Talk:Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Holiday-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of objectives or join the project.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Chicago Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This page has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Since male Reindeer Rangifer tarandus shed their antlers at this time of year, I think Rudolph must be really a she.

Rudolph is a boys' name and the song refers to Rudolph as "him."

Contents

[edit] Celebration of cruelty

This song has always bothered me for a variety of reasons, one of which is that it glorifies the concept of mocking and ostracising those who are different until they can be useful. Why did Santa (who was supposed to be an arbiter of morality) let this state of affairs continue until such time as he needed Rudolph's help? Is this not a tacit approval of the other reindeer's cruelty and xenophobia? If that Christmas eve had not been foggy, wouldn't Rudolph's perpetual torment have continued?

This is supposed to be a children's song. What kind of lesson does it teach?

No one said the other reindeer were justified in mocking Rudolph. The song refers to him, when he is mocked, as "poor Rudolph," indicating the reader/listeners sympathies should lie with him and not the other reindeer. It is never stated that Santa allowed the teasing or even that he was aware of it.
I too know who's naughty and nice, but I am not therefore an arbiter of morality. --Wetman 12:48, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This is hilarious. --Akutenshi 12:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I think the moral of the movie (not the song) was "You have to believe what others want you to believe" which is bad. (Especially for Jewish/Buddist/any other religion children who have Christian friends.)

For a long time I have felt that Rudolph is a Jewish symbol. (His two creators are Jewish.) Bear in mind that the story and song appeared when Hitler was riding high and when anti-semitism was all too commmon in the U.S.. Rudolph very much embodies the fate of Jews throughout much of history: despised and rejected except when they happened to be useful.Alloco1 16:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with the original poster. I found this wiki page while googling for the very same thing. Being one of the most popular songs during Christmas, it teaches kids that you shouldn't care for someone unless they are useful. Apparently they called him names until he was useful, then they loved him. I guess the song creators could've did this on purpose for their own agenda, but this song currently has always bothered me EVERY time I hear it (Which is a lot as of right now). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.136.86 (talk) 22:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Does the inclusion of the entire "Children's Version" of this song transfer any truly encyclopedia-worthy information (like a lightbulb)? --Wetman 12:48, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well...a lot of people are familiar with it and it doesn't take up much space.

English people are generally not familiar with it. I found it interesting.

[edit] Is this part necessary?

I agree that the children's version should be removed, as should the mockery... if people agree, I think we should get rid of them both.

It's not necessary. What the children sing (and change) in a school; what the Simpsons do to it, etc, is part of history and culture, but is has no business being in this article. This article is about A) the song by Johnny Marks, and B) the character of Rudolph. Carajou 15:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Hm, I agree. I already commented on how there were too many examples in the "humorous" version. Maybe we should just remove it altogether. We can make reference to how extra lyrics are often added humorously and how in popular culture the lyrics are often changed without having to give such long examples. --Merond e 10:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I suggest resotoring some of the parody material; I added a note on why Rudolph is of interest to folklorists that may make the relevance of such material clearer. DavidOaks 16:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Longest running TV special

CBS now airs it each year, making it the longest running TV special.

This superlative is doubtful. Does anyone have any source? -- Perfecto 06:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rudolph the Red-nosed Roo

The picture of the roo is funny, but I don't think it's really appropriate for the article. But it's cool enough that I'm moving it here for posterity. Merry Christmas! -- Hongooi 16:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Rudolph Red nose Roo1.JPG
Haven't found an original picture of Rudolph the red nose reindeer. The Roo does have a slight resemblence. I think the picture should stay until some

one finds and post an original picture of the real Rudolph....Merry Christmas to You too!...,,,,Ariele 17:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] He doesn't exist for cryin out loud!

I, for one do not believe in him. KinseyLOL 16:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

What's your point? Should we remove the God pages too? Xiner 16:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
He (Rudolph!) doesn't exist anymore, since I shot him in 1990, and we ate part of him for Christmas dinner. If that doesn't make your kids cry, then something's wrong with them....;-) Actually it was an act of mercy, since he was very old (about 54 years old at the time, much older than the normal 6-10 year life expectancy) and couldn't keep up with the other reindeer. Any sightings of Rudolph since then are sightings of imposters, and can be classed with other UFR (Unidentified Flying Reindeer) sightings. I suspect he had many off-spring, since one can sometimes catch glimpses of reddish lights at night, especially when one's night vision has been affected by the liberal imbibement of alcoholic beverages. -- Fyslee/talk 09:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism Again

Someone keeps changing parts of it to rediculous (and wrong) things like the owner of the song is "fufu the pink bunny". If you did that, don't. Thats a stupid thing to do, to corrupt the knowledge of a worldwide information resource.

I've seen some vandalism over the first paragraph that somebody did until it was finally cleaned up. If any vandalism happens again, give the user a strict policy to stop the vandalism over whatever article they change some information on, add, or delete, or perhaps at least use a lock which allows only certain users to edit. --PJ Pete 12-8-'07

[edit] Too Many Examples in the Song

In the song section in the second song (the humorous lyrics), people keep coming along and adding their favorite version. There are starting to be too many. The article says, "Sample lyrics follow...." We don't need all these examples. We just need a few common ones to demonstrate how humorous lyrics are added. --Merond e 10:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me the only version of the song in the article now (the "Politically Correct" one) is totally off point and not among the most well-known versions. I would think the traditional variations would be much more germane to the history of the character as portrayed in song. I see that the song isn't yet in the public domain, though, so I suppose that's why the original lyrics aren't directly in the article. But even though the PC version is slightly different than the original song, doesn't copyright still apply? I would think so. If not, I'd still say it's a very poor version to have as an example of the song, especially since it's the only one actually visible in the text of article. Also, there are barely over 1,000 Google hits for anything slightly relating to this version of the song, and even ones that are songs are not all even anything like this one. I don't see how such a minor blip merits entry in an encyclopedia, especially when there is only an easily missable mention of the more traditional variations. Bluela 01:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Rudolph Picture

I suggest that we replace this picture at the top of the page. A reindeer with an overly red dot on its nose is kind of cheap and untidy. Could we change this?Ohyeh 14:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, and it has been done. Since DVD covers are authorized, why not an image of the Rudolph familiar to audiences world-wide? Carajou 03:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, too. Of course, the DVD cover of the original TV classic is much better than the other picture was. :-) -- Cornelia -etc. 16:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio!

The "origins" section is an exact copy of the Snopes article on Rudolph! It needs to be fixed--we here at Wikipedia don't endorse copyright infringement! — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The song lyrics were also copyright infringement (this song is not in the public domain). I've removed both the Snopes copyvio and the lyrics. — Amcaja 09:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I did not vandalize this article

I wish to give notice that I did not vandalize this article; however, I presented what other editors have put there more tastefully [1]. I resent the accusation that I am a vandal here.--Drboisclair 19:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC) I have to take a step back here because a recent anonymous editor who edited this article is the source of the reference to porn and "gay-porn" in this article, which definitely is vandalism. I was going to do the same thing as User:Group29 has done, but I thought that there was support for the material that the anonymous editor put in there. I did put a [citation needed] indicator in there for there to be some support for the "gay-porn" reference. This is interesting. Perhaps I will have to watch the 1944 cartoon again to see if there is some substance to this characterization. This cartoon is presented in inexpensive holiday DVDs.--Drboisclair 19:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nose?

Why are Rudolph and the other reindeer are always depicted as white-tailed deer (which have a distinct nose, like a dog or a cat) instead of proper reindeer (which have blunt fuzzy antlers, not pointy thin ones, and no 'nose' to speak of, like a cow or a horse)? I mean, obviously you can't be red-nosed if all you have is nostrils on a muzzle, but are there that many people ignorant of the basic look of Santa's pack animals? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.73.48.43 (talk) 05:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

Because real reindeer aren't cute. So they went with a version that is more pleasing to the eye. Lighthope 06:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but how the heck did he get the stupid red nose? Did his dad have an affair with another reindeer or is the kid mentally ill??To my opinion, I think that his dad had an affair with the other female reindeers.

[edit] History

Not much history in this artical see http://www.snopes.com/holidays/christmas/rudolph.asp

[edit] Feature-Length Film Section

It seems to me that the section regarding the feature-length film version's plot is needlessly long and in-depth. Couldn't it be condensed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.70.172 (talk) 19:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Destiny Child bonus CD Picture

I'm not sure why the best picture found for the DvD cover was one that includes a destiny child bonus cd. Goolge shows a bunch without the commercial banner on them. I would think one of those folks would be glad to let you use their pic... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.230.237.108 (talk) 07:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2 Articles

Shouldn't there be articles for the fictional character and the book/movie? FogDevil (talk) 16:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Synopsis?

I noticed there's a conspicuous lack of summary of plot on this page. Is the story so simple that a synopsis would violate copyrights? Or am I just not seeing it?

-20:10, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Movie page

see could anyone make a page for "rudolph the red nosed reindeer the movie" please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.18.213 (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I took that out of the Rudolph article, because it was excessively long and inappropriate for the main article. If you can find information about the movie that relates to things in the real world (reviews, ratings, grosses, etc), we can add part of it back to an article about the movie. Don't worry, your work is still stored on Wikipedia. If you can find the rest, I will help make the article about the movie out of your work.Kww (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)