As I am making my way through "Gulliver's Travels", I am thinking about any and all times in the past that I may have been exposed to this story. Our discussion last week really made me stop and think if I had ever been exposed to this text in my childhood. Honestly, at least to the best of my recollection, I don't think I ever was.
I do vaguely (and I mean very vaguely) recall the old animated version of "Gulliver's Travels" being on CBC television eons ago. I believe this was a version that would have been made in the 30s or 40s. It had that old fashioned animation look to it, sort of like the old Disney or Max Fleicher cartoons. My attention span was brief, however, when I was a child, so I don't think I watched it for more than a few minutes.
By the way, if anyone is interested, I think I saw this old animated version on DVD in the cheapie bin at Wal Mart for less than $5. This was a few months ago. I don't know if it's still there, but it may be worth a look.
After our discussion last week, and reading other people's blog comments on whether or not they knew of "Gulliver's Travels" as children, it amazed me how often something that was originally intended for an adult audience can be watered down and passed off as kiddie entertainment. I understand that the original "Popeye" character (as he appeared in the comic strip in the 40s) was a very violent, loud, misogynistic drunkard. I guess his character was tamed down a lot for the child market, or so I've read. I guess some businessmen figured they could make more money if they tamed the sailor down.
I'm about to go off on a really wild tangent, but bear with me.
As a teenager, I was a voracious consumer of comic books. It was quite an obsession for me. At the time, one of my favorite comics was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. No, this wasn't the mutant turtles featured in the popular animated series. What many people don't know is that the Ninja Turtles started out as a very dark, underground comic printed on black and white newsprint. In the early days, the pages featured endless amounts of graphic violence...it was a very bloody comic definitely not intended for young children. But, the powers that be got a hold of it, homogenized it and groomed it for a mass audience of waiting children.
I've also seen pictures of Woody Woodpecker in his very early days, and he looked quite scary. He had sharp, serated teeth, and a wild bushy hairdo. And a maniacal look in his eyes. Google "Woody Woodpecker" if you don't believe me.
Anyway, I guess the whole point of this entry is that I am not the least bit surprised that "Gulliver's Travels" has been modified and "kiddified". I think that happens more than we realize.
I do vaguely (and I mean very vaguely) recall the old animated version of "Gulliver's Travels" being on CBC television eons ago. I believe this was a version that would have been made in the 30s or 40s. It had that old fashioned animation look to it, sort of like the old Disney or Max Fleicher cartoons. My attention span was brief, however, when I was a child, so I don't think I watched it for more than a few minutes.
By the way, if anyone is interested, I think I saw this old animated version on DVD in the cheapie bin at Wal Mart for less than $5. This was a few months ago. I don't know if it's still there, but it may be worth a look.
After our discussion last week, and reading other people's blog comments on whether or not they knew of "Gulliver's Travels" as children, it amazed me how often something that was originally intended for an adult audience can be watered down and passed off as kiddie entertainment. I understand that the original "Popeye" character (as he appeared in the comic strip in the 40s) was a very violent, loud, misogynistic drunkard. I guess his character was tamed down a lot for the child market, or so I've read. I guess some businessmen figured they could make more money if they tamed the sailor down.
I'm about to go off on a really wild tangent, but bear with me.
As a teenager, I was a voracious consumer of comic books. It was quite an obsession for me. At the time, one of my favorite comics was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. No, this wasn't the mutant turtles featured in the popular animated series. What many people don't know is that the Ninja Turtles started out as a very dark, underground comic printed on black and white newsprint. In the early days, the pages featured endless amounts of graphic violence...it was a very bloody comic definitely not intended for young children. But, the powers that be got a hold of it, homogenized it and groomed it for a mass audience of waiting children.
I've also seen pictures of Woody Woodpecker in his very early days, and he looked quite scary. He had sharp, serated teeth, and a wild bushy hairdo. And a maniacal look in his eyes. Google "Woody Woodpecker" if you don't believe me.
Anyway, I guess the whole point of this entry is that I am not the least bit surprised that "Gulliver's Travels" has been modified and "kiddified". I think that happens more than we realize.
posted by Gary F at 9:40 PM
5 Comments:
Gary, the connections you make here are interesting. I'm thinking of Bugs Bunny and all the cross-dressing an innuendo in some of the older cartoon. And now, they have (shudder) Baby Bugs.
I didn't see Gulliver as a child either. I have actually never seen it on film.. so If I ever make it out to Walmart I will look for this said "cheapie bin" and hopefully find it! Thanks for the tip and good connections!
Abby
Gary you are right about a Max Fleischer version of Gulliver's Travels and it was made in the 1930's. According to the "Oldies" website it even received Academy Award nominations.
Here's a bit of info from the website:
Produced by Max Fleischer and directed by his brother Dave Fleischer over a period of 20 months, Gulliver's Travels required the work of over 700 artists and was honored with two Academy Award nominations in 1939 -Best Score (Victor Young), and Best Song ("Faithful Forever", music and lyrics by Ralph Rainger and Leo Robin).
Now, if this is the version you saw in the "cheapie bin" it may be worth a look. One can never tell want treasures await you in a WalMart cheapie bin. Thanks for the tip.
I started to write a comment but it ended up being my own rant haha. My response to you can be found on my blog.
ama.krugferd.net
And I got a picture of Woody the Woodpecker to prove you were right lol :)
I seem to remember (it was so long ago LOL) that Popeye cartoons were a little less than aesthetically pleasing to the eye and to the ear! It wasn't until that cutsy baby and Olive Oil came along that people began to really tune in. I guess that relates a little to Gulliver. It isn't until we see where Swift is taking us on his travelogue that we really appreciate his satiric overview of the state of the crown!
Post a Comment
<< Home