Talk:Horton Hatches the Egg

Untitled
The moral of the story IS "always keep your promises". It's "don't demand the result of someone else's work". Anyone?  &mdash;msh210 22:47, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I would say it's that perseverence and dedication pay off, so that you bear the fruits of your labours; and if you don't have that perseverence and dedication, you won't have anything to show for it. Having said that, I recently heard someone say it was about adoption - which makes some sense, though I doubt that was the intended meaning because it would cast natural parents in a highly negative light. Roger 22:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

minor edit
I removed the following section from the article, because it is controversial and referenced only by a self published book which has no standing. If someone wants to argue for a specific interpretation I think it should be better referenced. Significant Gravitas Shortfall (talk) 17:01, 18 December 2010 (UTC):

Interpretations
Some critics have suggested that Seuss may have intended the story to increase awareness of the impact men could have on their children's lives if they would only become more involved in day to day childcare activities. Others, however, claim that it demeans the women who would stay at home to care for their children, indicts women who have interests outside the home, and feminizes men who would consider engaging in childcare activities. I personally think that it is about foster children and the love someone can develops for a child they did not create.

Themes
I think that this article would benefit greatly if someone explored the implied racial overtones that were prevalent throughout most the story. Although not explicitly depicted, the elephant did copulate with the bird which becomes clear when they hatch at the end, being half elephant and half bird. Horton did not supply half the chromosomes solely by sitting on the eggs. We are clearly not given the full story here, which could be expected given Dr. Seuss' target audience, children. Other books written by Dr. Seuss had implicit political themes and messages that were not specifically geared towards children (The Lorax &You're Only Old Once! : A book for Obsolete Children are both excellent examples of this). Mayzie, the mother in this story, is your typical mother from the ghetto, clearly she had no intentions of raising her children and is only capable of making selfish decisions. Seuss was making a statement about the types of parents who willfully neglect their children, and are surprised when they grow up to be social outcasts (What niche could a half-bird, half-elephant possibly fill in nature?) or a product of government intervention (Would government be able to provide the same quality of upbringing as two caring parents?). The elephant, a symbol of the predominantly white Republican party, is the only party concerned for the welfare of the children. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.178.10.140 (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Why should we read so much into a children's story? There is no basis for the opinions expressed above. The point Seuss was making is that if we neglect our responsibilities, we'll lose control over them and eventually, ownership of them. 123.100.93.103 (talk) 11:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Fish suicide
This is the oldest WB cartoon I've seen with this gag but it definitely appears a year later when Porky Pig's cat shoots himself after seeing the Flea carrying Porky and his dog on a silver platter in "An Itch in Time". Is the line "Now I've seen everything" followed by a self inflicted gunshot to the head some kind of pop culture reference similar to the use of the "Hut-Sut Song"? Brendanmccabe (talk) 01:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Backgound
This section appears to exist only to promote an unofficial biography. It seeks to create controversy where none exists. So Ted drew a picture of an elephant earlier. He drew a strange wiener-dog sitting on an egg earlier. He even drew a whale in a tree earlier. How does any of that detract from Ted's own tale of the wind blowing a picture of an elephant on top of an egg being the spark for writing one of his best books? If I can find some time I'll do a rewrite that simply lays out the steps, without attempting to create a false narrative. Is there really any need to reference C at all? The implication of Ted changing the story makes him... seem a dishonest person. This for a person who wrote I meant what I said and always faithful 100%? Alec Mayo the younger (talk)