Little Black Sambo

I was torn between giving this book 3 or 4 stars because of its history and racism. This is a book that I would come across at my grandpa's house. He had kept much of his children's books and toys in his basement, so that for family gatherings there was stuff for the grandkids to play with. Mind you this was way before it was normal for a toddler to have their own tablet (this was in a time when if there was a computer in the house, it was a FAMILY computer, never mind that nonsense about kids having their own devices!)

Plenty of the books were from the 1950s and 60s, and looking back, wow, that was pretty old. It has been years since I read this book so there's not too much I remember from it aside from two very important show more details.

Sambo's mom and dad were Mumbo (Mambo?) and Jumbo. And because of Sambo's cleverness, the tigers turned to butter. The illustrations were charming. The names do make me cringe now in 2022, but for a little kid, this was just a fun book with lovely illustrations about a clever boy who had to deal with FOUR fucking tigers. Why have a tablet when you can have tigers? lol. show less

I was about to re-read Pancakes for Supper! by Anne Isaacs and Mark Teague and saw that it was inspired this infamous book. Realizing I had no memory of ever reading this before, I accessed it on Internet Archive to see for myself what makes it so controversial.

And now I know. Bannerman's pictures and words are just so problematic in many ways. And ignoring everything else, the story is just dumb, with the boy bribing his way out of initial confrontations with tigers only to play no real role in their ultimate comeuppance.

I wonder why people feel the need to keep trying to remake and redeem this tale, but then I think about the awful stories from my childhood to which I have nostalgic attachment, and I can sort of understand the show more impulse, misguided though it is.

By the way, Internet Archive also has a copy of Ub Iwerk's 1935 cartoon version of the story that manages to make it even more racist. Oh my! show less

(Original Review, 1981-01-07)

Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn, anyone?

The whole notion of "tainted classics" gives me the creeps. "Tainted?" Sez who? But changing them to make them more PC is even creepier. Read on...

This is a true story, although it's hard to believe. In the 1980's I was perusing the selection on offer in the children's section of an otherwise wonderful bookstore, the kind long gone now. I was absolutely staggered to pick up a book--an actual, in-my-hand book--called "Little Gray Sambo." I stood there and read it: I had to make sure it wasn't a "fake" of some kind. But no. It was a re-telling of "Little Black Sambo" with the central character changed to...gray. It was beyond bizarre. Publish it or don't publish it. But...gray? show more Not too long after, I was in again. Same store, same section. Oscar Wilde. The Selfish Giant. The whole final bit where the giant realises the child he has longed to see is the Christ child was lopped off and a few clumsy sentences appended. Cutesy drawings and a fuzzy-focus lesson in "sharing." Censorship at work.

Children aren't stupid, and they won't turn into racists because they pick up an old classic from their grandparents' childhood shelves and read a good yarn that also includes attitudes we deplore. A lot of "boys own" or girl adventures had bucketloads of this stuff. Yet some of us marched for civil rights, are wary of what drives foreign policy, and are straight allies of LGBTQI family and friends. Remember, children are now receiving a culture (which itself will change) that has changed its attitudes. They can suss out quite a bit for themselves. Give them some credit. If the author of this piece wants to purge (deliberate usage there) her shelves, she can. If she wants to keep her kids' minds unsullied, she can. But I would be more inclined to let the old grubby-binding friends sit where they are. If my kids read them, I might ask if they noticed attitudes, and go from there.

And if we purge or avoid or hand-wringing, we lose the frames of reference and foundations for comparison. It's vital to be able to say to our children and each other, yes, this is the way it was, here are the ways in which these issues still exist, let's see how we can involve ourselves in positive ways. Elsewhere I cited Pepys, and his treatment of and attitude toward women in the 1660s - and what society right now is without the very same domestic problems? Racial issues are somewhat improved but hardly vanquished . . . we have kilometres to go yet, and the old(er) non-PC literature is one of the beacons along the way. Avoid it and we'll just continue chasing our tails instead of continuing social progress. show less

I just saw a Goodreads friend rate & review this, and it sparked my memory.

I absolutely loved this story as a small child, and to me it was about a boy who created a wonderful outcome for himself and who was the hero of the story. He’s intelligent, capable, creative, and very clever, and those pancakes were enticing and enviable.

It’s been close to 50 years since I had this story read to me or read it myself. As a 2 to 4 or 5 or 6 year old (1955-1959) I was not aware of any objectionable content; I did not know that sambo was a racist term and the pictures did not raise a red flag for me, and I’m positive the same goes for my parents. That doesn’t mean we weren’t ignorant, and that’s disconcerting.

Reading about his book now, show more I am saddened to recognize racist content (at least in the version I knew) and I must say the tigers turning into butter is another disturbing aspect for me. Both the racism & depiction of the tigers would keep me from recommending it to today’s children.

I’m doing what I’ve done with most books here at Goodreads: rating it based on my opinion when I read it or had it read to me. Now, I suspect the version I knew would get 1 star; the revised versions might fare better. show less

As a child, I loved this story. I admired the boy at the centre of the story. He had huge courage in the face of great danger. He was clever and outwitted his assailants. He was well loved by his mother and father. He was proud of his beautiful clothes and shoes. I wanted a pair of crimson soled shoes so much. Best of all he got to eat as many pancakes as he liked.

I wanted to be brave and clever, just like "Little Black Sambo".

When I became a parent, I wanted to share the joy of this story with my children but it had become difficult to procure. When I did find a copy, I spoke about the changes in language that reflected the changes in societal expectations. I was able to explain why the names of the characters are insulting and show more unacceptable by today's standards. The book became an historical teaching tool.

Sometimes in reading the story, I add my own embellishments. My children have loved it too.

I have read a few attempts to modernise the story but they do not capture the wonder of the character in the original work.

I still love this story and still read it to children of all ages. show less

Very much of its time, this book takes a paternalistic, colonial view of black people - in particular of Indians, where it is set. The story is interesting and the illustrations in the (1924) edition we have are more African than Asian but that is how confused people were at the time. Is it racist? Not intentionally but, by modern standards, it crosses a line. If read to a modern child that point would have to be made which, in my view, would be a valuable learning opportunity.

This review is for this edition. Christopher Bing's illustrations are gorgeous. The story is allowed to be an outright fantasy (after all, the boy is African but the parents, tigers, jungle, and food are Indian). The tigers melting into ghi is just plain funny - what small child doesn't imagine even sillier things? Bing chose to leave Bannerman's text intact, but rather to enhance it with so many details in the format of the book as a whole that we can easily believe she meant only joy and kindness. The complex author's note at the end is for grownups - after reading it they might choose to share bits with their children, but there's no need. 3.5 stars? I'm just not sure of one thing - can the simple silly story of the text support such show more a rich, heavy, gorgeous book? I feel a sort of a dichotomy or disharmony. show less