the munchkin wrangler.

I'm sure this will sound totally counter-intuitive to some people, but I found those old, over the top violence cartoons to not only be funny, but also educational.

Think about it for a sec, how else do children learn about what causes pain in others if they never feel pain for themselves. When toddlers came to visit us, sometimes we'd get one that did not have pets, and they might do something to the dog like pull it's ear. Now the dog was trained to not bite small children, but he might yelp, and one of us would come running and see what was happening. SOP was not to scold the child, or yell, or hit, but to grab the child firmly by the ear and tug until they gave a pain response. When the child looked at you with that face of "Why did you hurt me?", we would calmly explain that that was what they had just done to the dog, and ask them if they liked it. When the answer came back as no, the lesson was learned and we would then show the child how to nicely pet the dog.

Cartoon violence is along the same lines. As a child, you might not realize that slamming a hand in a hot waffle iron is painful, but after watching Jerry do it to Tom, you got an idea that it was, and if you had any empathy at all, you understood that hands and waffle irons do not mix without consequence.

I intend for my kids to enjoy all those old cartoons as I did.

There was also a lot of opposition to and subversion of authority in those cartoons, most obviously in the Bugs Bunny ones. Bugs used a lot of ridicule in his fights against authority, and one thing authoritarians can't stand is riducule.

Excellent analysis, and explains why some of the old ones are still funny to us adults, and why a lot of the newer ones aren't.

I am afraid that in todays world there is only black and white, all the shades of gray are gone. Instead of teaching how much of something is socially acceptable and what line should not be crossed, apparently the only way to control behavior these days is to outlaw it completely. Thus we have abstinence-only sex-ed classes, we have strict no-touching policies in schools (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/17/AR2007061701179_pf.html)

See, its possible that someone might touch someone inappropriately so instead of teaching what is and isn't acceptable, we simply outlaw all touching.

Violence is the same thing, we can't condone any violence so we simply outlaw anything connected with it. It doesn't seem to matter that the generations are becoming more sheep-like all the time. Try going to a sporting event or a bar or similar place and REALLY watch, anyone showing any sign of aggression is instantly given what they want, if they crowd into the front of a line, if they push someone away, if they shout loudly enough they get anything they want - why? because we have been taught not to stick up for ourselves, to avoid confrontation and to meekly let events happen so nobody gets hurt.

OK, I didn't mean to go there but its frustrating watching people talk about the violence in cartoons "hurting" our children

That's why I liked Droopy so much. He was just mindin' his own, but mess with him & you'd get your ass handed to you.

(For someone who's never had a good experience with the product line, he was unreasonably brand-loyal.)

Out here in roadrunner country, when you find someone willing to deliver that quickly and reliably it's enough of a miracle in and of itself to offset the exploding nature of the products. ;)

There are times, Wingie, when I just plumb love you.

In the masculine, sharing-a-trench way obviously. Not the squishy kind of way.

"It occurred to me that all the characters on the receiving end of the most gratuitous cartoon violence are almost always the ones who initiated force against their opponents."

I believe it was Chuck Jones who said essentially the same thing. Great post!

Thanks,
Bill

Today's kids cartoons seem so psychedelic, frenetic, full of oddly shaped people blinking and glowing and bouncing all over the place, with screwed up voices. Maybe this is why kids act like this?

Modern cartoons don't seem to have any cultural basis, meaning, or much in the way of humor, except maybe the Simpsons. I don't see why anyone bothers to watch them.

Maybe Nickelodeon is disproportionately responsible for creating the psychedelic, meaningless cartoons full of rapidly blinking colors and drugged out looking people. Invader Zim and Spongebob Squarepants, for example.

I wouldn't be surprised if the government was encouraging Nickelodeon to make such cartoons, in order to churn out meaningless, illiterate, drugged out looking adults (with the help of the compulsory public "educational" system of course), who will be utterly incapable of thought, completely susceptible to propaganda, and work mindlessly for their entire lives, while spending their spare time staring at rapidly blinking lights on the TV.