Tintin book deemed as 'racist'. Goes on trial.

[TheLastOne36]

Seems like a stupid idea to me...

PC'ism has gotten waaaay out of hand.

 

[Richard Cribb]

@Richard Cribb: you're the only voter for a ban on it. Could you please explain why?

That is actually quite disappointing. I had expected better from a few here.
We live on a planet with limited ressources. Which means that we can't publish absolutely everything somebody writes or draws, unless some people volunteer to plant trees to at least the outer of the rings of Saturn.
Given this, we must separate snot and moustaches. And if, as in this case, we deal with something that lacks didactic and aestethic value, then I for one see no reason why it should get priority to something worthwhile. And bringing great literature as the Bible or the works of Mark Twain into it is irrelevant.
Because I don't want it banned solely because of its doubtful political content. There are a lot of great reactionary writers,Balzac, Hamsun and TS Eliot comes to mind. I would never dream of exposing those to any censorship. But TinTin, especially those earlier albums, I'd be more than happy to leave to the flames.

Seems like a stupid idea to me...

PC'ism has gotten waaaay out of hand.

What is stupid is to play the politically correct card, which indeed is the last refuge of the political scoundrel, every time somebody asks for a little decency and maturity in politics.
Do you even know the origins of that expression?

 

[Leifmk]

I was raised reading French copies of Tintin, and I must've read Tintin in Congo when I was five? Frankly, I thought it was fantastic and quite hilarious, if not darker in tone to a lot of Tintin.

It's an early work (only the second Tintin story made) and doesn't have quite the same tone, or quality, as most of Hergé's later output. Apart from the unusually racist caricatures, Tintin comes across as a bit of an asshat in ways he wouldn't be later (blowing up wildlife, etc.) The other early stories (most especially the Soviet adventure but also the American one) are also pretty rough and full of caricatures and stereotypes.

 

[azzaman333]

If you don't like it, don't buy it and stop giving it free publicity.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

That is actually quite disappointing. I had expected better from a few here.
We live on a planet with limited ressources. Which means that we can't publish absolutely everything somebody writes or draws, unless some people volunteer to plant trees to at least the outer of the rings of Saturn.
Given this, we must separate snot and moustaches. And if, as in this case, we deal with something that lacks didactic and aestethic value, then I for one see no reason why it should get priority to something worthwhile. And bringing great literature as the Bible or the works of Mark Twain into it is irrelevant.
Because I don't want it banned solely because of its doubtful political content. There are a lot of great reactionary writers,Balzac, Hamsun and TS Eliot comes to mind. I would never dream of exposing those to any censorship. But TinTin, especially those earlier albums, I'd be more than happy to leave to the flames.

But wood is a renewable resource. And, of course, we can host these things digitally now, if we so wished.

 

[Formaldehyde]

This is going to be really bad news to all of Rupert Murdoch's holdings out there when they find out that only material deemed worthwhile by some has the right to be printed on such a scarce resource.

 

[Richard Cribb]

But wood is a renewable resource. And, of course, we can host these things digitally now, if we so wished.

That's true but it is still a limited resource. There are plenty of things fit to print, but to my mind this is not one of them.
I don't see why anybody should waste any time on hosting such things digitally either, but regrettably such animals probably exist.
Anyway, I was asked what I thought if I were to decide and I am honest enough to state that to me censorship is not a dirty word if it is applied with a minimum of sense .

This is going to be really bad news to all of Rupert Murdoch's holdings out there when they find out that only material deemed worthwhile by some has the right to be printed on such a scarce resource.

All published material ever have been "deemed worthwhile to be printed on such a scarce resource" by some, and in the real world it si precisely the Murdochs that usually are the somes. In principle, there is no difference if I do the same with another reason behind it. perhaps even somebody might prefer the last alternative.

 

[RedRalph]

I absolutely love Tintin, but I don't think this should be in the kids section, hence my vote. Incidentally, you should see how the commies are portrayed in Tintin and the land of the Soviets, if you think this is bad

 

[Snorrius]

I think that tovarisch Bienvenu Mbutu Mondondo should go back to Congo and stop harassing Belgian natives because of an old book .

And Africa did not evolved since then much. It made a step forward while being within colonial empires but since that time it mostly devolved back (looking at Zimbabwe).

 

[Formaldehyde]

All published material ever have been "deemed worthwhile to be printed on such a scarce resource" by some, and in the real world it si precisely the Murdochs that usually are the somes. In principle, there is no difference if I do the same with another reason behind it. perhaps even somebody might prefer the last alternative.

I certainly can't see any problems appointing some reactionaries to determine what should or should not be printed. What could possibly go wrong?

I absolutely love Tintin, but I don't think this should be in the kids section, hence my vote. Incidentally, you should see how the commies are portrayed in Tintin and the land of the Soviets, if you think this is bad

I think it would be quite appropriate to teach young kids about stereotypes and how their acceptance has changed over the years. Then if they ever are exposed to them in the adult section of a library on on an old TV show, they will understand the issues and be able to deal with them in a sensible manner.

The other alternative is to completely ban cartoons like Heckel and Jeckel from ever being shown to any child, because they may somehow teach a new group of youngsters to hate people who are different than themselves. I think this approach is about as sensible as banning all violence or sexual innuendos from any TV shows which may be seen by children.

I think I prefer the educational approach versus the censorship approach.

 

[Snorrius]

That is actually quite disappointing. I had expected better from a few here.
We live on a planet with limited ressources. Which means that we can't publish absolutely everything somebody writes or draws, unless some people volunteer to plant trees to at least the outer of the rings of Saturn.
[...]
But TinTin, especially those earlier albums, I'd be more than happy to leave to the flames.

Actually now we can just store and distribute anything we want in electronic form.

 

[Richard Cribb]

I certainly can't see any problems appointing some reactionaries to determine what should or should not be printed. What could possibly go wrong?

Yes, yes I saw that film too. I fail to see the relevance, though, given the criterias I gave above for censorship. The less reactionaries are to decide, the better.
What you describe above seems actually to be a quite accurate description of our own, present-day situation.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I certainly can't see any problems appointing some reactionaries to determine what should or should not be printed. What could possibly go wrong?

I think it would be quite appropriate to teach young kids about stereotypes and how their acceptance has changed over the years. Then if they ever are exposed to them in the adult section of a library on on an old TV show, they will understand the issues and be able to deal with them in a sensible manner.

The other alternative is to completely ban cartoons like Heckel and Jeckel from ever being shown to any child, because they may somehow teach a new group of youngsters to hate people who are different than themselves. I think this approach is about as sensible as banning all violence or sexual innuendos from any TV shows which may be seen by children.

Shame this song was written after the film came out - Go for it Huw!!! What a solo at the end!


Link to video.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What you describe above seems actually to be a quite accurate description of our own, present-day situation.

That is what scares me so much about censorship in any form. I think it is far better to teach children to deal with racism and bigotry, instead of trying to pretend they no longer exist by deliberately hiding all traces of it from the not-so-distant past.


Link to video.

 

[Richard Cribb]

Actually now we can just store and distribute anything we want in electronic form.

Yes we can. But that is another medium. Don't know about you, but I have a large library which is quite useful to me. Of course, this might have something to do with age, of course.
But very well. Then my proposition would be don't print that blasted comic book, but host it digitally if it means so much to you. Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
On a different note, I am not impressed of your historical analysis of Africa.

That is what scares me so much about censorship in any form. I think it is far better to teach children to deal with racism and bigotry instead of trying to pretend they no longer exist by deliberately hiding all traces of it from the past.

That is very touching. But if you had read my posts properly you would have discovered that I did not propose to censor all racist literature. I also tried to hint that a censorless society is practically impossible.

 

[amadeus]

I certainly can't see any problems appointing some reactionaries to determine what should or should not be printed. What could possibly go wrong?

Wouldn't the number of book-related fires decrease rather than increase?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Wouldn't the number of book-related fires decrease rather than increase?

Ever even looked at a list of books people in the US want to ban or have banned in the past?


50 Banned Books That Everyone Should Read

http://books.elliottback.com/banned-books-list-2008-to-2009/

I’m looking forward to see what foolish conservatives, religious nuts, and other assorted groups of close-minded individuals try to ban next year. As usual, the rule on banned books is “if you don’t want to read it, no one is forcing you to check it out!”

While close-mindedness isn't exclusively the domain of the provincial far-right, it is frequently found there.

 

[Lillefix]

Ever even looked at a list of books people in the US want to ban or have banned in the past?
50 Banned Books That Everyone Should Read

Best shopping list I've seen in ages.

 

[aneeshm]

All books (classic and contemporary) should be put before a Diversity Committee consisting of at least one of the following groups: homosexuals, Muslims, blacks, women, people with low incomes, and the physically and the mentally challenged. If any one of these representatives feels that her (or his) group is unfairly portrayed, the government will prohibit ownership of the book except for those able to successfully complete a state-administered Tolerance Test in order to determine that this book will not negatively impact their view of said groups and thus will not result in Turner Diaries-style violence seen manifested in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

By your command.

A quotation I find myself invoking more and more frequently:

Liberalism, Old and New

“They spoke much of tolerance, because they needed the very same for themselves, but already at that time there was no-one more intolerant than they against all those who gainsaid their opinions.” [1]

“To the extent society becomes liberal it becomes inhuman, and as the process approaches completion the society becomes unable to function or survive.” [2]

[1] Carl Ludwig von Haller, Restauration der Staats-Wissenschaft (Winterthur: in der Steinerischen Buchhandlung, 1820), Bd.I, p.117. [“ie redeten viel von Toleranz, weil sie derselbigen für sich bedurften, aber schon damals war niemand intoleranter als sie gegen alle diejenigen die ihren Meinungen widersprachen”.] Herr von Haller’s excellent book was burnt at the Wartburgfest.

[2] James Kalb, The Tyranny of Liberalism (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2008), p.141. Mr Kalb’s excellent book provides one of the best analyses of liberalism yet written, and his weblog gives one of the best summary definitions: “we’re free to be you and me, as long as the differences never matter.” ( “The One, the Many, and the Alternative Right”, Turnabout, 16th March 2010.)

 

[dirtyparrot]

Agree with you Lillefix, that's a solid bunch of books.