A few random thoughts about Dr. Seuss and the whole issue of racial representation in books. This time not from the point of view of righteous indignation (oh how dare they!) but rather after reading a few discussions from both sides of the argument and giving it some thought.

The first one is about racism. I always thought that racism (antisemitism, any other ethnicity-based bigotry) is based on explicit or implicit assumption that the other race or ethnicity is inferior. That is - and should be - the definition.

I have been trying, really-really hard, to figure out what is racist about a picture of a Chinеsе man in the typical Chinеsе garb (i.e., clothes worn all across Asiа up to the middle of the last century and beyond - see Vietnаm chronicles, see Chinеsе documentaries) eating rice with stiсks. Stereotypical? Sure. But that's what most of them looked like in those times, and in many villages still do. It does not make them worse, inferior, anything of the sort.

Many people bring up Jеws. What would you say if someone drew a Jеw with a big nose who looked longingly at a pot of gоld? I would say that would be anti-Semitic. Because we don't do that. No Jеw I know looks at gоld or money with an аvаricious expression bordering on pathоlоgicаl. Also, that hypothetical caricature Jеw would look mеаn and uglу - we've seen those cartoons, they don't come from a good place. But picture a Jеw with a big nоse, payos and kipa eating gefilte fish? And not with some evil grееdy expression, but quite friendly and smiling? I am all for it. There are plenty of pictures drawn by Jеws themselves, loving pictures, of very sympathetic, and very stereotypical, shtetl dwellers. If I knew that the author was born in 1904 I would have even fewer questions.

It's not cool today because relatively few people, in Africa, Asia, or Brooklyn, wear traditional clothes. You still see plenty of Chinеsе in cone hаts and sаndals, Jеws with massive blаck hаts and payos almost to their knees, and blаcks in tropical outfits and afros untouched by hair products, but they are minorities living in separate communities. 60-80 years ago there were way more of them. And when someone wanted to represent a group, they resorted to these stereotypes. Personally, I don't think stereotypes are racist per se. If the person in the picture looks nice, is smiling, is friendly and not doing anything bad, then…

Then explain to your children that this was the manner to draw people in the last century. And out of half a billion Chinese in, say, 1950, more than 70% looked exactly like that. Use it, if you have any intelligence, to explain how the world has evolved, how the standards have evolved, how perceptions have changed, and how the society's norms have changed. It's a great learning opportunity. Sure better than sanitizing book offerings.

My second point is about representation. I keep reading that minorities complain that there are not enough heroes who look like them.

Well, first off, I have no clue how this is connected to the issue above. Making more art with positive representation does not mean removing what is already there. This is not a zero-sum game, eh?

But more importantly, let's talk about the book market. People write about what they know and what is close to them. Sometimes they try to get into the skin of a completely different person (say, an ancient Egyptian). And some of these books are good. But a popular series that captivated kids for generations? They occasionally change genders (like J.K. Rowling writing about a boy Harry Potter), but not much else. Not only that, but if a white author tried to write a popular book series about a boy who is, let's say, black, s/he would today be accused of cultural appropriation. What can you possibly know about their lives, huh? Huh?

Who's better to write about blacks than black writers? (Personally, I think anyone can, what's what writing is, to inhabit other people, but our woke SJWs disagree.) How many of African American children's writers do we have? A few, not too many. When they write good books, they are printed and sold, no question, but none of them has yet produced a Pippi, a Harry, a Huck Finn… Or a Cat in a Hat for that matter.

Then, you need to sell the books. Behind all the brouhaha about how we will be a minority by 2050 hides the fact that right now Caucasians are over 60% of the population. Blacks are a little over 13%. Hispanics are under 20%. Asians are not quite 6%. And guess what? All kids, of all races, want heroes who look like them. Heck, personally, I never even liked blonde princesses - I much prefer brunettes.

So, who buys books with heroes who are brown?

Well, there are several options:

1. People who look like them - a minority. Consider also (this is statistics) that they don't buy nearly as many books as whites. Asians do, but that's 6% of the population.
2. Woke whites who want their children to be exposed to diversity. I suspect that these guys buy more such books than the actual minorities.
3. Anyone, if you create a really compelling character who transcends the race. If you give me a boy with Lassie, I don't care what color that boy is.

#3 is in, shall we say, short supply. Most of these modern woke books for kids are a snore. Also way too sanitized for most kids to fall in love with. Regarding #2, even most liberal parents want books that are GOOD, interesting, original, cool. They'll buy something to scratch their virtue signalling itch, then revert to same old, same old. And #1 is not much of a market to sustain it.

This is not to say, not at all, that publishers should not actively seek good books that feature minorities. This IS to say (aside from the fact that the color of the protagonist should not substitute for the quality of writing) that the reason there aren't enough great heroes that look like them are not necessarily rooted in racism. Publishers need to make money.

Meanwhile, the least they can do is to not limit access to masterpieces that exist. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Better even, if you see something that seems not quite up to today's standards, talk about it. See above about the learning opportunity. Making a big show about not printing, not reprinting, removing, how terrible, how uncouth, how our children will grow racists if they read If I ran the Zoo, etc., etc. is simply counterproductive. It would do zero to fight bigotry. Big fat zero. It would help many scratch the aforementioned virtue signalling tich. It would convince half of the population that the cultural warriors are out to lunch and would not stop at any stupidity to get their way. It would exacerbate the cultural wars. All in the name of the children who are already growing up in a vibrant multicultural society and are smart enough to understand what is what. I am not sure the children would appreciate the favor.

https://www.facebook.com/sara.barabu.moo/posts/10159680572964048