h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I remember the fuss about that. Common sense and a sense of humour seems to have Oh, we are not allowed to use 'common sense', either the expression or the 'sense'.

Websailor

A good point from McKay, though:

>>Prejudice is in the mind, not the word

Actually...golliwogs *are* inherently offensive, both as a toy (characertured portrayals of black people refering back to slavery minstrel origins - etc. etc.) and as a word (because racists have grabbed hold it and used it to taunt and instill fear).

But - as McKay points out - the offence is not in the word per se, but in the mind. In the context if you like.

Yes, there are some contexts in words associated with racism are (arguably) not offensive - debate continues, for example, about the use of the N-word by the likes of NWA and Chris Rock. Black opinion is mixed on this. Myself - well, I'm a major fan of the 'Straight Outta Compton' album.

The Jamaican Garage story might be worth mentioning as an example the hate power of golliwogs being neutralised by their being recaptured by the garage owners. One has to admire their in-your-face attitude - while worrying that they inadvertantly imply blanket acceptance of golliwogs to those less conversant with the specific context.

We will, however, need some more research. Places. Dates. References. It's not that I'm doubting Mckay...but the only reference I've found so far is a posting a Laurel and Hardy forum. Not necessarily an authoritative source. That source also mentions that 'Trading Standards came down like a ton of bricks' (so not 'The Race Relations', whoever they are). I'd like to know the full story.

Oh...I meant to add:

I doubt there can have been any official action. Golliwogs are not illegal. Words are not illegal. Racist abuse and intimidation are.

Very well put. I think the abbreviation is very much more offensive than the full word, because the meaning behind it is clear.

I had one as a child and never hear a whisper of any of the connotations now attached to it. It was about as different as a Cabbage Patch doll that was all. Very sad.

Websailor

Interesting to see this discussion and the one about the swastika in PR at the same time. (Even if my post got yikesed over there )

The swastika, as GB points out, is a symbol that isn't inherently offensive - it started out as a Far Eastern good luck sign - but has become offensive through what it was used for.

Now, I won't say that banning the golliwog is anywhere near as clear an issue as banning the swastika, but there are parallels in the discussions.

Surely if the alternative is having only white dolls, that's much more damaging to race relations in the long run?

(I'd never heard of them before this Entry, though...)

For Mal

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/golliwogMENSYN0305_468x580.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-452477/Police-order-shopkeeper-remove-golliwogs-window.html&usg=__5PuuzPRhaPOjCBcvgey2NFqrDp0=&h=580&w=468&sz=66&hl=en&start=2&tbnid=BnEGwxTlFEoBHM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgolliwogs%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-GB:official%26sa%3DG

Eeek!

Websailor:

I don't think I'd quite go as far as saying gollies didn't have negative connotations in our childhood (yes, I had one too). Even leaving aside the slavery/minstrel aspects (jolly darkies dancing for massa down on the plantation - etc. etc.) - and, fair enough, that might not be obvious unless it's pointed out - I thing we might still legitimately be embarassed, with hindsight, that we were playing with characertures of black people. Why characature *black* people specificically? What's inherently laughable about them in particular? And these were, remember, just about the only portrayals of black people we had.

Which kind of answer's Mal's point, also:

>>Surely if the alternative is having only white dolls, that's much more damaging to race relations in the long run?

Well, yes - maybe on some level, we were loving cuddly, black people. But *characertures*.

Plus...following the Thatcher incident, numerous black Britons pointed out that they *always* found golliwogs offensive.

All that bypassed me as a child. I always found them much loved and not laughed at. My aunt used to make them, and I can't ever remember any adverse comments. Perhaps I was lucky.

Websailor

Oddly enough, I don't think there have ever been complaints about the Sarotti logo. http://www.ml-creativstore.de/shop_cfg/cleanuser/Sarotti-Mohr.jpg

>> And these were, remember, just about the only portrayals of black people we had.<<

I suppose you're from the generation before mine, so I can't really comment on that! I even had black guys in my Playmobil.

Hi all

Thanks for all your comments. So far I have corrected the nitpicks GB has mentioned. I need a little more time for the other comments so please bear with me. Sorry.

GB I'm afraid I don't follow your aside:

<<I'm reminded of the "maid" in the original Tom & Jerry cartoons - who has been edited out and her voice updated.>>

Does this mean you'd like to be credited? I left you out as in the original thread you said

<>

Ah. I wasn't meaning there were adverse comments back then. We were sheltered and monocultural.

btw...the names of Enid Blyton's 'Three Little Golliwogs'? Gollie, Woggie...and a word I can't use on this site. OK - so in our youth, we weren't aware that this last one was *grossly* offensive to black people. (Guy Gibson's dog and all that). But we were ignorant.



In the interest of balance, though...here's an alternative view:
http://bnp.org.uk/tag/golliwog/

How *do* you spell 'characerture', by the way. Not the way I keep spelling it!

Caricature. But we got what you mean

>>Oddly enough, I don't think there have ever been complaints about the Sarotti logo.

That's been extensively redesigned, has it not?
http://www.biosiegel.de/typo3temp/pics/b0bbc6769f.jpg

I remember seeing something about the stages it's gone through over the years.

And those chocolate-coated marsmallow things have ben renamed, too.

Ah, yes. I was thinking of cooked meat products.

Yes, but they've been bringing out "nostalgia" chocolate editions lately, and nobody minds. (I still call the marshmallows by the old name without thinking - everyone does, really.)

That bpn site is truly frightening! I feel like I need a bath after just looking at it. Battle for Britain, eh?

The seeds have been sown and I regret they will take root

Did anyone see then recent story about how the BNP featured a picture of Spitfire on its site...from a Polish squadron.

Mal:
Since the three Germans I know best are a Kashmiri-German, a Puerto Rican-German and somebody married to a Puerto Rican-German...there's no way I'm going to get those marshmallows wrong.

Steering the Entry back on course I have read everyone's comments now and have addressed everything except for

<>

Sorry but I don't understand. What would you like me to do?

<< Quotes within paras: Is it House Style to italicise? (it would make them more readable)>>

again there appears to be two ways one italicise the other as I've done

<< The official Beeb statement will be online somewhere. (I think that for hootoo purposes, we should regard this as authoritative. maybe even link it?)>>

I don't think it necessary to go that deep

<< You may disagree with me on this one...but I really don't think there ought to be a mention that a false picture has been painted, for political reasons, of an orchestrated campaign by 'The PC Brigade'. Quite the opposite seems to be true. You may not want to quite take my party line...but maybe there could be something to the effect that golliwogs have become a touchstone issue for right-leaning patriots who, failing to understand the offence, feel that they are beleagured by 'political corrctness.>>

Again I don't understand. Sorry.

<>

Would you guys/gals like me to incorporate this?

<>

And add this too?