Politically CorrectrnNursery Rhymesrnby Ken BoguzrnPolitical correctness may have startedrnin the universities, but it has begunrnto trickle down into other areas of Americanrnculture. I recently discovered a newrnseries of biographies for children that includesrnlives not only of George Washingtonrnand Abraham Lincoln but alsornof former Beatles guitarist John Lennon.rnI also came across a book that purports tornhelp parents locate “nonsexist readingrnmaterial” for their children—as if arn”nonsexist” tale were as hard to find as arnspotted owl or a whooping crane. I knewrnthings were really getting bad when Irnsaw that a local restaurant had renamedrnits Indian pudding “Native Americanrnpudding.” If things keep going at thisrnrate, it won’t be long before p.c. tricklesrnall the way down to nursery rhymes.rnWhen the revisionism does come,rnwhat will the new thinkers do with thernold rhymes? Will “Rub-a-Dub-Dub,rnThree Men in a Tub” be transformedrninto a gay liberation anthem? Will feministsrninsist on eliminating Peter-Peter,rnthe Pumpkin-Eater, on the grounds thatrnhe chauvinistically tries to confine hisrnwife in a pumpkin shell? Will theyrnrewrite Punch and Judy so that Judyrnstarts punching Punch back? Will theyrnchange “Old Mother Hubbard” to “Oldrn(M)-Other Hubbard,” in keeping withrnthe latest feminist orthography? Willrnthey rewrite “Jack and Jill” to illustratern”the oppression of wimmin in Amerika”?rnif so, the new version may soundrnlike this;rnJack sent JillrnOn up the hill,rnTo fetch a pail of water.rnJill fell downrnAnd tore her gown.rnWhile Jack dissolved in laughter.rnUp Jill gotrnAnd home did trotrnAs fast as she could scamperrnTo mean old Dad,rnAnd, boy, was he mad!rn”By God,” he swore, “I’ll spankrnher!”rnThen Jack came in,rnAnd he did grinrnTo see his dad oppress her.rnJack, you cad.rnYou’re just like your dad.rnYou both are sexist bastards!rnFeminists tend to be dreadfullyrnearnest, so they probably would not hesitaternto transform even the most jollyrnrhymes into dreary manifestos of genderrnsensitivity. Lewis Carroll’s “FatherrnWilliam” might be rewritten thusly:rn”You are old. Dr. William,” thernyoung girl said,rn”And your syllabus is exceedinglyrnwhite.rnYour authors are pale, & they’rernmale, & they’re dead.rnDo you think in this age it isrnright?”rnAnd little girls of the future could bernencouraged to jump rope while chanting:rnMary, Mary, quite contrary.rnHow does your essay go?rnWith language tropes, andrnFoucault quotes,rnAnd marginalized texts all in arnrow!rnWhile it is easy enough to imaginernwhat the feminists might do to nurseryrnrhymes, it is a bit more difficult to guessrnwhat deconstructionists might do.rnThere is, however, at least one nurseryrnrhyme that, when crossed with an axiomrnfrom Paul de Man, could be madernto express the deconstructionist positionrnthat all language is unstable and endlesslyrnself-referential:rnSticks and stonesrnMay break my bones.rnBut since languagernIs a vertiginous systemrnOf signs and significations.rnRather than a codifiedrnPattern of meanings.rnWords can never hurt me.rnWhen the age of sensitivity is usheredrnin, most of the old rhymes will presumablyrnhave to be ushered out, or atrnleast substantially rewritten. However, arnfew might be retained for “educational”rnpurposes. Gonsider, for instance:rnThere was an old woman whornlived in a shoe.rnShe had so many children sherndidn’t know what to do;rnShe gave them some brothrnwithout any bread;rnShe whipped them all soundlyrnand put them to bed.rnThe archaic spelling of “woman”rnin the first line would, of course, havernto be changed to the politically correctrn”wombyn,” but otherwise these coupletsrncould be used to raise consciousness.rnStudents could be made to understandrnthat these lines represent a thinly veiledrnallegorical commentary on the status ofrn”wimmin” in pre-p.c. “Amerika,” Teachersrncould explain that, in all likelihood,rnthe old wombyn was forced to live in arnshoe because ruthless conservatives cutrnfunding for low-income housing. Probablyrnshe was forced to have all of thosernchildren because reactionary extremistsrnprevented her from procuring government-rnsubsidized birth control and abortions.rnThe children, no doubt, wererncompelled to go to bed without properrnnourishment because right-wing zealotsrncut the old wombyn’s food stamps. Ofrncourse, some might argue that it wouldrnbe better if it were an old man beatingrnthe children in the last line, instead ofrnthe old wombyn. Instructors could explain,rnhowever, that the old wombynrnhad been unconsciously conditioned tornaccept such violence by the patriarchalrnsociety in which she lived.rnOn the whole, though, the old rhymesrnwould have to be rewritten or replaced.rnIn place of the old alphabet rhymes therernwould be new ones, such as:rn”C” is for condoms, which wernkeep in our pants.rn”D” is for Derrida, who came herernfrom France . . .rnFinally, given the modern obsession withrnsex and sexual paraphernalia, it might bernappropriate to change “Hot Cross Buns”rnto:rnCheap Condoms!rnCheap Condoms!rnOne a penny, two a penny.rnCheap condoms!rnIf your daughters do not likernthem.rnGive them to your sons.rnCheap Condoms!rnOh, brave new world!rnKen Boguz is the pen name of arndisgruntled English graduate student.rn48/CHRONICLESrnrnrn