Talk:Horton Hears a Who!

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2020 and 6 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stchung19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Pro-life message
Once again, an addition indicating the book is anti-abortion has been removed. Please see the comments below and read the 'Involvement in the abortion debate' section of the article. BukkWylde 05:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

"'Many ProLifers argue that Dr. Seuss, though liberal, supported the life of unborn children as part of his libertarian leanings.'"

I'm sorry, it doesn't really matter what people argue if it's unsupported by fact. If you have some documentation of Seuss's views on abortion, please provide it. BukkWylde 16:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's interesting to learn that Philip Nel essentially asserted that Geisel was extremely hypocritical -- backing away from his own phrase, "a person's a person, no matter how small" -- when it comes to applying that phrase to the smallest human beings. 174.24.25.153 (talk) 15:40, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Um, source? Here's what I found Nel had to say about it: "People in the Pro-Life movement often interpret Horton Hears a Who! that way. Seuss disagreed with that interpretation, and actually threatened to sue a Pro-Life group that had used the “A person’s a person no matter how small line” on their stationery. Of course, an author ultimately does not get to decide how his works are interpreted: a work always signifies in ways that exceed the intentions of its author." - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 15:56, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

"'It is noted by many, however, that Seuss, though liberal, appreciated human life at all levels, and hence the argument is made that as a liberal, he is for the liberties of even the unborn.'"

Unless you can provide specific support for Seuss's views on abortion, this is inappropriate speculation. It's been removed. BukkWylde 01:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

One point, shouldn't the heading be "Abortion Debate" not "United States Abortion Debate", considering the cited example is about a lawsuit in Canada?

The link referring to the lawsuit in Canada leads to a page that doesn't say anything about that suit. It might need to be double-checked, especially since it's such a recent addition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.191.50 (talk) 03:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a question. I know Dr. Suess isn't pro-life but what about the people that made the movie? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.89.42 (talk) 23:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

People in the Pro-Life movement often interpret Horton Hears a Who! that way. Seuss disagreed with that interpretation, and actually threatened to sue a Pro-Life group that had used the “A person’s a person no matter how small line” on their stationery. Of course, an author ultimately does not get to decide how his works are interpreted: a work always signifies in ways that exceed the intentions of its author.

Merge suggested.
I suggested that Beezlenut be merged into this article, as Beezlenut cannot be expanded terribly much, and is really only a part of this book. Clq 09:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

They've been merged and Beezlenut redirected to this page. I don't really know that beezlenut even needs its own section, but I don't want to mess with someone else's contribution. BukkWylde 02:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

The Underdogs
Not Bomb Nor Abortion nor Even Frawg, just little old us, the underdogs.

What's it about? It's about the underdogs of society being important.

Very Frustrated Underdogs Live Here.

Political Meaning
This might interact with some of the debate about whether or not the book has a pro-life message or this could be considered as entirely separate from that matter. According to this site, the book is about the American occupation of Japan. I don't know if this is an established fact, but if it is, it should certainly be included in this entry. N Vale 04:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Duh - the book is about any second-class citizen or apartheid situation, and the nature of non-violent protest... --Phlip2005

Reworking
I have a suggestion, as AI was reading through this I found that many sentences should be rewritten. Is there a way to ask for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealth500 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Other Meanings
Judging by the TV special, I'm thinking that the story is also about the concept of infinity. While the Whos are microscopic to Horton, his world would be gigantic to the Whos. At the end of the special, one of the Whos finds his own dust speck and hears a voice coming from it. That world would be microscopic to the Whos and subatomic to the world of Horton. 76.126.29.36 (talk) 00:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, no original research. Carl.bunderson (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Changes
I cleaned up the section on anti-abortion appropriation of the "a person's" phrase. The statement about a Canadian lawsuit was not backed up by the source, nor could I find one. I tried to find a cite for American Life League using the phrase in a pamphlet, but I can find no cite other than forums. If you can find proof for these, but the bits back in, but I could find no reputable source (Wikipedia is most people's cite for the latter "fact"). I put sources for the disapproval the Seuss' felt for Horton being used against their wishes. The cite I removed is for a site that only echoed other publications and is not reputable, and does not cite sources except things like Jesus quotes from 1977.

To fend off future "Ms. Geisel is pro/con abortion," please note the cites in the article now state she gives no support either way, only against those twisting her husband's words to promote a group's political agenda. The only sites I can find that state a definite pro-choice stance (without her quote saying so or a citation, mind you) are blogs or extremist religious sites, most of which, to add further irony, call her a "grinch."Penguinwithin (talk) 00:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not ironic; it's an insult to the Grinch. The Grinch, while dastardly, never advocated for the right to kill anyone. 174.24.25.153 (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 15:21, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Horton Hears a Who!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110910214905/http://www.blueskystudios.com/content/company-pressrelease.php?id=20 to http://www.blueskystudios.com/content/company-pressrelease.php?id=20

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed Changes
I have filled several content gaps that this article was lacking. The existing article is bare and lacks substance in a lot of sections. I also have added a couple of sections to add to the article which I hope will improve the overall quality of the article. I have also revised the existing article to improve word quality, sentence structure, and grammar of the article. My bibliography is in my sandbox which includes all of the sources for the information I am inserting into the article.Stchung19 (talk) 12:46, 27 April 2020 (UTC)