Brer Rabbit
sonia_dyer@hp.com
sonia_dyer at hp.com
Wed Mar 1 20:00:08 CET 2000
The characters are mimicking black people's speech and behavior -
which makes them seen as "black people" (although being rabbits etc.).
Is this in itself offending?
My point is that the context the stories now would be published in (if
they were) is much different from the original context. Is it possible
for a child who reads the stories now, to see that they once pictured
a race of "lower value"?
And in a similar way, "Hiawatha" stories (or any stories with Indians)
are banned in the US, just because Indians could be offended by seeing
comic characters mimicking Indians.
It just doesn't make sense to me. I do understand that both black
Americans and Indians have a tough history behind them, but have this
weakened them to such extent that they can't bear to see a black or an
Indian comic character? I would appreciate an answer to this.
Hi Jorgen-
I understand your perspective. Perhaps in another hundred years
the Brer Rabbit and Hiawatha stories can be told in the USA in
the original form, and be accepted in their historical context.
In the interim, while many members of a previously discriminated
against ethnic group may not be so "sensitive" about it, others
are. One on-going example is the loud objections by some native
americans to American sports teams like the Braves or the Chiefs
being named in reference to indians, even though the names are
meant to imply courageous warriors. Similarly, in the original
Uncle Remus/Brer Rabbit stories, the rabbit was a very very
clever and inventive fellow. Go figure! I guess you have to
have walked a mile in their shoes for it to make sense. I can
only say that the majority of my black friends still feel they
are discriminated against, just not as openly as in the past.
Sonia
More information about the DCML
mailing list