I am a mess. I turn to my husband, tears pouring down my face, ‘That was one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. I honestly think that's the future of cinema. I could sit here and watch it all over again’.
My husband is understandably perplexed. Because I'm not talking about Amaldovar, Lars Von Trier or even one of Jane Campion’s more commercial offerings. I'm talking about Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse.
I can honestly say it is one of my favourite films. It’s moving, authentic, full of humour, action packed, progressive and innovative while still honouring the legacy of its predecessors.
You can bet your spidey senses that I have been waiting with anticipation for the, incidentally hugely successful, follow up, Spider-Man: Across the Spider Verse, which one newspaper described as, ‘Wokeness in action’.
I’ve found I've become a bit of a connoisseur of woke children's TV. Not surprising, since my son is approaching three years old and our promises of ‘no screen time, no sugar’ were thrown out of the window when we realised that concessions would have to be made if our family was to stay together and stay sane.
I love that kids TV is so educational these days but I like even more how unapologetically, how understatedly, diverse and inclusive it is. Particular favourites in this house are JoJo & GranGran which depicts a small girl of St Lucian descent, hanging out with her grandma in multicultural London with a cast of friends from all sexual-orientation, ethnic and economic backgrounds.
READ MORE: I'm waving goodbye to housing woes by sailing off into the sunset
I’m a fan of In the Night Garden not only because it makes me feel like I've done some very good drugs when all I've had is two strong coffees and a bacon sarnie but because it transcends the binary where prejudices exist. It is vaguely gendered but all other signifiers go the same way as the plot - to the wind.
Australian cartoon Bluey is not only genuinely funny but it shows a different daily dynamic, one where the mum is the primary breadwinner which helps my little boy understand that mummy is not just ‘away’, she is doing something for the family.
Yakka Dee, meanwhile, features children of every background meaning kids can see themselves on screen as well as kids very different from themselves.
It seems to me that inclusivity and diversity in TV and the arts for adult audiences can go wrong because it can so often be overwrought, ham-fisted and feel tokenistic.
Somehow children’s shows sidestep these issues, perhaps because of the simple format. Kids TV is short form and by necessity only focuses on the most essential facts to communicate. There is no subtext or explanation, it is just given that there will be a child with disabilities, a mixed race couple, two mums, a single dad.
Of course not all kids shows are created equal. Having for my sins watched many, many episodes of Peppa Pig, it's no surprise to me at all that Boris Johnson once extolled the Peppa empire as an exemplar of British industry.
It is entertaining yes, but middle class, heteronormative and patriarchal to its core. Peppa and her nuclear family get to go off and stay in holiday villas in Europe and eat pizza while Miss Rabbit, perhaps not coincidentally the only one with a less than posh accent, does every job in town.
READ MORE: Kerry Hudson: Pride – I'm here and I'm queer
Tell me that's not capitalism writ large. Don't even get me started on why some animals get to be sentient characters and others become their silent pets.
Sadly, my son, like so many children, loves Peppa and so I watch too, cringing inwardly every time Daddy Pig insists that he is brilliant at something, while Mummy Pig watches on passively only to pick up the pieces afterwards while Miss Rabbit is in the background doing all the hard labour.
Of course, woke TV is nothing new. I grew up in council estates that were largely white in the environment of the 1980s and the 90s where feminism, alternative sexual orientations and mental or physical disabilities were still things that the mainstream often struggled to portray let alone accept.
And yet I grew up watching Sesame Street, one of the most radical programmes of its time. So progressive, in fact, that in 1970 it was banned in Mississippi for showing black and white kids playing together.
Because of Big Bird and his pals, I sat in my council flat in Aberdeen watching civil rights activist Jesse Jackson, a whole decade earlier, lead a group of children of all ethnicities in a chant declaring, ‘I am somebody. I may be poor but I am somebody…I may be on welfare but I am somebody…I am black, brown, white, I speak a different language but I must be respected, protected, never rejected. I am somebody.’
Meanwhile, Byker Grove, which aired while we were living in a north east England pit village decimated by the mine closures, was the first time I ever saw young people from working class backgrounds with working class problems like mine treated with nuance and sensitivity.
Is it just because children’s TV is simpler? Or because there is more creative freedom in writing for a younger mind?
I’d like to think it’s because the people who are making children's TV are usually not doing it because they're hoping to coin it in with plastic merchandise and branded pyjamas but because they understand that children watch a lot of TV and that means they have a responsibility. Creators understand good TV can really shape a child’s understanding of society and therefore our future society.
I remain full of gratitude for progressive children's TV. They show us a society we could live in if, like children, we all lacked the inherent prejudices and preconceptions we learn as adults.
Woke TV shaped my perspective of the world for the better when I might have grown up believing the worst. I’m so glad my son will grow up with that too and enter the Spider-Verse in all its glorious woke technicolour.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel