Talk:Uncle Remus

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Angelesdc, Dlordd77.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Expansion on Racism and Controversy

This article in no way reflects the harmful and racist images that plagued the black community after these folklores were published. Before citing that the Uncle Remus stories were simply recanted tales and mostly fact, provide sources. These images are more than likely false narratives told from the perspective of a rich white male, these are not images and stories that should be glorified. If discussing Uncle Remus in a neutral space, add more commentary on it's harmful effects. The controversy section needs much work. Mary T. Brown (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

If you are able to find relevant sources about the topic, you can expand the article yourself. Just be careful for undue weight to specific opinions. Dimadick (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

No relevant sources were found. The "racism and controversy" should be removed, as it is pure speculation based on the premise that racism and controversy must somehow exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.195.251.128 (talk) 16:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on roots of stories

Thanks for the editing. However, I'm not sure this statement The style of story is the trickster tale; and many may well have roots in West Africa. is entirely accurate. Harris was white and I suspect that the stories are folklore only in style. I don't remember anyone ever claiming that the stories have their roots in authentic American Negro folklore (as opposed to being complete inventions by Harris). If you can't support such a claim, it might be more accurate to say that they resemble trickster folktales. Do you know more than this about the origin of Harris' stories? alteripse 16 apr 04 Ok, thanks to the link from Gutenberg text, it is obvious from the author's forward that he was using oral folklore and not wholesale invention. I withdraw my quibble above. alteripse

There is a *lot* of discussion of the roots of the stories. Harris said both that he got the tales from slaves in his youth and that he invented them. I don't know that anyone has found satisfactory African analogs. One thing that is slipping around in my memory, though, is Harris's relationship to Mark Twain, which would be worthy of inclusion. Twain was an unambiguous abolitionist, and I think that he was friends with Harris. I can't be sure enough to make an edit and inclusion, though. On the matter of the trickster tale, it's true that pretty much every mythos has them, but it's not necessary for an African trickster to show up in these tales, because European literature was full of the rube-done-good tales, and in particular southern literature was by the time of Harris. (See, for example, the play that Lincoln was watching when he was assassinated: Our American Cousin.) It was a genre already. Geogre 13:26, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

While the Uncle Remus stories are amusing, it doesn't take into account that race relations cast into a comedic form were easier to believe and accept as the real thing. Stafford's 1946 analysis can hardly be viewed as contemporary, according to the inference in the article. Uncle Remus may be exemplary for its capturing the Southern dialect, but there are plenty of late nineteenth fiction with examples of this genre. This contrary sentiment is that this is apologist literature, not merely to justify slavery, but to make the Restoration period - North and South -believe that this was what the South was really like.

• Fox & Lears, The Culture of Consumption
• Stafford, John: Patterns of Meaning in Nights with Uncle Remus", American Literature 18 (May 1946).

--allie 02:16, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ah. Allie, first let me say that the article did not look like this when I wrote my comment above, nor was I an editor or author of it. In fact, I think that right now it needs considerable mediation for POV. There are several questions that the article can't quite deal with and yet begs.

1. Is it African material (a la "Porgie and Bess") stolen by an unscrupulous hack?
2. Is the author's intent to portray the "happy darky" (a stereotype in use as late as the 1950's)?
3. Do the works deserve a place in the contemporary canon of American literature?
4. Has this been a "suppressed" work?

Now, I'm one of those born before 1970, so I know both the books (a compilation of them) and the movie that the original author has said is "uncirculated" now, so I'm not sure that it has been suppressed as a work. However, I am sure that the article as it stands now aggravates matters by almost discussing each of these points, and each from an implied point of view (i.e. "yes, yes, yes, and yes") that is inconsistent. An objective or scholarly removed point of view would be better, but it would mean a direct statement of the issues. I do know that Harris was viewed, in his own day, as no apologist, although he may be an architect of the "happy darky" stereotype. Whether he intended to say that slaves were happy or not, he may have done so simply by trying to suggest that culture on the plantation was not all Simon le Gre and Uncle Tom. Stowe aggravated Southern authors, and Harris implies that her unfamiliarity with actual plantations leads her to betray her own cause. I would be interested in anyone who attempts to rewrite this article in such a way that both sides, or no sides, of these issues is presented. I, however, am no Americanist (18th c. British is my field). Geogre 03:05, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, your summary is right on target for a more balanced approach. I know that I can't tackle all of these points, but I think I can locate reliable and contemporary source work - as well as someone to take on this challenging task, as well. Comments appreciated and very helpful. --allie 03:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for editing this entry. I had a minor concern about the alleged circulation of this item; I was born in 1979 and have both seen and read the tales in question. What's more is that of 15 of my close (in relationship and age) American friends were all familiar with the work in question. We primarily grew up in Ohio, Minnesota, and North Carolina. The article seems to belittle the influence on popular culture that these tales had, and I am not sure that's completely warranted. Thanks for taking the time to read my (as above, admittedly minor) concern. vajdaij

Allow me to make the point that nearly all languages use terms such as "uncle," "brother," "grandmother," et cetera, regarding strangers, not at all in pejorative reference. I suggest that the use of "uncle" in the context referred to here represents respect, just as does "our American Cousin" in the fourth paragraph above. Uncle Remus and many other so-called "Southern" tales (for example, Little Black Sambo)wrongly draw the race card. Let's cool it on the race thing, which could be applied in some fashion to nearly everything literary. We could just as well condemn most literature (for example, The Scarlet Letter)as being sexist, racist, classist, and so on. Anyway, where are the references here for this entry?

I think the last sentence of your comment is really the important one... we're not here to decide whether Uncle Remus is racist or not, or whether the race controversy is overblown or justified, etc., just to document what other people have said on the subject. And that's a very good thing in this case, because if we had to settle the issue before writing an article, an article would never get written. --Delirium 19:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I seem to remember having read somewhere that, ignoring for a moment the legitimately troublesome racial attitudes and stereotypesto be found in Harris's work, the Uncle Remus stories are one of the best, if not THE best compilations of African slave stories ever put together, and the ONLY place that many of these stories were preserved. PurpleChez 23:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest that commenters here at least read the Joel Chandler Harris entry here on Wikipedia before making suggestions. Harris was a remarkably disciplined folklorist for his day. He disclosed the specific locations where he gathered his stories, and he insisted on multiple informants for each story and third-party verification. He put the Grimm brothers to shame. Professional anthropologists didn't match his techniques until after WWII. His transcription of the dialect, if anything, is too accurate, in the sense that the stories are really difficult to understand in their original versions, but it's been a boon to historical linguistics researchers. And as another person here commented, a lot of the folklore that Harris recorded is not available from any other source. No serious researcher has ever suggested that Harris "invented" any of his stories. The Uncle Remus framing device was never claimed to be a real, single informant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.158.9.214 (talk) 09:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Film adaptations

In the article it is mentioned that there have been three film adaptations of the book, but then only names two of them. Is there a third, and if so, what was it? ChrisStansfield 19:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Stories were stolen

Laura Plantation

Harris is credited in some places as the actual author of the stories, for example at U.S. National Historic Landmark webpage for Joel Chandler Harris House, a house now described in Joel Chandler Harris House article, but I believe he stole them.

Having visited a plantation house museum near New Orleans where the Brer Rabbit stories were written by a black slave (from oral history stories of slaves from West Africa I believe), I recall that Harris is regarded there as a blatant thief and/or plagiarist. I don't know enough right now to write this definitively, but I recall from the tour there that Harris is spoken of as a copyright thief. Either copyright laws were not strong, or it was impossible for the actual recorder to pursue legal claims against Harris, or both. I believe that there is very good authentication of the recording of the stories at that plantation. I think there is some additional story that needs to be told in the article, although it would need proper sourcing of course. doncram (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

What plantation, and who is the person who supposedly wrote down the stories? Edison (talk) 22:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Funny this should pop up on my watchlist. Actually, in the year since when i posted that, i came across the plantation's name: it is Laura Plantation, perhaps known also as "Lara Plantation" or "Lara". I went on the tour there, which includes visiting slave cabins behind. Unfortunately the main plantation house had been damaged in a fire in 2006 or so, and was closed, so the tour spent more time on the cabins. The stories were told/retold by a black slave. As I recall, the stories were traditional, based on original African stories, revised/embellished by this story-teller and perhaps others before him to apply to rabbits and briar patches in the South. This one particular slave wrote them down, has a name I don't recall. These were published by Harris, who gained all the credit and money, back when it would be impossible to stop anyone from doing so. Probably Harris retold them with some "improvements" or other changes, but the bulk of it was stolen, I understood. There must have been some academic-type study of this; the information presented in the tour is very detailed and convincing. doncram (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

More: The Laura Plantation article now states: "Alcée Fortier, who later became Professor of Romance Languages and folklore at Tulane University, was said to have collected Louisiana Creole versions of the West African Br'er Rabbit stories here in the 1870s.", while the Alcee Fortier article does not mention that. I don't know if he, not a slave, is the person that i am recalling or whether there was a particular slave who wrote them down. Also, it could be that Gullahs in South Carolina and/or others could also legitimately believe the Brer Rabbit stories were theirs, if they also brought them from West Africa. doncram (talk) 23:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at the references on the Joel Chandler Harris page: there is quite a bit of research as well as primary source material in the introductions to the first two Uncle Remus books. The Brer Rabbit stories are a cycle of folklore. If this collection of them is theft, then each generation of people telling these stories would be guilty as well. The Brer Rabbit stories were recorded by people other than Harris and Fortier, including Robert Roosevelt. J L Shakespeare (talk) 22:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Book Titles

How about a bibliography, or a list of books of the Uncle Remus stories? I've been interested in reading the original stories, but I'm not really sure where to start since it looks like Harris published several Uncle Remus books. Also, some of the books I've come across appear to be compilations or "best of" versions of the original Harris books. A list would be very handy. 69.204.5.228 (talk) 23:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Currently, a list is available on the Joel Chandler Harris page. J L Shakespeare (talk) 22:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Gullah roots?

I myself have heard these stories first hand growing up from native Gullah speakers in South Carolina, so why are the Gullah roots not listed here? RoyBatty42 (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

He is a fictional character, he has no roots. Skiendog (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, the Remus character is from middle Georgia. A Gullah character written with corresponding dialect, Daddy Jake, first appears in Nights with Uncle Remus. J L Shakespeare (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Uncle remus norman rockwell.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Uncle remus norman rockwell.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:58, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Info box

An info box was added and quickly deleted from this article. I would like to see an info box so I agree with the addition, but I would like it to have more than two lines, so I agree with the deletion. I would like to see an info box that give more info. A Softer Answer (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree one hundred and ten percent!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

First edition

1880 or 1881? The Harris biography states 1880. Published by whom? Both articles are silent. Illustrated? --P64 (talk) 21:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Strengthen entry

This entry could use some work. Uncle Remus's bio was only a couple of lines. It could discuss why Joel Chandler Harris created this fictional character. The beginning could illustrate that the fictional character became a phenomenon. It briefly touched base on how Uncle Remus was turned into a live action film created by Disney. This post could go more into detail on why Disney recreated Joel Chandler Harris story and its importance. What was the reaction to the film? Did viewers take well to it or was it not popular to the public? I believe that this article definitely could use some work to strengthen it. The majority of the information came from google pages which the information isn't terrible but they should use more articles and refer more back to Harris's stories. I checked a few of the citations and the links work however, there are a few spots throughout the post that they did not even provided the appropriate citation. It currently says [ citation needed] at the end of the sentence. For this post it is necessary to add more information to strengthen it. Also, to acquire more information from articles and the discussed texts instead of off websites. When using information from another source it is required that you cite it appropriately, which was not evident throughout this post. Citations should be consistant throughout the entry and not just disregarded at times.

(Komak1006 (talk) 23:42, 5 April 2017 (UTC))

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Uncle_Remus&action=edit&section=new#

"Creek Indian" influence?

This year an unnamed editor added the sentence Many of these stories are believed to have Creek Indian influence too. There's no citation, and the linked-to Creek Indian page doesn't mention anything. Maybe this is accurate, and maybe it's not, but for now this is cookie-cutter unsubstantiated rumor, even phrased in the passive voice to avoid naming the people who "believe" this (but don't "know" this for certain?). For now I've flagged it as original research; I'll let future editors either fix it or remove it.

I'll also note that, as per the usual lazy edit job, the unnamed editor shoved the text in any random ol' place, and it doesn't read well. I don't know what the right fix would be--would it merit a new section titled "Influences"? Again I leave these decisions to those that might come after me.

--Larry Hastings (talk) 22:12, 26 November 2023 (UTC)