Scan barcode
emilyusuallyreading's review against another edition
3.0
While I love the clever wit of these stories, as well as the mischief between Brer Rabbit and Brer Fox, the broken English of these stories is so very difficult to read. I would love my children to one day read about the antics of these animals and see stories of the south, but I wouldn't necessarily prefer them to read the grammar and English of these tales.
ayavandenbussche's review against another edition
2.0
It has taken me a long time to write a review for this book that I have finished reading a while ago. I should point out that I listened to the audiobook and I admit it has left me somewhat stumped. But perhaps not quite as stumped as I felt after reading some of the reviews on here and coming face to face with some of the ignorance regarding Harris and the subject matter.
It is true that Joel Chandler Harris had a significant role in the documentation of the Afro-American folktales and putting them into writing. His books, for good or bad, have brought attention to these tales. His use of what he thought was 'authentic' dialect and slang in his writing is definitely interesting if not somewhat problematic. Whether these stories would have been lost without him, I cannot say other than looking into this I am not convinced they would have. It is not a far stretch to think that we should be grateful for slavery for creating those folktales.
It is important to note that Harris was a problematic figure and a supporter of slavery, even if it was a 'liberal' kind of slavery. He romanticised the South and its values, which included slavery. He is considered to be a prominent spokesman of the 'uncle Ben and aunt Jemima' type of view of slaves. He ignored, most likely on purpose, the contradiction between the extreme violence and insanity of the stories, attributing them to 'the roaring wild nature of the animal kingdom' and his romantic view of the South and slavery.
Furthermore, he was highly misguided and quite single-minded. He was convinced he had a 'hotline' to the life of the Afro-American folktale and that his and his alone were the 'authentic' and true stories. Despite researcher, even in his time, pointed out that some of the stories he documented, most notably the famous Tar Baby story, did not and could not have originated in Africa, but rather in India, possibly America, or Europe. There is some mistral aspect to Harris too, he prided himself on his ability to speak in the same accent and dialect as the African-Americans and often spoke in this way in real life. He wanted to be identified as uncle Ramous and often sign his letters as him. Most importantly perhaps, Harris has taken what were meant to be adult stories, for Black people and turned them into children's stories for white children. It is this, I think, that brought Alice Walker, author of The Colour Purple, to accuse him of stealing her heritage.
Many of the reviews on here consider these stories a piece of history, which I think is as misguided as Harris himself was. This is not a history, this is a point of view about a history. I would not recommend reading these stories out of context, or without background. The language and dialect are difficult and to modern ears could sound even offensive. After listening to this book that has left me confused and uncomfortable, I was loaned another book Annotated African American Tales. This book is an in-depth overview of African-American folktales. This book has a clear distinction between folktales that originated in Africa and those that were told by the African-American slaves. It gives a lot of background to the legends and has a whole section about Joel Chandler Harris, it includes his notable stories. It is thanks to this book that I learned, for example, that there were hundreds of Tar Baby stories, only one version is told by Harris. The Annotated African American is a better book, better researched and really interesting. Thankfully, we live in a time where we don't have to and we shouldn't rely on Joel Joseph Harris and his worldview to get to know these interesting stories. I would recommend reading those books instead.
A little note about the stories themselves, despite Harris' best effort to make them seem like they are for kids, they are not. They are extremely violent and brutal. It is part of what is interesting about them. But while the Annotated book provides context to this extreme and often seemingly unjustified brutality (the rabbit attacks innocent animals as well as those who are trying to kill it), the Uncle Remus books do not.
It is true that Joel Chandler Harris had a significant role in the documentation of the Afro-American folktales and putting them into writing. His books, for good or bad, have brought attention to these tales. His use of what he thought was 'authentic' dialect and slang in his writing is definitely interesting if not somewhat problematic. Whether these stories would have been lost without him, I cannot say other than looking into this I am not convinced they would have. It is not a far stretch to think that we should be grateful for slavery for creating those folktales.
It is important to note that Harris was a problematic figure and a supporter of slavery, even if it was a 'liberal' kind of slavery. He romanticised the South and its values, which included slavery. He is considered to be a prominent spokesman of the 'uncle Ben and aunt Jemima' type of view of slaves. He ignored, most likely on purpose, the contradiction between the extreme violence and insanity of the stories, attributing them to 'the roaring wild nature of the animal kingdom' and his romantic view of the South and slavery.
Furthermore, he was highly misguided and quite single-minded. He was convinced he had a 'hotline' to the life of the Afro-American folktale and that his and his alone were the 'authentic' and true stories. Despite researcher, even in his time, pointed out that some of the stories he documented, most notably the famous Tar Baby story, did not and could not have originated in Africa, but rather in India, possibly America, or Europe. There is some mistral aspect to Harris too, he prided himself on his ability to speak in the same accent and dialect as the African-Americans and often spoke in this way in real life. He wanted to be identified as uncle Ramous and often sign his letters as him. Most importantly perhaps, Harris has taken what were meant to be adult stories, for Black people and turned them into children's stories for white children. It is this, I think, that brought Alice Walker, author of The Colour Purple, to accuse him of stealing her heritage.
Many of the reviews on here consider these stories a piece of history, which I think is as misguided as Harris himself was. This is not a history, this is a point of view about a history. I would not recommend reading these stories out of context, or without background. The language and dialect are difficult and to modern ears could sound even offensive. After listening to this book that has left me confused and uncomfortable, I was loaned another book Annotated African American Tales. This book is an in-depth overview of African-American folktales. This book has a clear distinction between folktales that originated in Africa and those that were told by the African-American slaves. It gives a lot of background to the legends and has a whole section about Joel Chandler Harris, it includes his notable stories. It is thanks to this book that I learned, for example, that there were hundreds of Tar Baby stories, only one version is told by Harris. The Annotated African American is a better book, better researched and really interesting. Thankfully, we live in a time where we don't have to and we shouldn't rely on Joel Joseph Harris and his worldview to get to know these interesting stories. I would recommend reading those books instead.
A little note about the stories themselves, despite Harris' best effort to make them seem like they are for kids, they are not. They are extremely violent and brutal. It is part of what is interesting about them. But while the Annotated book provides context to this extreme and often seemingly unjustified brutality (the rabbit attacks innocent animals as well as those who are trying to kill it), the Uncle Remus books do not.
mysmallreadingcorner's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
I read this book for a research paper for school and I have to say that it was a struggle. I enjoyed the book for the parts where I could understand it, but the English was so hard (I didn't read this exact edition but one from 1880 so that probably made it hard, or just the fact that English isn't my native language so English with a dialect is kind of a nightmare at times). I did read through a little summary or analysis of one of the chapters (had to highlight it in my paper so I wanted to make sure that I fully understood it) and that was quite interesting so I might go back to this book if I can find a modern version of it.
emdoux's review against another edition
3.0
Read: The Wonderful Tar-Baby Story, Why the Negro is Black, Uncle Remus Preaches to a Convert, Mr. Fox is Again Victimized, Mr. Rabbit Finds His Match at Last
faeriedrumsong's review against another edition
1.0
ugh... the story frame is completely unnecessary, even using the standards of the day and time in which it was written. forget the glaring racism that we see through 21st century eyes.
the forced and farcical dialect completely distracts from and detracts from the stories.
completely unreadable today. His only saving grace is that he at least wrote them down. That leaves them for the rest of us to pick and and write down better. Although, I do believe these stories would have survived without him and been written down eventually anyway.
the forced and farcical dialect completely distracts from and detracts from the stories.
completely unreadable today. His only saving grace is that he at least wrote them down. That leaves them for the rest of us to pick and and write down better. Although, I do believe these stories would have survived without him and been written down eventually anyway.
lanikei's review against another edition
2.0
I had read a few of the Brer Rabbit stories as a kid; this collection included not just the Brer Animal stories, but also all of the (even more) terribly offensive Uncle Tom stories of Uncle Remus. I have an affection for the Brer stories, and also see some value in their place as American 'Aesop's Fables'. Morality tales couched in animal form that are fun, silly, and still a little creepy.
That said, the collection is difficult to read due to the dialect, and once you've made it through the children's stories, you get bogged down in old negro hymns and more folksy wisdom from Uncle Remus. These stories are even more cringe-inducing to the modern ear and include jokes hinging on Uncle Remus's love of watermelon and his support of his white family, his former masters.
I haven't studied the time period enough to say whether the book offers any historical value. If it is an accurate chronicle of some experience - for example if the stories, songs, and wisdom are actually black folktales that are not written elsewhere - then I can appreciate the book. Unfortunately, I think more of it is a white-washed 'idealized' black existence based around stereotypes that were only perpetuated by this book becoming a classic. That's a shame particularly because I think that it diminishes the Brer stories. As some have suggested (again, not sure if this is entirely accurate), many of the stories themselves are reflective of plantation life and storytelling, but the encompassing story of Uncle Remus is the creation of Joel Chandler Harris. In that case there is also some concern with a white author co-opting these tales to be packaged, sold, and branded as "his" creations for posterity.
The whole book suffers from its history and it makes even the simplest stories an uncomfortable read when considering the context.
That said, the collection is difficult to read due to the dialect, and once you've made it through the children's stories, you get bogged down in old negro hymns and more folksy wisdom from Uncle Remus. These stories are even more cringe-inducing to the modern ear and include jokes hinging on Uncle Remus's love of watermelon and his support of his white family, his former masters.
I haven't studied the time period enough to say whether the book offers any historical value. If it is an accurate chronicle of some experience - for example if the stories, songs, and wisdom are actually black folktales that are not written elsewhere - then I can appreciate the book. Unfortunately, I think more of it is a white-washed 'idealized' black existence based around stereotypes that were only perpetuated by this book becoming a classic. That's a shame particularly because I think that it diminishes the Brer stories. As some have suggested (again, not sure if this is entirely accurate), many of the stories themselves are reflective of plantation life and storytelling, but the encompassing story of Uncle Remus is the creation of Joel Chandler Harris. In that case there is also some concern with a white author co-opting these tales to be packaged, sold, and branded as "his" creations for posterity.
The whole book suffers from its history and it makes even the simplest stories an uncomfortable read when considering the context.
abomine's review
3.0
I really wanted to give this book a higher rating than just three stars. The folk-tales themselves are wonderful and culturally significant classic trickster tales that, to quote the introduction by Robert Hemenway, "symbolically inverted the slave - master relationship and satisfied the deep human needs of a captive people". Brer Rabbit is a survivor, the Fabled Hare, a symbol of endurance and the triumph of the underdog over his big brutish oppressors. In other words, NOT RACIST.
However, Joel Harris did not understand the deeper meaning of these stories, and only saw Brer Rabbit's misadventures as silly nonsensical tales meant only to entertain children. He stripped these classic figures of almost all of their dignity, bogging down their words with that atrocious 'pidgin-speak' and cutesifying them almost beyond recognition.
However, in spite of all the pidgin-speak and the extremely outdated/insulting framing device of an ex-slave storyteller who actually didn't think being a slave was "all that bad" (Brer Rabbit is not a racist character, but Uncle Remus most certainly is), my three-star rating still stands. In spite of Harris's bastardization and complete misunderstanding of the importance of these stories, the stories themselves still manage to retain some of their dignity. Again, Brer Rabbit is a survivor, and the universal appeal of the conquering Trickster Hero shines through, even through the mess of Joel Chandler Harris's post-Civil War racism.
However, Joel Harris did not understand the deeper meaning of these stories, and only saw Brer Rabbit's misadventures as silly nonsensical tales meant only to entertain children. He stripped these classic figures of almost all of their dignity, bogging down their words with that atrocious 'pidgin-speak' and cutesifying them almost beyond recognition.
However, in spite of all the pidgin-speak and the extremely outdated/insulting framing device of an ex-slave storyteller who actually didn't think being a slave was "all that bad" (Brer Rabbit is not a racist character, but Uncle Remus most certainly is), my three-star rating still stands. In spite of Harris's bastardization and complete misunderstanding of the importance of these stories, the stories themselves still manage to retain some of their dignity. Again, Brer Rabbit is a survivor, and the universal appeal of the conquering Trickster Hero shines through, even through the mess of Joel Chandler Harris's post-Civil War racism.
More...