Sunday papers...
I have this habit of getting the Sunday paper about every 2-3 Sundays a month and if I don’t finish a section for whatever reason, usually a time factor, I’ll put it into my stack of to-read-later-on’s. Anyway, so there I was reading from one of my stacks of papers I collected over the last month or so (okay, it seems to be going back about 4 months or more) and happened upon the style section of the Washington Post from March 6th Sunday 2005. I was suddenly reading about Buster Bunny from Arthur. For those of you who don’t know Arthur, he’s a popular kids show aired on PBS. Very good actually, even for us parents who sit in the same room and have to be subjected to most of these types of programs.
Anyway, I’m reading this article and all of the sudden it’s talking about funds cut for airing Arthur and the “dangerous” episode. I’m like what? Is this some weird publicity stunt or something? Then I read on and it’s about the character Buster the bunny traveling across America visiting various families and cultures. I’m like, yeah, I’ve seen those…Buster goes to some farming area and dances a jig with some kids in a barn or goes camping with some other kids and tries out rock climbing. Or else he’s going to this kid’s Baptist church or as the article mentions sharing a Jewish Shabbat meal. I’m like, that’s cool. All of the sudden I read that the Bush administration is taking out funding for an episode because it shows a kid that has two mommies. “Education Secretary Margaret Spellings wrote to PBS last month (February 2005): “Many parents would not want their young children exposed to the lifestyles portrayed in this episode.” She asked for the Education Department’s $160,000 back.” I’m like, what is wrong with this picture? Why is the government suddenly so concerned with a kids show that shows various people’s lives in a America? I suddenly started getting really mad. I’ve seen the show maybe 3 times and they’ve shown many different lifestyles and they can’t show this?
What troubles me over all about this message is not so much the blatant prejudice the government is endorsing or the heavy hand of governmental censorship in art but the fact that our US government is more concerned about a children’s television show that promotes understanding and insight yet does absolutely nothing to stop blatant commercialism on kids with cartoons and does nothing but cut aid for the poorest children in the US. What is wrong with this picture?
This is quite ironic, actually. I saw a documentary about a month ago on PBS, of course, about Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the Taliban took over for many years, as we know. The religion is very strict. So strict, in fact, they absolutely do not allow any music or for that matter very little artistic expression to be permitted. What happened was they began to destroy artwork that contained elements they deemed evil. Anything with a human shape was to be destroyed; films, books, paintings, all to be destroyed. But some artists and historians rebelled. They did the unthinkable. They hid the film behind walls and painted over human figures in paintings. They saved the art. Are we headed down this path? Certainly, Buster Bunny is not a Van Gogh painting but the message is the same. Don’t go against what this person deems is unacceptable or risk them destroying your art work or for that matter taking away your funding.
Anyway, I’m reading this article and all of the sudden it’s talking about funds cut for airing Arthur and the “dangerous” episode. I’m like what? Is this some weird publicity stunt or something? Then I read on and it’s about the character Buster the bunny traveling across America visiting various families and cultures. I’m like, yeah, I’ve seen those…Buster goes to some farming area and dances a jig with some kids in a barn or goes camping with some other kids and tries out rock climbing. Or else he’s going to this kid’s Baptist church or as the article mentions sharing a Jewish Shabbat meal. I’m like, that’s cool. All of the sudden I read that the Bush administration is taking out funding for an episode because it shows a kid that has two mommies. “Education Secretary Margaret Spellings wrote to PBS last month (February 2005): “Many parents would not want their young children exposed to the lifestyles portrayed in this episode.” She asked for the Education Department’s $160,000 back.” I’m like, what is wrong with this picture? Why is the government suddenly so concerned with a kids show that shows various people’s lives in a America? I suddenly started getting really mad. I’ve seen the show maybe 3 times and they’ve shown many different lifestyles and they can’t show this?
What troubles me over all about this message is not so much the blatant prejudice the government is endorsing or the heavy hand of governmental censorship in art but the fact that our US government is more concerned about a children’s television show that promotes understanding and insight yet does absolutely nothing to stop blatant commercialism on kids with cartoons and does nothing but cut aid for the poorest children in the US. What is wrong with this picture?
This is quite ironic, actually. I saw a documentary about a month ago on PBS, of course, about Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the Taliban took over for many years, as we know. The religion is very strict. So strict, in fact, they absolutely do not allow any music or for that matter very little artistic expression to be permitted. What happened was they began to destroy artwork that contained elements they deemed evil. Anything with a human shape was to be destroyed; films, books, paintings, all to be destroyed. But some artists and historians rebelled. They did the unthinkable. They hid the film behind walls and painted over human figures in paintings. They saved the art. Are we headed down this path? Certainly, Buster Bunny is not a Van Gogh painting but the message is the same. Don’t go against what this person deems is unacceptable or risk them destroying your art work or for that matter taking away your funding.
Comments