Why is "Song of the South" still basically banned?

The plot is about a little white boy, whose father is missing after the Civil War, and finds a father figure in an older black man. Why is this taboo?

The film is perhaps a bit too sentimental but what of it? What is wrong with this story line? Little boy needs a father figure and an older black man steps in to provide it. This is racist?

Maybe in the the 1950s when blacks and whites weren't supposed to be friends and when the film was first banned but now? What's wrong with this sweet, sentimental film? The blacks don't speak as grammatically well as the whites? Is that what's wrong with it? It's set post war and there are no slaves depicted here. What's wrong?

Oh, whatever.

This is being discussed on at least three threads AND there are about two dozen previous threads on the topic, OP, you fucking trolling little bitch.

I recently watched it BECAUSE it had been banned and found it a sweet and gentle story.

R1, I don’t see a thread on the movie, Song of the South. Can you link to it here?

Type

"song of the south" site:datalounge.com

into Google. Over 500 results. Also try the GWTW threads, where OP posted almost this exact same thing just moments ago.

The Hall monitor has spoken OP, be afraid be very AFRAID

R4, you are blaming OP for not going to a different website to see whether to post on this one?

R6 don't be irrational, that is why he is the hall monitor.

Yes, R1, CUNT, I got the idea to start this thread from a reply I posted in the "What's next to be be cancelled" thread.

DEAL WITH IT.

Most people who bitch about it have probably never seen it before in their lives. They just heard somebody call it "racist" once so they just blindly go along with it.

I find it astonishing that some on DL will gladly speak derisively about topics concerning other minorities, but don't want so-called 'fraus' on a purported gay message board. Talking about 'gay' topics.

I'm so glad we've reached that level of hypocrisy.

Don't you understand, 'Song of the South' is racist because it was made by white people.

Yeah, well I guess it was just wrong for white people to star black people in a 1940s film.

Yes R11 & R12 - white people should stay in their lane and only make films for and about their own community. They have no right to appropriate other cultures. This ensures cultural enrichment.

R9 gave the answer. You can't argue reason with a mob, OP.

Propre only want to see "The Flying Ace"!!

I had a Disney Singalong VHS in the 90s that featured "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" and "How Do You Do?"

I've never seen Song of the South, but I'm intrigued as to how racist a film would have to be in order to be banned from home video IN THE EIGHTIES.

It’s racist because the Blacks appear happy to poor slaves. I’m guessing that wasn’t the actual case.

i want to see Ingagi. The only prints known to exist belong to The Library of Congress but they won't allow public exhibition. Big pre-code hit that influenced the making of King Kong.

There used to be tons of bootlegs on Ebay years ago. I think if you just search the title and dvd on Google you'll find a copy.

Song of the South takes place in the 1880s, twenty years after the Civil War had ended, and there are no depictions of slaves or slavery.

I saw Song of the South when I was in 3rd grade with a childhood friend. While I remember enjoying the movie (music!) my friend had a tough time because her father had passed away the previous year. Uncle Remus to me was a wise, kind man. I guess a lot went over my 8 year-old head!

In 1946 you were 8, so you're 82 years old now, R22? Wow.

r23, Before the days of home video, Disney re-released its animated films periodically so new generations could see them. This included Song of the South.

I'm not r22, but likely he/she saw Song of the South during one of the re-release years. Below is what Wikipedia has to say about those re-releases:

[quote]Song of the South was re-released in theaters several times after its original premiere, each time through Buena Vista Pictures: in 1956 for the 10th anniversary; in 1972 for the 50th anniversary of Walt Disney Productions; in 1973 as the second half of a double bill with The Aristocats; in 1980 for the 100th anniversary of Harris's classic stories; and in 1986 for the film's own 40th anniversary and in promotion of the upcoming Splash Mountain attraction at Disneyland and Disney World. The entire uncut film has been broadcast on various European and Asian television networks including by the BBC as recently as 2006. The film (minus the infamous Tar Baby scene which was cut from all American television airings) was also aired on US television as part of the Disney Channel's "Lunch Box" program in the 1980s and 1990s until December 18, 2001.

In the words of folklorist Patricia A. Turner:

[quote]Disney’s 20th century re-creation of Harris’s frame story is much more heinous than the original. The days on the plantation located in “the United States of Georgia” begin and end with unsupervised Blacks singing songs about their wonderful home as they march to and from the fields. Disney and company made no attempt to to render the music in the style of the spirituals and work songs that would have been sung during this era. They provided no indication regarding the status of the Blacks on the plantation. Joel Chandler Harris set his stories in the post-slavery era, but Disney’s version seems to take place during a surreal time when Blacks lived on slave quarters on a plantation, worked diligently for no visible reward and considered Atlanta a viable place for an old Black man to set out for.

Kind old Uncle Remus caters to the needs of the young white boy whose father has inexplicably left him and his mother at the plantation. An obviously ill-kept Black child of the same age named Toby is assigned to look after the white boy, Johnny. Although Toby makes one reference to his “ma,” his parents are nowhere to be seen. The African-American adults in the film pay attention to him only when he neglects his responsibilities as Johnny’s playmate-keeper. He is up before Johnny in the morning in order to bring his white charge water to wash with and keep him entertained.

The boys befriend a little blond girl, Ginny, whose family clearly represents the neighborhood’s white trash. Although Johnny coaxes his mother into inviting Ginny to his fancy birthday party at the big house, Toby is curiously absent from the party scenes. Toby is good enough to catch frogs with, but not good enough to have birthday cake with. When Toby and Johnny are with Uncle Remus, the gray-haired Black man directs most of his attention to the white child. Thus Blacks on the plantation are seen as willingly subservient to the whites to the extent that they overlook the needs of their own children. When Johnny’s mother threatens to keep her son away from the old gentleman’s cabin, Uncle Remus is so hurt that he starts to run away. In the world that Disney made, the Blacks sublimate their own lives in order to be better servants to the white family. If Disney had truly understood the message of the tales he animated so delightfully, he would have realized the extent of distortion of the frame story.

(r14) thanks, you're correct. I was born in 1964 so it looks like I saw it on its 50th anniversary. Sorry (r13) to ruin your snark.

Damn, I messed that post up... try it again....

(R24) thanks, you're correct. I was born in 1964 so it looks like I saw it on its 50th anniversary. Sorry (r23) to ruin your snark.

[quote] I had a Disney Singalong VHS in the 90s that featured "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" and "How Do You Do?"

Racist!!!11!eleven1!

You all cannot possibly be this dumb.

I bought a bootleg copy in a gift shop where they filmed Fried Green Tomatoes' Whistle Stop Cafe.

The animation sequences are wonderful. The live action, not so much.

[quote] Sorry R23 to ruin your snark.

That wasn't snark, R27, I was genuinely impressed someone in their 80's was posting on Datalounge.

The You Must Remember This podcast series about Song of the South is one of the best thy did.

I've just kind of watched it. Downloaded off Piratebay in great quality.

I don't get it. I don't like musicals so I was bored very quickly. It's a film for children so of course plantation workers were happy, what did you expect? I really don't understand the hate.

Then again identity politics loves to whine about micro aggressions, so what do I know? They'll find a problem with pretty much anything.

Perhaps Tarantino can direct a new version, with songs.

R33, I know what you mean. What would be the harm in leading children to believe that black people love to serve white people? What possible bad result could come about from leading them to think that black people are happy in the subservient role that is their natural place?

(And by the way, I bet you pictured white children when reading the above, didn't you? That is part of the problem.)

I hope OP gets the crap kicked out of him at a BLM march.

[quote]Perhaps Tarantino can direct a new version, with songs.

He's already done a delightful added scene!

I would only watch it if it showed big black dongs. Nothing else matters.

"Dongs of the South"

R35 you assume a lot of things, I'll go ahead and assume that we'll get another Trump term because of hyperbolic perpetually oppressed whiners like you.

I saw the 1973 release when I was ten on a double-bill with The Aristocats, which I also loved. I don't recall what message, if any, I took from the film, other than the song "Zip-a-Dee Doo Da", and a chant from some other song where black adults sing "More, more, tell us more!" to Uncle Remus. That's it.

I never saw the movie but did see the video clip of Zip A Dee Do Da when I was little. I believe I saw it on the Disneyland tv show. I'm a relic.

I am glad you did not just imagine white children, but the point remains that showing blacks who are all happy to be subservient is indeed not sending a neutral message.

And where is the hyperbole? I do not know a single white person who has been physically touched by cops. But all of my black friends have had a cop lay hands on them--many more than once.

^^^That does not come from nothing.

Don't be stupid, the hyperbole is referring to the banning of the movie, not the riots and BLM.

raci$t le$bian troll alert!!

(r23) sorry for taking your interest as snark. (R42) that wasn't my experience. You see, my dad (white) had an agrarian job at the time so for me I missed the subservient part, it just seemed like work. It seemed perfectly normal!

I just received a copy of it yesterday. I'm watching it as I type.

[quote]I know what you mean. What would be the harm in leading children to believe that black people love to serve white people? What possible bad result could come about from leading them to think that black people are happy in the subservient role that is their natural place?

Why does everything have to be pedantic and teach a lesson? Can't people figure out they are watching a depiction of another time? When I was a kid we lived in LA for a few years, one of my friends, whose mother was in the movies, had a black housekeeper. A servant. She was good at her job, and a happy person. Visited her years later and she was happy. But we could never do that story on the screen now.

PS Yeah she probably had little opportunity to do other things. But we all know that. The reality was she was happy, said so, and she was close to my friend and his family, though a servant. I'm just saying we can't depict that now even though it's a depiction of reality, we have to idealize certain things and demonize others. My friend's family would have to be depicted as racists or idiots but they weren't.

Little things like that add up, R49. The generation that was raised watching that film became the opponents of black civil rights, who simply didn't see what the fuss was all about, having as naive a take on it as OP's question. The message of 'Song of the South' contributed to white boomers' perceptions of blacks and their lots in life.

It’s shockingly racist if you watch it from today’s perspective, I have a dvd pirated copy a friend downloaded for me in the early 00s, strangely it has Korean subtitles.

It's not "banned", per se. Its owners have just decided to keep it on the shelf. Theoretically, they could release it if they so desired. They have their own platform.

I get why it's perceived as sending the wrong message to the children of today, but as an adult who is fully capable of putting things in their proper historical context, I think I'd be capable of watching it and not instantly becoming a raging racist.

I regret not seeing it when it was more widely available. It's one of the few Disney classics I've never seen. Oh well.

There's versions of the film available for download, including a very good one, blu ray quality, at archive.org. Last year I used that version as the basis for a restoration of the original RKO intro to the film (all extant prints use the later Buena Vista) for my own personal collection; I'm OCD like that when it comes to opening and ending logos. Sources for the film have not yet all dried up, so anyone who wants to see it can satisfy their curiosity.

That said, I'm really not that fond of it. As a film, it's kind of banal.

I just finished watching it. Is it racist? Hmmmm? It's old fashion. There are cringing stereotypes and dialog for sure. Yikes! Should it be banned? If other stereotypes are free and clear to be watched then no. I cringe at the King in Hamilton but people don't blink at that.

[quote]I cringe at the King in Hamilton but people don't blink at that.

Yes, people are blinking at 'Hamilton,' R55.

Trollin', trollin', trollin'...

People always want to talk about how it’s only because if cancel culture that they won’t release it.

Bitch, the NAACP tried to cancel it in the 40s.

[Quote] Yes, people are blinking at 'Hamilton,'

Yes but not for the reason I stated. Thought I agree with the reason they are doing it for.

I've never seen 'Hamilton,' R59, so I'd need a bit more context to know what you're specifically objecting to.

Oh okay r60. The King is a flaming queen who's on fire flaming. It's uncomfortable at times. I'm not prissy but I have to say that stereotype was totally unnecessary for the show. Even my brother who's a cop and a total bubba living in Texas for 30 years said it was a bullshit stereotype.

R61: That sounds like the tendency of performances pertaining to the story of Jesus which frequently depict either Herod the Great or Pontius Pilate as flaming homosexuals. It's a fairly old trope, but offensive, I agree - a sloppy shortcut to making a character into a villain for largely straight audiences. It needs to be put to rest.

It is a nostalgic portrayal of how good life was for slaves and their masters before reconstruction, the fact that white people who made the film wanted to continuously push the idea that the former slaves MISSED BEING SLAVES in the movie is racist and offensive. Listen to the multi episode arc about Song of the south on the podcast You Might Remember this and you’ll understand why it’s offensive and the history of why white supremacists love this movie. It’s pretty eye opening.

R51 I don't particularly care if the movie is banned, never seen it or been very interested to see it. But the generation who watched that movie also became SUPPORTERS of the Civil Rights movement. Lots of white "boomers" supported Civil Rights. The movie most likely neither contributed for or against that generations support or lack thereof of the Civil Rights movement.

[quote]Lots of white "boomers" supported Civil Rights.

Not as many as those who opposed it, R64.

[quote]The movie most likely neither contributed for or against that generations support or lack thereof of the Civil Rights movement.

Don't be disingenuous, R64. There's a reason that the continued censorship of this film elicits cries of dismay from basically the same group who wax nostalgic for Southern culture as it used to be, and lament the removal of the Confederate flag and statues. The film's supporting constituency are a known quantity.

[quote]The King is a flaming queen who's on fire flaming. It's uncomfortable at times. I'm not prissy but I have to say that stereotype was totally unnecessary for the show.

But it gives all the black people in the audience a chance to yuk it up at the FAGS and how white people are all gay! They love that shit!

^^ Attempt at divisiveness.

I don't know how else to explain to you all that if you allow corporations to produce all the art that you consume, that some of said art will be removed from circulation for financial and publicity reasons.

You can cry about cancel culture all you want but if Disney could make money releasing this movie, they would have. That's the bottom line.

That's another thing You Must Remember This touched on.

People shit on Disney for remaking their old movies in live action, forgetting that they regularly re-released their old movies AND pioneered the whole Disney Vault thing specifically to encourage cycles of consumption.

[quote] The generation that was raised watching that film became the opponents of black civil rights.... 'Song of the South' contributed to white boomers' perceptions of blacks and their lots in life.

The boomers raised on this film were in GRADE SCHOOL when the civil rights bills were passed.

[quote]The boomers raised on this film were in GRADE SCHOOL when the civil rights bills were passed.

And they witnessed all the unrest, the protests, the marches, etc, and couldn't understand why black people were doing it, R70. Having seen the depiction of the bucolic lives of former slaves in 'Song of the South,' the marches and civil disobedience came across to them as ingratitude and subversion.

Lifelong points of view are often cemented in childhood. To this day, that's still the take of many conservative white boomers on blacks' search for equality. 'Song of the South' is by no means solely responsible for that perception, but it contributed.

Well, I saw it as a kid and I thought it was racist then.

If you want to watch racist movies, go ahead OP. You can be as racist as you want to be. But only other racists will likely approve. Don't expect others to kiss your ass for being a bigot.

Still regular bigots sure won't like your fat ugly failed drag queen ass, but your chose the life you wanted to live.