Sunday, April 11, 2021

Cancel Culture, part 2: Dr. Seuss

While my initial inspiration for writing about cancel culture was the John Schnatter booster going after it, so much has come up since then that there is a veritable wealth of material. 

People are decrying "cancel culture" right and left. 

Phrasing it that way not only hints at the ubiquity but also works as a political metaphor. And one of the complainants is John Schnatter! It's all connected.

Recent specific complaints about cancel culture include Schnatter and Andrew Cuomo (who differ politically, at least a little) for themselves, and others clamoring on behalf of Piers Morgan, Winston Marshall (the banjo player in Mumford & Sons), and Dr. Seuss.

My goal is to look at some of those and try and get beyond the reflexive response. That will cover multiple posts, but we will start with just Dr. Seuss.

In the case of Dr. Seuss, Dr. Seuss Enterprises decided to no longer publish six of the books because of offensive stereotypes depicted therein.

One possible hint that conservative backlash is not sincere is that the most common form of protest has been readings of Green Eggs and Ham, which is not one of the books being removed from publication. 

One complaint has been that Dr. Seuss did not have any children, so he is not the one making these decisions. This was also brought up when people thought The Cat in the Hat movie was terrible. (Apparently his widow agreed.)

That can be difficult, and some heirs (who may not be the literal children) may be overly protective, where others may seem overly mercenary. The law covers what is required, but there is a lot of room for variation within that.

In this case, it is the foundation's place to make the decision. It is not government censorship, it doesn't recall already existing editions of those books, and it doesn't do anything to the more than 50 other books he wrote.

There can be two good reasons for the decision. 

One is that children learning to read are also learning about the rest of the world and people. Not indoctrinating them with harmful stereotypes seems like a good idea. 

The books are for children, even if adults often like them or have fond memories of them. 

(This is why the complaints of how you can defend "W.A.P." -- a song that is not aimed at children -- while being against If I Ran the Zoo are specious arguments.)

In addition, you can wonder about Dr. Seuss's intent, and how he would have felt about it. It is true that he produced propaganda during WWII that was anti-Japanese and played into stereotypes, which can be a whole other subject. However, it is also true that the man who wrote The Lorax may have wanted a better world, and could very well have grown along with his books.

Richard Scarry was able to go back during his lifetime and update one of his classic books to make it more inclusive:

https://www.upworthy.com/8-changes-that-were-made-to-a-classic-richard-scarry-book-to-keep-up-with-the-times-progress

It is not impossible that Dr. Seuss might have done the same. His death may mean that the books cannot be altered with his blessing, but it does not mean that this subset of his books need to be published in perpetuity, freezing those stereotypes in amber.

I like this perspective from his godson:

https://www.danvillesanramon.com/news/2021/03/15/dr-seuss-godson-weighs-in-on-the-culture-wars-uproar-over-decision-to-stop-publishing-several-books

Really, is there any cancellation here? The author is still beloved, with many books that are beloved, but with some that might have done harm in the past now retired from doing harm. That was decided by people who care about his legacy but who do also care about capitalism and profit.

If the objection is going to be to racist stereotypes becoming less common, then say that outright.

No comments: