Politics in Children’s Media

Connection and COVID-19

Sydney Wilson Contributor

I spent the summer counting down the days until I would be back at Bishop’s University. I was so excited to see my friends and to come back to Lennoxville, despite the fact that this year would be different. I was not completely prepared, though, for how different it would be.

Everyone says that online classes are much more difficult than classes in person, and I agree – but not because I am having a harder time learning. No, these classes are difficult because I am missing the social interaction with my professor and peers. Sitting at a desk in an apartment, staring at a laptop watching lectures, and then doing homework all day is not healthy or good for anyone.

I was bored and lonely by the second week back. I found that I could not pay attention in class, spending the entire time scrolling through social media instead. It was depressing and I was not accomplishing anything. As such, I decided that I needed a new plan: if I was so desperately missing that social interaction, I would seek it out myself.

I booked study rooms in the library in order to sit with

That I am an avid lover of fiction should come as no surprise to anyone who knows me. I love books, and that has not changed throughout my 19 years of life. One of the reasons I love fiction so much, especially the fantasy and science-fiction genres, is because of the brilliant and often scathing social commentaries found within them.

I have always viewed books – and other such stories, regardless of the medium – as a reaction to our reality. The more fantastical the elements, the more rooted they are in our own systems and the world we readers inhabit.

I find that aspect most resounding in children’s media. A lot of animated movies and shows marketed towards children, but enjoyable for all age groups, seem to bear very pointed social commentary and criticism of society. the discussions of politics that make up a core part of the show. After all, the show takes place between Episode II and Episode III of Star Wars; they flesh out the prequels, which are, among other things, about the collapse of a democratic regime that is replaced by a tyrannical, imperial one. Political matters are central to the story in the context of a galactic war meant to uphold the Republic against the Separatists that would destroy it.

Moreover, the political theme is relevant to the world context of the time. While The Clone Wars aired from 2008 to 2014 (apart from the last season released in 2020), the Star Wars prequel movies came out between 1999 and 2005. It is quite obvious from the episodes and story arcs that the creators were influenced partly by Bushera politics and use their show to critique the American government and democratic capitalism.

Instances of such references and critiques run the gamut: from having an antagonistic Kaminoan senator called Halle Burtoni (who, as a great proponent of increased military spending, is a direct reference to Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s former company), to the Trade Federation and the Banking Clans having direct representation in the senate.

The main conflict centres around a group of nations that feel the current system is devaluating them. The a friend and watch lectures together. I spent time in the Sportsplex studying, so even if I was doing homework alone there were people around me doing the same. I tried going for walks, even if it was just to buy coffee. I attempted to maximize the time I spent outside of my apartment, and when I was at home, I connected with my roommates.

The weekends, I have found, are the most difficult; everyone wants to go out and party with their friends, but no one wants to get caught or catch COVID-19. Going outside to meet friends is fun until it becomes dark and cold, pushing people to meet inside.

I try to visit the same person’s house with the same five or six people each time. But it remains difficult. You do not know who your friends come into contact with when you are not with them, leading you to question if it is really safe to see them. I personally decided that I trust my friends to make smart decisions, but it is nevertheless important to remain vigilant.

I think that despite the fact that this year is different, we can all step out of our rooms once in a while and find a safe way to spend time with our loved ones.

Safia Hafid, Opinions Editor » thecampus.opinions@gmail.com

Students studying in the reference room of the Library Learning Commons Photo Courtesy of architizer.com

Politics in Children’s Media

Safia Hafid

In particular, I am referencing shows such as The Clone Wars.

Anyone who has watched more than one episode of The Clone Wars can notice the social commentary and

Opinions Editor situation leads to demands of separation and freedom – a valid cause defeated because it was hijacked by a Sith Lord. The show tackles the cut of funding from healthcare to support the war effort, takes the time to differentiate between freedom fighters and terrorists, and gives the message that it is right to stand up to oppressive systems and authority.

The show’s content is both a reflection on and a critique of the world. At its heart, the prequel Trilogy, and by extension The Clone Wars, is a tragedy. Like dystopian novels, it imagines worst-case scenarios in a plea for the current world to change, or at least to begin thinking differently.

Photo Courtesy of LucasArt/Public Domain

The show says: this is what happens when you treat sentient beings like slaves (the clones); this is what happens when capitalism is allowed free reign in the government; this is what happens when war and military spending are the most important agendas; this is what happens when people (the Jedi) are forced to give up their morals, ethics, and ways; this is what corruption brings; this is how a Republic becomes a Galactic Empire. After all, the Republic was the Empire in all but its name long before the ending of Revenge of the Sith.

What is interesting about the show, and the six original Star Wars movies in general, is how it explores and depicts these issues and criticisms. Though the references are anything but subtle, the writing does not preach. It shows instead of telling.

Yes, this is a children’s show first and foremost, and yes, children themselves will not understand most of the political context. However, they are still exposed to these stories and are bound to absorb some knowledge, which will be beneficial for them in the future. Also, due to the often ethically grey storylines, the viewers are allowed to come to their own conclusions. The good guys often face ethical quandaries. The bad guys – the Separatists – have a legitimate rationale for their cause, which could have been resolved had the Republic not escalated the issue into a war under the direction of the villain. Even when the Jedi win, they still lose.

It is even plausible, for those with little or no knowledge of Star Wars, to not realize that Supreme Chancellor Palpatine and the Sith Lord Darth Sidious are one and the same. Yet, such viewers can still observe how the elected leader of the Republic makes dubious choices and is often portrayed as sinister by the narrative. As the show progresses, it becomes darker, and its reality and social commentary become more dire.

Why is this important? Because, as mentioned before, it is both a warning for the viewers and a reflection of political issues happening globally today. Even the Bushera critiques still resonate in 2020. Some of my favourite media are those that expose and tear apart issues relevant to the time and offer at least some form of resolution or answer. Though the prequels are a tragedy, viewers know that Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Leia Organa prevail. Even at the height of the Empire, there was resistance and rebellion, and they won.

Even if democracy has its issues and failures, empires are the problem – not the solution. It is crucial, now more than ever, to be aware of politics and how they affect people’s everyday lives. It is important to fight against the forces that threaten true democracy, forever aiming to create an autocratic empire. It is imperative to continue demanding representation, fairness and human rights.

Stereotypes: How the West Views Quebec

Shelby Page Contributor

This week I will be writing about how the West views Quebec. First, I want to make it clear: I really like Quebec. It is affordable, the poutine is superb, and the people here are lovely.

Despite my own opinions, I must say the following might not be very nice, yet sometimes these things need to be said. The coming text is based on generalizations, which tend to numb complexities, but oh boy are they fun!

In order to give a general sense of how the West generalizes Quebec, I will anthropomorphize this province. In doing this, I am not trying to describe the people in the region, rather the person that Westerners think Quebec would be if it were human.

So, here she is: Quebec is in her 20s, covered in stick-n-poke tattoos, and feels liberated when her navel is showing in public. Her blue hair is a sign of rebellion, and her small clique straps her down to her progressively liberal ideologies.

For breakfast, she puffs on her e-cigarette, sips on her organic, fair trade, Ethiopian brewed coffee, and slathers cream cheese on her locally sourced bagel.

In a crowd, she sticks out; her fashion makes her special. Her motto is: “Why doesn’t, like, anyone get me?” Two words describe her state of mind—victim complex. Westerners can spot it a mile away when she talks about her struggles with historical battles or her rival relationship with Anglophones, and when she competes against other minorities for the limelight.

Her monologue goes something like this:

“We didn’t win the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759 because the French, like, totally abandoned us. I don’t care if they were preoccupied with domestic disputes and regional wars; they still owe us, big time.

“OMG, we would have been sooo good at colonizing! But those Brits were sooo rude; like, why would they take our land? We were obviously here first.

“Indigenous peoples? Who are they? … Oh yeah, them … well, they’ll be fine, but we won’t be. After all, we’re the most important minority, and they should talk to those Anglophones if they want any compensation. If we had been the one and only colonizer, we would have given them such a good life. I mean, we were way better to them than those Anglos.

“Remember Champlain? He was that one good French leader who befriended just some of the Indigenous Peoples. Oh yeah, and Jacques Cartier was nice. Sure, he kidnapped and killed a few First Nations people along the way, but I’m sure he had super good intentions. Response to “Death of the Author”

In our last issue (Sept. 16), Opinions Editor Safia Hafid wrote about her love for the Harry Potter series and the way that J.K. Rowling’s discriminatory beliefs complicate her relationship with the books that she loves so dearly. In her article “Death of the Author,” Hafid suggests that, to combat the author’s views and to continue to enjoy the series, it must be separated from the author who wrote it. The story can remain wholesome while the author’s prejudices are denunciated. This proposition caused me to consider to what extent this separation is possible, and whether the work can truly be distinct from its author. transphobic views. For the generations that grew up on Harry Potter, it can be difficult to freely enjoy the work that Rowling created, knowing her personal views. How can you support the series that means so much to you without supporting the bigot who wrote it? Cleaving the work from its author is thus a comfort that grants readers with the pleasure of the story unmitigated by the views of its author.

However, the novels cannot stand alone from their author because her views are woven into the fabric that makes up the story. For instance, how does knowing that Rowling is anti-Semitic colour our understanding of the goblins in Harry Potter? What does her prejudice mean when we look at a money-hungry race in control of the banks? If we deny Rowling’s authorship in order to consume her work without guilt, then we become blind to the harmful stereotypes encoded into her novel and allow ourselves to be affected by them. when we consider the house elves in Harry Potter? This subservient race prides itself on its servitude. House elves belong to their “masters” and tend to be physically mistreated by themselves or others should they disobey orders. They are treated as property, belonging to a household rather than an individual. Their traits, needless to say, are strongly reminiscent of slavery. So how are readers to interpret house elves when they know J.K. Rowling espouses racist beliefs? What does the house elves’ substandard intelligence then seem to suggest? What about their willingness to serve and fear of freedom?

The work cannot be separated from the author, because it prevents us from being critical

To summarize, this is what the West hears when she talks: “Look here; I am the only one who struggles. Look at how different I am; I need special privileges, and no one else deserves them.” When Quebec complains, the eyes of Westerners are in pain from all the rolling.

I hope your blood is not boiling too much after reading this. Before I published this article, I let some of my Quebecois and Westerner friends have a read. Most of them said they did not like it, mainly because it was too broad and did not reflect the diversity of the peoples’ opinions.

I agree; it does not. This article is about stereotypes and generalizations, not facts and complexities. I did not write about this topic because I fully agree with that perspective, but because these generalizations exist.

Therefore, I might as well lay them out on the table so it becomes easier to sort out the degrees of truth and misconceptions that each group can have about each other.

Later segments will dissect these stereotypes and use research to find out where they come from and how much truth they hold.

Before that happens, however, Quebecois will get a chance to tell us how they see the West. Do they really think Westerners are just a bunch of cowboy, hat-wearing hillbillies?

More on this next time.

“A View of the Taking of Quebec,” Sept. 13, 1959, by Laurie and Whittle

J.K. Rowling seems to often be in the hot seat these days for her racist, anti-Semitic, or

Rowling has on multiple occasions expressed racist beliefs. What do these mean, then,

Photo Courtesy of The Canadian Encyclopedia

Casey Hebert Copy Editor

in our consumption of their work. The author writes according to their belief system, and if we ignore that, then we are susceptible to fall into their beliefs. We let our guard down and forget to filter the novel for prejudiced beliefs. When consuming any form or writing, it is crucial to consider the author and the beliefs that colour their vision of the world. Only then can we, as readers, be aware of the angle they might be pushing. We cannot let our guard down because it makes us more comfortable to separate the author and their views from the pleasant media they generate.

Hafid’s suggestion to add disclaimers about the author’s nefarious beliefs is perhaps the best way to navigate the complicated relationship between a bigoted author and a beloved book series. Since the author’s beliefs are inextricably woven into the novel, the author cannot be separated from their writing. It is better to draw attention to the ways in which prejudiced messages are coded into the novel so that readers can read critically but continue to enjoy positive messages.