Theodor Seuss Geisel (1904 – 1991) is perhaps the world's most popular children's author. More than 60 books under his pen name Dr. Seuss, had sold over 600 million copies and translated into more than 20 languages by the time of his death. His rhyming books like The Cat in the Hat (1957) and Green Eggs and Ham (1960), are foundational in early childhood reading. Children annually celebrate his birthday, March 2, adopted as National Read Across America Day, by dressing up in "crazy socks" and "wacky hats" to promote reading.
However, in 2021, Dr. Seuss Enterprises ceased to publish six books due to supposed racist content. And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street (1989), If I Ran the Zoo (1950), McElligot's Pool (1947), On Beyond Zebra! (1955), Scrambled Eggs Super! (1953), and The Cat's Quizzer (1976), were all published by Random House Books for Young Readers. Dr. Seuss Enterprises wrote, "These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong. Ceasing sales of these books is only part of our commitment and our broader plan to ensure Dr. Seuss Enterprises's catalog represents and supports all communities and families." (March 2, 2021)
Ceasing to publish, but retaining the copyright, ensures that no other publisher can sell these once-popular books. The dwindling supply has driven up the price of the used copies.
HEAC's Online Public Forum
On October 17, 2024, the Heterodox East Asia Community (HEAC) and National Writing Invitational (NWI) sponsored an online public forum on the Dr. Seuss controversy and his legacy. It featured Kansas State English Professor Philip Nel and University of Pennsylvania historian Jonathan Zimmerman.
Professor Philip Nel is the author of Was the Cat in Hat Black? (2017, Oxford University Press). He argued that some Seuss books have negatively impacted young, impressionable readers with racist stereotypes, such as a "Chinaman" carrying chopsticks.
Nel said that a frequent argument is that everyone should be offended equally. He replied, "Offending everyone equally is a false equivalency. It doesn't take into account the unequal distribution of power. The most obvious example is that there is no n-word for white people."
Professor Nel explained that as a white man, he could easily be offended, but not dehumanized by the dominant American language, art, culture, and history. On the other hand, the traditional culture dehumanizes women, lgbtqia people, and people of color. He concluded that it's actually impossible to offend everyone equally.
Censorship: Who Gets to Decide?
Critics have framed books such as The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird as "harmful." The arguments are similar to Dr. Seuss's books.
Jonathan Zimmerman, the second speaker, stated that he was "terrified, literally terrified by the idea of using that rubric ['harm'] to decide what should be acceptable for people to read." Additionally, Zimmerman personally does not believe that Salman Rushdie writes about hate speech, although his satire of the Prophet in The Satanic Verses (1988, by Viking/Penguin), deeply offended millions of religiously conservative Muslims.
Zimmerman used this example to explain that censors always say someone's going to be harmed. Censors then deny that individuals of equal understanding and benevolence could interpret the same text differently. In Salman Rushdie's case, not all Muslims agree that his book was offensive. It cannot be assumed that The Satanic Verses is anti-Muslim. Just as not every Muslim thinks that Rushdie is anti-Muslim, not all, or even most, Asians agree that Dr. Seuss is anti-Asian.
Students' Perspectives on Censorship
Three young Asian-American students from Orange County, California shared their experiences reading Seuss books. Aaron is a sophomore at La Mirada High School He spoke about how he didn't find any of Dr. Seuss' works offensive as a child. Moreover, he supported Dr. Seuss' creativity and imaginative stories, and strongly rejected banning the author's books.
Gerald, another sophomore (Sunny Hills), talked about how he saw the supposed "racist" picture of the Asian man holding chopsticks as a child and simply thought it was another wacky character among all the other wacky characters. Gerald disagreed with discontinuing any of Seuss' works. Instead, he spoke about how children could learn and have a broader perspective from controversial books, including literature such as Heather Has Two Mommies.
Gabrielle, an 8th grader (Oxford Academy), also rejected banning Seuss' stories. The author's good intentions and creativity were far more powerful than a few outdated pictures and words, she said. Instead, she suggested the government revise copyright laws and allow out-of-print books to enter the public domain. Many Americans want to read Seuss's books, but it's difficult as the supply dwindles and prices rise. As long as Americans want to read certain books, the government should allow them to do so.
Young Readers Want to Choose
Audience members also voiced their thoughts at the forum and at the forum public doc. Wrote Sua, a 7th grader at Oxford Academy:
"I completely agree that multiple Seuss books fit my standard of racism, but I think that people should choose if they want to read them or not. After all, these books have been a huge part of our childhood.
"I will first start off by pointing out the obvious: these books are old. Super old. Times change, and back then, racism was very common and went unpunished. A lot of people did not even think about if it was wrong. So, when writing his famous children's books, Dr. Seuss did not think that the content was wrong. He probably did not think it was offensive in the slightest. As the content of these books [was] not written in malice, not publishing several of them anymore is not going to be a stand against racism. It will just take away some great children's books."
Brandon, an 8th grader at Beechwood Elementary, suggested that schools can impose an age limit for controversial books.
"People shouldn't ban these books. I think it would be perfect to add a certain age limit to read some of these controversial books because of mature stuff. How this will work is that people will find an age restriction, such as thirteen, instead of total restrictions. Students under 13 can read with parental approval or notification.[…] In my opinion, I feel like people (at least 13 and over) should be allowed to read any book."
Then and Now, Not All People Think Alike
Both Philip Nel and Jonathan Zimmerman agreed that the commonly used excuse for accepting controversial books, "That's what people thought back then," is not persuasive. Professor Nel asked: "Which people thought like that? Certainly not all people. No one could have possibly all thought the same thing."
Zimmerman added, "I'm a historian and that makes me crazy. Certainly a lot of white people [but] not all white people. So the weakest defense you can make of any text, or really any idea, is precisely 'That's what people thought.'"
Both Philip Nel and Jonathan Zimmerman concluded that it's okay, and even healthy, for readers to have complicated relationships with their favorite childhood books. We encourage all young readers to share their thoughts with Heterodox Academy and to publish their writings with the National Writing Invitational.
Please share your voice about whether some books should be banned!
RELATED:
- [Mythbusters] BBC Stuck in the Stereotypes of its Own Correspondents
- The Welcome Death of a Derogatory Term
- EDITORIAL | Free Speech Threatened by Hostility to Transgender Book
Authors: Gabrielle Park and Dr Joseph Yi
Gabrielle Park is a student at Oxford Academy (Cypress, CA). Joseph Yi is an associate professor of political science at Hanyang University (Seoul).
