Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> The Social Scene -> Entertainment
When is the last time you read your kids “McElligot's Pool”
Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h



When is the last time you read your kids “McElligot's Pool”
Its our favorite book  
 0%  [ 1 ]
Today  
 0%  [ 1 ]
This week  
 1%  [ 2 ]
My kids are older, but we used to read it regularly  
 9%  [ 11 ]
This month  
 0%  [ 1 ]
Never  
 21%  [ 25 ]
What is "McElligot's Pool"?  
 64%  [ 74 ]
Total Votes : 115



sushilover




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 1:13 am
Am I the only one reminded of Dumbledore's notes in Tales of Beedle the Bard? Of how some lady sanitized all the fairy tales to protect the "precious flower of children's innocence". The ministry ended up banning those unoffensive books because it induced uncontrollable retching in any child who read it.

I thought Jk Rowling was mocking puritanical religious mothers. I never thought it would be the future of American publishing.
Back to top

b.chadash




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 1:49 am
amother [ Goldenrod ] wrote:
Isn't there a difference between a stereotype and a negative stereotype?

I don't think I'd be offended if someone drew a Jew at the kotel wearing a kippah and tefillin, a British woman with an umbrella on London Bridge, or a New Yorker in Manhattan eating a hot dog. The fact is that among many of the broad cultural practices in Asia, eating rice and having certain recognizable facial features is common.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I wouldn't find it offensive to portray Black culture with colorful fabric and dreadlocks - even though of course there are plenty of Blacks who don't dress that way, and plenty of people from other cultures who do.

Portraying a Black person as a bumbling fool, primitive or subhuman ch"v is of course terrible, on par with the hook-nosed Jew or savage "Indian".

I did a geography report on the Inuit in elementary school, and yes, as part of their fascinating way of surviving in their environment and respecting and not wasting any part of nature, they did wear the stereotypical furry hoods (for reasons I explained). I honestly wonder if my report would have been considered offensive today.

If I want my kids to have a broader perspective on any subgroup, I'll have them read more about them. We definitely had some great award-winning books on Asians as kids, can't remember the names right now.

This! Very well said.
Back to top

b.chadash




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 1:57 am
SixOfWands wrote:
Given the utter consternation over the decision not to publish it anymore, when is the last time you read your kids “McElligot's Pool”


I think the premise of the OP is false.
The "utter consternation" over the decision not to publish McElliots Pool is not because we all loved the book. (As you pointed out, it's not one of his most popular books). The utter consternation is due to what is behind this public announcement to cancel some of the works of an American icon who was the furthest from a racist or bigot. It is because this is another example of the radical left spreading its tentacles to destroy our culture and remake it in its own image.

I sometimes wonder if people who ask questions such as these are purposely being misleading or if they really, really don't get it. What


Last edited by b.chadash on Sun, Mar 07 2021, 1:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

b.chadash




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 1:58 am
Double post
Back to top

amother
Goldenrod


 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 2:31 am
DrMom wrote:
Is this it? I don't get it... It looks like the Lorax or the Grinch.

Is the problem the fur hood?

I am perplexed.


One good way of checking for racist stereotypes is to try substituting:

Some Jewish fish
From Jerusalem town
Might be headed this way,
Perhaps they'll swim down?

It's a pretty long trip,
But they MIGHT come around.

[Picture is a guy with a Tallis waving off a school of fish wearing kippas.]

No, not offended.
Back to top

DrMom




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 2:34 am
amother [ Goldenrod ] wrote:
One good way of checking for racist stereotypes is to try substituting:

Some Jewish fish
From Jerusalem town
Might be headed this way,
Perhaps they'll swim down?

It's a pretty long trip,
But they MIGHT come around.

[Picture is a guy with a Tallis waving off a school of fish wearing kippas.]

No, not offended.

Me neither.
Back to top

youngishbear




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 3:29 am
amother [ Babypink ] wrote:
First of all, you are a very talented writer. That just needed to be said.

But even as history extends further into the future, is there ever an excuse or a logical reason to try and blot out the history that has already been made? Especially in art and literature. These books are examples of their times.


Thank you Smile

Did you know that Walt Whitman revised and republished Leaves of Grass at least six times? That the Nancy Drew series we can buy today is not the same as the ones first published? That the history books my children use are not the same ones we used in high school?

You get my point.

Times change, new information comes to light, new voices are heard, and society decides to leave fewer and fewer people out of the umbrella of inclusivity. Texts are updated to reflect that. I don't see anything wrong with that. Let the literary historians analyze the changes and put them in proper context for future generations, especially as most books of historical value come with a foreword, preface, introduction, and appendix for good measure.
Back to top

DrMom




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 3:45 am
youngishbear wrote:
Thank you Smile

Did you know that Walt Whitman revised and republished Leaves of Grass at least six times? That the Nancy Drew series we can buy today is not the same as the ones first published? That the history books my children use are not the same ones we used in high school?

You get my point.

Times change, new information comes to light, new voices are heard, and society decides to leave fewer and fewer people out of the umbrella of inclusivity. Texts are updated to reflect that. I don't see anything wrong with that. Let the literary historians analyze the changes and put them in proper context for future generations, especially as most books of historical value come with a foreword, preface, introduction, and appendix for good measure.

But that's different than someone changing the text of Leaves of Grass after Walt Whitman is dead.

And if someone thinks that Leaves of Grass doesn't reflect the times the live in, let them write their own poems; not cancel the old ones.
Back to top

mommy3b2c




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 4:29 am
b.chadash wrote:
I think the premise of the OP is false.
The "utter consternation" over the decision not to publish McElliots Pool is not because we all loved the book. (As you pointed out, it's not one of his most popular books). The utter consternation is due to what is behind this public announcement to cancel some of the works of an American icon who was the furthest from a racist or bigot. It is because this is another example of the radical left spreading its tentacles to destroy our culture and remake it in its own image.

I sometimes wonder if people who ask questions such as these are purposely being misleading or if they really, really don't get it. What


Of course the premise of the op is false. That’s why I didn’t bother answering. And yes the op gets it. She’s very smart.
Back to top

mochamix18




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 4:35 am
I would probably not purchased a copy of McEligots Pool or To Think That I saw it on Mulberry Street but they are a part of a Dr Suess Anthology I bought long before I was a mommy or a wife. We love all Dr Seuss as they are wonderful vocabulary builders and intro to reading. I could see some very outdated cultural stereotypes in Mulberry Street but attribute it to the time period it was written in. I need to read through McEligotts Pool as I’m not sure what might be considered racist in this book (not saying there is nothing, I just really don’t recall).
ETA: I’d like to echo others l that Dr. Suess was a very big proponent of humanity, environmentalism among many other good things.
Back to top

amother
Crimson


 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 7:54 am
sushilover wrote:
Am I the only one reminded of Dumbledore's notes in Tales of Beedle the Bard? Of how some lady sanitized all the fairy tales to protect the "precious flower of children's innocence". The ministry ended up banning those unoffensive books because it induced uncontrollable retching in any child who read it.

I thought Jk Rowling was mocking puritanical religious mothers. I never thought it would be the future of American publishing.


Don't you go mentioning jk Rowling, she's canceled too (sarcasm, in case you can't tell. Another victim of the woke mob. Sad).
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 8:04 am
SixOfWands wrote:
The child catcher with a big pointy nose and long black coat and hat are widely seen as an antisemitic stereotype. Apparently that's pure movie, apologies to Ian Fleming. As one commentatory points out, "Dahl sets children up as the undesirable race and then cobbles together Jewish stereotypes to hunt them out. Really? To what end?"


And the wicked witch of the west in the movie?
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 8:07 am
amother [ Goldenrod ] wrote:
er perspective on any subgroup, I'll have them read more about them. We definitely had some great award-winning books on Asians as kids, can't remember the names right now.


Such mental whiplash from all the messages. Right now there's a PSA that starts, Grandmother, how come we're not having a powwow this year? Grandmother replies in this monotone voice, in very simple words. I know some people with Cherokee yichus who don't speak that way.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 8:28 am
youngishbear wrote:
Thank you Smile

Did you know that Walt Whitman revised and republished Leaves of Grass at least six times? That the Nancy Drew series we can buy today is not the same as the ones first published? That the history books my children use are not the same ones we used in high school?

You get my point.

Times change, new information comes to light, new voices are heard, and society decides to leave fewer and fewer people out of the umbrella of inclusivity. Texts are updated to reflect that. I don't see anything wrong with that. Let the literary historians analyze the changes and put them in proper context for future generations, especially as most books of historical value come with a foreword, preface, introduction, and appendix for good measure.


There's a lot of bowdlerizing. And bowdlerizing by definition (at least the first google hit) is making the text less effective. That should be the barometer of revisions.
It's making me think of Go Set a Watchman. Harper Lee didn't want to write that book. IIRC I read that that was her first iteration of her characters and stories and it wasn't the one she wanted out there for eternity. But someone saw a cash cow, I guess, so that's why this is the taste that lingers, and I don't like it.
Back to top

amother
Navy


 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 8:32 am
The point is that kowtowing pandering and /or silently accepting this type of cancellation gives more power and a green light to whoever is pushing this agenda of censorship and control.
Back to top

youngishbear




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 2:48 pm
DrMom wrote:
But that's different than someone changing the text of Leaves of Grass after Walt Whitman is dead.

And if someone thinks that Leaves of Grass doesn't reflect the times the live in, let them write their own poems; not cancel the old ones.


The people in charge of preserving Seuss's estate and legacy, in other words, the ones arguably most familiar with what he would have wanted, did it for him.
Back to top

amother
Teal


 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 2:49 pm
amother [ Navy ] wrote:
The point is that kowtowing pandering and /or silently accepting this type of cancellation gives more power and a green light to whoever is pushing this agenda of censorship and control.


Methinks this is tilting at windmills.
Back to top

amother
Navy


 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 2:52 pm
why?
Back to top

b.chadash




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 3:42 pm
youngishbear wrote:
Thank you Smile

Did you know that Walt Whitman revised and republished Leaves of Grass at least six times? That the Nancy Drew series we can buy today is not the same as the ones first published? That the history books my children use are not the same ones we used in high school?

You get my point.

Times change, new information comes to light, new voices are heard, and society decides to leave fewer and fewer people out of the umbrella of inclusivity. Texts are updated to reflect that. I don't see anything wrong with that. Let the literary historians analyze the changes and put them in proper context for future generations, especially as most books of historical value come with a foreword, preface, introduction, and appendix for good measure.


I love how you managed to turn a cancelling of 6 books of the most popular children's book author on its head by claiming its in the name of inclusivity. Just brilliant!

Brilliant how deriding and degrading heroes from our history for their views (which the left, in their infinite wisdom have deemed "offensive" ) is now all about inclusivity. You can't make this stuff up.
Back to top

b.chadash




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Mar 07 2021, 3:45 pm
mommy3b2c wrote:
Of course the premise of the op is false. That’s why I didn’t bother answering. And yes the op gets it. She’s very smart.


She may be smart. It doesn't mean she gets it. Smart people on the left and smart people on the right don't get things the same way.
Back to top
Page 4 of 5 Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> The Social Scene -> Entertainment

Related Topics Replies Last Post
I love frum fashion for kids
by amother
130 Today at 11:27 am View last post
Belati Kids
by amother
0 Today at 11:05 am View last post
Saying no to kids for selfish reasons
by amother
47 Today at 7:37 am View last post
Disciplining other people’s kids
by amother
37 Yesterday at 11:53 pm View last post
Kids shabbos shoes affordable. Let's make a list!
by amother
63 Yesterday at 10:17 pm View last post