MovieChat Forums > Jonny Quest (1964) Discussion > Klansmen would love the original series.

Klansmen would love the original series.


Pretty much all non-white people in the show were schemers or were "savage" natives that wanted to kill and eat white people. And then there is Hadji, playing the "House Negro" role.

-------------------------------------

End Hypocrisy...Increase tolerance...shoot a fanboy today.

reply

Right, except that Hadji was portrayed as more wordly and intelligent than Jonny and was a family member, not a servant. Let's see, there was Pasha Peddler, Commissioner Wah, Raj Guru, to name a few positive ethnic characters. Nope, don't buy it.

reply

The bad guy in the one where Race had to pilot a WWI-vintage biplane in a dogfight was German, obviously of Aryan descent.

There is good/bad in all cultures, races, socio-economic classes, etc. Jonny Quest gave us a look at different cultures, even though it was filtered through American sensibilities.

Nobody hears me bitching about Homer Simpson making pudgy-middle-aged-middle-class-white-guys look bad. (I am a pudgy-middle-aged-middle-class-white-guy who should be offended if I took the PC crap as seriously as others seem to.)

reply

Nobody hears me bitching about Homer Simpson making pudgy-middle-aged-middle-class-white-guys look bad. (I am a pudgy-middle-aged-middle-class-white-guy who should be offended if I took the PC crap as seriously as others seem to.)


Wouldn't you agree that it's easy for us not to be offended? No "stupid white guy" jokes have ever preceded the denial of our right to vote, or our enslavement, or our relegation to second-class citizenship, or violence against us.

And I agree that a lot of the portrayals of non-Americans were offensive and stereotypical, but I remember this as a relic of the Cold War. I think it's that the propaganda machine that started up in the 1940s, arguably out of necessity, hadn't wound down just yet (or at least had set a racist standard for the animation industry that had hit its stride in the 1940s).

But I agree with grendelkhan, at least on Hadji. For the time, I think he was a pretty liberal character. He was clever and capable, and a respected member of the family. But of course I'm looking at it as a white guy, so maybe it's more offensive than I perceive.

Proud of what the Republicans have done? If not, vote Democrat this November!

reply

Just jumping in on this one from the point of view of a black female who was enthralled by the series as a little kid and remains that way today:

People today either forget or are unaware of the fact that in 1964 it was rare to see brown faces on TV in the US and that there were markets, particularly in the South, which would yank a show right off the air for showing a person of color unless it was in a derogatory manner. There were many towns in the America of that time in which the Quests couldn't have stayed in a hotel if they'd insisted on Hadji staying with them (which, of course, Benton and Jonny would). The tie-in books of the time, such as the British annuals and US children's books, weren't allowed to depict Hadji at all, as if the character didn't exist, because the books couldn't be sold universally. And the series repeatedly flirted with censorship by depicting noble and heroic people of color and non-Western religious beliefs beyond Hadji, including Pasha, the Raj Guru, Jade, Aku and Nuago and other natives who put their lives on the line to protect the kids, Dr. Quest and Race.

So I'm not really sure how anyone could decry a series which was as groundbreaking on racial issues as "Jonny Quest" was at that time. Hadji is indeed portrayed as being clever, intelligent, respectful and polite, often far more than is Jonny. The dialog told a seriously racially divided America that Benton had adopted Hadji after the little boy had selflessly saved this white stranger's life, and it's made clear through their warm and affectionate body language throughout the series that the Quests accepted this child as family at a time when many whites wouldn't shake hands with a person of color for fear that person's skin color would "rub off." Trust me, no klansman wants to see Jonny with his arm draped around Hadji's shoulder speaking of "our Bandit" or Benton protectively holding Hadji by the shoulders.

What's really sad is that we've apparently traveled backward instead of forward when it comes to such inclusiveness in current days. By the time of "The Real Adventures Of Jonny Quest," the producers had decided that it might "offend" someone in the audience if the fact that Hadji is a Hindu were to be mentioned in a script, as if it's some big secret that there are Hindus in India. Forget that he's referred to as "the Hindu boy" in the "Anubis" episode in 1964---we apparently can't handle such information these days. The fact that he was actually Benton's adopted son was also sidestepped completely in the 1996 series until well into the second season (by which time cooler heads, better scripts and more sensible character models finally made an impact). However, by the time his history is altered by the scripts and we find that he's actually royalty (oh brother!), no one bothered to research enough Indian cultural history to understand that a Hindu ruler of Bangalore would be a "maharajah," and they instead opted to refer to him as a "sultan," a title used by solely the Moslem rulers of that region. Jinkies.

So....it seems to me that we might have actually been more progressive 40 years ago, or maybe responsible people were just trying harder back then. Still, this series, in its own way, paved the way for cartoon characters who soon followed Hadji, such as Val in "Josie And The Pussycats," Link in "The Hardy Boys," and the "Fat Albert" gang, and I'm sure that the Klan wasn't happy about them, either. (I dunno---do humorless, goosestepping bigots really even watch cartoons)...?

reply

Great post, johntracytb5.

Proud of what the Republicans have done? If not, vote Democratic this November!

reply

Cheers! (Lordy, I do love a rant now and then)...!

reply

johntracytb5: "So....it seems to me that we might have actually been more progressive 40 years ago..."

We were. Ninnies come unglued now when Race's ladyfriend Jade smokes a cigarette.

reply

well homer is SUPPOSED to be like that. but there were plenty of stereotypes in jq. that's not being "pc" that's the truth.





















reply

Giving a little too much thought to something that was created 40 years ago.

reply

Giving a little too much thought to something that was created 40 years ago.


Wow---then you'd better tell folks to give up discussions on the works of Shakespeare, Socrates and Plato. Those are even older.

reply

Are the unedited versions of the really notorious episodes available anywhere? I've always wondered just how bad they were.

reply

Are the unedited versions of the really notorious episodes available anywhere? I've always wondered just how bad they were.


The series has been available on DVD for several years now. The episodes are as they originally aired, including "The Devil's Tower" which is no longer shown on television. (Boomerang deleted it from the run a good while ago).

reply

How interesting! Boomerang just ran "Devil's Tower" This past week; but you are right---I hadn't seen that ep before on it's current run but I vaguely remember it from back in the 1960s run...any idea why Boomerang was reluctant to run that particular episode?

NM

reply

It sounds like you are just a little too sensitive. What did you do take Wussie classes. It was an action/adventure cartoon. Most of the bad guys were white. It nevers fails we always get one who sees race where it doesn't exist.

reply

I agree with you Sawyertom.

I just wanted to point out that the show came out in the heat of the Cold War (After the Bay of Pigs and during the Cuban Missile Crisis) so a lot of the villains on the show were Soviets or eastern Europeans, but you all already knew that; especially if you lived during that time.

Dust off the TV screen, it's bothering my chickens.

reply

How many names do you go by, troll? You're the one who sees racism in virtually EVERY movie and TV show, and who delights in stirring up a hornet's nest with your ignorance.
Is this how you crave attention? Get a life, dammit!

reply

Lol! I was thinking the same thing! But I still liked the show!





















reply

its weird

I'm as non white as it gets
proud of my heritage

for some odd reason I always loved Jonny Quest and never took offense to anything in it

reply

That's probably because you're a sane, well-adjusted individual who doesn't sit on a sensitivity button all the time, just waiting to be offended by the most innocuous things.

reply

There would be no need for a "sensitivity button" if some people weren't historically so insensitive. White people created and fostered racism, so there's no use playing "blame the victim."

reply

johntracytb5, I appreciated your post of 10/06.

Not sure if I like this one so much. I'm never a huge fan of

"after all, white people are the ones who . . .," or

"black people are all . . ." or

"did you ever notice that Muslims . . ."

I just don't know that any good or healing or uniting things come from comments like that.

reply

Crack a history book some time. Arabs enslaved blacks for centuries before whites got in on the game; the Japanese were very racist towards any non-Japanese, especially Koreans; the Chinese called their land the Middle Kingdom and considered everybody else to be barbarians; the Turks massacred the Armenians and enslaved thousands of white people in the Balkans; etc. The very word "slave" comes from "Slav" because so many Slavs were enslaved. Slavs are white, by the way.

Now that we've got that settled, excuse me. I'm going to go watch Race Bannon slaughter some of those heathen monkeys.

reply

Arabs enslaved blacks for centuries before whites got in on the game...


Speaking of insensitivity, is it any surprise you'd dismiss slavery as a "game?" I'd bet if you were on the receiving end of the whip, you wouldn't view it so casually. By the way, you managed to leave out the scores of whites who were enslaved BY WHITES (via indentured servitude) and the Acadians who were sold into slavery by the Brits when they stole all of that Canadian farmland from France. Better get cracking at your own history book.

It wasn't the Japanese, the Chinese, the Turks or the Arabs who overran India and subjugated her people, murdering untold thousands for fun and profit. That was the work of British Imperialists, and, when last I checked, there were only white men holding seats in Parliament at the time. None of the above groups were responsible for the modern slave trade out of Africa either, since those slave ships were based in Bristol and Liverpool. So guess what---yep, it's the white guys again. History is a tough mistress, especially since Western History is all told through the viewpoint of the whites who controlled what was written of it. Deal with it.

reply

I notice that instead of actually address any of my points, you argue semantics over the word "game." OK, let's redact the word "game" and call it "business" then. After all, we're talking about livestock trading here. You don't deny the truth of anything I said; you just ignore it, meanwhile sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating "Whitey is the devil, nyah, nyah, nyah!" over and over.

I don't deny that whites enslaved lots of other whites and people of other races. I just deny that ONLY whites did it... something you won't admit. To address one of your lies, the Arabs didn't use many slave ships because Arabia is kind of, like, CONNECTED TO AFRICA BY LAND so they could use slave caravans and coffles. Something they did well into the 20th Century, until (gasp!) the European colonialists put an end to their slave-trading. Oh, and to address another of your lies, before those big, bad British you love to hate so much overran India, some other people overran it and murdered thousands for fun and profit. They were called the MONGOLS (Moguls). And by the way, genius, Mongols weren't white, either. Deal with it.

reply

Africans were captured by other Africans, sold to Arab slavers who, in turn, sold them again. There were barracoons in west Africa to ship slaves to the new world and, in East Africa (present day Tanzania) for shipment to the middle east and Asia.

To say it's the evil whites is pure ignorance and, probably the result of a PC (public school) education. The chain of slavery involved Blacks, Arabs, Whites and Asians. Even American Indians took slaves from other tribes. Roman history shows that many citizens were black as ebony and many slaves were white as ivory.

The Huns (asian) overran Europe, killing, raping and pillaging. The Ottoman Turks had a huge empire that overran souther Europe. THe Zulu people of south Africa had a huge empire and killed other Africans my the 1000's. The Romans did, the British did, the Egyptians did, the Moors did, the Spanish did, the Chinese did, the Japanese did.

Saying it's only whites is pure ignorance.

reply

And once again race has to be brought into an innocent kids TV show...

reply

Mandatory diversity strikes again.

reply

Or you could look at it that Hadji proved that not everybody in his race was bad.
If your liberal you will always look for race.

reply