Since Sarah Baartman, black female woman continues to be highlighted in the media. My Blackness in Pop Culture class had many discussions last year about our culture’s current obsession with Nicki Minaj and Kim Kardashian, women often famous for their larger bottom halves. By brining attention to their bodies, are Nicki and Kim serving as role models for positive body image, or are they continuing a prejudiced stereotype of the black female body?
I asked this question again when reading Jackie Ormes comics. I was struck by the number of images of Torchy nude, or nearly nude. How was it alright for Torchy to be seen without clothing, but in other comics, even a cleavage line was considered inappropriate?
The two snippets above were created before the 1954 Comics Code Authority, so this could give reason behind the near nudity. Maybe other comics written at the same time that we have not read in this class had just as much revealed skin as in Ormes's comics. It could also be that maybe censorship was not as strict in the lesser known publications such as the ones in which Ormes’s comics were featured, as censorship was in mainstream magazines and newspapers. Even so, I found it surprising that a black female cartoonist would include images of a nude woman in her comics. The images do not seem to be included in order to show body acceptance or appreciation. In both of the above cases, the inclusion of nudity does not seem necessary. I believe the same message of Torchy running late, or the message of Torchy’s beauty could have been shown with clothes on. Why have her undressed? I wonder if this was a method to lure in more readers, particularly male readers. What is your opinion? Do you think there is a reason behind Ormes’s decision to include these near nude images? Am I being too prude and PC?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.