rileyuk.co.uk

Would you believe that the Commission for Racial Equality is taking a pot shot at Tintin Cartoons as being potentially racist! The good news for the publisher is their sales have shot up 3800% since the row began which is not doubt the highest they have been for years and a good indication that the readers support the strip.

This article explains in more detail. The issue was raised following a single complaint about the sixty year old strip. Ridiculous, just goes to show we still have witch hunts going on!

They won't like my copy of Little Black Sambo then.

None of these things was in the slightest bit racist, they were just a product of their time.

Sometimes I think people find it easier to moan and grumble than to just get on with life.

i dont have much knowledge of the tin tin cartoons, but i have to say john a lot of things from the period were racist because they were a product of the times. old depictions of africans in literature depict black people as sub-human mental retards, a by product of imperialism and the belief in white western superiority. i do think the sensitivity of modern audiences can blur the lines between intent and interpretation, but suggesting none of these things were racist is ridiculous; bigorty is an indemic part of society and has been for centuries.

I think it depends what you mean by racist. It was found, for example, that children had been told not to talk to strangers and eventually someone had a nasty thought and asked them what they thought a stranger was. They didn't know.

So language needs to be specifically defined. The call of "racist" has been made loud and long, but I have a nasty suspicion that what I think it means and what others think it means may not be the same.

Take Helen Bannerman's little book "Little Black Sambo" - it's just a charming little tale about a little African boy. And yet I suspect it would be on the list of suspects.

Do you think that there is a natural tendency for a society to be closed and suspicious of outsiders? Is this a natural defence mechanism? Is it reflected in the tribal warfare of football fans? Could it have nothing to do with race per se but just be a matter of belonging or not belonging to a team/tribe?

racism is by definition a belief other people are inferior because they are of a different race. although it appears bannerman did not intend any slur with her character, and is citied by many critics to be a positive role model, the term ‘sambo’ was in use when she was writing the story as a degrading term for black people in the same vein as ‘nigger’. it becomes a case of can a character be positive with a name attached to a great deal of negativity? would we all be clamouring for children’s tales about happy john the convicted paedophile? after all its just a name isn’t it to someone who doesn’t understand the implication?

the football analogy has no bearing because that is a matter of rivalry which doesn’t necessary have anything to do with deeper connections to hatred and bigotry, and often unites people of different backgrounds to the same cause – racism in football, which there is still a lot of, is a separate social issue that goes beyond supporting a team. but a suspicion of outsiders cannot justify degrading terms of abuse when the ‘outsider’ is a known quantity who’s only difference is a different skin colour. its hard to explain when there aren’t any racial insults for white people to compare with, but would you like to be referred to as a cunt by someone who thought it was alright because he read a story in his childhood about quick-witted little john cunt? is it an offensive description in any context or does there have to be intent? see later cunts!

The problem is that people do take the whole issue too far. There are some words which have a negative connotation but only when used in a derisive manner. I don't think that you can try and ban bits of history because you don't like it because that guides you away from a correct interpretation of the past. Tintin was and is a reflection of the time it was written and to deny that is to force an opinion (which will be outdated in another 50 years) onto the past.

of course it can be taken to extremes by overly sensitive types who want to pretend anything that even carries the suggestion of insult is a bullet to the heart. censoring history is a similarly ill-placed idea of keeping modern audiences who are only aware of the current connotations happy, however, the word sambo had a racially degrading meaning even when the bannerman story was being written and isn't being taken out of context by latter day critics - the fact bannerman didn't know that is more of a reflection on her ignorance than modern intrepretation.

the tintin story is a product of its environment but at the time it was written the author was immediately defending himself after publication against accusations of racism, trying to explain himself somewhat feebly as only reproducing the views of the natives. in this instance, which doesn't apply to all examples obviously, there were protests about the cartoon's content almost as soon as it was released, so controversey about its racist overtones are contempory and not a modern occurance

Funny bit from the Wikipedia entry for it: "When the album was to be published in Scandinavia, the publishers objected to the infamous scene on pg. 56 of the colour album, where Tintin blows up a rhinoceros with a stick of dynamite."

Unfunny bit from Wikipedia: the exploitation of the Belgian Congo, now the Democratic Republic Of Congo.

For those who aren't going to read it, right up until 1908 the Belgian monarch raped the "Congo Free State" of resources for personal profit, with mass killings and maimings all part of it. It's probably a really sensitive subject to the Belgian people, and this is partly why it's such a big deal.

I don't think Borders have even removed it from sale, just put it in the adults section like everyone else who still stocks it does. People will simply take it as a messed-up product of it's time, but I feel the CRE just has to be seen to be acting on this one, otherwise its position is somewhat weakened. Herge now understands how stupid it was to publish it, but I cannot believe he wasn't aware how sensitive a subject it was. Call it naive racism if you will, because I don't think it was malicious intent on his part.

i didn't want to mention the rhino incident because it would have detracted from a quasi-serious point i was trying to make before, but blowing the damn thing up - the funny side of animal cruelty! :D

The serious point aside, why on earth did Tintin blow up a rhino with dynamite? The ultimate random action?

It could've been some bizarre existential exercise, or that the rhino was actually attacking him.

Well, after some digging around on Google, I've found a link with the pictures on, but all the text is in a north-european language. You get the idea, though. I might also add that there is minor nudity in the crappily drawn banner at the top of the page, linked here. The rhino was so not self-defence. I'll leave everyone to come to their own judgement on the way "the natives" are portrayed.

Genius! I think I would like to read some Tintin again now. That was very funny. Excellent find mr_e.

He blew up the rhino because he was bored and wanted something for his tea. Bloody obvious.

I must blow up a chicken later ready for tonight's meal...

Damn it, I have serious competition because I too ''feel like chicken tonight, like chicken tonight!''

P.S. Would this be classed as Smokey BBQ flavour?