Arthur Cleanup

I can't believe people take Arthur, a show aimed at young grade school children as Serious Business to the point of citing a joke video. As someone who grew up with Arthur all the hate for DW, Muffy, hell even Francine on this wiki is pretty sad. Just think, were YOU more mature at 8 or 4? I think Francine falls into a similar boat as Rainbow Dash from MLP G4. She comes off as rude sometimes, and can be in the wrong but people seem to harp on their faults too often rather than what good the character does. Also did someone seriously suggest an elderly lady who later comes down with cancer was not only at fault for putting the quarters in the brownies but deserved to be fired from her job especially when seniors are prone to certain amounts of absent-mindedness. Honestly the fact Mrs. Mac Grady is one of the more reasonable adults should eschew her from Karma Houdini. And yes I believe Ratburn's mother calling toddler Nigel Ratburn "Emile/Emil" is just Arthur's Wild imagination on thinking Ratburn has an obscure first name.

Edited by Klavice on Oct 30th 2023 at 2:37:11 AM

Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.

In general, people tend to overthink children's shows.

I have questions about this Jerkass Has a Point entry on Arthur: Younger Children under D.W.'s folder:

• D.W. can sometimes be a Spoiled Brat, but she brings up valid points at times:
  • She was worried about James when he was invited to the sleepover with the Tibbles in "Night of the Tibble." She did have the right to be worried because James is a timid boy and the Tibbles are rowdy and could take advantage of him.

If she's worried about James because the Tibbles could take advantage of him, that in and of itself is not really being a Jerkass, but in the episode, D.W. tries to get him out of going to the Tibbles' sleepover because of that worry, which might come across as a bit jerkish towards the Tibbles, but on the other hand, the Tibbles do have well-earned reputations as Trickster Twins, so she might be in the right to do so. If she is, then that raises the question of whether Jerkass Has a Point even applies if the character is not being a jerk in this particular instance.

On a semi-hiatus from this site due to being busy with other things (may contribute here and there, but nothing major).

Yeah, and in the episode, James actually goes to D.W. for help on this; once he imagines what the sleepover could be like, he asks D.W. for ideas on how to get out of it, since she had managed to avoid it first. D.W. isn't being a Jerkass at all in the episode. I'm not sure if Jerkass Has a Point is supposed to be referring to characters who are a Jerkass in the specific episode, or as an overall character. If it's about the specific episode, this doesn't really apply.

The things in my dreams wish they could chase me!

Heck of a complaining sub-bullet on YMMV.Arthur, under Unintentionally Sympathetic:

• D.W. of all people ends up this way in "D.W.'s baby". It's understandable she get frustrated since her parents had the brilliant idea to make a four year old share a bedroom with ''a newborn'.

Edited by Unicorndance on Nov 27th 2023 at 10:40:52 PM

For every low there is a high.

I feel like Mr and Mrs Read are really hated on this wiki, and thus bias against them is clear, even though the point of the adults, is to show kids that yes, adults have issues too. D.W. is shown to be deserving of sympathy though she literally tried to pinch a baby (Kate) when she wouldn't give her toy back. And yes, that DOES hurt babies more than older kids. So I'm fine with the removal.

Fair warning: I can get pretty emotional and take things too seriously.

How's a four-year-old supposed to know that pinching is worse for a baby though? I mean, I agree that Mr. and Mrs. Read not being perfect isn't a bad thing, but that thing you said about pinching babies... what are you trying to say?

Edited by Unicorndance on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:38:48 PM

For every low there is a high.

Funnily enough I just had a another UU entry on the actual episode's page removed that had more words but didn’t actually say much.

Wait does she actually pinch Kate in the episode? If not then I feel like they’re confusing that with a certain four year old doing to his sister when he was two.

Edited by PlasmaPower on Nov 30th 2023 at 7:46:39 AM

Thomas fans needed! Come join me in the the show's cleanup thread!

It's been a hot minute since I've seen Arthur, but I do remember watching it a lot when I was a kid, and I remember the infamous "So Funny I Forgot to Laugh" episode rather clearly.

The YMMV page for that particular episode pretty much just seems like an excuse to complain about it, though:

The Bile Fascination example may be valid, but could use a rewrite to tone down the complaining and add more context as to why people dislike it. There's a somewhat more neutrally-phrased example on the show's main YMMV page which mentions that the backlash is because of the characters - especially Arthur himself - acting out of character.

The Hilarious in Hindsight example is just straight-up complaining as well, not to mention that isn't an example of Hindsight at all.

Also, I think the Never Live It Down point was contested on this thread, in part because the main thing fans dislike about it was - as I said - Arthur being unusually out of character, so I feel like that's more Fanon Discontinuity. (In fact, the episode is also listed on FanonDiscontinuity.Western Animation.)

I'm not entirely sure if this YMMV subpage is worth keeping, admittedly.

Cold turkey's getting stale. Tonight I'm eating crow.

At the very least, the Hilarious in Hindsight example can be snipped.

I agree that the Hilarious in Hindsight example is wrong, because not only is it complaining, the episode was never intended to be funny in the first place.

Bile Fascination could be reworded to "The reason most people watch this episode is because it has a very negative reputation in the Periphery Demographic for Arthur being uncharacteristically antagonistic in his mean joking to Sue Ellen".

For every low there is a high.

I've cut the Hilarious in Hindsight example, and I've reworded the Bile Fascination entry to something along the lines of what Unicorndance suggested.

Admittedly, I have a pretty Don't Shoot the Message opinion of the episode, from what I remember of it. The anti-bullying Aesop, including the message of how a "Just Joking" Justification doesn't necessarily make everything okay is a good lesson, but portraying the characters as unnecessarily out-of-character to deliver the message wasn't a good way to go about it.

Cold turkey's getting stale. Tonight I'm eating crow.

That sounds like it would be a valid addition.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Yeah, agreed.

I totally get what they were going for with the episode, they just did it extremely awkwardly.

"I shall not be foolish again, my dear Gwendolyn!"

Here's my suggested writeup for a Don't Shoot the Message entry to the page. Let me know if there's anything I should change before I add it:

"The Aesop against bullying, especially the message of how teasing can go too far and that a "Just Joking" Justification is not an appropriate apology, is a good lesson for the show to have. However, the reason why this episode is widely disliked is due to how there were several characters going against their usual personalities in order to deliver this message, which makes the lesson come off as awkward."

Cold turkey's getting stale. Tonight I'm eating crow.

An entry under Unintentional Period Piece on YMMV.Arthur was updated to this:

• Unintentional Period Piece:
  • The idea of Arthur getting a pen pal in "Dear Adil" (2003) seems kind of unspectacular after the rise of social media, where one can speak to anyone anywhere in the world in real time. Notably, Arthur and Adil initially write to each other via handwritten letters before switching over to email halfway through the episode. (And in later episodes, Arthur communicates with Adil through what's implied to be instant chat messaging)

Justified however, in that Arthur gets his penpal through Mr. Ratburn via a program facilitated by teachers that matches up their students from around the world. Even with the commonplace use of Internet and social media making it easier to meet new people, it's still a risk for users, at any age, since it's easy for someone to lie about themselves or have underlying ill intentions, especially regarding minors, so this is still a safer method for elementary school children like Arthur to connect and communicate with other verified kids and facilitated by teachers without adults worrying about them speaking to strangers.

——

On top of the person who edited this entry forgetting to format the third paragraph with the rest of the entry, the third paragraph is a just a Justifying Edit on why this whole pen pal program still makes sense apparently.

Edited by PlasmaPower on Dec 1st 2023 at 11:15:11 AM

Thomas fans needed! Come join me in the the show's cleanup thread!

I'm not sure if Unintentional Period Piece can be justified like that since it effectively means "this thing happens but also makes sense in modern times", which takes out the whole period piece aspect. The method of communication is even updated over time to stay current so I'd cut the example. Even if the plot started fresh today with social media or not in a "school pen pal" context, it would look the exact same after they start messaging each other.

I agree that the Unintentional Period Piece thing can go.

Now, here's an example on Recap.Arthur S 1 E 8 Arthurs New Puppy Arthur Bounces Back that I think is misuse:

• Lies to Children: Francine says that her cousin's dog was sent to a farm. Arthur is worried this fate will befall Pal, and even sets up a poster to motivate his dog to avoid this. Neither of them knows this would be a Deadly Euphemism for a dog being surrendered to a shelter, or euthanized.

I feel like the part I bolded is just speculation, since there's no mention in the episode of it being a lie or a euphemism.

For every low there is a high.

Yeah, that may even be Fridge Horror from the perspective of adults. If the episode doesn't even hint that it's a lie...

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Added the Don't Shoot the Message example. What should be done about the rudely-written Unintentionally Sympathetic example on YMMV.Arthur regarding room-sharing?

For every low there is a high.

Bumping because I still don't know what to do.

For every low there is a high.

You could always just delete it and post it on the discussion.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

And can I cut the Lies to Children example?

For every low there is a high.

I would.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

I recently noticed that the YMMV page for Sagwa, the Chinese Siamese Cat mentions that Steven Crowder also had a role on the show (as Mung). There's been no attempt to shoehorn Crowder's scandals into the entry as of yet, but should we go ahead an add an altered version of the Crowder Clause that's already on the Arthur YMMV to it as well, just in case?

"I shall not be foolish again, my dear Gwendolyn!"