"Tovarisch Smurf": how Peyo pulled the wool over many an eye
There are times when some of us sadly have to question the things we spent our time on in our childhood, but if we're to ensure that our descendants don't make the same mistakes, that's why it pays to.
How long has it been since I had the Smurfs seriously on mind? A little over fifteen years, perhaps? But with the discoveries I've made about it of recent, that's probably why it's a good thing I haven't thought about it in so long, and why I'm glad I don't remember much of the Hanna-Barbera cartoon either.
Two years ago, when the Belgian UNICEF outfit exploited the Smurfs for anti-war propaganda, that's when the subject returned to mind. And that's also when I discovered, more than I had before, that the Smurfs, alarmingly enough, bore traces of Marxism when they were first created.
The Smurfs (or, as per the original Flemish pronunciation, Les Schtroumpfs) first debuted in 1958 in a Belgian comic strip called Johan et Pirlouit drawn by one Pierre Culliford, a Belgian comics artist who did a lot of his work under the pen name of Peyo, which he took from an English relative's mispronunciation of the name Pierrot. They became quickly popular and the next year got their own comic strip with merchandise beginning to turn up soon afterwards. The Smurfs reached US shores two decades later,* with Marvel Comics reprinting some of the original strips translated into English, and in 1981, Hanna-Barbera produced a TV cartoon that ran almost a decade.
At that time, mindless toddler that I was, I could not possibly have seen it as anything other than some simple comic and cartoon set in medival Europe, starring some otherwise asexual characters who lived in a village, where, with the exception of meddlings by adversaries like the goofy sorceror Gargamel, they were happy and content and led a great life. Or so it seemed.
It was two years ago that I learned that when the Smurfs began, there were allegories to Marxism in it. Disappointed as I was, I wasn't too surprised. I realized that the structure did seem to follow Karl Marx's whole odd notion of "equality". But it was only more recently that I took to researching just how far not just the Marxist, but also the Communist analogies and allegories went. So I turned to the Google search engine to see what I could find, and wow, there sure were quite a few very eyebrow raising results. Wikipedia had an entry on the subject, and there were various other startling items such as this one and this one and also this one, which says:
Just how many children, not only in Europe but also in North America and other parts of the globe, were brainwashed by a comic strip like this? But it figures how it could all go past them: "cute" characters seem to be the perfect weapon for misleading tons of innocent youngsters, and adults too.
And if there was anything else that creeps me out today besides Vanity Smurf, it's how the Smurfette seems to have been a very subtle analogy to a prostitute. More on that in the comments section in this entry at Johnny Triangles. Wow, is it possible that, when Papa Smurf used his talents for sorcery to turn the Smurfette into a "real" female version of themselves, that besides turning her into what they themselves considered the "ideal" woman, they even turned her into a sex-toy? Good grief.
And the whole notion that capitalists are money-grubbers is really insulting. The creed held by those who support capitalism is that everyone should work to earn their living, and have the right to do so too, and not lazy around living on welfare like socialists seem to want to do. On the other hand, if there is any time when capitalism becomes objectionable, it's when someone wants to capitalize on the misfortunes of those less fortunate than themselves. That's when it becomes wrong.
As for Bill Hanna and Joe Barbera, who're guilty of producing the cartoon series: they may have shown promise when they first created Tom and Jerry in the 1940s for MGM, but all that began to dissolve when they opened their TV animation studio. I really did not think much of the Flintstones when I came of age, nor the Jetsons, and that they adapted the Smurfs to TV has made me lose even more respect for them than before. To think, that this, of all things that could've been imported to the US from Europe, was what anyone thought to bring over! And it's alarming how popular it became in its time. The much superior Asterix did have its moments stateside, including a few animated films, yet it could never hold a candle to the following that the Smurfs was garnering, and finding it sold in US bookstores is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Asterix is not without its flaws, but it has much more brains, and unlike the Smurfs, the residents of the little Gaulish village that stood strong against the Roman invaders made livings for themselves with the trades they learned and were experts in, and had their own economy. No wonder the left-liberal media would rather get something that depicts everything in upside-down, inside-out fashion instead of Goscinny's and Uderzo's gem, which was much more fun.
I feel really ashamed of Peyo, due to the fact that not only was he foisting proto-Marxist propaganda on an unsuspecting generation of children, but that he was doing it at the expense of mine and other families' money as well. This doesn't mean that UNICEF was right to exploit the Smurfs for anti-war propaganda back then, but it doesn't make them any better either. They were probably the most cleverly subtle form of moonbat propaganda to litter up any comics medium in the past five decades.
It's a shame that all this only came to light a few years after Culliford passed away, but at least it's been in discussion since then. No child should have to have bad idealistics foisted upon him/her, and that's why it's important that these kind of matters be studied.
Update: read also this page, which focuses mainly on the anti-feminist leanings the Smurfs had.
* When the Smurfs were sold over here in Israel during the 1980s, the given name in Hebrew was "Dardasim", or "Dardas" if referring to just one Smurf. Yep, here too, more than enough people were fooled by Peyo's Marxist nonsense.
Trackposted to: 123Beta, bRight and Early, Jo's Cafe, Third World County.
How long has it been since I had the Smurfs seriously on mind? A little over fifteen years, perhaps? But with the discoveries I've made about it of recent, that's probably why it's a good thing I haven't thought about it in so long, and why I'm glad I don't remember much of the Hanna-Barbera cartoon either.
Two years ago, when the Belgian UNICEF outfit exploited the Smurfs for anti-war propaganda, that's when the subject returned to mind. And that's also when I discovered, more than I had before, that the Smurfs, alarmingly enough, bore traces of Marxism when they were first created.
The Smurfs (or, as per the original Flemish pronunciation, Les Schtroumpfs) first debuted in 1958 in a Belgian comic strip called Johan et Pirlouit drawn by one Pierre Culliford, a Belgian comics artist who did a lot of his work under the pen name of Peyo, which he took from an English relative's mispronunciation of the name Pierrot. They became quickly popular and the next year got their own comic strip with merchandise beginning to turn up soon afterwards. The Smurfs reached US shores two decades later,* with Marvel Comics reprinting some of the original strips translated into English, and in 1981, Hanna-Barbera produced a TV cartoon that ran almost a decade.
At that time, mindless toddler that I was, I could not possibly have seen it as anything other than some simple comic and cartoon set in medival Europe, starring some otherwise asexual characters who lived in a village, where, with the exception of meddlings by adversaries like the goofy sorceror Gargamel, they were happy and content and led a great life. Or so it seemed.
It was two years ago that I learned that when the Smurfs began, there were allegories to Marxism in it. Disappointed as I was, I wasn't too surprised. I realized that the structure did seem to follow Karl Marx's whole odd notion of "equality". But it was only more recently that I took to researching just how far not just the Marxist, but also the Communist analogies and allegories went. So I turned to the Google search engine to see what I could find, and wow, there sure were quite a few very eyebrow raising results. Wikipedia had an entry on the subject, and there were various other startling items such as this one and this one and also this one, which says:
...the Smurfs shared everything. The food in the Smurf village was stored away in those mushrooms the minute it was harvested and then equally distributed to all the Smurfs throughout the year. No one "farmer Smurf" sold his crop to a "consumer Smurf," or saw his labor exploited by another. It was understood that the crop was for the entire Smurf population, not for the sale or profit of one Smurf alone.I learned that Papa Smurf's character design with the round-shaped beard was apparently modeled after Marx himself, and that Brainy Smurf was meant to be a take on Leon Trotsky. And I even learned that Gargamel was written as a stereotype of capitalists (and worse yet, may have been based on a Jewish stereotype)! And Papa's use of a red colored outfit was apparently intentional in its allusion to commie colors. The white outfit worn by the other Smurfs was apparently meant to allude to Maoist China, and the replacing of various, possibly intelligent words with "smurfing, smurfed", for example, was almost similar to how China's commies muddled up everything into incomprehensibility. (See, years ago, I'd thought that it was just meant to be humorous, now, I realize that there may have been more to it than meets the eye.)
Some other evidence I've gathered may strain the limits of credibility. Decide for yourself: Papa Smurf wore a red cap. All the Smurfs were the same color and sang the same song everywhere they went - stressing their Smurfy unity. Didn't you catch yourself singing that song as a kid? I know you did. Everyone did. Everyone.Yes, unfortunately, I too am guilty as charged. I may not have sung or hummed it as often as others, but I too sang that tune of, "la la, la la la la", that I'm starting to grow really tired of.
Just how many children, not only in Europe but also in North America and other parts of the globe, were brainwashed by a comic strip like this? But it figures how it could all go past them: "cute" characters seem to be the perfect weapon for misleading tons of innocent youngsters, and adults too.
And if there was anything else that creeps me out today besides Vanity Smurf, it's how the Smurfette seems to have been a very subtle analogy to a prostitute. More on that in the comments section in this entry at Johnny Triangles. Wow, is it possible that, when Papa Smurf used his talents for sorcery to turn the Smurfette into a "real" female version of themselves, that besides turning her into what they themselves considered the "ideal" woman, they even turned her into a sex-toy? Good grief.
And the whole notion that capitalists are money-grubbers is really insulting. The creed held by those who support capitalism is that everyone should work to earn their living, and have the right to do so too, and not lazy around living on welfare like socialists seem to want to do. On the other hand, if there is any time when capitalism becomes objectionable, it's when someone wants to capitalize on the misfortunes of those less fortunate than themselves. That's when it becomes wrong.
As for Bill Hanna and Joe Barbera, who're guilty of producing the cartoon series: they may have shown promise when they first created Tom and Jerry in the 1940s for MGM, but all that began to dissolve when they opened their TV animation studio. I really did not think much of the Flintstones when I came of age, nor the Jetsons, and that they adapted the Smurfs to TV has made me lose even more respect for them than before. To think, that this, of all things that could've been imported to the US from Europe, was what anyone thought to bring over! And it's alarming how popular it became in its time. The much superior Asterix did have its moments stateside, including a few animated films, yet it could never hold a candle to the following that the Smurfs was garnering, and finding it sold in US bookstores is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Asterix is not without its flaws, but it has much more brains, and unlike the Smurfs, the residents of the little Gaulish village that stood strong against the Roman invaders made livings for themselves with the trades they learned and were experts in, and had their own economy. No wonder the left-liberal media would rather get something that depicts everything in upside-down, inside-out fashion instead of Goscinny's and Uderzo's gem, which was much more fun.
I feel really ashamed of Peyo, due to the fact that not only was he foisting proto-Marxist propaganda on an unsuspecting generation of children, but that he was doing it at the expense of mine and other families' money as well. This doesn't mean that UNICEF was right to exploit the Smurfs for anti-war propaganda back then, but it doesn't make them any better either. They were probably the most cleverly subtle form of moonbat propaganda to litter up any comics medium in the past five decades.
It's a shame that all this only came to light a few years after Culliford passed away, but at least it's been in discussion since then. No child should have to have bad idealistics foisted upon him/her, and that's why it's important that these kind of matters be studied.
Update: read also this page, which focuses mainly on the anti-feminist leanings the Smurfs had.
* When the Smurfs were sold over here in Israel during the 1980s, the given name in Hebrew was "Dardasim", or "Dardas" if referring to just one Smurf. Yep, here too, more than enough people were fooled by Peyo's Marxist nonsense.
Trackposted to: 123Beta, bRight and Early, Jo's Cafe, Third World County.
Labels: comic strips, Europe and Asia, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, politics
