemma on the horizon.

Much as we might wish to avoid offensiveness, we can’t allow the impressive creativity of Theodore Geisel to be canceled with the “RACIST!” stamp. He made too great a contribution — to learning and to childhood joy. Rather, we must evaluate his legacy with a proper sense of balance and proportion.

At least, that’s what I’d do, if I ran the zoo.

____________

 

Tristin Hopper, a reporter and columnist for Canada’s National Post, runs down six illustrations that have drawn fire, and recounts some of the criticisms which have been directed at Dr. Seuss — including over a particular political drawing…

“One 1942 cartoon even endorses Japanese-American internment by showing Japanese-Americans as disloyal citizens stockpiling explosives and ‘waiting for the signal from home.’”

Hopper notes, however, that Theodore Geisel was “an early advocate for strong U.S. action against Nazi Germany,” and observes that, even though he used racial stereotypes…

“Geisel could simultaneously take stances against racism and prejudice, even when those concepts were against the mainstream.”

Check out Hopper’s report at…

https://nationalpost.com/entertainment/books/here-are-the-wrong-illustrations-that-got-six-dr-seuss-books-cancelled

 

Britain’s Daily Mail observed the outrage at cancelling Dr. Seuss books. Included were complaints about eBay dropping Geisel’s work while continuing to carry Hitler’s Mein Kampf and the anti-Semitic writings of Louis Farrakhan…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9326645/Ebay-BANS-people-reselling-six-offensive-Dr-Seuss.html

 

Writer Emily Zanotti views the Dr. Seuss controversy from the vantage of her own family situation, and sees a certain irony…

 

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson looked at the Dr. Seuss issue, and highlighted the extent to which Theodore Geisel tried to emphasize tolerance and social unity, despite the occasional lapses into ethnic clichés. He noted that Geisel’s view — one which might be described as traditional liberalism — is unacceptable to today’s Left…