Readers interested in learning more about Allen’s work are encouraged to look at the in-depth treatment in “The Developing Conjuncture and Some Insights from Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen on the Centrality of the Fight Against White Supremacy” (Cultural Logic, 2010) available at JeffreyBPerry.net (top left). For those interested in Allen’s two-volume “classic” The Invention of the White Race (Verso Books, 1994, 1997; 2012) see Vol. 1: Racial Oppression and Social Control and Vol. 2: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America and see Allen’s online “Summary of the Argument of The Invention of the White Race” (in two parts).
What is the difference between this book and “Stay, Illusion!: The Hamlet Doctrine”by the same authors, published by Pantheon in June 2013?
"If we are to resist the tyrannical expressions of religion, we have to stop believing that hostility to religion suffices to make us enlightened. Indeed uncompromising hostility to religion, however pleasurable, will only isolate intellectuals from the rest of society, especially in America. Further, we need to recognize how hostility to religion leaves intact much more serious threats to reason. Enlightenment, in the sense of a commitment to understand the world, turns out to promise us a very worldly kind of discomfort - the very opposite of the cosy theological musings of Dawkins and Harris." Dan Hind in The Threat to Reason
"As a non-believer, I want the atheist case to be made. I want religious belief to be scrutinised and challenged. I want Britain to be a genuinely secular nation, where religious belief is protected and defended as a private matter of conscience. But I feel prevented from doing so because atheism in public life has become so dominated by a particular breed that ends up dressing up bigotry as non-belief. It is a tragedy. And that is why it is so important that atheists distance themselves from those who undermine our position. Richard Dawkins can rant and rave about Muslims as much as he wants. But atheists: let's stop allowing him to do it in our name." Owen Jones in Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/not-in-our-name-dawkins-dresses-up-bigotry-as-nonbelief--he-cannot-be-left-to-represent-atheists-8754183.html
The comments seem like none of those people have ever read this book - yes, including Mr. Jones. I'm not even thirty pages in and I have learned nothing, except that the cartoon is like vaudeville, and that Felix was awesome. (I've read Felix: The Twisted Tale of the World's Most Famous Cat, and I'm sorry to say, it was a much better read than this.)
He claims to start in 1928 - and yet talks about nothing but the 19th century for a good two pages. The first chapter is a waste of pages and words.
The reason I'm bringing this up is because I'm attempting to write a book on the history of American animation. The books I have found are awful. If anyone could help me find either books pertaining to this subject or could point me in the right direction, I'd be forever indebted. I took this book from the library assuming it would be the best thing I've ever read pertaining to this subject.