tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648480292622180743.post5463717850375503729..comments2023-06-25T01:20:35.889-07:00Comments on Very Rarely Stable: Explaining the internet to C. S. LewisDaniel Copelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05944461326199566111noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648480292622180743.post-2537244477291058652015-04-23T07:31:14.867-07:002015-04-23T07:31:14.867-07:00"The deconstructionists I have read are all v..."The deconstructionists I have read are all very concerned about the likely effect on society of the texts they are criticizing. I think they worry too much. When I read The Jungle Book as a child, Kipling’s disciplinarianism went right over my head; all I saw was a boy running naked in the forest with his animal friends, that being my own life’s ambition at the age of seven."<br /><br />I don't disagree, there certainly is a lot of paranoia over kids being ruined by media. Heck, even adults, if they're from the lower classes. I mean, did you know middle class women were once concerned working women were being "degraded" by their reading choices? Look at this:<br /><br />"This time the outcry was not against women reading in general, as it had been earlier, but specifically directed against women who read “degraded” literature. Critics such as Stowe feared that this new genre represented a nation in moral decline. For the middle class, the dime novel became a site of struggle as they sought to impose middle-class gender norms on the working class and to curtail new gender developments among the working class that allowed women unprecedented freedom in selecting and dating potential partners." - The American Women's Dime Novel Project<br /><br />But in defense of the deconstructionists, I think it's safe to assume that this kind of stuff didn't fly over their heads. Like I remember reading Gulliver's travels when I was 8 (I think) and though I did focus on the interesting travels and places, the biting satire against humanity and Gulliver's misery that culminates in him rejecting all society did make a strong impression on me. I also remember very much noticing that the nerdy characters from cartoons (I was a dorky kid) were always the laughing stock whose company no one (especifically the protagonist) actually enjoyed.<br /><br />So I think this is one of the rare cases where the golden mean applies. ;)<br /><br />PS: I loved the Jungle Book too, and didn't wear clothing inside the house for years on end, to my babysitter's chagrin. lol =)<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906890777837063836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648480292622180743.post-55982523726226522082015-04-22T18:45:08.412-07:002015-04-22T18:45:08.412-07:00I can't wait for it! =DI can't wait for it! =DAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906890777837063836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648480292622180743.post-28444403334629482882015-04-22T17:54:53.810-07:002015-04-22T17:54:53.810-07:00Thank you for understanding (and you're absolu...Thank you for understanding (and you're absolutely correct that this part reflects my white privilege). I should mention too that this was my first Narnia post, and when I wrote it I had very little idea of how deep the misogyny in the series goes. If you read through the blog series you'll see my attitude gradually change.Daniel Copelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05944461326199566111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648480292622180743.post-84550354665403372262015-04-22T05:27:55.836-07:002015-04-22T05:27:55.836-07:00"The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle we..."The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle were not racist by the standards of the 1950s."<br /><br />I have a problem with this, what's racist is racist, what's sexist is sexist, these things don't change with the standards of the time. There are no "standards" for what's racist, merely a tolerance to racism. And this tolerance didn't really change much from the 1950s to now, most white people now are completely fine with racism, as they were back then, and people of color are not, as they weren't back then. When you say racism wasn't so much of a problem back then, you betray that you're really only counting how white people stood by it.<br /><br />I understand what you're trying to say, that the racism you can find in these books was something white people felt so comfortable with and they were so accostumed to listen only to themselves talk, that you find you can't judge a white man so harshly for it as you would today, where the voices of people of color are harder to ignore and so you imagine it takes more effort than it once did to be as racist. I agree with that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906890777837063836noreply@blogger.com