Hmm, I tried posting this before. Good luck.

wow, thats a bit excessive

Whoa. Upvote for being a significant work, but that was incredibly hard to watch. The energy and creativity are certainly there, but I literally had my hands over my face for large swatches of the movie.

Wikipedia

In addition, Martin "Dr. Toon" Goodman:

Because the film is a cartoon masterpiece, a cultural tour de force of 1940's America, and a vital example of how animation is often able to capture a nation's social nuances in ways that live-action films can never hope to do, Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs should be seen by animation fans and anyone else interested in the evolution of our cultural mythos. There is, however, a problem. The film contains what are today considered shockingly racist images. In fact, one might say that in some circles its reputation is blacker than coal. Defenders of this short are quick to point out that the cartoon was made without malice, meanness of spirit, and with the full cooperation of black performers who by all accounts found the cartoon hilariously entertaining. It has been noted that Clampett, by insisting on using Watso, Beals, and the Dandridges, struck a blow agaist the inherent racism of 1940's Hollywood. Again, the concept of black men (though in caricature) wearing US Army uniforms while performing heroic deeds has been lauded in some quarters as one of the few depictions of blacks in that sort of role during the war years. Beacause the country adopted racist attitudes, it has been reasoned, cartoons carried these images forth, as did radio, stage, and movies. For good or ill, such were the times.

Yet for many, the coat-of arms bearing dice and switchblades, the dice that serve as Prince Chawmin's front teeth, the wild-eyed jitterbigging, the black dialect, and the thick-lipped caricatures mark this cartoon as far from harmless. Even though Clampett may have meant to show the Teutonic Master Race that even the blacks they despised were a formidable foe to reckon with when gathered under the American flag, the racist images speak only of contempt, bigotry, and ridicule. Some feel that this cartoon is so offensive to African-Americans that it should be consigned to the censor's vault for all eternity, lest any showing of it at all spark an outpouring of anger, shame, and outrage among blacks and indeed, all who rightfully seek to eradicate racism from our society.

wow, thanks for the background maudlin, that was hard to watch.

Still not a documentary on old WB cartoons, or even shifting images in media portrayal over time.

I STILL VOTE this violates posting guidelines, and does nothing more than stir up crap. This is only HERE for sensationalism, that's why this video get traded all around the internets. THIS IS EQUIVALENT to Saddam hanging video.

*blog

Please do not post videos that make fun of other races. Because of the high volume of traffic on the site, it would be very easy to offend a good deal of people with material like this. If you think the material is questionable, it's probably not going to pass our standards.

Sending this video to Sift Talk for discussion (sent by gold star member joedirt)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'm inclined to say that as a community, we are able to view this in its historical context as a document on the crazy racist early 20th century America. I'm happy to hear views on this though.

If it was a documentary, or discussion of attitudes in any way.. well, that would be different. But given your policy statement (which makes sense), the offensive nature (regardless of historical context), and this quote "Some feel that this cartoon is so offensive to African-Americans that it should be consigned to the censor's vault for all eternity, lest any showing of it at all spark an outpouring of anger, shame, and outrage among blacks and indeed, all who rightfully seek to eradicate racism from our society."

I tend to agree with that quote and don't forget there are many people who still hold these views and stereotypes.

I will start to post every black-face clip, Amos and Andy, and other "historical" documentation of the early 20th C.

I expected this to be a bit funnier. It was actually quite a boring toon. There are portions of other toons that get cut out that are actually quite funny and racist and that makes me angry... but I could actually do without this one.

This reminds me of another banned cartoon, "Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips" (1944) where the target was the Japanese--obviously because of WWII. Would that also fall under historical context, and allowed to be posted here?

I'm inclined towards Dag's opinion here, but there is no denying that this is making fun of African Americans. Those were the times, and I find it interesting to see how things were during those years...good or bad. Personally I don't find this offensive because it's the past. This cartoon should be seen as that...the past. Look how far we've come.

I dislike censuring even if it's offensive, the votes would decide. But this community has limits that has been posted in the policy for all to read upon joining.

This isn't a free forum, there are *limitations..so let's not be hypocritical, alright? Well..then according to policy, this can't be here.
----
edit: I have found a few examples of how we make exceptions depending on how racism is portrayed.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Dave-Chappelle
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dave-Chappelle-Everything-is-better-in-slow-motion
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dave-Chappelle-Reparations-language-nsfw
http://www.videosift.com/video/Samuel-Jackson-Beer-Dave-Chappelle-NSFW
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dave-Chappelles-Fear-Factor
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dave-Chappelle-Show-Black-White-Supremacist
http://www.videosift.com/video/Borat-Hunts-the-Jews
http://www.videosift.com/video/Ali-G-Throw-The-Jew-Down-The-Well
http://www.videosift.com/video/Borat-Sings
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Passion-Cant-Get-Enough
http://www.videosift.com/video/Borat-interviewed-by-a-jew-Madness-324
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-sheriff-is-a-N
http://www.videosift.com/video/Blazing-Saddles-Where-Are-The-White-Women-At
http://www.videosift.com/video/Michael-Richards-Kramer-goes-nuts-on-hecklers
http://www.videosift.com/video/Americas-First-Blackstronauts-NSFW-Language

(someone needs to teach me how to make those nice, short, one word links )

A related question is whether we allow the votes to take care of this kind of submission or allow gold stars to make the discard call. (Please don't ban anyone . . .you know who you are).

I would downvote this video precisely because the viewer is the only person providing the external context. If the viewer is already aware that cartoons like this one were a direct descendent of Jim Crow, lynchings, 'coon' films, Stepin Fetchit, and Sambo, then I suppose that you (as the well-informed viewer) can sidestep all of the race-baiting.

However, if a ten-year old or quantummushroom is watching this clip, it probably just seems like an awesome piece of truthful Spike & Mike. Shock for shock's sake. Ultimately, VS is a public site and not wholly our little salon (tho' ladybug is staying up nights to rectify that issue).

Historical mustiness does not alter the fact that something is appalling.

I can see both sides to this story but I don't think it should go. They basically did what we do now with [insert race/nationality here]. We still make fun of almost everyone in movies, and TV shows but blacks are off limits because of our history with slavery. I don't really find the video hateful but see it for what it was, a cartoon that used the stereotypes associated with blacks as the joke.

I hope that made since and didn't come across as mean, hateful or ignorant.

I originally upvoted because I think that the cartoon is a powerful, albeit disturbing, historical document, and I haven't changed my mind about that. (I'd really like to hear more from the black performers who participated in the production. Could they have been as comfortable as that quote from Dr. Toon suggests, or was it a tough decision for them?) I don't consider this to be the same thing as, say, a modern video of some dumbass students playing at blackface.

But I agree that not everyone will see this in historical and cultural context. In addition, applying the posting guidelines to this in a straightforward way may be justified. Historically significant or not, Reg Harttapproved or not, this video may not be a good fit for this site. My vote stands, but if this gets downvoted out, or if it gets discarded, I'll support that decision.

That was my point basically with the Chappelle/Borat rant. I'm sure if one spent all day here searching, one would find tons more. (edit: looks like I have already )
Usually, I would have simply read this thread without participating, but something Joedirt said changed my mind:

"I will start to post every black-face clip, Amos and Andy, and other "historical" documentation of the early 20th C. "

That would be unnecessary JD, and counterproductive ...we have so many examples already here. Let's just have a look at the content we have already voted on and *accepted.

Well...that's if you agree that the examples I gave are racist. (which I don't since the racism/race related content is parody)

grspec:

What could this lil' toon do to be more hateful? Drag a couple of the sebben behind a pick-up truck? You get away with more with animation (even much more in Japan . . .yikes raping penis monsters), but still . . .

However, I do think the community should discuss/argue about/debate the intent of pieces such as this one when applying its guidelines. There are pieces that "make fun" of other races to explode stereotypes and challenge traditional power structures (Chappelle, Voltaire, anything that Sacha Baron Cohen touches) and those pieces that "make fun" to subjugate and humiliate minorities (Coal Black, Nippin the Nips, anything that Andrew Dice Clay touches).

grspec, I think that you are doing a disservice to skillful and thoughtful satire when you argue that all pieces use racial stereotypes with the same purpose.

rickgee: I am not saying this is thoughtful satire. I am saying this is humor at the expense of a stereotype which happens all the time but we have different tolerances for them. If you take the bugs bunny cartoon Hillbilly Hare they are making fun of southern sterotypes. One example of humor at the expense of another person/race/class of people. It happens all the time but this one raises serious guile due to its circumstances.

I'll defend Southerners (well . . . not KKK and Fundie Southerners) from hate cartoons as well. And I agree completely that comedy traffics in stereotypes and that stereotypes are often essential tools of comedy. But it is crucial for comedic value that the comic recognize that the stereotype is either false or grossly exaggerated.

The community's tolerance for comedic stereotypes is (or should be) conditioned more by the tone or cultural context of the piece rather than the particular stereotype used. I don't see Coal Black as comedy because it completely buys into and promotes the stereotype.

Rickegee, I see your point....but the fact that Choggie used "banned" in the title informs the viewer that it's no longer shown because of it's racism. Therefore the cartoon in itself IS educational in it's absurdity. None of you think it's funny, yet it generated this thread didn't it?

For example, look at the last link I posted above in the thread:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Americas-First-Blackstronauts-NSFW-Language

This was made to look like a documentary with fake stock footage and photos. It's CLEARLY not funny at all...none of it, yet it was accepted because it parodies racism. Instead of it being comedic, it exposes racism to the audience in the guise of humor.
This WB cartoon could be argued (in spite of it's original intent) as doing the same, correct?

'Banned' only indicates that it is taboo. And taboo is so effin' cool.

I think the Blackstronauts sketch is a wanna-be Chappelle in that its sole intent is to mock historic racial stereotyping. And the sketch is a middling to poor parody of Ken Burns and PBS. Failed comedy can also be somewhat toxic.

The distinction I would make is that Coal Black is BOTH failed comedy and a very intentional and odious celebration of entrenched racism while Blackstronauts, Borat, Chappelle are only samples of failed comedy (at worst).

But we should have a vigorous discussion of videos like Coal Black and ultimately leave it up to the votes.

If Choggie were to change the tags to insert, "racism" or "racist"....then would it be considered editorial opinion in the same spirit as say the "documentary" I offered above?

-Correct-rsp to swampgirl q. #1
Another dynamic to consider, which I took into consideration when watching this before posting, was the reaction I had watching at 42 years , compared to the one I had at 10, quite different. No doubt others have seen this while their sensbilities we less than developed, hopefully. Do these, "don't hurt feeeeelings" guidelines as stated,

(Please do not post videos that MAKE FUN of other races. Because of the high volume of traffic on the site, it would be very easy to offend a good deal of people with material like this. If you think the material is questionable, it's probably not going to pass our standards.)

cover every possible "reaction"- Offence, is subjective. My sensibilities are offended by morons making fun of or supporting the plight of the weak, whether they be brainwashed zealots from the Middle East or Fundie-B-belt Bar-B-Quers. Bleeding hearts go out to all associated with the former, and slings and arrows to the latter.....Just-Us is served, while the fundamental issue of propaganda destroying souls, remains to be dealt with.


Paul Mooney is my favorite comedian, not because he offends white folks with his flagrant ab-use of the word nigger, but because he has no qualms about offending anyone, blacks included, because he knows he is right. He is intelligent, afro-centric, but not blindly so. He comes down on blacks the hardest, and is a funny ass motherfucker doing it! I have no doubts as to my own unprejudiced view of humanity....Stupid is universal, and that is the only offence I take, when it comes to a paticular race. So if the intent of the poster makes a shit-lick of difference to any of this blog, so be it or not.
I will be offended at the didactic adhesion to a stated rule, over the intent being the final say(if in fact that rule applies here), but not for this cartoon leaving....You can have media content like this here, and Amos and Andy, and Stepn' fetch it, but it's up to the people of the sift to either vote it up or not, and then talk about it in the queue, before letting it stew in here, to be nit-picked.

In light of the recent disappearance of several Looney Toons clips due to their being pulled by their keepers, it would be just dandy if this gets pulled here, due to a more insidious creature, even moreso than the great mammon herself!!! The name which can'not be spoken.....
Imbecillicus-Unilateralus-Subjecticus.....A creature, who, whether they know it or not, limits, restricts, or otherwise deals with an issue passive-aggressively, in order to appease, not the sensibilities of the subject of the offence, but their own, weakened form of action-reaction, emotionalism and personal, mental dis-array.

sometimes you people are too sensitive.

There. I gave in, to the best advice blogged so-far, and changed the tags.....to place the blame squarely where it is deserved. Feel free to adjust the tags before sending it back to the queue, and a pre-ban raspberry, to anyone who decides to rip this from the sift.


Offensive is different than offend, and I have no desire, to appease damaged, emotionally-driven-to-distraction, sensibilities.

Have a NICE day.

Don't confuse long-windedness as my being upset or sensitive about this topic. I'm just attempting to offer an opposite opinion than JD.

I don't really expect everyone to mob-gut VS today in the spirit of political correctness, alright. One of those Chappelle posts were mine!

I posted all the Paul Mooney, "Ask a Black Dude" sketches from chappelle.....my motivation for posting those, were the same as his when delivering that cold-dose hilarity, in the only way he chooses to......make fun of sterotypes, expose them for the offence they are, and feel sorry for no-one, who can't process, just guide them along the way, and watch out for a passive-agressive attack, or worse, bullets.

Did Comedy Central kill all of your Mr. Paul Mooney posts? Can't find him.
<shakes fist at comedy central in advance>

Oh noooooooo! Oh well, they were offended about something completely different!!
The ever changing, ever growing, gale force winds......

I think we should *ban Comedy Central from the sift, for their linear, self-serving addiction to the current paradigm.

Hail Pirate Bay!
Hail Eris!
Hail Bob!

choggie cannot be banned because starred accounts are immune from banination. If you feel this account requires banination, please contact the administrators (ignoring banination request by gold star member choggie)

Damn staraight bitch, er uh ahem, bot!

I think we as a group are capable of seeing this in its historical perspective. I think maudlin is right in saying that their use of black actors for the voices during that time period was probably quite progressive. Does that change its impact now? No probably not, but these shows still came on late at night when I was a kid, anyone remember Speedy Gonzales? I guess the point I am trying to make is that I vehemently oppose sanitizing the past in the name of a liberal PC agenda. We are who we are because crap like this was made and the nation at large grew to find them abhorrent.

If we take it down the net impact is that the educational experience of seeing this piece out of its historical context is lost, however by leaving it up are we promoting racism? I don't think so, I think the conversation in this thread pretty clearly shows that we aren't.

So does this rule exist anymore for the purpose of discarding queued videos?

"Please do not post videos that make fun of other races. Because of the high volume of traffic on the site, it would be very easy to offend a good deal of people with material like this. If you think the material is questionable, it's probably not going to pass our standards."


Again, I think that this one should be returned to the queue and put to the vote.

Agreed. Ultimately let the voters decide.

Yeps x 3. *see attached reference

>attached reference
which, incidentally, referring to the 3-way "yea", in a vote here in the blog that got sent here, should have its own *rule/instant mechanism, like the *ban funtion, so this can be returned ala vote, and not diatribe. Agreed?? or rather, better way of explaining the same?

I don't really see how this is historic. It's simply offensive and the only reason it's kept around on the Internets.

it's already escaped the queue, a return puts it back into main circulation. Although i suppose it could be down voted out of existence

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

OK, well I think the consensus (just slightly) is to let this live.

We should make it clear that obviously this is not a vote for racial stereotyping, but it is a vote for allowing an ugly historical document to see the light of day. I don't think progress is served by suppressing this kind of information.

If this gets voted down and out, so be it. I won't shed any tears over that. *return

Returning this video from Sift Talk (Returned by gold star member dag)

no farhad, its not the only reason......think about that last statement, if it ends up NOT being downvoted....if it does, then everyone loses.....oh yeah, and burn any work of art ifit pollutes an otherwise healthy mind....

I would disagree Choggie, watching this, am left wondering exactly what kind of deranged person would think of a set of people in such a strange way. It's no offensive so much so as it makes you realize that whoever made this needs some kind of psychological care.

....perhaps, but who would be anylised as to approve the psychologists' competent to make such an analysis, and who would be certified to render such a competency examination??

The reason, it is kept on the internets, is, that it is supposed to be here for a reason, wehatever reason that is that you are able, or unable to process....

hmmmm, looks as if those more concerned about their "RIGHTS" to certain material, have anothe stream of disscussion going on, much more dire and important..
"THIS VIDEO CURRENTLY UNAVAILABLE< TRY AGAIN LATER"....."they know yer addresss!"
oh PLEASE try again later....that makes their bullshit go down easier.....

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Still works for me.

I agree with joedirt - I think that this is only here for sensationalism. Furthermore, I can't help feeling that this was posted simply to cause controversy and offence. It is not in the context of a documentary, nor did choggie provide any information about the clip when he posted it. As such it doesn't really inform us about racism in the past. If this was a modern cartoon I would vote against it. I think we must accept that racism is a reality, and do our best to fight against it. Down-voting this doesn't mean that we are in denial about the past it just means that we are keeping stuff like this where it belongs - in the past. If I didn't vote against this I would be a hypocrite.

Funny, I voted *for* it for the same reason. It's showing that *is* the past.

Noted the first time and I'll post it here again:

"Clampett intended Coal Black as both a parody of Snow White and a dedication to the all-black jazz musical films popular in the early 1940s" [wikipedia]

As mentioned previously in this thread, a clip will almost always pass the 'racism test' if presented as a parody. It seems alot of folks haven't been able to get past the blatant ugliness to see the original intent...

well hell, inherent in the original tags, was the vibes' intended transmission, as well as the inciting, and reference to the recent history(gwann),of the U.S.

Funny how it takes so many words, to express oneself, in a number of ways with one blow, in an arena of visual media#$%^&089356

original tags:
warner bros.race,jazzy,allreet,(one more, unretrievable...("Thank you , Mary Jane!")

I can't help but notice that rickegee voted for it when I posted it and against it this time. What's changed 75 days later?

can we play now???? mom says we can stay out till it gets too dark to yell after they go to sleep!!

JD also wasn't as offended when you posted it either,lol.

mlx:

Heh. I thought that might be the case. Have you ever seen LOST HIGHWAY? (iam deranged)

The short answer is the Saddam hanging video. The beauty of a Sift is that you actually have the ability to filter out a lot of ugly shit. And I cannot imagine that this video teaches this enlightened group of people very much. We really blew the lid off the fact that racism is pernicious today.

Yet, I would indeed be angry if this video was locked away in a vault and not available anywhere (cue Lost Highway music now). I just don't think it belongs on this site.

And I think Clampett is either a liar or a fool if he thinks that he was making an homage to any aspect of black culture.

Well, as long as one black man watching this, can see it in all contexts, and appreciate it and be sickened by it at the same time, then it warrants a space, on the enlightened, and tolerant, Videosift!

or not, and it still deserve a spot here, considering the soul-searching comments, this stream has illicited.

which means, the more rules the better, and not!

rickegee you need to be careful calling someone a fool or liar when they lived in completely different times. He grew up in the days of segregation and it was all around him and he may no have thought this cartoon was disrespectful. In fact in his mind he might have thought it was the total opposite. Times were very different then, by today's standards you might find this cartoon makes you sick, but back then it was commonplace. I again want to reiterate that doesn't make what they did right, but it may put into perspective ones judging people from another era. It not always appropriate to use our logic and morals which has been shaped by history and apply it to them.

xactly, and keep in mind some, who, exposed to this toon given their date of incarnation and exposure, upbringing,education,etc, may see this a a missing piece in a puzzle, a reprisal to accepted norms, or offensive because of an archetype of their grandmother, as remembered from a story fom their mother, told during hard times....IMPRINTING.....soooo...there ya go.

Is it not obvious to anyone who has read this thread, that the poster is neither mean, nor predudiced against any but the unwilling to change, nor tired, nor whole , nor finnished????


Bring on your best argument for censorship of anything-included in the invitation-

Idealist porn-junkies
People containing melanin in any amount.....and albinos
Those who love to hear themselves write in their diary
Unilaterally motivated N'er-do-wells
Junkies
Pimps
Hoes'
government emplyees
racketeers
mouseketters
simians
meatbots
enlightened masters
bears fans
MANCHESTER UNITED RULES!!!
sumarians
french(little eff)
furries
transvestites....etc...etc....etc.....
"I wash all day...but get da Bluuuuuuuuues, in deh niiiiiight!"

Clampett produced this piece in a time when the NAACP was just beginning to flourish, he lived during the actual Harlem Renaissance, he likely witnessed a period of horrific and constant lynchings, he had access to the writings of W.E.B. Dubois and other Black Nationalists, and he was probably in contact with more black persons than choggie's MeMa due to his employment in the entertainment industry.

If Clampett still believed that his brilliant piece of Looney Coon was somehow a tribute, he was either lying or he was a fool.

Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Thurgood Marshall, Mr. Paul Mooney, and all of the posters to this thread would likely find this cartoon to be demeaning.(Though Mooney would probably want this piece played on a repetitive loop in Times Square to rub fat tourist faces in the ugliness). But it was far too late in the historical race game for this degree of ignorance.


And as a side note, we do need a new rule auto-discarding any Man United videos.

One more vote in favor of keeping it.

You should keep it. As much as I can't stand choggie, the video itself is a document as to how things were. It shows where we came from. It shows the whole cartoon without interruption so people can decide for themselves without it being wrapped in a documentary style that just shows highlights.

Also, what is with the "choggie cannot be banned because starred accounts are immune from banination"? If you own this site, you can do whatever you want! If you want to ban someone that has 1000 posted videos you can still ban them. Come on. Not saying that choggie should be banned for this video either...just saying that as owners and operators of this site, you can do whatever you want, including changing the rules.

I think keeping it is wrong. Racism is racism, fact. just my 2c.

Again rick you are making a lot of assumptions about things he may have/should have experienced and that should have helped him see the light. He was born and grew up in a time that was very very different and I don't think its fair to say you or me know the facts that surround the making of this video. I can however read and find out as much as I can about the why the episode was created and make a judgement which you may or may not agree with.

A quote from this bob clampett site:

Coal Black is one of the clearest explorations and illustrations of this break with the Disney tradition. Rather than ignore the dominance of Disney's feature production it is a very deft, energetic and controversial parody of Snow White that illustrates the brevity, visual rhythm and rapid-fire pacing of the studio's best work (15). Nevertheless, it is probably more accurately viewed as a riff on rather than a parody of Disney's film. Unlike much of the Disney studio's work, Coal Black is a raunchy, contemporary, extreme and shockingly racist film (the racism of many Disney films is often less up-front and more cloying). It updates the Disney story to a contemporary war-time setting in which Queenie calls in Murder Inc. “to black out So White”, and to stop her from stealing the zoot-suited Prince Chawmin'. This is a cartoon widely regarded as a masterpiece in absentia, a seldom seen product of the sexual mores and ethnic stereotyping of its time. Nevertheless, many writers understandably go out of their way to both underline the ideological problems of the film – especially for contemporary audiences – and its extraordinary energy and vibrant style as a truly animated cartoon. As Terry Lindvall and Ben Fraser suggest:

Coal Black's brazenness earned the film much of its notoriety, but even as shocking as it is for its racial content, the aesthetic and musical brilliance, the unabashed raunchiness, and the pure cartooniness salvage it as a masterpiece for most audiences, even some black audiences (16).

part 2 below

Continued:

Much is often also made of the “exceptional” research that Clampett and his animators undertook (they visited night-clubs and “drafted” African-African musicians and actors) to provide an accurate, celebratory, authentic and incorporative vision of urban African-American culture of the time. Along with Tin Pan Alley Cats (1943) it highlights Clampett's fascination with African-American street culture, its syncopation and language, pushing its potent stereotypes to the extremes of comic absurdity.

Also, as with many of Clampett's cartoons, one can sense the direct influence of comic books, popular music, street culture, live-action cinema and contemporary art (especially surrealism) upon these two films. Like much of Clampett's best work, these films are syncopated snapshots of a particular time, place and set of social mores. So it is hardly surprising to discover that the greatest period of Clampett's tenure at Warners coincides with the ramped-up stereotypes encouraged by the World War II era. As Tim Onosko argues, “Clampett created an entirely new and irreverent style of animated filmmaking more suited to the era than either Disney or Fleischer” (17). Although Onosko's parochial account unnecessarily favours Clampett at the expense of his Warners' colleagues, as well as Avery at MGM, it does pinpoint the ascension of the studio to the pinnacle of Hollywood short animation during this period and accurately regards Clampett's work as a cornerstone of this process.

To me that is what this video is, a snapshot of that era, not a racist hate film.

Nice work, grspec.

Tolerance is often a learned behavior.

You can excuse slavery with your argument. The time was different. White people weren't used to working in the sun. Grandma said it was alright. But even slavery was done away with in most nations before Bob Clampett was born.

And my assumptions are borne out by the text that you cite. This was not a person living in the deep pockets of Appalachia. Which is why you research the historical and cultural context of the time and do your best to reconstruct how people lived and what people knew. This period in American history is very, very well-documented. You must look at cultural products within this well-documented context with a critical eye.

Although you may enjoy the aesthetics of the cartoon (hell, I think it is skillfully made and interesting -- ha! i voted for it before I voted against it), to call it a mere cultural 'snapshot' rather than what it is, a rather virulent piece of racist propaganda, illustrates the inherent problem of posting without context.

Like today, America was a very fearful place during the 1930s and 1940s. And one of the ways that the fear manifested itself was through race-baiting entertainment like this piece and many other pieces during the 30s and 40s. Like JD said, we could fill several queues with all of racist cartoons of this time period.

I don't believe for a second there are two sides to the debate here as to whether or not this piece is racist. The only debate worth having is whether it falls afoul of the posting guidelines and, if not, then what does that particular posting guideline mean.

I see you are trying to take what I said then extend out the equation to include slavery. The original point was you calling BC a liar and/or a fool and I provided information that says otherwise. We can agree to disagree about his motives but don't take my points which are relative to this discussion and use them as a stepping stone to slavery.

Also I never said this wasn't a racist cartoon but that it was a piece that represents that era.

It does represent that era. Can we all agree that posting guideline #2 is dead, dead, dead for the purpose of preemptively discarding 'historical' racist documents (put it to the vote!) because, ultimately, viewing such 'historical' racist documents inspires a warm feeling of how nice, fuzzy, and tolerant our society has become?

BUT

Posting guideline #2 still stands for non-historical racist documents (i.e. white Clemson students partying in blackface, drinking malt liquor and calling each other the word that Paul Mooney no longer says but choggie is brave enough to) because those 'non-historical' racist documents are just such a fucking downer, ruining the giddy high that we received from viewing the 'historical' racist pieces.

However, if a ten-year old or quantummushroom is watching this clip, it probably just seems like an awesome piece of truthful Spike & Mike.

The cartoon is a piece of Americana from the 1940s. That's the way White Americans at the time viewed Black people and there's nothing anyone can do about it now except learn from it.

In real-life, which this website is not, I'm a harmless little fuzzball whose opinions and ideas are only dangerous to humorless ideologues and busybodies. No one here especially gives a damn about me, nor would I expect them to, but if certain members feel the need to pin all things racist on me to feel better about themselves, that's their problem, not mine. They don't have a case, and my time is too precious to waste on their invincible ignorance and hardened opinions. Doesn't mean I'm not up for a good old-fashioned debate, and some that "hate" me have been quite civil.

I've had my run-in with the Thought Police around here already, those who have taken high moral ground on a website built mostly on the theft of copyrighted materials, whether or not for personal gain or profit. As a willing participant of this site, I'm no less guilty just because I'm not the one soliciting the ads and writing the code, but for the record I'm merely unimpressed with those who have passed judgment on me.

Try harder or not at all.

*dead
Try this:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&gid=1073749916&vid=213547&b=274

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by Sylvester_Ink.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by critical_d.

Awarding oritteropo with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.

*length=7:40

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 7:40 - length declared by oritteropo.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by chicchorea.