For a more modern yet still dystopian talking-train kids program, check out Chuggington. It's also British, but instead of the Fat Controller, there's "Vee", a disembodied GlaDOS-like female voice who orders the trains around via loudspeaker and chastises them when they're naughty.
The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
51–60 of 279 posts
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#52Almost all the content we've got is representative of "corporate-totalitarian dystopia", because we live in a corporate-totalitarian dystopia. Thomas the Tank Engine isn't some special case.
Did we live in a "corporate-totalitarian dystopia" in the 1940s - 70s? Because that's when the stories this show is based on were written. Simply considering all culture to be propaganda as you appear to be doing is intellectually lazy.
Yes, we did live in a corporate-totalitarian dystopia in the 40s to 70s.
And you are being lazy for assuming things that I did not say. I'm not implying that it's propaganda. I'm saying that media reflects the world we live in, as that is the context that we are familiar with, and we tell stories set in our own world.
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#53The next episode [1], aired two days later, contains the conclusion of the story, and he gets out of the tunnel. I do agree that 2 days is rather long to leave kids with the conclusion of that first episode though. The final lines are: "Henry doesn't mind the rain now. He knows that the best way to keep his paint nice is not to run into tunnels, but to ask his driver to rub him down when the day's work is over." It m…
Regardless of the story, I find it weird when kids shows split the story across episodes. As an adult I watch series in the right order. As a kid, I didn't know there was any timeline behind the shows. I watched every episode as a separate story, would miss a few, would watch the repeats of what I already saw on different channels, etc. Maybe that doesn't apply to everyone, but I wouldn't expect young kids to connect episodes unless explicitly prompted about it. Was my experience unusual?
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#54Thomas & Friends is gold. The show is dignified and wholesome. It is always about respect, diligence, and humility. It isn't there for stupid antics and wacky laughs. It doesn't blast color explosions and ADHD-fueled off-the-charts mind-numbing exuburance to capture kids attention. And it's been doing that for decades (pretty much eternity, as far as kids TV goes). Not since Mr. Rogers has there been a better kids TV…
> Better known as Sir Topham Hatt since the 1950s. Seemingly only in the US ("the Fat Controller is always referred to by his real name, "Sir Topham Hatt" in the US"[0]). I was born in 1990 (UK), and as I recall he was almost always refered to as "The Fat Controller". [0] http://ttte.wikia.com/wiki/Sir_Topham_Hatt#Trivia
Can confirm, "fat controlla" is alive and well in UK. I personally hate the character and agree with Ms. Tolentino, the whole setup is very regressive. What angers me most is that it exploits British pride in their early railway industry (which is basically dead now, ok, but is still venerated, especially outside of London) to peddle a worldview completely based around hierarchies and the duty of subordinates.
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The show is dignified and wholesome. really? I always found it to be quite creepy. The constant obsession with being a "really useful" engine. The shaming of engines who don't toe the line. Victimisation of engines who misbehave. The show makes me strangely uncomfortable for some reason.
It doesn't make as much sense for our imminent future state, when robots do all our jobs and we sit around all day, but I like the distinctive "really useful engine" complement. Obedience, diligence, and selflessness are admirable qualities. All kids and adults should strive to be really useful, in the best sense of the phrase. There's far too much narcissism in the world.
I have NEVER seen a good explanation of how 'Obedience' is EVER an 'admirable' quality. If you can't think for yourself and make rational decisions, you have much bigger problems than not 'respecting authority'. Any authority that is incapable of demonstrating the rationale behind their directives is a fool and should be treated as such, with the utmost disrespect.
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#56Thomas & Friends is gold. The show is dignified and wholesome. It is always about respect, diligence, and humility. It isn't there for stupid antics and wacky laughs. It doesn't blast color explosions and ADHD-fueled off-the-charts mind-numbing exuburance to capture kids attention. And it's been doing that for decades (pretty much eternity, as far as kids TV goes). Not since Mr. Rogers has there been a better kids TV…
> Not since Mr. Rogers has there been a better kids TV show. I'm too young to have watched this show. Just googled it and it really does look like a lovely, wholesome show. Personally my gold standard is the original Looney Toons (Mel Blanc era). I could watch that irreverent, slapstick all day. I'd rather my kid take a leaf from Bugs Bunny's F-you style than Thomas' meek, obey, do what you're told and stay on the ra…
> Personally my gold standard is the original Looney Toons…
I find Looney Toons extremely racist and stereotypical. Though I grew up on it, I wouldn’t expose kids to it.
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#57> In 2009, the show went completely C.G.I. As much as I love the New Yorker, my fondest hope is that one day the N.Y.C. media will free themselves from whatever repressive authoritarian soul compels them to put those dots in every single acronym and initialism, when the rest of the country abandoned the dots long ago. They even put them in names that once were initialisms but now are genuine names on their own: they…
The New Yorker also insists on typographical affectations such as coöperate and reëlect. Most publications have a "house style." The New Yorker's is particularly eccentric, and I think they like it that way.
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#58> In 2009, the show went completely C.G.I. As much as I love the New Yorker, my fondest hope is that one day the N.Y.C. media will free themselves from whatever repressive authoritarian soul compels them to put those dots in every single acronym and initialism, when the rest of the country abandoned the dots long ago. They even put them in names that once were initialisms but now are genuine names on their own: they…
I think you mean NYC media ;)
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The show is dignified and wholesome. really? I always found it to be quite creepy. The constant obsession with being a "really useful" engine. The shaming of engines who don't toe the line. Victimisation of engines who misbehave. The show makes me strangely uncomfortable for some reason.
It doesn't make as much sense for our imminent future state, when robots do all our jobs and we sit around all day, but I like the distinctive "really useful engine" complement. Obedience, diligence, and selflessness are admirable qualities. All kids and adults should strive to be really useful, in the best sense of the phrase. There's far too much narcissism in the world.
Diligence and selflessness are admirable. Obedience is, at best, sometimes necessary, and at worst a source of atrocities. (You might be thinking of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_(military)#Common_inten.... The desire to establish—and function under—common intent, whether through consensus or authoritative credence, is an admirable quality in a person. But that is not the same thing as obedience.)
Re: The Repressive, Authoritarian Soul of “Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends”
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did we live in a "corporate-totalitarian dystopia" in the 1940s - 70s? Because that's when the stories this show is based on were written. Simply considering all culture to be propaganda as you appear to be doing is intellectually lazy.
Yes, we did live in a corporate-totalitarian dystopia in the 40s to 70s. And you are being lazy for assuming things that I did not say. I'm not implying that it's propaganda. I'm saying that media reflects the world we live in, as that is the context that we are familiar with, and we tell stories set in our own world.
> Yes, we did live in a corporate-totalitarian dystopia in the 40s to 70s.
I understand people like to interpret things through that lens now but like seeing Tolkien's work as an allegory for industrialization or the atomic bombs, it seems to me to be mostly post-hoc revisionism to do so. Reading the Wikipedia page of the author, I don't see any evidence of a "corporate-totalitarian dystopia" which would inform his stories.
So you're going to have to define "corporate-totalitarian dystopia" in a way that even makes sense in that context.