Why is children's literature able deal with more mature and darker themes than children's cartoons? Heck...

Why is children's literature able deal with more mature and darker themes than children's cartoons? Heck, even animated films are often able to delve on topics in a slightly more complicated manner than TV series. The "it's a cartoon" excuse seems to exclusively apply to TV shows.

Because cartoons have their roots and continue to exist solely to push merchandise on impressionable children

Because literature has fewer restrictions in general, and with music is one of the only commercial industries where creative freedom still shines through on all levels (inb4 "music this generation sucks"), primarily owing to the lower barrier for entry.

Cartoons have more money tied-up in them. Because of that, they can't afford to take risks or appeal to niche audiences.

>they can't afford to take risks
Why does Disney have Scar get eaten alive but stops Alex Hirsch from writing a short about Mabel visiting a prison to cheer the inmates up?

This.

Not so much this. Literature and music is flooded with pop garbage and always has been.

Because it's easier for parents to be offended over a 10 minutes cartoon episode than to be offended over a 300+ pages books.

Because your mom couldn't walk in on and overhear out of context the part with Scout asking her dad what the word rape meant when you read To Kill A Mockingbird, but she could walk in on you watching it on tv.

>What is Harry Potter

there's like a 20+ year difference between those two things user

Literature doesn't really have shit like network restrictions or a group of censors or whatever to approve each episode (chapter?). It doesn't even really have age restrictions in the vein of TV ratings in the sense that a kid could get possibly get away with checking out an adult book from the library but not so much walk into an R-rated movie alone.

That's not to say authors aren't asked at times to change or censor their work to better appeal to their audience, as they absolutely are, but it's not really as regulated as something like trying to fit within a Y7 children's cartoon regulation or whatever.

Only because they talked about it on TV. They didn't read it, only heard on TV that it was a story of wizard and thus satanic.

Hiro wanting to kill the teacher guy with Baymax and being consumed by revenge, then.

Because they weren't childrens books.

because books are more respected

It really depends on which books you're talking about. There are and have been books that are definitely targeted towards children. And plenty do contain material that probably wouldn't be allowed on a cartoon.

The kinda people who get butthurt at television content aren't the same people capable of the effort to read a book.

Because prisoners deserve to be tortured, not consoled. It says so right there in the constitution.

Every kids' book you remember was written by some British fucker who lived through WWII bombing.

I think it's exactly this

I swear to god, I thought your image was the cover of "The Velveteen Rabbit".
That's always a good one when you need a good hurt/feel-good cry.