Evaluation
The Rabbits’ Wedding was published during a time in the United States when racism was still blatantly prevalent. Even though important milestones had occurred in children’s literature publishing (Nancy Drew had been revised to eliminate hurtful ethnic stereotypes and Florence Crannell Means wrote The Moved Outers, a pro-Japanese-American novel for children during the Japanese encampment tragedy, for example) prejudice was rampant in the United States. That being said, the book was received overwhelmingly positively. It was only a group in Alabama and one columnist in Florida that protested the book. The White Citizen’s Council of Montgomery, Alabama states that the picture book was pro-integration. Alabama libraries decided that they would place the book “on reserve” so that the public would have to ask to borrow it. An Alabama state senator, Senator Eddis, was quoted as saying that he thought the book “should be taken off the shelves and burned.” The library director, Emily Wheelock Reed, let it be known that she would have it put on reserve but he would not remove access to it.
Perhaps one of the reasons that the South had such a problem with the book is because of the Civil Rights movement. Both blacks and whites were standing up in very public and meaningful ways proclaiming the rights for blacks and for interracial marriage. People who were against such ideas would most certainly believe that the black and white rabbits in the story were representing what was going on in the current human world. There was news coverage all over the United States and even in Europe. The Daily Boston Globe ran a story on May 22nd, 1959, entitled “No, Suh! Not in Alabama!” that quoted Emily Wheelock Reed saying that “We have had difficulty with the book. We have heard rumblings since last Fall but we have not lost our integrity. I am interested in seeing the library division grow and expand and we had to make a choice because of the aroused feelings to stop peddling the book.” The Daily Defender from Chicago ran a story about the picture book, saying that a columnist for the Orlando Sentinel “denounced “Rabbits” as propaganda for mixing the races and as a “most amazing example of brainwashing.” The article goes on to say “One would think that the story was written by one of the directors of the NAACP as a process of racial education from the cradle, to the grave. Maybe the Supreme Court will have to pass on the rights of rabbits to associate with their own kind. For goodness sake, how silly can the state of Alabama be?” There was even international coverage. The Irish Times covered it on May 23, 1959 stating that Williams had said, “it is only about a soft furry love, and has no hidden message of hate.” London papers ran a story entitled, “Even Rabbits Hit by U.S. Color Bar, London Jeers Poke fun at Ban of Book in Ala.” Finally, a Los Angeles Times article on January 10th, 1960 states that “Miss Emily Wheelcok Reed, who was bitterly criticized because the book, The Rabbits’ Wedding, was allowed on general circulation shelves, has resigned effective April 21. “ She went on to be a library consultant in Washington D.C.
Today the racial concerns of the past seem to have dissipated. It is difficult to find a negative review; all of the Amazon customer reviews I found were very positive. One reader from Amazon said “This is a sweet sweet story and the illustrations are especially endearing. The expressions on the rabbits faces, and hilarious detail to their feet, paws, etc, make this a must have for any childs library. It is excellent to give as a gift.” Another said “The Rabbits Wedding was my favorite book as a 4-year-old - and it still is! The story is sweet, the illustrations are precious and young children get their first glimpse of true love. It is a very touching little story.” And yet another said “I remember as a child loving this book because it must have had all the right ingredients: a little sorrow, joy, love and beautiful illustrations that took me into a wonderful world of imagination. That would have been in the early 70s - in the UK. Looking back I understand why this book came into my life - I was a biracial child. My mother is white Scottish and my father black Caribbean. On some level, it brought clarity and understanding to what my parents must have had to experience in their own travels and after their own rabbits' wedding. With the subtext or without it, it's a lovely book and I'm so happy to see it's still in print.”
This book is still popular because of Williams’ incredible talent as an artist. The book has a timeless message of love and peace. All is well in the lovely forest where the rabbits coexist with other animals. And what better way to celebrate life than getting married amongst friends? It is the type of book that most parents want to share with their children and people want to give to children as a gift. In addition, Williams creates his wonderfully lush illustrations typical of his style. Large pages show soft fuzzy bunnies that beg the reader to reach out and pet them. Hints of color hear and there create a pop of interest. This is a book that will probably always stay in print.
References
"Rabbits' wedding" banned; black bunny one of couple.(1959, May 23, 1959). Atlanta Daily World (1932-2003), pp. 1.
"Rabbits' wedding" book banned.(1959, May 23, 1959). The Irish Times (1921-Current File), pp. 11.
Alabama against black rabbits.(1959, May 28, 1959). Daily Defender (Daily Edition) (1956-1960), pp. 13.
Ban "mixed" fairyland bunnies.(1959, May 30, 1959). New Journal and Guide (1916-2003), pp. 1.
Becker, B. C., Stan, S., Pistolis, D. R., & American, L. A. (2002). Hit list for children 2 : Frequently challenged books. Chicago: American Library Association.
Black, white rabbit wedding book stirs storm.(1959, May 30, 1959). The Chicago Defender (National Edition) (1921-1967), pp. 1.
Black, white rabbits breed a racial row.(1959, May 23, 1959). Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), pp. 15.
Boye, I. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Library Journal (1876)., 83, 1940-1940.
Burn that rabbit book, Alabama senator urges.(1959, May 23, 1959). Daily Boston Globe (1928-1960), pp. 1.
By GEORGE A. WOODS. (1958, Jun 8, 1958). Pictures for fun, fact and fancy. New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. BR42.
By KARLA KUSKIN. (1972, May 7, 1972). Femalechauvinistmousemaker. New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. BRA2.
Center for Children’s Books Bulletin (1958-1959) The Rabbits Wedding 12:39.
Children's book about rabbits banned in Alabama.(1959, May 30, 1959). Cleveland Call and Post (1934-1962), pp. 8_D.
Diamond, J. (1997, Jul 6, 1997). Birds do it, bees do it, and rabbits are at it, well, like rabbits. but none of them dress up in rubber.. The Observer (1901- 2003), pp. 69.
Display ad 106 -- no title.(1960, Dec 2, 1960). The Guardian (1959-2003), pp. 8.
Display ad 169 -- no title.(1960, Dec 4, 1960). The Observer (1901- 2003), pp. 28.
Display ad 20 -- no title.(1959, Jul 15, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 23.
Display ad 224 -- no title.(1958, May 11, 1958). Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), pp. G9.
Display ad 33 -- no title.(1960, Oct 7, 1960). The Guardian (1959-2003), pp. 16.
Even rabbits hit by U. S. color bar, London jeers.(1959, Jun 6, 1959). Afro-American (1893-1988), pp. 3.
Graham,Patterson Toby,,. (2002). A right to read : Segregation and civil rights in alabama's public libraries, 1900-1965. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
How rabbits perished.(1901, Dec 21, 1901). The Sun (1837-1987), pp. 10.
An interrupted wedding.(1897, Feb 14, 1897). New York Times (1857-1922), pp. 20.
L., J. D. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Horn Book Magazine, 34, 192-192.
Library head to quit post.(1960, Jan 11, 1960). The Sun (1837-1987), pp. 13.
M., P. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Christian Science Monitor, , 11-11.
The nation.(1959, May 24, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. E1.
No 'mixing' of rabbits says ala.(1959, May 26, 1959). Philadelphia Tribune (1912-2001), pp. 2.
Photo standalone 3 -- no title.(1959, May 23, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 27.
Rabbits and racialism.(1959, May 23, 1959). The Manchester Guardian (1901-1959), pp. 1.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). The New York Times (Early City Edition), , 42-42.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Bull VA Kirkus' Bookshop Serv, 26, 179-179.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Commonweal, 68, 210-210.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Bookmark (Albany, N.Y.)., 17, 227-227.
'Rabbits' wedding' assailed.(1959, May 24, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 46.
Shenton, E. (1950, Mar 5, 1950). Rabbits always circle. Daily Boston Globe (1928-1960), pp. A14.
Theo nix thomas DEADLINE DATA.(1959, May 28, 1959). Los Angeles Sentinel (1934-2005), pp. A5.
Wants $100,000 for one needle.(1959, May 30, 1959). Afro-American (1893-1988), pp. 1.
Perhaps one of the reasons that the South had such a problem with the book is because of the Civil Rights movement. Both blacks and whites were standing up in very public and meaningful ways proclaiming the rights for blacks and for interracial marriage. People who were against such ideas would most certainly believe that the black and white rabbits in the story were representing what was going on in the current human world. There was news coverage all over the United States and even in Europe. The Daily Boston Globe ran a story on May 22nd, 1959, entitled “No, Suh! Not in Alabama!” that quoted Emily Wheelock Reed saying that “We have had difficulty with the book. We have heard rumblings since last Fall but we have not lost our integrity. I am interested in seeing the library division grow and expand and we had to make a choice because of the aroused feelings to stop peddling the book.” The Daily Defender from Chicago ran a story about the picture book, saying that a columnist for the Orlando Sentinel “denounced “Rabbits” as propaganda for mixing the races and as a “most amazing example of brainwashing.” The article goes on to say “One would think that the story was written by one of the directors of the NAACP as a process of racial education from the cradle, to the grave. Maybe the Supreme Court will have to pass on the rights of rabbits to associate with their own kind. For goodness sake, how silly can the state of Alabama be?” There was even international coverage. The Irish Times covered it on May 23, 1959 stating that Williams had said, “it is only about a soft furry love, and has no hidden message of hate.” London papers ran a story entitled, “Even Rabbits Hit by U.S. Color Bar, London Jeers Poke fun at Ban of Book in Ala.” Finally, a Los Angeles Times article on January 10th, 1960 states that “Miss Emily Wheelcok Reed, who was bitterly criticized because the book, The Rabbits’ Wedding, was allowed on general circulation shelves, has resigned effective April 21. “ She went on to be a library consultant in Washington D.C.
Today the racial concerns of the past seem to have dissipated. It is difficult to find a negative review; all of the Amazon customer reviews I found were very positive. One reader from Amazon said “This is a sweet sweet story and the illustrations are especially endearing. The expressions on the rabbits faces, and hilarious detail to their feet, paws, etc, make this a must have for any childs library. It is excellent to give as a gift.” Another said “The Rabbits Wedding was my favorite book as a 4-year-old - and it still is! The story is sweet, the illustrations are precious and young children get their first glimpse of true love. It is a very touching little story.” And yet another said “I remember as a child loving this book because it must have had all the right ingredients: a little sorrow, joy, love and beautiful illustrations that took me into a wonderful world of imagination. That would have been in the early 70s - in the UK. Looking back I understand why this book came into my life - I was a biracial child. My mother is white Scottish and my father black Caribbean. On some level, it brought clarity and understanding to what my parents must have had to experience in their own travels and after their own rabbits' wedding. With the subtext or without it, it's a lovely book and I'm so happy to see it's still in print.”
This book is still popular because of Williams’ incredible talent as an artist. The book has a timeless message of love and peace. All is well in the lovely forest where the rabbits coexist with other animals. And what better way to celebrate life than getting married amongst friends? It is the type of book that most parents want to share with their children and people want to give to children as a gift. In addition, Williams creates his wonderfully lush illustrations typical of his style. Large pages show soft fuzzy bunnies that beg the reader to reach out and pet them. Hints of color hear and there create a pop of interest. This is a book that will probably always stay in print.
References
"Rabbits' wedding" banned; black bunny one of couple.(1959, May 23, 1959). Atlanta Daily World (1932-2003), pp. 1.
"Rabbits' wedding" book banned.(1959, May 23, 1959). The Irish Times (1921-Current File), pp. 11.
Alabama against black rabbits.(1959, May 28, 1959). Daily Defender (Daily Edition) (1956-1960), pp. 13.
Ban "mixed" fairyland bunnies.(1959, May 30, 1959). New Journal and Guide (1916-2003), pp. 1.
Becker, B. C., Stan, S., Pistolis, D. R., & American, L. A. (2002). Hit list for children 2 : Frequently challenged books. Chicago: American Library Association.
Black, white rabbit wedding book stirs storm.(1959, May 30, 1959). The Chicago Defender (National Edition) (1921-1967), pp. 1.
Black, white rabbits breed a racial row.(1959, May 23, 1959). Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), pp. 15.
Boye, I. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Library Journal (1876)., 83, 1940-1940.
Burn that rabbit book, Alabama senator urges.(1959, May 23, 1959). Daily Boston Globe (1928-1960), pp. 1.
By GEORGE A. WOODS. (1958, Jun 8, 1958). Pictures for fun, fact and fancy. New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. BR42.
By KARLA KUSKIN. (1972, May 7, 1972). Femalechauvinistmousemaker. New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. BRA2.
Center for Children’s Books Bulletin (1958-1959) The Rabbits Wedding 12:39.
Children's book about rabbits banned in Alabama.(1959, May 30, 1959). Cleveland Call and Post (1934-1962), pp. 8_D.
Diamond, J. (1997, Jul 6, 1997). Birds do it, bees do it, and rabbits are at it, well, like rabbits. but none of them dress up in rubber.. The Observer (1901- 2003), pp. 69.
Display ad 106 -- no title.(1960, Dec 2, 1960). The Guardian (1959-2003), pp. 8.
Display ad 169 -- no title.(1960, Dec 4, 1960). The Observer (1901- 2003), pp. 28.
Display ad 20 -- no title.(1959, Jul 15, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 23.
Display ad 224 -- no title.(1958, May 11, 1958). Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), pp. G9.
Display ad 33 -- no title.(1960, Oct 7, 1960). The Guardian (1959-2003), pp. 16.
Even rabbits hit by U. S. color bar, London jeers.(1959, Jun 6, 1959). Afro-American (1893-1988), pp. 3.
Graham,Patterson Toby,,. (2002). A right to read : Segregation and civil rights in alabama's public libraries, 1900-1965. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
How rabbits perished.(1901, Dec 21, 1901). The Sun (1837-1987), pp. 10.
An interrupted wedding.(1897, Feb 14, 1897). New York Times (1857-1922), pp. 20.
L., J. D. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Horn Book Magazine, 34, 192-192.
Library head to quit post.(1960, Jan 11, 1960). The Sun (1837-1987), pp. 13.
M., P. (1958). Rabbits' wedding (book review). Christian Science Monitor, , 11-11.
The nation.(1959, May 24, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. E1.
No 'mixing' of rabbits says ala.(1959, May 26, 1959). Philadelphia Tribune (1912-2001), pp. 2.
Photo standalone 3 -- no title.(1959, May 23, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 27.
Rabbits and racialism.(1959, May 23, 1959). The Manchester Guardian (1901-1959), pp. 1.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). The New York Times (Early City Edition), , 42-42.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Bull VA Kirkus' Bookshop Serv, 26, 179-179.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Commonweal, 68, 210-210.
Rabbits' wedding (book review).(1958). Bookmark (Albany, N.Y.)., 17, 227-227.
'Rabbits' wedding' assailed.(1959, May 24, 1959). New York Times (1923-Current File), pp. 46.
Shenton, E. (1950, Mar 5, 1950). Rabbits always circle. Daily Boston Globe (1928-1960), pp. A14.
Theo nix thomas DEADLINE DATA.(1959, May 28, 1959). Los Angeles Sentinel (1934-2005), pp. A5.
Wants $100,000 for one needle.(1959, May 30, 1959). Afro-American (1893-1988), pp. 1.