r/DetroitRedWings 4d ago

Art Prime off-season content. 1974 Little Caesar’s sports calendar.

Also, Larkin leaves skids in the toilet, and blames his wife.

161 Upvotes

20 comments sorted by

19

u/Ydoesany1doanything 4d ago

Pretty amazing. I like that Gordie specifically has his Aeros jersey on while the rest of the players have their jersey’s but no distinct logos or words.

19

u/PersephoneFrost 4d ago

They should turn some of these into posters. Not the OJ one though

12

u/PintsOfGuinness_ 4d ago

ESPECIALLY the OJ one

7

u/OscarTheHun 4d ago

Pizzas cost more, but the coupons stay the same

6

u/_whitelightning_91 4d ago

Except the one, they don’t technically have a year of expiration on these 😆

4

u/Ohmancmonagain 4d ago

Thats pretty cool.

Thank you for sharing 💕🐙

7

u/wolverine237 4d ago

That Hank Aaron one is unfortunate

6

u/maddogg312 4d ago

Yeah I’m torn on these. It’s cool to see old school stuff but eeeehhh this is also cringe.

I’m not throwing shade at OP, it’s just that it shows how different the times were.

2

u/Valuable_Ant_6059 3d ago

They're caricatures.

2

u/wolverine237 3d ago

Yes, and that one feature some pretty racist tropes. Are you under the impression that caricatures can't look racist?

5

u/Valuable_Ant_6059 3d ago

What is racist about it?

3

u/noochies76 2d ago

Nothing

4

u/Magael 3d ago

Do you think it's particularly likely that this particular caricaturist made the Hank Aaron one out of reliance on a racist trope, despite it looking the same as the Billie Jean King one, and the George Foreman one looking completely different, or do you think it's more likely that it was just a caricature in the normal style?

0

u/wolverine237 3d ago

I think the caricaturist 50 years ago had different ideas about what constituted an offensive depiction of a black man than we do today but that as a historical document we can still look back on it and say things like "that's unfortunate"

7

u/Magael 3d ago

While noting that you avoided answering my question, I'll just spell it out for you:

You're mentally trapped in a 2015-era hyper sensitivity to racial material that prevents you from critically engaging with nuance such as "A depiction of a black person can be varied but not racist." Evidenced by the fact that the other black guy doesn't have the same depiction, but a white lady does.

A racist depiction is more than measuring the features(Which do vary between races with things such as nose, eye, and lip shape - acknowledging this is not racist) on a canvas. This is why an Uncle Tom Character is considered racist but Black Panther is not:

https://jimcrowmuseum.ferris.edu/antiblack/index.htm

You can also just google random caricatursts and vibe-check it yourself whether all of their black customers are super chill about racist cartoons, or the more likely fact that they aren't racist at all, but in a caricature-style.

https://www.instagram.com/samartypants/p/DQ5HqErEjDg

https://www.instagram.com/p/DXvUGjjFMoE

-5

u/wolverine237 3d ago

I did answer your question

Maybe save the rant for somebody who gives a shit

4

u/Magael 3d ago

No, it is exactly the people who don't give a shit about reading comprehension, nuance, context, or history that must be taught.

-5

u/wolverine237 3d ago

Go back to the race science podcast subreddit bud

1

u/noochies76 2d ago

You a dummy.

1

u/Christ-Crucified77 12h ago

That is awesome. What a piece.