question about racism in classic cartoons

[speedy fast]

Considering how politically incorrect cartoons were during the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, I was wondering two things:

1. was the KKK portrayed in any cartoons?

2. was the "N" word ever said on-screen?

[Dafffy Duck]

The KKK never appeared (as far as I know anyway)

I don't think the 'N' word was ever used on screen, though I've heard it was written on the script for "Scrub Me Momma With A Boogie Beat"

[dandu]

The N word was said in a silent krazy kat cartoon.

[Tom Stathes]

The 1930s-1950s almost represents the less "racist" half of classic theatrical entertainment. The KKK is parodied in a 1926 Disney short and "*N*****" was used in a caption in a 1916 Paul Terry short.
It is unfair to make other assumptions if one has not researched or seen a majority of animation's fledgling beginnings.
Tom

[J Lee]

The "N" word is inferred, but not spoken, in one Warner Bros. cartoon (and that's all I'm saying on the record about the subject).

[barnyarddawg]

The most racist thing I can think of is a Van Beuren cartoon called Uncle Tom and Little Eva, which features chained slaves on the auction block. That scene alone is worth 1000 "N" words.

[Tom Stathes]

The most racist thing I can think of is a Van Beuren cartoon called Uncle Tom and Little Eva, which features chained slaves on the auction block. That scene alone is worth 1000 "N" words.
Yes, it's a pretty bad egg. But still worthwhile having in celluloid form ;)

[The Silver Fox]

wasn't there a rumer that the N word had slipped into a

Bosko toon, that later had been exciced when the cartoons were sold for reairing on Sydication?

[Studio Toledo]

The more I think about it, it's rather funny they didn't even slip in the N-word or too many KKK references if some writer felt that made me laugh the most of all.

(having heard "porch monkey" in Clerks II, why would I imagine that term getting used in these cartoons as well)

[JDWeil]

Speedy Fast~

To my knowledge the KKK was never portrayed in cartoons of the sound era... The dreaded "N" word was used I believe once in a sound cartoon.


THere was a KKK gag in one of Disney's early Alice shorts during a live-action sequence.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I would assume that any animated cartoon that might contain a racial slur would have been produced before the Production Code of 1934. Use of racial slurs was one of their no-no's. (Although the term "darky" is used in Gone With The Wind in 1939.)

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Although it isn't a portrayal of the KKK per se, in Bimbo's Initiation hooded figures chase him around and ask menacingly, "Wanna be a member?"

[Dafffy Duck]

It is unfair to make other assumptions if one has not researched or seen a majority of animation's fledgling beginnings.
Tom

Who are you refering to when you say this ?, who made "unfair assumptions"?

[Tom Stathes]

Who are you refering to when you say this ?, who made "unfair assumptions"?
It was indirectly in response to your first post. If you were referring to 1930s to 1950s cartoons only as originally asked then it need not apply. However this makes the earlier period irrelevant as usual. :shame:
-Tom

P.S. We can't forget the 'clever' use of the words 'coon' and 'Cohen' in Blackton's LIGHTNING SKETCHES.

[Dafffy Duck]

It was indirectly in response to your first post. If you were referring to 1930s to 1950s cartoons only as originally asked then it need not apply. However this makes the earlier period irrelevant as usual. :shame:

The way you described by original post as an "unfair assumption", sound as if I stated that my knowledge was fact , yes I did falsley state that the KKK never appeared and that the "N" word was never used , but I made sure that I wrote "As far as I know", because I know that I have not seen the majority of cartoons before 1940, and that I may very well have been wrong, and I was, but that can hardly be counted as an unfair assumption as I assumed nothing.

[Tom Stathes]

The way you described by original post as an "unfair assumption", sound as if I stated that my knowledge was fact , yes I did falsley state that the KKK never appeared and that the "N" word was never used , but I made sure that I wrote "As far as I know", because I know that I have not seen the majority of cartoons before 1940, and that I may very well have been wrong, and I was, but that can hardly be counted as an unfair assumption as I assumed nothing.
Not to worry, I totally understand what you mean. My contempt for "unfair assumptions" is more loosely aimed at the greater animation history community which has a habit of lightly touching upon early animation but not delving into it on a deeper level. In no way is it a personal attack on you, and my apologies if it came off as being such.
Tom

[Dafffy Duck]

Dont worry, I was not offended, I just wanted to make sure you knew that I was not trying to state my knowledge as if it were a fact.

[pablo]

I think the racist elements, or what is deemed racist now, was not put into the cartoons out of racism but stereotype. There's big difference.

[Tom Stathes]

I think the racist elements, or what is deemed racist now, was not put into the cartoons out of racism but stereotype. There's big difference.
I agree. There has to be an reasonable understanding...I don't believe these animators were outright racist bigots, I think they were just enacting normal practices of what was acceptable at the time.

[pablo]

Stereotypes, by the way, did not end with "racist" portrayal of blacks. Numerous instances can be found of all sorts of other cultural stereotypes, including whites.

[Tom Stathes]

What's funny is how no one really cares about hillbillies and white trash being portrayed in the media. I don't care myself, but it is curious how this isn't deemed politically incorrect. Media has to walk on eggshells around certain ethnicities, but is free to parody others. I don't see the "equality" in that.

[Cartman]

Black stereotypes still haven't ended. They're alive and well, just in another form.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kc4EwD5hoA

[dandu]

Heres something, if they think these old cartoons and shows like Amos and Andy are racist, what about this popular cartoon called the Proud Family or the Boondocks?

[Mark J]

Amos and Andy was a radio show where two white men did black dialect, and the humor was that most of the black characters were shiftless, lazy, and could not speak or pronounce words properly and plots revolved around avoiding honest work etc. - i.e. it fed into and off of racist stereotypes of the time. The Amos & Andy movie in the early 30's was worse - the radio actors wore black face along with other actors in black face and put on a minstrel show. This is quite different from Boondocks which is created by an African American cartoonist - he is portraying his particular viewpoint as an African American and not a view of blacks as an outsider. What I have seen of the Proud Family is not racist or stereotypical and I don't understand your criticism. Now, Amos & Andy the TV show is a different story - black actors were used and although there was the basis of racist stereotype and white writers etc. there were some positive portrayals and genuine humor, as well as excellent acting. The problem the NAACP had with the show is that there were no other portrayals of blacks on TV at the time so there was no balance, a valid point.

[Do-Do]

What's funny is how no one really cares about hillbillies and white trash being portrayed in the media. I don't care myself, but it is curious how this isn't deemed politically incorrect. Media has to walk on eggshells around certain ethnicities, but is free to parody others. I don't see the "equality" in that.

Well, white trash/hillbillies/rednecks/whatever were never legally discriminated against or enslaved in this country, so it's not exactly the same.

[dandu]

Sorry about that last script, I was talking about Amos and Andy TV show which had an all black cast and also they thought the PJs is racist, thats created by Eddie Muphy too!

[Tom Stathes]

Well, white trash/hillbillies/rednecks/whatever were never legally discriminated against or enslaved in this country, so it's not exactly the same.
It may not be the same, true, but for how long will slavery be a sensitive issue? It hasn't happened in this country since the 1860s.
I just fail to see how one stereotype is ok when another is not.

[sarah]

Well, white trash/hillbillies/rednecks/whatever were never legally discriminated against or enslaved in this country, so it's not exactly the same.
The American Eugenics Society formed in approx 1900 managed to get laws passed to enable the forcable sterilisation of "white trash" and other "undesirable" (that usually meant poor) members of the American population. The Nazis allegedly took their ideas on racial purity from this organisation. So yes, in a way rednecks and white trash were legally discriminated against and the laws were not repealed until the 1960s.

http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/exhibits/treasures/aes.htm

[pablo]

Stereotyping is stereotyping, whether the person being stereotyped is black, white, or another color. What about other cultural stereotypes in cartoons? French are always portrayed in a certain way, with accordion music, heavy accent, wine and cheese, etc. Russians are always portrayed "kick-dancing", again with heavy accents, usually nearby a grizzly bear, etc. And this can go on to describe other ethnicities. This is not exclusive to blacks. Why then is that taboo, but not showing the wolf in Pigs in a Polka kick-dancing, or impersonating a (highly overstyleized) Gypsy?

[dandu]

Pablo has a great point and I think that way as well.

[Tom Stathes]

Same here, Dandu. Thusly, my point of view is this: Either allow all stereotypes (to a reasonable extent- not like minstrel-type blackface) or allow none. The latter makes for a bland, oblivious reality.

[Detroiter]

It may not be the same, true, but for how long will slavery be a sensitive issue? It hasn't happened in this country since the 1860s.
I just fail to see how one stereotype is ok when another is not.
I don't have time to give more than a quick response on this, but the Wall Street Journal from the 2002-04 period reported a large study conducted by a number of universities (one of which I think was Temple) all over the country. Two candidates were sent into white-collar job interviews, one white man, one black man. Their background, age, education, shoot even height and weight,everything, were as identical as they could arrange. White man got the job every time. As the study got deeper, they began making differences in the candidates: black man clean record, white man convicted of selling small amount of drugs. White man gets the job everytime. White man convicted for selling a lot of drugs? White man gets the job. White man serves a few years in jail. White man gets the job. White man serves several years in prison? White man gets the job unless it's really a lot of years.

So one well-qualified black man with a clean record has the same chance of getting a good job as a convicted felon who did hard time for several years.

There were a lot of variations in the study as to age, gender and the like, and though the situation was better for black women than black men, the results were pretty consistent.

We still have a serious problem in this nation when it comes to the color of a person's skin, folks.

If I walk into a room, the people in their will have to get to know me before they form an opinion of me. If I'm black, though, I'm black as soon as I walk in.

Will keeping old cartoons out of sight help this problem? No, it probably won't have much of an effect. Will affirmative action programs solve this problem. They haven't yet, have they?

But we cannot say that there is no problem, because there is. What can we do? Try to be sensitive of the feelings of others, and not so sensitive about myself is a place I could start. So Catholic jokes are OK, as long as they're good natured.

[Mark J]

It may not be the same, true, but for how long will slavery be a sensitive issue? It hasn't happened in this country since the 1860s.
I just fail to see how one stereotype is ok when another is not.

Slavery should always be a "sensitive issue". The vast majority of African Americans are descended from people who were brought here by force, sold at auction, and forced to work without pay and without any legal rights or even legal recognition that they were human. White Americans - Christians, Jews, Catholics, came here by choice, to find work or a better life. My grandparents came to America to flee discrimination and Anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe. Blacks had no such experience. Just because the legal concept of slavery ended after the Civil War, doesn't mean de-facto slavery didn't continue long after. The sharecropper system was set up as basically a slavery replacement - black farm workers compelled to work on "rented" land, "sell" their product to the owners who gave them whatever they decided it was worth, usually just enough to cover the "rent" and then the sharecropper went into hock for supplies which he could never pay off. This continued well into the 20th century - many people are alive who remember this form of legal servitude. Don't forget legal segregation which lasted in America until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - that wasn't too long ago. Only Black Americans were legally restricted where they could live, work, shop, eat, travel, etc. Stereotypes of hillbillies, created by whites for whites to laugh at, is nowhere near the same as the history of racism we are talking about which underlies racist depictions in popular culture.

[pablo]

While I appreciate what Mark is saying, I must respectfully disagree, and reiterate what I wrote before: stereotyping is stereotyping. Stereotypical depictions of blacks in cartoons that are now banned were not used with pure racist intentions and prejudice, and thus, while certainly racism continues to be a sad part of our society, it cannot be linked with slavery, etc., in my opinion.

I can see how somebody who's black could be offended by a short like Coal Black, but that person must realize that the creators of the short did not make it specifically with racist intentions. I myself, being of Russian heritage, could be offended by the aforementioned wolf from Pigs in a Polka, but again I realize the animators' intentions were not those of racism but of stereotyping. Stereotyping in comedy is funny; racism isn't. Some people don't see the difference.

[Tom Stathes]

Again, I agree with Pablo. Mark- what you about about slavery is true, but the point I'm trying to make is that we are so far removed from that society in this country. And of course descendants of slaves are very present in this society, they themselves are not victims of slavery.
In any case, we should not forget the atrocities such as slavery. How we individually react to these things will always vary, and nothing can be done to please everyone especially in censoring classic animation. Censorship is a dangerous thing. Can anyone say Fahrenheit 451?

[Mark J]

I hope you didn't think I was advocating censorship - I do not think that cartoons should be censored or edited or banned. This is the worst thing to do. They should be allowed to be seen so people can draw their own conclusions on the intents of the animators and learn about societal views and attitudes from the time the cartoons were created.

I do think we will all soon have a good opportunity to see how slavery is linked to the depiction of blacks in cartoons and how recently it was fresh in the mind of America - Southern Fried Rabbit, a 1950's Bugs cartoon, something everyone saw on Saturday mornings (edited), made when my parents were already adults, not that long before I was born, is going to be on LTGC 4. Watch the previously edited scene - Bugs in blackface playing slave to Sam, Bugs playing Lincoln, basically making comedy of slavery and emancipation. Not in a Krazy Kat cartoon from the 1910's or forgotten Van Buren toon from the early 1930's, but a mainstream popular Bugs Bunny cartoon from the 1950's.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

The American Eugenics Society formed in approx 1900 managed to get laws passed to enable the forcable sterilisation of "white trash" and other "undesirable" (that usually meant poor) members of the American population. The Nazis allegedly took their ideas on racial purity from this organisation. So yes, in a way rednecks and white trash were legally discriminated against and the laws were not repealed until the 1960s.

http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/exhibits/treasures/aes.htm

I just read about eugenics not too long ago in a book titled "War Against the Weak". (http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/) It's a fascinating, yet obscure subject and I recommend to book to everyone.

People who consider themselves to be rednecks seem to like the humorous stereotypes that represent them. Otherwise, how did Jeff Foxworthy become so successful? Those of us who are not rednecks seem to find Mr. Foxworthy's "you just might be a redneck if..." routine pretty tiresome.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I think Mark J and Detroiter make some excellent and insightful points. Their comments were cogent and nuanced, and I can't add much more to the debate than they already have. I just wanted them to know that I support what they've written so far.

[pablo]

I also agree with what they both are saying, while also trying to make a case for delineation between racism and stereotyping. I hope I'm not coming across as a racist person, which I am far from in reality, being a very tolerant person and an admirer of different cultures.

[travis t]

I know today we still have racism going on, and its a little riduclous sometimes and sad. I am a white person and I don't want to sound racist here, but other races will look at whites and hate us for what has happened to them in the past. I am only 23 I have not done anything to anybody thats racist or stereotyping, or made someone my slave or told them that they can't go to this school or come to this country. I was born way after all this has happened, so I have not personnally done anything to anybody. I also have friends of different races. Still some people out there hate us and I don't understand why.

[Dan Porceddu]

I think the classic cartoon community over the last few years has been reluctant to acknowledge that racism is still a sensitive issue in this day and age as a way of protecting our hobby against censorship. I don't think this is the right way of doing things. I don't support censoring or banning any classic cartoons, obviously, but to ask when slavery will stop being a sensitive issue is simply misguided. There have to be a few ground rules established:
1. Slavery is wrong, no matter what race is being enslaved.
2. No person alive in America today is responsible for the enslavement of anyone else, nor has any person alive in America ever been enslaved by a fellow American.

So why is slavery still a sensitive issue? It all hangs on the first part. Slavery is wrong, and there is no justification for what happened in America up to the 1860s. Telling someone to get over it, to move on, to make it stop being a sensitive issue is the first step in a process that basically leads to hiding shameful history. And you know what happens when we try to hide our past. If we don't learn from our mistakes, we are doomed to repeat them.

As for the "stereotyping is stereotyping" comments, it's important to look at the intent and context of each stereotype used in a cartoon. A french character will be accompanied with accordian music, a stereotypical accent, and maybe something to do with cheese. Why is this different to having a black character being slow-witted and big-lipped? Because no one making those cartoons thought that being born in France made you inherently inferior to anyone else, nor was the stereotype based in any sort of history that relied on such a belief in order for the stereotype to work. The case has obviously been quite different for black people in the U.S., in the past.

The tasteless stereotypes in classic cartoons should be left alone not because racism is no longer an issue in this day and age, but rather to serve as a reminder of what took place in the past. Each cartoon is a product of its times and reflects the attitudes and beliefs that were prevalent then; censoring it is just as silly as wondering why slavery is still a sensitive issue.

[Dan Porceddu]

I don't have time to give more than a quick response on this, but the Wall Street Journal from the 2002-04 period reported a large study conducted by a number of universities (one of which I think was Temple) all over the country. Two candidates were sent into white-collar job interviews, one white man, one black man. Their background, age, education, shoot even height and weight,everything, were as identical as they could arrange. White man got the job every time. As the study got deeper, they began making differences in the candidates: black man clean record, white man convicted of selling small amount of drugs. White man gets the job everytime. White man convicted for selling a lot of drugs? White man gets the job. White man serves a few years in jail. White man gets the job. White man serves several years in prison? White man gets the job unless it's really a lot of years.

So one well-qualified black man with a clean record has the same chance of getting a good job as a convicted felon who did hard time for several years.

There were a lot of variations in the study as to age, gender and the like, and though the situation was better for black women than black men, the results were pretty consistent.

We still have a serious problem in this nation when it comes to the color of a person's skin, folks.

If I walk into a room, the people in their will have to get to know me before they form an opinion of me. If I'm black, though, I'm black as soon as I walk in.

Will keeping old cartoons out of sight help this problem? No, it probably won't have much of an effect. Will affirmative action programs solve this problem. They haven't yet, have they?

But we cannot say that there is no problem, because there is. What can we do? Try to be sensitive of the feelings of others, and not so sensitive about myself is a place I could start. So Catholic jokes are OK, as long as they're good natured.

I must say that I wholeheartedly agree with this excellent post.

[wackyoverkhaki]

Well, you've already heard my opinions. I look foward to the day I can own the black cartoons on an DVD official release, you know, in high quality without the blurriness, muddiness, etc. typical of bootlegs:) It's going to be pretty pathetic if takes til 2050.

[Mark J]

Excellent post Dan. I completely agree. We can't rationalize our valid desire to see uncensored cartoons the way they were intended to be seen with a false belief that racism is no longer an issue or relevant, or that all stereotypical jokes are equal regardless of the target or intent. I must say that this has been an excellent discussion and it was good to see all viewpoints expressed.

[Emmanuel Cruz]

It's a shame that I haven't jumped into this very intriguing discussion earlier. Most of the viewpoints I have read from my fellow TTTPers are from Caucasians (if I am wrong, please correct me.) But try to hear out from someone who has dealt with some form of harsh racism in his life: a minority. I am a Latino, and I've been the target of discrimination several times in my life. I've been called a spic, a Communist (because of my Cuban heritage), a switchblade wielder (Puerto Rican heritage), and many other awful slurs. But what do I do about this? I ignore it. Sometimes I laugh off what I hear. Why do you ask? Because I look at the person that has decided to mock me, and realize that I am a better person.

For a Latino, I feel I'm doing well. I graduated my high school in the top 25 in my class, and I'm about to start attending college this Wednesday. I constantly push myself to reach my highest potential possible in order to better myself as a person, as well as benefit my family and friends later on in life. Some people find it a bit unnerving that a Latino is trying to better himself, instead of the usual mooching off the government and impregnating every girl in sight. (See, stereotypes I have to live with.) When I hear or see the depictions in media against my heritage, I laugh it off, to show that what is shown is a result of pure ignorance, and I try to "sock it to the man" by making myself better than my detractors.

However, there are those in my ethic background, as well as others, such as African Americans, who choose to embody the stereotypes that have been placed upon us before our births. A wonderful example is something that I constantly target: The rap/hip-hop culture, as well as reggaeton. (For those who do not know what reggaeton is, think of Spanish rap, accompanied with the same rhythm in every song. You'll recognize it.) These videos and songs usually throw the same filth towards audiences: the ideas of sex, drugs, violence, and the such.

And I SEE with my own eyes how this music is used to lower people I know. MY OWN FAMILY, too. I caught my little cousin listening to a rap song talking about raping and murdering a woman, and my cousins simply waved it off as "ghetto life." It's a shame that some Latinos, as well as African Americans, aren't strong minded enough to see such representations of their ethic/racial heritage being manipulated and grotesquely distorted, and then embodying or acknowledging these "ideas" as truth. What I've been trying to say, pretty much, is that with the issue of racism in media, is that it depends on who is watching it. There are some minorities, such as myself and Tom, that do not take it to heart, and see these atrocities and use that as fuel to better themselves. There are others who accept this nonsense as the reality of their lives, and it's a damn shame.

I had an odd experience once. I was accepted into the Central New Jersey Regional Chorus several months ago, and I believe I was the only Latino in the group. I got my fair share of stares just because of the fact I was darker than most of the people there, and when some knew where I came from (the inner city), they were unnerved even more. But I saw that, and then used what I know and can do (singing wise) to show these people that I'm not what you think I am. Just because I have tan skin, doesn't mean that I'm lower than you, and I'm more than meets the eye.

-Emmanuel:bosko:

[Do-Do]

I've been called a spic, a Communist (because of my Cuban heritage), a switchblade wielder (Puerto Rican heritage), and many other awful slurs. But what do I do about this? I ignore it.
Some people are just a-holes, for example, just a few weeks ago I was with a friend of mine who has a little Spanish heritage and he has somewhat tan skin, and someone in a passing car yelled at him, calling him a "spic". Now what is the point of that?

instead of the usual mooching off the government and impregnating every girl in sight.
Oh don't worry, I can take care of that.....


And I SEE with my own eyes how this music is used to lower people I know. MY OWN FAMILY, too. I caught my little cousin listening to a rap song talking about raping and murdering a woman, and my cousins simply waved it off as "ghetto life."
Yeah, a lot of rap can be garbage but there is good stuff out there, for example Mos Def and Talib Kweli.

ANYWAY! I find it strange that racial stereotypes were so common in old cartoons that we end up discussing it to this extent. The thing that troubles me about most of the racial gags is that they were done without trying to be hurtful....i.e. these very talented animators/directors/etc had these attitudes so ingrained in them that they thought it would be OK to degrade an entire race for a cheap laugh in a cartoon. You see, times do change don't they.

[The Spectre]

The tasteless stereotypes in classic cartoons should be left alone not because racism is no longer an issue in this day and age, but rather to serve as a reminder of what took place in the past. Each cartoon is a product of its times and reflects the attitudes and beliefs that were prevalent then; censoring it is just as silly as wondering why slavery is still a sensitive issue.

A problem with this though is that cartoons naturally appeal to children, and some children viewing such stereotypes might pick up the impression that they are an accurate depiction of black people or illustrate an acceptable way to behave towards black people.

[Cartman]

A problem with this though is that cartoons naturally appeal to children, and some children viewing such stereotypes might pick up the impression that they are an accurate depiction of black people or illustrate an acceptable way to behave towards black people.
Like they don't already see enough of that in the media of today.

[Tom Stathes]

A problem with this though is that cartoons naturally appeal to children, and some children viewing such stereotypes might pick up the impression that they are an accurate depiction of black people or illustrate an acceptable way to behave towards black people.
I grew up watching JASPER IN A JAM, ALL THIS AND RABBIT STEW, and others...I don't think they did much to alter my perception. I still believe that sentiments such as racism are mostly passed down from generation to generation or formed on negative observations made in daily life.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

A problem with this though is that cartoons naturally appeal to children, and some children viewing such stereotypes might pick up the impression that they are an accurate depiction of black people or illustrate an acceptable way to behave towards black people.

I don't think it would be a big deal to allow those cartoons on DVD if they had clear warnings on the front of the box stating that the contents were meant for adults only, or simply that they contain racist imagery.

It seems unfair that cartoons are a particular target for this type of scrutiny, because of the assumption they were made for children. After all, BIRTH OF A NATION (the most racist movie ever made) and GONE WITH THE WIND are on DVD, available for sale in every video store outlet in America, without any warnings on their labels.

[Emmanuel Cruz]

Another point that I failed to mention before:

I hate how people who are not the ones being stereotyped are the ones who are so gung-ho about the fear of offending others. I don't mean to attack Caucasians, but I hate the oversensitivity some Caucasians have over stereotypes directed towards minorities, including Latinos. We are ones that are perfectly capable of determining what we deem is tasteful, and what is not. It's this mentality among non-minorities that annoys me.

-Emmanuel:bosko: