Spring Break
For kids or not for kids
The changing face of cartoons
Matthew Parker, Web Editor
Issue date: 6/4/08 Section: Opinion
Being the avid cartoon watcher that I am, I recently discovered a cartoon titled "Happy Tree Friends." In this cartoon, the viewer watches a number of woodland creatures go about their day in a carefree, happy manner. Sounds very heartwarming, right? Here is the catch; in practically every episode, each of these furry, happy creatures dies a very unexpected and gruesome death.
To most parents, a cartoon such as this would be an abomination. No parent would possibly reason that this show is acceptable for their children. However, you must ask yourself: is this the first cartoon not suitable for young viewers? Of course not, but at least this cartoon provides you with a viewer discretion warning.
I don't know about all of you, but I remember enjoying "Hey Arnold!" when I was younger-- I still like to catch the occasional re-run. This brings me to my point; when watching a re-run of this seemingly innocent cartoon, Helga Petaki, while worshipping her bubble gum statue of Arnold, says that Arnold makes her "girlhood" tremble. I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think that trembling girlhoods sound very innocent.
If we take a look at cartoons even further back, we can recall the Disney fiasco with the inappropriate cover art and wedding scene of The Little Mermaid. The lovely phallic tower and the presumable erection of the priest are definitely not what a child needs to be exposed to.
Disney also had its issues with perversion in The Lion King and Aladdin.
Cartoons such as "Beavis and Butthead" have been attacked by parents for their inappropriate messages; however, most of these cartoons were shown on networks like MTV. In my opinion, parents need to be more concerned with shows that are shown on children's networks. It is obvious that a show that can be watched late at night on a network that is meant for mature viewers should not be available to impressionable children.
However, I will say that I also feel that no matter the network a cartoon is shown on, the cartoon should not be aesthetically appealing to children. I believe "Happy Tree Friends" takes things a bit too far. Even though it is an adult cartoon with a disclaimer, if it is going to portray horrific killings, it should not use furry animals.
If animators would make appropriate shows for youth, and parents would adequately monitor what their children watch, cartoons could be enjoyed by both young and old. Everyone just needs to do their part and be sure that the appropriate audience views the appropriate animation.
This writer can be contacted at opinion@theeastcarolinian.com
To most parents, a cartoon such as this would be an abomination. No parent would possibly reason that this show is acceptable for their children. However, you must ask yourself: is this the first cartoon not suitable for young viewers? Of course not, but at least this cartoon provides you with a viewer discretion warning.
I don't know about all of you, but I remember enjoying "Hey Arnold!" when I was younger-- I still like to catch the occasional re-run. This brings me to my point; when watching a re-run of this seemingly innocent cartoon, Helga Petaki, while worshipping her bubble gum statue of Arnold, says that Arnold makes her "girlhood" tremble. I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think that trembling girlhoods sound very innocent.
If we take a look at cartoons even further back, we can recall the Disney fiasco with the inappropriate cover art and wedding scene of The Little Mermaid. The lovely phallic tower and the presumable erection of the priest are definitely not what a child needs to be exposed to.
Disney also had its issues with perversion in The Lion King and Aladdin.
Cartoons such as "Beavis and Butthead" have been attacked by parents for their inappropriate messages; however, most of these cartoons were shown on networks like MTV. In my opinion, parents need to be more concerned with shows that are shown on children's networks. It is obvious that a show that can be watched late at night on a network that is meant for mature viewers should not be available to impressionable children.
However, I will say that I also feel that no matter the network a cartoon is shown on, the cartoon should not be aesthetically appealing to children. I believe "Happy Tree Friends" takes things a bit too far. Even though it is an adult cartoon with a disclaimer, if it is going to portray horrific killings, it should not use furry animals.
If animators would make appropriate shows for youth, and parents would adequately monitor what their children watch, cartoons could be enjoyed by both young and old. Everyone just needs to do their part and be sure that the appropriate audience views the appropriate animation.
This writer can be contacted at opinion@theeastcarolinian.com
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Justin
posted 6/05/08 @ 2:46 PM EST
Or you can stop being so touchy and taking everything and yourself so seriously. Its just a cartoon. How about raising your kids instead of letting the television raise them. (Continued…)
Pete G.
posted 6/09/08 @ 3:30 PM EST
Honestly, did you really see the perversion in the Disney movies as a kid? Admittedly, I only saw them after the news teams pointed it out.
Maria
posted 6/11/08 @ 6:30 PM EST
I agree with Justin. Please stop being so touchy about cartoons these days. You neglected to mention when this cartoon airs and on which station. If it's adult swim, I doubt it's getting to a large amount of "young impressionable kids. (Continued…)
Post a Comment