Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Infants, Toddlers, & Preschoolers
Reply to "I dislike Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My kids were watching it this morning and I really dislike this show (and, to a lesser extent, a lot of the PBS lineup these days). They have very positive toddler-focused messages. Their representation is just so, sometimes a bit too much so (e.g. it's Daniel's mom who always fixes things with the tools, and never his dad? I get it, it's important to normalize women and girls as being able to do masculine work, but I guess now we can never depict a man doing that kind of work anymore?) But what really gets me is the thought doesn't go deeper than this thin veneer of sense/morality for toddlers. Here are some examples: Today, King Friday tells Daniel, "being a king is about helping others." No, it's not. I mean that's part of it, but it's about leadership, wisdom, honor, responsibility for those under your care. I get that getting into heavy detail is maybe too much for toddlers, but it feels like beyond the egalitarianism (reinforced by Prince Tuesday doing all the odd jobs around town), they didn't really think any deeper than that, how to render the idea of a "king" in a modern story and make it work (because for the modern morality it's not, I guess, but there was a King Friday in the original Mr. Roger's neighborhood!). Or the other day, Miss Elaina was drawing pictures of leaves, insects, etc. - in particular, a snail - in her little sketch book and said, "I'm a scientist, which means I'm curious about the world!" Sure, we got representation of an African American Girl as Scientist, but that's not what the quintessence of a scientist is. Curiosity and recording are part of it, but a scientist tries to understand the *truth* about the natural world, dispassionately based on evidence and observation. It's about finding out how the world works. And if a scientist was writing that script I have a feeling they'd include that bit. Or I remember one episode from a long time ago where the kids go to see a crayon factory. I was excited - in the old Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, they'd show a video of how things are made in almost every episode. In this one, they don't really give you an understanding how crayons are made. The color is added (great) but they don't pour hot wax into molds, or let them cool, or show the inner workings of any machines. The crayons just kind of materialize out of a closed machine. And maybe toddlers don't need anymore, but the better-done shows HAVE more, just like well-illustrated picture books, and good children's media (including books) in general. I find this lack of thought, things that carelessly make no sense, in a lot of children's media and toys and it annoys me. (E.g., a polar bear in a puzzle with otherwise African Savannah animals, predatory animals being friends with their prey, tropical fruits growing along with non-tropical ones in the same forest....) [/quote] It's a TV show for little kids. Not an investigative documentary. You can teach your kids and read to them.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics