This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article focusses on the 1907 version of the stories by Bryant, which does seem to have been pretty racist (I've not seen it, but googled a couple of illustrations - aweful!) But the stories themselves originate in the black community, and therefore can't be racist per se. I have the version by Eve Merriam, which is relatively harmless, though still by a white author. We need a rather more differentiating account here; and possibly the article should just be called "Epaminondas (folk tales)", with sections on original stories, the Bryant version, the Merriam version, etc. --Doric Loon (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed; it's a little disconcerting that both this article and that of Constance Egan have existed for over a decade, each presenting this notion of her writings having been problematic and offensive, and never reworked to give sources or a more balanced appraisal in line with your points above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.64.232 (talk) 21:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, well two years on that suggestion hasn't attracted a lot of attention, but the one IP user who commented agrees, so I will make the move now, and make a first start on the content shortly. Doric Loon (talk) 19:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]