I see that the Speed racer entry has appeared on the "Toonopedia almost exactly when Don estimated it would. Very nice to see it.
But I have a couple of questions about Don's article.
I don't remember the Mach 5 having "camouflage" among it's many gimmicks, all controlled from the "dial" set in the center of the steering wheel. And, I was surprised that Don didn't mention how much controversy the original Speed Racer series was given stations that carried it, by certain "children's television advocates" who claimed it was too "violent." (Car crashes, fistfights, and, the occasional bomb, or, gun fight. I can think of at least a few other cartoons, Japanese, and/or, American, that might also be considered "violent" by those definitions, but wasn't in the middle of a storm of criticism around that time.)
Don;
I'm not criticizing your article. You are the one who decides what 'toon comes in to the 'Toonopedia, and, when. You do the research, write the entry, and, see that it's "published." I was just surprised at the mention of "camouflage" as a function of the Mach five, and, the exclusion of the "violence" controversy.
Login to reply to this topic
Comments:
|
Posted by: Don Markstein
Posted on: 2008-03-10 at 07:58:03 AM
|
I'm not as familiar with that cartoon as I am with a lot of others, but I do seem to recall the camouflage. I'll do some further research, and if it turns out I can't support that, I'll remove it.
As for violence -- I didn't think it worth mentioning. Practically everything on Saturday morning TV was attacked for alleged violence, from Looney Tunes to Bullwinkle. It would be like adding a paragraph to the Batman article to note that 1950s comic book critics claimed he and Robin were gay. That sort of criticism was so common, it could be assumed.
I don't know. Was Speed Racer particularly noted for that? If so, maybe I should add it. I knew it had been there, but figured big deal, so the namby-pamby parent action groups thought it was violent. What else is new?
Yeah, that was about when I said I'd add it. The movie is due in the second week in May, so if I'm going to do any riding on its coat-tails, the article has to be there by the beginning of April. It took a lot of personal gearing-up, tho, to broach the subject of Japanimation. I'm glad I did it, but now that it's been broached, I can see a lot of it following, pretty quickly.
Quack, Don
As for violence -- I didn't think it worth mentioning. Practically everything on Saturday morning TV was attacked for alleged violence, from Looney Tunes to Bullwinkle. It would be like adding a paragraph to the Batman article to note that 1950s comic book critics claimed he and Robin were gay. That sort of criticism was so common, it could be assumed.
I don't know. Was Speed Racer particularly noted for that? If so, maybe I should add it. I knew it had been there, but figured big deal, so the namby-pamby parent action groups thought it was violent. What else is new?
Yeah, that was about when I said I'd add it. The movie is due in the second week in May, so if I'm going to do any riding on its coat-tails, the article has to be there by the beginning of April. It took a lot of personal gearing-up, tho, to broach the subject of Japanimation. I'm glad I did it, but now that it's been broached, I can see a lot of it following, pretty quickly.
Quack, Don
|
|
Posted by: Rob Allen
Posted on: 2008-03-10 at 10:00:44 AM
|
I was pretty young at the time, but I don't recall Speed Racer being particularly controversial. I remember it being immensely popular with kids my age, and some adults always tend to look askance at anything that kids like that much - especially if it's something unfamiliar to the adults. I'll bet a lot of the people attacking Speed Racer were not as upset about the violence in The Lone Ranger.
|
Posted by: Chuck Taine
Posted on: 2008-03-11 at 05:34:50 AM
|
As my somewhat hazy memory serves me, Action for Children's Television was especially vocal about Speed Racer, whatever animated version of the Lone Ranger that was being shown at that time, and, any other TV 'toon that was being shown that didn't meet their standards.
Don, your point about the "violence" in Speed Racer, and, other cartoons is mine. There probably WAS more violence in the "classic" theater cartoons-although it was it was exaggerated, today labeled "fantasy violence." And, if you didn't think that ACT's complaints, protests about Speed Racer (and, other TV 'toons of that era,) didn't merit mentioning in your article, (as Wertham's accusations of homosexuality in Batman weren't included in that article.) Then, as I said previously, it is your right as moderator of this site to exclude that. (Besides, since I've mentioned that you excluded Wertham's accusation's from the Batman article, I see I should've realize that you'd exclude the ACT protests about Speed Racer as well.)
Don, your point about the "violence" in Speed Racer, and, other cartoons is mine. There probably WAS more violence in the "classic" theater cartoons-although it was it was exaggerated, today labeled "fantasy violence." And, if you didn't think that ACT's complaints, protests about Speed Racer (and, other TV 'toons of that era,) didn't merit mentioning in your article, (as Wertham's accusations of homosexuality in Batman weren't included in that article.) Then, as I said previously, it is your right as moderator of this site to exclude that. (Besides, since I've mentioned that you excluded Wertham's accusation's from the Batman article, I see I should've realize that you'd exclude the ACT protests about Speed Racer as well.)
|
|
Posted by: Don Markstein
Posted on: 2008-03-12 at 06:38:22 AM
|
As a parent, I loathe the parent action groups that took control of kids' TV back then. It's bad enough that they were unable to see the difference between prime time shoot-'em-ups and Elmer Fudd getting whacked with a falling anvil (which kids never had any trouble distinguishing between). The whole philosophy of gentleness and cooperation, which practically all '70s and '80s TV toons had to follow, did more than make me gag -- I don't think it was good for the kids.
It's very nice, on some level, I guess, to get along. But it betrays (and leads to) a collectivist mindset to harp on it to the extent they did. Teamwork is not just emphasized -- it's emphasized to the exclusion of any other way of doing things. (As you may surmise, I'm not a fan of Nickelodeon's Wonder Pets, who sing a song in every episode about how powerless they are without the team.)
I mean, sure, teamwork is valuable. But so is individual action, independent of, and possibly even opposing, the team. In fact, traditionally, a fictional hero is a guy who strikes out on his own, defying conventional wisdom, getting things accomplished despite opposition of the crowd. In cartoons controlled by parent action groups, anyone who deviates from the crowd is a wrong-thinking misfit, and a successful story outcome consists of bringing him around to the "correct" point of view.
That's just wrong. It teaches kids not to think for themselves. And it has broader applications than just kidvid. It's the basis of a lot of what I think is wrong with modern education. I'm not a bit surprised to see such a philosophy dominate schools run by the government, which regards docility and controllability as more valuable traits than strength and independence.
(Note: I'm a linguistic troglodyte who still uses "he" for undetermined gender just like Miss Grundy taught me back in the last century. I intend this to include "guys" of the female persuasion too.)
I didn't expect this to veer off the way it has. But consider yourselves lucky. I could go on like this all day.
Quack, Don
It's very nice, on some level, I guess, to get along. But it betrays (and leads to) a collectivist mindset to harp on it to the extent they did. Teamwork is not just emphasized -- it's emphasized to the exclusion of any other way of doing things. (As you may surmise, I'm not a fan of Nickelodeon's Wonder Pets, who sing a song in every episode about how powerless they are without the team.)
I mean, sure, teamwork is valuable. But so is individual action, independent of, and possibly even opposing, the team. In fact, traditionally, a fictional hero is a guy who strikes out on his own, defying conventional wisdom, getting things accomplished despite opposition of the crowd. In cartoons controlled by parent action groups, anyone who deviates from the crowd is a wrong-thinking misfit, and a successful story outcome consists of bringing him around to the "correct" point of view.
That's just wrong. It teaches kids not to think for themselves. And it has broader applications than just kidvid. It's the basis of a lot of what I think is wrong with modern education. I'm not a bit surprised to see such a philosophy dominate schools run by the government, which regards docility and controllability as more valuable traits than strength and independence.
(Note: I'm a linguistic troglodyte who still uses "he" for undetermined gender just like Miss Grundy taught me back in the last century. I intend this to include "guys" of the female persuasion too.)
I didn't expect this to veer off the way it has. But consider yourselves lucky. I could go on like this all day.
Quack, Don
