As a community and an industry, we are desperately trying to prove that “Comics aren’t just for kids anymore!” Whenever the mainstream media starts talking about a comic book, its usually how they lead the story. We tout famous books like Sandman and Watchmen (rather than Maus and The Neighborhood) to our non-comics-reading friends as proof of the versatility and maturity of the medium.
Its not just us trying to prove ourselves to outsiders. We’re trying to prove ourselves to each other. The superhero books we read, leftovers from decades clutching the apron strings of the CCA-Nanny, are struggling to grow up and lose the trappings of childhood. With the Nanny gone (or at least too old and senile to babysit effectively), the writers and artists have tools that they are using as shorthand for “maturity.” Violence and sexual situations and sexualized violence and strong language have been increasing steadily for decades.
Of course, if you’re reading this website, you already knew that. Better writers than me have decried this, and better writers than me are actively using these “mature” tropes to good and bad effect in their stories. Chances are if you’re reading this site, you’ve already taken a side in the great “Maturity, Censorship, and Decency in Comics” debate.
As that debate is going on, both sides are killing the concurrent debate on social issues in comics.
Here’s an example of how it works. A young lady, a huge fan of Supergirl, reads an issue of Supergirl where the main character is drawn in suggestive poses, poorly characterized, and romantically linked to a much older man. She writes a post expressing her concerns on the artist’s message board, pointing out how the art sacrifices storytelling in favor of sexualization, and how a few brief panels meant to pass as characterization just seem like rationalization for the excessively skimpy new outfit. She logs back on the next day to find the thread is filled with Wertham references because the first reply to her post accused her of wanting to reinstate the Comics Code.
It becomes a sore spot, and she brings it up in another thread. Only this time, our Supergirl Fan has an unlikely ally. “Won’t Someone Please Think of the Children?” Man. He’s generally unpopular on the board, because he believes that there should be no blood, no gay relationships, and no sexuality in comic books. But he’s now using her arguments to support his own argument.
The end result is that she can’t get a decent discussion on the portrayal of Supergirl going because on one side she has people freaking out about the spectre of censorship, and on the other she has people wanting to reinstate Draconian censorship disrupting the conversation. She doesn’t want to leave and hold the conversation elsewhere, because this message board is on the artist’s website and she wants his ear. But he can’t listen to her because she’s being shouted down by the other posters in the censorship debate.
For other cases, consider the poster worried about offensive images of black people in imported Manga, or the poster who wants to see two gay men in a relationship in a superhero comic. Such posts cause much the same argument. Instead of discussing racism or homophobia, we end up discussing censorship and artistic freedom.
So, for future reference and to prevent such derailments, let me let you in on a little secret. Nobody who wants to see real diversity in any medium wants to support censorship.
And that’s not a “No True Lantern” argument. Its strategic thinking.
Censorship hurts us here. It encourages lazy writing. It prevents people from thinking about other people’s situations. It is the opposite of sensitivity. Censorship is when you decline to show something because you will get in trouble if you do. Sensitivity is when you decline to show something because it will make other people uncomfortable. Censorship keeps you thinking of yourself as a person, while sensitivity has you thinking of the other as a person.
Since one of the major problems (if not The Major Problem) with the portrayal of female, minority, and LGBT characters is not thinking of them as people but rather as objects, quotas and plot points, this is a big difference.
In order to have a truly diverse range of characters who reflect the makeup of the population, you cannot have creators relying on cultural cliches and ingrained stereotypes as shortcuts. You need the creators to actually think about who they are creating, and understand basic identity politics. If they understand the complexity and scope of sexual assault in our society, how unoriginal an idea it is, and how dreadful it is to read, they won’t bother with the hackneyed rape origin story for the female character. They won’t make that Asian superhero with cultural powers they had the idea for, because they’d understand it’s tired and it’s insulting to potential readers.
For that to happen, we need to have the conversation. We need an environment where the writers will actually try to use a different kind of person as the hero, rather than one where they go with the plain white male because they don’t want to risk the rules. We need for comic book creators to be thinking of these things.
So censorship is bad as applied to creators.
Critique, however, is a good thing. Even though I personally don’t wish to censor a creator, I reserve the right to analyze, criticize, complain, demand, and generally make a pest of myself when I see something offensive in a book I’m reading. I don’t want their bosses to make a rule that stops them from offending me. I want to make them think so they will stop themselves from offending me.
This brings me back to my opening paragraph, about us desperately trying to prove that comics aren’t for kids. When offensive images and storylines are examined, the idea that comics aren’t being read by kids often comes up in the defense, especially when discussing sexuality and sexualized violence. On one side, people argue that such things are necessary for a mature story, and that anyone who doesn’t want to read about them should go back to Care Bears and My Little Pony (which I suggest because they may be the only properties from my childhood that haven’t been updated for adults yet). On the other side, people who actually should stick with Care Bears and My Little Pony insist that comics should be for kids, and quote your arguments in favor of the white-washing of superhero comics and the reinstatement of the Comics Code.
In the meantime, the companies and creators continue to churn out so-called mature storylines that have all of the offensive material, ingrained stereotypes, cultural cliches, and a extra-slathering of graphic violence and sex to even the whole mess out. They do this to market for adults. They know adults are reading, and they figure this is what adults want.
Well, in this debate I have taken a side. I am an adult. I read comics. I’d like for children to read them, but I’d also like for all books to have content for adults. This is not the same as “Adult Content.”
“Adult content” generally means graphic violence, sexualized violence, dirty jokes and graphic sex (though these have their place) slathered on an insubstantial and meaningless storyline.
Content for adults generally means a decent story with well-developed characters and interesting events. This can be light-hearted and fun, heavy-hearted and engaging, and often unsettling or disturbing. Creators who make content for adults consider the purpose of their audience, and make a product appropriate for that purpose without alienating potential members of that audience. They offer an escape from reality (superheroes, science fiction, fantasy) while still reflecting enough of reality (the characters) to make it relatable. It can have adult content, but that’s not what makes it for adults.
Content for adults is virtually impossible to create when you have a censor filtering out all adult content, because censorship encourages lazy art and writing. Content for adults can only be made by a thinking creator.
We all know adults read comics. Its time to stop pretending and actually make comics for adults.
April 27th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Well, you may be preaching to the choir a bit here, Lisa. At least so far as the general thrust of your concerns – we do need creators who are willing to forego Adult Content in place of Adult Comics. However, I think there’s a few key roadblocks in seeing that become a reality:
1) Creators have to be up to the challenge. I’m not pointing fingers or saying that the folks who work for the majors aren’t capable of creating truly mature works, but it takes a lot of craft and skill to write engaging, mature stories. Add in the fact that you’re trying to do it within the confines of the superhero genre, and you really are throwing down the gauntlet. Not every writer has the chops, which may be why their stories ‘need’ sex and violence. Without the more visceral lures, they would have to rely on character and story, and we might truly see the emperor has no clothes.
Alan Moore has been quoted as saying that many creators took the wrong lessons from “Watchmen” and Miller’s “Dark Knight Returns,” and one would be hard pressed to disagree with him. Instead of trying to tell increasing complex stories using increasingly mature techniques and approaches, many folks simply upped the ante with the more taboo aspects of the aforementioned works. I really believe this has more to do with the shortcomings of the respective creators as much as a readership that might be drawn to gratuitous subject matter and art. However, that does bring me to the next point:
2) Sales. OK, let’s look at this realistically. Manga has pretty much proven that there are audiences for just about every kind of story under the sun. Some are soaps, some are thrillers, some are fight stories, and some are sci-fi. Every genre has its audience, and they like their genres. The audience that reads superhero books LIKE superhero books, and they like them just the way there are, thank you very much. The problem is, as much as they might like superhero stories, they’ve read so many of the damn things that unless you pump up the volume, so to speak, you risk losing sales. A little sensationalism can bring in readers who are otherwise bored with standard, generic superhero fare. I mean, what makes the headlines around here, Daredevil punches Kingpin or Daredevil runs over Kingpin with a Semi (hmmm)? What gets people to pick up books they’ve stopped reading years ago? Sensationalism. Shocking developments. That’s what gets people talking around the comic shop. That talk turns into sales. And it’s safe. Sure, having Superboy knock someone’s head off is gross and shocking, but it’s still just Superboy punching someone – that’s what he does. That’s what they all do, in the end. They punch people. It’s not Superboy tackling serious social issues or getting involved in a story that violates the appeal of the genre. Which begs the question – do readers want adult content? Yes, we love the Dark Knight Returns, but how many of us love it because it’s mature, and how many of us love it because it “kicks ass”?
3) Which brings us to the last big roadblock – the medium is a niche market, and that means that what goes on between the pages doesn’t matter to most people. Unless some horrible act of violence is attributed to comics, most people are content to let comics and their content live in the proverbial gutter. And a lot of creators like it that way – as you said before, it’s the lack of censorship that draws a lot of comics creators to the field. Unfortunately, it also means that many can get away with unchallenging work that relies on sex and violence to bring in a jaded readership. There is no mainstream accountability – just sales. Meager sales, in the big picture, to be sure but for an industry that’s always a couple of bad years away from disappearing, every sale counts. As long as folks buy it, publishers will print it. And that means that they’ll hire people who can deliver product and readers.
I know that there are many sides to the arguments I put forth above. Hell, this topic has been done to death, as you said. Still, I think it’s still a relevant topic, as evidenced by the fact that we’re still talking about it. There isn’t one solution – telling creators to just write better comics isn’t going to make anything happen. There are a whole lot of shifts that need to occur – creatively and in the readership. And, frankly, I’m not sure the majority of superhero comic readers care enough to make that happen.
April 27th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
well said, and lord knows this is a big sore spot for me right now. i’ve always come down against censorship, but there’s a very big difference between complaining about something stupid and tasteless and preventing people from creating stupid and tasteless things in the first place.
i grew up on horror films (which i don’t recommend, by the way, but there it is), so i don’t have a problem watching bloodshed per se. but if i’m happily watching friends or something and suddenly there’s santa claus shooting someone in the face with a graphic exit-wound splatter, i think you know, there’s a time and a place for something like that, and this really isn’t it. yeah, it upsets me, and yeah, part of that is that these are my childhood icons they’re drenching in gore. i don’t mind, say, green lantern taking on actual mature topics. (and you know what? that was being done pretty darned well back in the ’70s.) what i mind is immature sensationalism that screws up characters that are important to people for no good reason. a lot of good art is difficult and sometimes hard to look at, but that doesn’t mean i’m going to rivet my attention to everything disgusting that they throw at me hoping that in the end i’m going to get something out of it. most of the time, horrible things are simply horrible.
the lesson i take from the fact that kids don’t read comics anymore is not that it’s a good opportunity for more brain splatter on billy batson’s shirt. i just think it would be nice if, like you say, comics took the opportunity to engage my adult brain a little more, rather than making a beeline for my caveman id.
i think fans are just doing their job when they kvetch about what they don’t like and squee about what they like. it’s positive reinforcement, our way of saying, yes, more of that, please or oh, for chrissake, enough with the women in refrigerators already. yeah, a lot of the dialogue is polarized and unhelpful in itself, but if it stimulates debate i think that’s all to the good. and if the comics powers-that-be do eventually say uh-oh, we’d better knock that off, that’s not censorship either. that’s just editors doing their job. not for nothing is a lot of the fist-shaking currently aimed at dan didio, after all.
April 27th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Interesting article. Thanks!
April 27th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
“Censorship hurts us here. It encourages lazy writing. It prevents people from thinking about other people’s situations. It is the opposite of sensitivity.”
All too true. When the Authority “dared” to have two gay characters in a mature and realistic relationship, people freaked. One message board I was on at the time totally lost it, with posters calling for the book’s cancellation and Warren Ellis’ head on a pike. “I don’t want my child exposed to this kind of (homosexual) filth” someone wrote, yet seemed to have no problem with the sex and violence in it.
Censorship does lead to lazy writing. Creators walk on eggshells with their stories, publishers worry about offending people, retalors don’t want controversy, etc. So they play it safe, recycle hokey storylines and hope that’s enough. The label “comics are for kids” will always stick because the public still sees comics as juvenile and silly. Movies grew up (R.I.P. Jack Valenti), television grew up, video games grew up (somewhat). Why can’t comics?
April 27th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
I’ve been kvetching about this for a while, but I’d also argue that when a comics company (Marvel, in this case) has a ratings system that they brand their comics with, they need to stick with it. Certainly there is a market for every type of comic, and I’m not advocating that ALL comics should toe any particular line. But when you label a comic as OK for ages “9 and up” (The “A” rating from Marvel, which is NOT “All-Ages”) it should actually be something that would suitable for a 9 year old. Granted definitions vary, but you’d think that suggestive cheesecake, adult sexual themes and realistically gory violence would be unacceptable.
April 27th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
I wonder how much of this actually has to do with a readership that desperately wants to avoid any thought of reading “kid’s stuff”, so they demand the gore and the grimness and the weird Benny Hill-esque sexuality (which stops short of actual nudity and sex because the Big Two still want to put the characters on lunchboxes.)
April 27th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Great article, and an equally salient reply about Marvel not sticking to its own rating system, which is especially idiotic because it’s their own rating system, that they themselves created, and not some sort of Wertham-esque external control mechanism that’s being imposed upon them. Then again, this is the same Marvel that’s consistently demonstrated a pathological inability to meet the publishing schedules that they themselves decide upon, so I suppose this behavior is pretty much par for the course.
It’s terribly unfashionable to advocate any measure of self-discipline these days, but on some level, no matter how brilliantly creative everyone else might well be (even though, most of the time, most of them aren’t really), somebody has to be the Jim Shooter Iron Hand Uber Alles, who suggests things like, you know, maybe it’s not such a hot idea to publish a story that shows Peter Parker killing Mary Jane with his Radioactive Spider-Sperm, right on the eve of the latest big-budget movie in the character’s film franchise (especially if the rest of the story is nothing more than a Grade-Z retread of The Dark Knight Returns, remixed with crass bits of “Remember 9/11!” imagery and blatantly ripped-off pieces from Watchmen).
April 27th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
I really can’t think of anything I disagree with in this.
I’ve been struggling with similar issues regarding both the portrayal of rape in comics and the role of editors and publishers as potential censors. In both cases, there’s a think and tricky line between criticism, editing, and censorship, and I’m really glad to see it examined more closely. Thank you!
April 27th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
On a slightly more serious note: if you want to have the discussions you’re talking about, you need to find a place with less idiots, preferably with some radical moderation of bullshit and those bringing it to the table. To my knowledge, such a place doesn’t exist. (The Engine might have been, but IMHO clearly isn’t.) Until it is created, you’re stuck with sporadic and local exceptions like this thread. Thanks for that.
April 29th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Thanks for this lisa
October 22nd, 2007 at 7:43 pm
This pretty much says it all- you try to have a mature discussion about issues and you end up with hysteria and off-topic nonsense. My favorite iteration of this is when two opposing viewpoints go at it relentlessly… which invariably turns into each person over-explaining their talking points… which turns into “you-said-I-didn-t-say”… which turns into insults.