From: inkblot@leland.Stanford.EDU (Thomas Calvin Cannon)
Subject: Re: Song of The South and Gone With the Wind
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 19:22:35 GMT

In article <4903@moscom.com> jrjj@moscom.com (Jad Jordan) writes:
>In article <1k4hdoINNghq@shelley.u.washington.edu> mousktr@carson.u.washington.edu (Denise "ABU" Lockner) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan26.215151.23231@leland.Stanford.EDU> inkblot@leland.Stanford.EDU (Thomas Calvin Cannon) writes:
>
>>>Just out of curiousity, why isn't Disney re-releasing SotS?  And (of course)
>>>why, why, why not the Black Cauldron??
>>>
>>I have heard it is because the movie portrays Uncle Remus, and other black
>>characters, in a way that would be deemed "offensive" by today's standards.
>>
>
>You know, I don't remember the Uncle Remus part of Song of the South (as I was
>only five when I saw it, that was 20 years ago) and the only part that scared
>me stiff was when poor Brer Rabbit got all covered in that tar. (That scene 
>was very traumatic for a 5 year old, who imagined what it would be like to
>be buried in tar.) Anyway, I just watched Gone With The Wind on TBS this
>past weekend, and I must say that the treatment of African Americans in that
>movie could be very "offensive" by today's standards. The South considered
>slaves as property. Prissy is at best ignorant (let alone annoying). Mamie
>while somewhat more respectable than Rhett and Scarlet is still uneducated
>and a little nosy. Still, the 'darkies' had their place.
>But as long as everyone realizes that this is fiction, based loosely on facts
>of the time period, then this movie will continue to be replayed over and
>over, because it is good. If the big complaint with Song of the South is that
>a black slave was content with his surroundings, then lets look at Roots.
>Roots is a very strong portrayal of the slavery incident. But I believe there
>were characters in the series that accepted being slaves. This too is
>historical fiction (more or less).  My point is one movie will not corrupt
>America. 

I agree with your point, but you should consider that there's a big difference
between a movie like Gone with the Wind and any Disney animated feature
(one of which you in fact mention)....

1)  Consider what it would be like for a black adult (especially now) to take
his little boy/girl to see SotS.  Disney's made lots of films about white
culture, but when they finally do a film about black culture, we get this
silly, happy-go-lucky guy bouncing all over the screen, much like a clown.
I think that kids would notice the discrepancy, and would not find if 
flattering.

2) Gone with the Wind is a _good_ movie portaying historical fact.  One could
argue that if blacks _were_ treated with respect, the movie wouldn't work; it
would come off as fake.  SotS may be an O.K. movie, but its animation and
story don't make it a 'classic'.  So, while I can watch and appreciate GWtW
time and time again (despite the fact that blacks are trodden on) , it's
hard to do that with SotS, where the whole point seems to be a caricature
of black history.

>It's kind of like Huckleberry Finn being baned because Jim is called the
>n-word. Jim is a strong correct black character. Reading one book is not
>going to change everyone's opinions. Even if Uncle Remus is a weak, morally
>incorrect black character, watching one movie is not going to change
>everyone's opinion. 

Again, because Huck. Finn is a really good book, and it accurately portrays
a historical situation, I have absolutely no qualms about the style that
it's written in.  Anyone who reads the book can clearly see that it's not
anti-black, so the use of the 'n-word' is totally forgivable, and really not
worthy of mention.

[stuff deleted]

>
>"Oh, Isn't this amazing?
>It's my favorite part 			   Jad R. J. Jordan
>Because, you see,			  MOSCOM Corporation.
>Here's where she meets			    jrjj@moscom.com
>Prince Charming!				()_()
>But she won't discover that it's him		 (_)
>'Til Chapter Three."

(sheep takes bite of page)

---
T. Cannon
inkblot@leland.stanford.edu