Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Does anyone find SONG OF THE SOUTH (1946) offensive...?


TopBilled

Recommended Posts

You're reply here really has nothing to do with your previous claim that the birds that find SOTS offensive do NOT find certain type of rap offensive.    That is the claim I said was bogus (as well as HoldenisHere).    (as well as assuming "all birds" think the same way)

 

My own view is that certain rap is a lot more offensive than SOTS.   A lot more.  

Why is rap being mentioned here? Is it because it's considered a form of black music? I don't understand where this is leading...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is rap being mentioned here? Is it because it's considered a form of black music? I don't understand where this is leading...

 

Why are you asking this question in response to jamesjazzguitar's post?

 

The question should be directed to NipkowDisc, who was the first to state that those who found THE SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive had no issues with rap music that degrades women.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you asking this question in response to jamesjazzguitar's post?

 

The question should be directed to NipkowDisc, who was the first to state that those who found THE SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive had no issues with rap music that degrades women.  

James and Nipkow can answer (or not) about why they are both discussing rap music. My need for clarity was genuine, because I did not see how it relates to SONG OF THE SOUTH, unless the underlying implication is that it is black music. But there are non-blacks who record rap, whether offensive or inoffensive. So I wanted to know why rap was seen as relevant in a discussion about a Disney film.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you asking me a question about my asking a question? Both james and Nipkow can answer (or not) about why they are both discussing rap music.

 

Because he noticed you were asking the person who didn't introduce rap music into the discussion, rather than the person who did? Maybe? Possibly? And why would you engage in such transference? All worth being curious about? Maybe not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he noticed you were asking the person who didn't introduce rap music into the discussion, rather than the person who did? Maybe? Possibly? And why would you engage in such transference? All worth being curious about? Maybe not.

 

Exactly. And notice that the response has now been edited to remove the snarky comment, "Why are you asking me a question about my asking a question?" which of course lends itself to the question "Why are you asking me a question about my asking why you were asking a question?"

 

But, thankfully, darkblue has preserved the snarkiness in his response to it by including a quote from the original unaltered post.

 

I am surprised this thread is still open for discussion.

 

The original question was: Does anyone find THE SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive? 

 

The answer is, yes, there are those that find it offensive.

 

Question answered.

 

It's adapted from a work described by its author as a "defense of slavery."

 

From Joel Chandler Harris's introduction to Uncle Remus: His Songs and His Sayings:

 

If the reader not familiar with plantation life will imagine that the myth-stories of Uncle Remus are told night after night to a little boy by an old Negro who appears to be venerable enough to have lived during the period which he describes - who has nothing but pleasant memories of the discipline of slavery - and who has all the prejudices of caste and pride of family that were the natural results of the system

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is rap being mentioned here? Is it because it's considered a form of black music? I don't understand where this is leading...

 

If you would have read the previous post in the thread you wouldn't have to ask questions.   Isn't that something a critical mind would do?

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he noticed you were asking the person who didn't introduce rap music into the discussion, rather than the person who did? Maybe? Possibly? And why would you engage in such transference? All worth being curious about? Maybe not.

I simply clicked on the most recent post about rap music. There is no conspiracy, no transference, no nothing. But enough about that-- what is the reason we're discussing rap music, when SONG OF THE SOUTH is as far from rap as one can get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you would have read the previous post in the thread you wouldn't have to ask questions.   Isn't that something a critical mind would do?

;)

Need to let it go. We've had a mostly fine posting history together-- so why go down such a vicious road now? For the record, I did read the previous posts-- and I saw Nipkow making some sort of comparison, then I saw you hopping on that comparison-- but none of it seemed very relevant to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. And notice that the response has now been edited to remove the snarky comment, "Why are you asking me a question about my asking a question?" which of course lends itself to the question "Why are you asking me a question about my asking why you were asking a question?"

 

But, thankfully, darkblue has preserved the snarkiness in his response to it by including a quote from the original unaltered post.

 

 

There was nothing too objectionable about my earlier post-- but I modified it because I wanted to eliminate the tangents and get right to the point about rap music. Also, I decided that if I had points to address with you individually I can do that in a private message. Come on, Holden-- let's be civil and keep the conversation on track. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The original question was: Does anyone find THE SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive? 

 

The answer is, yes, there are those that find it offensive.

 

Question answered.

 

And some answered they saw the movie as not offensive-- which seems to have offended those who wanted to cling to being offended.

 

The original question (and I should know because I wrote it) was reverse psychology-- how could anyone be offended by such a movie? Does anyone find SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive (because how could they?). The fact that people have written volumes about its so-called objectionable content tells me that extreme sensitivity and political correctness are deeply enmeshed. And in my opinion that is not a good thing.

 

At this point we have several race-related threads dominating discussions on this board. If one thread gets shut down, the thoughts and ideas (for and against) will just travel over to the other threads. This is a topic that people have something to say about. What's different is that it does not involve politics or religion, so it is not violating TCM's rules of conduct. Unless that statement is altered in the future to say that conversations about race in movies are no longer permitted. But then that would mean we cannot discuss the Projected Image series-- so I don't see that happening.  TCM, by example of its programming and special series and guest hosts, wants to foster discussions about race.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to let it go. We've had a mostly fine posting history together-- so why go down such a vicious road now? For the record, I did read the previous posts-- and I saw Nipkow making some sort of comparison, then I saw you hopping on that comparison-- but none of it seemed very relevant to me.

 

Since your telling others what to do and how to think,  I think you need to lighten up.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please see the mod's comment about discussing the original topic. Thanks.

 

Related to this topic is how some people have extreme sensitivity.    I made what was clearly a joke and instead of viewing it as such it is viewed with extreme sensitvity.     At the same time one shakes their head at those that are offended at movies like SOTS with a 'get over it' type of POV.   I find this very ironic.

 

I do agree with the overall view that movies should be viewed from a historical POV and that little to nothing is gained by extreme sensitvity as it relates to the content of a movie.   Clearly something is lost when groups and individuals try to censor said content.

 

But one area I wasn't comfortable with is what I viewed as an extreme lack of sensitvity as it relates to the historical black experience in America.    I still don't understand what 'blacks have some white blood' or 'whites have been discriminated against also' has to do with the overall historical black experience in America, that to me was clearly more harsh than the treatment of others at the time with the exception of native Americans.       Maybe I'm reading into this but to me it sounded like 'their extreme sensitvity isn't supported by the historical record'.

 

Why can't we just acknowledge the American historical black experience and at the same time state that nothing is gained by extreme sensitvity and instead much is loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I do agree with the overall view that movies should be viewed from a historical POV and that little to nothing is gained by extreme sensitvity as it relates to the content of a movie.   Clearly something is lost when groups and individuals try to censor said content.

 

I would very much like to see TCM air this film. Bring on a guest host or two, fill the wraparounds with warnings or historical analysis of why Disney made this film and the resulting backlash in subsequent decades. But I would love to see it broadcast, and I think that TCM would easily have its highest viewership the night SONG OF THE SOUTH is played. People would be talking about it for a long, long time afterward.  

 

I also think they need to work on a deal with NBC where they get to show IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE in July (like Christmas in July)-- letting NBC still have it for December broadcasts.

 

Can you imagine how huge it would be if TCM was able to show SONG OF THE SOUTH and IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE? It would put the Classic back in Turner Movies.  The folks at Dish would be begging to get TCM back. 

 

Take my ideas, people. Run with it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

♠ IDEA ♠

 

    >  Anyone who goes back and reads every post of this Thread should be awarded by TCM a free Redd Foxx LP of "You Gotta Wash Your A-s-s", the 1975 Atlantic album.  ► It's the one with the picture of the donkey on the front.   ;)  

 

   

 

    

Link to post
Share on other sites

One member is following this topic, so I am sure he has read every post in the thread! LOL

 

As we move forward, I would like to quote more users from the IMDB (and other sources) who do not find SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive. I think we can continue to make a case that this beloved classic motion picture is mostly harmless entertainment...

 

I also want to ask people why, if the NAACP (or whatever group it was at the time) was objecting to the adapting of Harris' well-known stories, did Disney ignore them and press forward? Plus, why didn't black Americans who objected to the Uncle Remus stories not try to get Harris' writings banned? Why go after the movie instead of the book? Is there a vendetta afoot against Disney? Wouldn't the original text(s) be more damaging? Because anyone, long after Disney, can come along and re-adapt them (without making them politically correct)...

 

Look at all the free (meaning they are in the public domain) writings by Joel Chandler Harris that anyone can make into a movie nowadays:

 

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/search/?query=joel+chandler+harris

Link to post
Share on other sites

TB there are a lot of movies where you have to ask why was this turkey made. SOTS was certainly not the first and was followed by enough to fill 8000 Thanksgiving dinners, lol.

 

TCM could show some of the modern turkeys for Halloween to scare us if they wanted. Chances of TCM showing SOTS though are somewhere between Pluto and Alpha Centauri.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea if what you're saying is factual or not - that's why I asked where you heard it. Or read it.

I would have to go back and dig it up-- it would be easier for me to turn this part of the discussion over to someone else who knows more about that. But I do think blacks (not all, but some influential black leaders) objected in the mid-40s when they found out Disney was making a film based on these stories. And after it was made, they protested at the premiere. Let me go back and try to find it. If anyone else knows, feel free to jump in.

 

The point is that this film was controversial from the very beginning. But Disney pressed ahead. And it was re-released several times-- so the Civil Rights movement of the 60s didn't even slow it down. Its last theatrical re-release in the U.S. was in the mid-80s during the Reagan era. So for forty years, Disney didn't cave to outside pressure. Then suddenly during the Clinton years, it all changes. And this film was denied a 50th anniversary celebration in the U.S. It has gone underground like Harriet Tubman's railroad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to go back and dig it up-- it would be easier for me to turn this part of the discussion over to someone else who knows more about that. But I do think blacks (not all, but some influential black leaders) objected in the mid-40s when they found out Disney was making a film based on these stories. And after it was made, they protested at the premiere. Let me go back and try to find it. If anyone else knows, feel free to jump in. The point is that this film was controversial from the very beginning. But Disney pressed ahead.

 

See, again - I have to ask where you heard that. I'm aware that there was criticism of the Disney movie from members of the NAACP and certain African-American media figures following the premier of the movie. I wasn't aware there'd been any outcry prior to that - or of any ongoing criticism of Harris and his writings. The movie was the catalyst for the outcry - that's what I understood. I'm willing to admit I could be wrong but it would be helpful to know the source for what you're claiming.

 

I'm not saying you're making it up. But I am wondering if you are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...