And you know, it’s not just Brooke McEldowney
Cidu Bill on Oct 22nd 2009
Last week, when a Newsweek interviewer asked him whether parents might be concerned that the film Where the Wild Things Are might be too scary for younger children, Maurice Sendak replied, “I would tell them to go to hell.”
Excuse me?? Parents seeking to take responsibility for what their young children see should go to hell???
I could understand saying parents can be overprotective, that a little Wicked Witch of the West never scarred any child for life, there are valid opinions capable of being expressed in a civil manner… but “I would tell them to go to hell“???
I’m really starting to think, you should pardon the language, that there’s a virulent strain of Asshole Virus going around. Obviously Kanye West was Patient Zero, and it’s already spread to comic strip artists and children’s book writers.
Filed in Asshole Virus, Bill Bickel, Brooke McEldowney, Kanye West, Maurice Sendak, Newsweek, Where the Wild Things Are | 35 responses so far
WhitneyD Oct 22nd 2009 at 02:41 pm 1
Honestly, I think that part of it is being blown out of proportion. Sendak’s been known to be difficult and self-important in the past (which is why I tend to ignore interviews with him, since it only makes me feel sad, due to how much I love his books- and how much my little ones love them , too). I do think it was an ill phrased sentiment- Roald Dahl did a much better job in saying that all children need to have a little of the macabre in their lives to help them process life. Not the exact quote, but certainly the sentiment.
Brooke’s comic though was just completely unnecessary. There’s no joke there, even if he says there is. It just reads like a giant middle finger being raised to the audience. (Which makes me sad, I do still enjoy 9 Chickweed Lane. Not as much as I used to, but his lines as a cartoonist are so lovely)
Daniel J. Drazen Oct 22nd 2009 at 03:12 pm 2
There was a better response from Neil Gaiman when asked whether kids would like the animated version of his book “Coraline.” His reply was something to the effect that that’s like asking whether a kid likes mushroom soup.
paperboy Oct 22nd 2009 at 04:05 pm 3
Now, was Sendak chuckling when he said that? And I think Kanye West is doing schtick: I saw him do a skit with Wayne Brady and Rainn Wilson where he made fun of his petulance at never winning anything. But, still, you may be right about Assholism spreading.
David Oct 22nd 2009 at 04:21 pm 4
Yes, Sendak is opinionated and short with criticism, but that line is pulled out of context of the further comments made about scary things. Sendak (and Jonze and Eggers) go on to say that everyone gets scared by things in life, and it’s up to you to figure out for yourself and your kids what is tolerable in a movie and what isn’t. Also, they said that people are too scared of being scared. He wasn’t saying that he doesn’t care if the movie is scary to kids, he was saying that he won’t put up with people complaining to him about it.
And not all A-holes are the same. Giving a snide answer to an interview question is different from using your comic strip to rant, is different from charging on stage and grabbing the microphone. All examples of assholery, perhaps, but in different categories and with different magnitudes. After The Royal Tennenbaums, I got into a few discussions about the difference between an asshole and an S.O.B. A tricky distinction to explain, but an important one.
Here are some of the relevant parts of the Sendak interview (http://www.newsweek.com/id/216997/page/1):
What do you say to parents who think the Wild Things film may be too scary?
Sendak: I would tell them to go to hell. That’s a question I will not tolerate.
Because kids can handle it?
Sendak: If they can’t handle it, go home. Or wet your pants. Do whatever you like. But it’s not a question that can be answered.
Jonze: Dave, you want to field that one?
Eggers: The part about kids wetting their pants? Should kids wear diapers when they go to the movies? I think adults should wear diapers going to it, too. I think everyone should be prepared for any eventuality.
Sendak: I think you’re right. This concentration on kids being scared, as though we as adults can’t be scared. Of course we’re scared. I’m scared of watching a TV show about vampires. I can’t fall asleep. It never stops. We’re grown-ups; we know better, but we’re afraid.
Cidu Bill Oct 22nd 2009 at 04:32 pm 5
David, I read the interview and I really didn’t think the context mitigated what he said. I’m not really sure there’s a context in which “I would tell tehm to go to hell” is a civil response.
Eric Oct 22nd 2009 at 05:24 pm 6
From the creators point of view, Assholism is a response to Complainism, America’s current epidemic. You can’t make any kind of art without someone saying it’s too scary/boring/confusing/weird/offensive/not funny… etc. As the creator of something, fielding the constant whining can turn anyone towards assholism. Artists should be prepared for criticism, but critics need to be prepared for the artists to not give a rat’s ass, and tell you so.
Plus, these assholy messages aren’t for the fans, they’re for the complainers. And though it might be assholic thing to say… those imbeciles can go to hell.
I have to say, the vocabulary of this thread is a lot of fun.
Jesse Oct 22nd 2009 at 06:33 pm 7
Eric, well put.
Paperboy Oct 22nd 2009 at 06:47 pm 8
An article on James Cameron in the latest New Yorker quotes The Titanic director on “the media’s treatment of the film”: “We were branded as the biggest idiots in movie history. They were just sharpening their knives so they could really take the film apart. Then they couldn’t. So, f@#k them. F@#k ‘em all.”
S.P. Charles Oct 22nd 2009 at 06:57 pm 9
Of course to put things into perspective, Titanic WAS a terrible movie. It made a ton of money because teenage girls would go back 20+ times to see Leonardo DiCaprio, but money doesn’t mean quality.
Still and all, there’s a difference between the director of a PG-13 rated movie saying FU to people who criticized him, and a children’s book author telling parents concerned about the content of a film (who aren’t even criticizing it) to go to hell.
Mark in Boston Oct 23rd 2009 at 01:25 am 10
Well I for one am glad that nobody made a movie out of “In the Night Kitchen.”
mkilby Oct 23rd 2009 at 03:31 am 11
@ Mark in Boston - If “Where the Wild Things Are” makes enough money, there’s bound to be a sequel, and “In the Night Kitchen” looks like prime material for the scriptwriters to mangle.
chuckers Oct 23rd 2009 at 05:51 am 12
Oh sure, “In the Night Kitchen” will get made. And the pedophiles will have a field day with it. Or the critics will be all over it because it was changed enough that the pedos DON’T get into it.
Basically, I thought it was silly that one parent was complaining “Where the Wild Things Are” was too scary for his 20 month old daughter. Who takes a 20 month old kid to a PG rated movie? My 3.5 year old daughter likes the book but I doubt I would take her to a theater to see it. Might rent it on video for her but come on! Do kids that you even have attention spans that long?
Tom T. Oct 23rd 2009 at 07:20 am 13
Sendak has been saying stuff like this basically since the book was first written. He’s still bitter about Bruno Bettelheim having called it scary.
Karen Oct 23rd 2009 at 09:18 am 14
I personally hated “Where the Wild Things Are” as a kid. And as i grew up I read all kinds of scary junk, but when I in the age range for which picture books are intended, it scared the crap out of me; the line where the monsters say, “We’ll eat you up, we love you so!” FREAKED. ME. OUT. Also, the monsters just looked scary and I thought Max was a booger of a kid.
So no, I haven’t read this classic to my kids. After my husband made the serious mistake of showing “Monsters, Inc” to our oldest at the age of two (WTH), and we dealt with monsters in the closet for about eight months, I have no inclination to read monstery books to my kids, not when they’re at the picture book stage.
Yes, Americans do tend to complain and suffer from “Offensensitivity”, as Berkeley Breathed put it. But you know what, Maurice Sendak can bite me if he wants to swear at me for thinking “Where The Wild Things Are” can be scary for my kids. Maybe they are wimps, but they’re TWO. And FOUR. Geeze Louise. I don’t buy that kids need to read scary crap at that age to ‘deal with their own demons’ or whatever.
The movie is geared to adults who have romantic, nostalgic memories of that freaky book. Let the adults go see it. It’s not geared towards the picture-book crowd.
CIDU Bill Oct 23rd 2009 at 09:35 am 15
Karen, I think we also have to distinguish between the two forms of “offended”: There’s “I don’t like this and I refuse to see/hear/read it” and “I don’t like this and I want to make sure that nobody else can see/hear/read it.” Unless somebody is advocating an enforced ban on Sendack and McEldowney’s works, their only acceptable responses to criticism is “sorry you didn’t like it” — or better yet be professionals and say nothing at all.
Janice Oct 23rd 2009 at 09:53 am 16
Chuckers: people take their 20 mon old to movies?! Don’t they know that both the Canadian and American Pediatrics Associations recommend NO screen time (TV, computers, movies) for children under two? Not that I think most parents follow that recommendation, but I can’t imagine taking my toddler to see Thomas the tank engine in the theatre, let alone something that might be scary.
Cidu Bill Oct 23rd 2009 at 10:20 am 17
It’s rare to go out to a movie where there isn’t at least one baby in attendance. The typical excuse is “it costs too much to hire a baby sitter.”
That’s why God invented Netflix, you idiots.
BillClay Oct 23rd 2009 at 11:10 am 18
Cidu Bill said, “That’s why God invented Netflix, you idiots.” Look, people shouldn’t be bringing kids into theaters, I agree. But saying netflix is the answer is just wrong. A theater experience is *completely* different than watching it at home.
As to the original premise, Sednack’s “go to hell” comment, he couldn’t “say nothing at all” as he was answering an interview question. Also, I think Eric nailed it. Parents who complain that a movie is too scary for little Jason (or is it Jayson these days?) or sweet little Kaylee to go see should just shut up. Take your kids to a park instead.
Cidu Bill Oct 23rd 2009 at 11:30 am 19
This is true, BillClay. It’s also true that watching a movie in a theatre without a restless baby two rows in front of you is a completely different experience than watching a movie in a theatre with a restless baby two rows in front of you. You choose to have a baby and you can’t afford a babysitter, you skip the theatre experience for a while. You don’t have the right to ruin everybody else’s.
Judge Mental Oct 23rd 2009 at 11:54 am 20
As has pointed out, Sendak has never been a particularly warm person. There is his infamous “I hate people” quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/arts/design/10sendak.html
Dan Oct 23rd 2009 at 01:10 pm 21
“Excuse me?? Parents seeking to take responsibility for what their young children see should go to hell???”
I think what we have here is a case of the Overreaction Virus.
Keera Oct 24th 2009 at 09:28 am 22
Uh, doesn’t this film have an age limit? *googling* Yes, it’s PG-rated. That right there tells me the movie isn’t intended for very young children. I wouldn’t even bother asking if it would be too scary for them. It would be (or contains something else unsuitable) or it would have a G-rating.
furrykef Oct 24th 2009 at 02:03 pm 23
Judge Mental — why should “I hate people” be an infamous quote? I hate people too.
CIDU Bill Oct 24th 2009 at 02:06 pm 24
Was it Lucy who said “I love humanity; it’s people I can’t stand”?
Lihtox Oct 24th 2009 at 03:53 pm 25
The “context” in which this comment should be understood is the one in which Sendak has been hearing these complaints for YEARS. It’s like a tall guy being pissed at you for asking if he plays basketball (which he hates): the diplomatic response would be a simple negative, but you can kind of understand it if he’s reached his limit.
Cidu Bill Oct 24th 2009 at 04:32 pm 26
Okay, let’s discuss Mr. Sendak’s grievances. How about “Hey, tough shit”? Nobody was asking him an insulting or insensitive question, and nobody was criticizing his work. The interviewer asked a reasonable question and if he’s uncomfortable with the question, he can either write different books or stop giving interviews. Or he could have asked the interviewer ahead of time not to ask him that question because it annoys him. I’ve conducted many interviews, and I’ve never said no to this sort of request.
Saying “They can go to hell” shows the sort of lack of impulse control that might seem moderately cute in 6-year-old Max, is a little weird for the 10-year-old movie version (seriously, wouldn’t a 10-year-old who bites his mother be in therapy?), and is entirely out of line for a grown-up under these circumstances.
Powers Oct 25th 2009 at 09:06 am 27
Bill: It was Linus. Lucy was questioning his desire to be a doctor, claiming that he doesn’t have a deep and abiding love for humanity. He protested with that quotation.
labradog Oct 25th 2009 at 06:26 pm 28
I think telling overprotective parents to go to hell is a good thing.
Seconded.
mkilby Oct 26th 2009 at 02:32 am 29
@ CIDU Bill (24) and Powers (27):
I googled the Linus quote, and found all sorts of references (including a number of icky religious screeds), but I can NOT find the DATE of the original Peanuts strip (or an image). I’d be grateful for a tip or a link to either one.
CIDU Bill Oct 26th 2009 at 02:42 am 30
Don’t look at me, mkilby, I was going entirely from memory: Whenever the original strip appeared was probably when I read it.
p Oct 26th 2009 at 04:00 pm 31
mkilby: 12 November, 1959
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/8720/peanutslovemankindqj3.gif
Sendak has always been grouchy as hell, if his interviewing persona is anything to go by.
mkilby Oct 29th 2009 at 03:46 am 32
@ P(owers?) 31 - Thanks VERY much!
@ CIDU Bill - Are you interested in “reforming” the categories to correct typos? This one has “Sendack” with a C, and I’ve also seen “governor(s)” with and without an S. I’m sure there are others, those are just the ones I’ve noticed. Also, is there a reason that the category list is double spaced? It makes the page “jump” (because of the colossal length change) when it finishes loading.
trlkly Dec 1st 2009 at 02:13 pm 33
I think this is way overblown. I live in the freakin’ Bible Belt, where even low level cursing is frowned upon, and “Go to hell” still has very little sting. It just means “I don’t care what they think”, but with a slight bit of invective.
I do find the idea inherently stupid that saying “FU” is acceptable, while “go to hell” is not. Hell is barely a even a curse word. Notice how nobody has a problem saying it here, while the “F-word” remains unspoken.
The truth is that, in many social circles, telling someone to “go to hell” is actually within the circle of decency (although on the outer edge.) And I think people know this: if it was truly offensive, there would be calls to boycott the artist.
Cidu Bill Dec 1st 2009 at 02:22 pm 34
trlkly, the issue here (at least for me) isn’t the severity of the insult but rather the inappropriateness of gratuitously insulting the parents at all. There’s a pretty wide disconnect between “I don’t care what they think” and “they can go to hell”
paperboy Dec 1st 2009 at 05:21 pm 35
Hey, CIDU Bill; in the category list on the left there’s a “Charles Shultz” listed, but no “Charles Schulz”, the creator of “Peanuts”.