The trailer for The Magic School Bus Rides Again dropped, you can see it here, and a common sentiment I'm seeing in response is "Netflix has ruined my childhood." I think this statement requires a lot of unpacking to even get to a point where it is reasonable, and it still doesn't apply to this show anyway. First off, I get that they mean "ruined a favorite thing from my childhood" not literally "suddenly my childhood, which previously was fairly happy and a decent upbringing, is now one filled with sorrow and abuse." I get that. Let's not have the "it's a metaphor" argument. But I really want to look at what "ruining my childhood" means, because I absolutely think it is possible. However, what you probably mean is "I was the target audience 20 years ago and now I'm not anymore, and I'm misdirecting my fear of death towards a children's show getting a sequel." Bam! Children's show to existential crisis in under 160 words, that's gotta be some kind of record, right?
So the first thing you have to overcome in order to ruin something from 20 years ago is the fact that the thing already exists and is unchanged. Unless you're George Lucas, generally nobody is going back and literally changing the thing, and even then, the original releases of Star Wars still exist and you can still enjoy them. However, just because the text itself still exists, the subtext can be changed dramatically and this can definitely retroactively ruin things. But before we get into negative examples, lets look at some positive ones. How has re-contextualization made things better?
I think the most prominent example in recent pop culture is in Harry Potter, specifically Snape's whole story. While you could argue that since the whole story was built with Snape's background in mind, it doesn't really apply here, it is a good example of how a more recent work can completely change previous ones. Before book seven, Snape goes from being a dick to being an outright baddie. Sure, he's got depth and isn't always on the wrong side of things (he famously did not get along with Umbridge), but all of that seems to stem from his innate dickishness (He doesn't like Umbridge because she took the position he was after). But after the reveal about how James Potter treated him, what he was doing with Dumbledore, and most importantly, his feelings for Lily Potter, the way Snape treats Harry takes on a whole new dimension. Snape's actions in the new context change the way we see his every interaction. Rereading book one is a different experience after that. This whole idea of re-contextualization is the one argument for how crazy people get about spoilers that I agree with, by the way. The fact that Character X gets killed in three episodes doesn't change things for me, but the fact that the murderer is a close friend who has been plotting this murder for months does.
So how does this fit in with ruining a childhood? Well, imagine if Snape's backstory wasn't a key plot point of book seven, but comes out in 20 years in a Harry Potter tie in novel by someone else. Or worse yet, imagine if that book reveals that Snape never met Lily Potter, but Dumbledore had Gilderoy use his memory magic on Snape to make him think he was in love with her. Then Dumbledore arranged for Gilderoy to be obliviated too much to cover it up. Think of how much that changes everything again, and how that changes everything Dumbledore did in the books. If that's not a character decision you get behind, then yes, you could argue that this book "ruined your childhood." That totally makes sense to me, I'd probably be pretty angry too.
But to get to that point, a lot of changes happening to Magic School Bus are not this. For one, Magic School Bus isn't about the story, it's a framing device for teaching kids about science. The kids aren't really characters, they're just a diverse bunch of kids* meant to give the audience, also kids, someone to identify with and think "I can also learn about science!" and Arnold. Wishbone never explored the deeper implications of what a world would be like if all dogs are well read, or the inevitable canine uprising once dogs read some Jack London. Because it's not a show about a world in which dogs love literature. It's a show about literature and exposing children to it that happens to have a dog as a framing device. Just like the Magic School Bus, a show about science, never really addresses the fact that they live in a world where magic is real. They do laughingly play off how dangerous, silly the concept is. Arnold dies because he takes his helmet off in space in like the first episode and is brought back. This doesn't kick off a PTSD story arch for all the kids in Ms. Frizzle's class, because, and I can't say this enough, it isn't a show about that.
Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that there are people who really treat the show as more akin to "X-Men", "Transformers" and, I don't know, "Game of Thrones" instead of "Mister Rogers", "Wishbone", and "Dora the Explorer". That these people care deeply about Magic School Bus canon, and whether or not the one kid grew up to be a doctor or something? I'm having a really hard time putting this lens on, but lets go with it. How does the new show ruin the original? A sequel with a different art style doesn't really change anything about the original work, neither does introducing new kids or a new teacher. That's like saying that somehow "The Batman" cartoon changes how you feel about "Batman: The Animated Series." The two shows are a world different, and nothing I see in "The Batman" will change how good TAS was.
A big complaint I hear about the show is the new animation style. I don't think it looks much worse than the original show, just different. It's the style now. If you've ever looked at Monet's Water Lilies and wondered "How could something this beautiful cause riots and make people angry," well, now you know. All the people who grew up on Ruysch's Flowers in a Vase were like "Impressionists are RUINING MY CHILDHOOD. VAN GOGH ISN"T CANON!!!!111!!!" If they did a new Wishbone series that was animated instead of live action, or maybe had a different dog (like a Corgi) hosting, would that ruin the original show? Or would that just be a sequel show? We can just make new things, even things that are spin offs of old shows, without the old show suddenly being ruined.
They could ruin the original Magic School Bus. There could be a flashback to how Ms. Frizzle was brought up in a fundamentalist family and denied science before having some sort of turn or whatever. Some heavy handed attempt to try to give her narrative weight or something. Or she's a witch, Liz is her familiar and the Bus is a Dark God giving her powers, obviously. Boy, would that change the original show. Field trips are less an educational experience and more a crucible to weed out the weak children so only the strongest and smartest are sacrificed to The Nameless Yellow, The Bus of Madness.
My point is that a sequel has a very difficult time ruining the original. The worst episodes of Star Trek Voyager do not really change my opinion of Next Gen or DS9. It's when you start messing around with prequels or "X was actually Y the whole time" that things get messy and very different. Hell, "Battlestar Galactica" managed to have the main twist be "The weird, mystical being that claims to be an angel was a weird, mystical angel the whole time, you just didn't believe me" and people were upset about ruining the show. So, from watching the Magical School Bus Rides Again trailer, here's what we know: the style is different and the target is a young audience. It isn't a gritty reboot, it isn't taking a beloved childhood show and trying to target the original audience that is all grown up now. If you want that, you can watch Michael Bay's "Transformers" and "TMNT" movies, to see how great those things turned out. It's a sequel to a good kids' show aimed at kids, and a new generation will love them. You're perfectly fine not liking it, you're well within your rights not to watch, hell, you can even complain about it if it does things poorly. But don't say it ruined your childhood or the original, because the original still exists and you still have that. Engage with the new thing in the proper context. Don't become the "well in my day..." type. Because as much as you struggle against the current, beating on ceaselessly into the past, you're being carried into a future. A future where something special and educational for you is being reimagined as something special and educational for the next generation. We might have a better future than past, celebrate it.
*And lets take a moment to shame all the people out there complaining about how the new show is too diverse and SJW-y. The original show was just as diverse and that's a good thing.
