Wednesday, October 7, 2015

I thought formulas were for math

So I will say upfront that this blog post is more about the comics code authority than the actual SuspenStories we read for this week. In case you were interested, I was regrettably underwhelmed with the individual stories that comprised the publication. As I have mentioned before in previous blog posts, I am a diaogue-ophile. I love witty conversations, plot and character development and well crafted storytelling, and SuspenStories was the complete opposite. There was a very clear formula to the so-called suspenseful stories: the exposition is rushed, flat characters are introduced, a conflict is outlined, ending with a final panel(s) that features some kind of deus ex machina/twist ending paired with a comically over-dramatized line or panel that exhibits a character's demise. The novelty of this formula wore off in a matter of minutes, and I quickly found myself rapidly skimming, trying to predict the resolution of each story like a an episode of scooby-doo.


But in regards to the ongoing conversation on the comics code authority, it was very surprising to see the degree of censorship that this regulatory agency had on free speech. I was under the impression that our society today is very conservative, but it seems as though there was no problem forcing publications to tone down their content, something that would be unheard of today. But here is my question... where are the parents in this whole equation. I understand that society should not want latch-key kids swapping torture techniques they read in a comic book, but wouldn't the purchase of books be at least moderately overseen by the parents of small children? If my child asked me for a dime to buy a comic, I would undoubtedly accompany them to make sure they aren't being irresponsible. I think that, as usual, there was a fad (anti-comics) that the media effectively perpetrated for their bottom line. The same way baseless accusations were made about vaccines causing autism (admittedly, an extreme example), or video games creating the next deranged mass campus killing perpetrator, so too were comics condemned. Above all else, I think that the comics code authority stifled creativity and was an unnecessary impediment to the dissemination of comics. As much as I empathize for the little old lady reading every single DC comic and giving it her stamp of approval, contemporary mainstream comics is liberated by the death of the CCA.    

1 comment:

  1. I think you're right that the death of the CCA has led comics to become more wide-reaching in terms of audience and content, but I also wonder if the impetus to push boundaries would have existed if there were never any boundaries to begin with. Comic artists who participated in the Golden Age were artists, but they were also celebrities and salesmen. They sold their strip and got rich creating characters the whole country would recognize, and continued their creations to keep the public entertained and their pockets full. So from this angle the comic looks more like a consumer good than an art form, and I believe that the CCA helped change this perspective. When you have creatives deriding and lashing out against a set of rules, the public cannot help but see that their is something more human and essential at the heart of a 'good,' which I believe helps classify it as art. Without the CCA, we may still live in a world where comics refuse to push boundaries in order to keep their sales. I believe that the CCA provided an opportunity for rebellion and experimentation, two things essential to developing worth-while comics and graphic novels the world over can enjoy.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.