The guy that caused the comics code...lied

[Sundancer]

http://io9.com/5985199/how-one-mans-lies-almost-destroyed-the-comics-industry

 

[redmarvel]

One thing the comics code did - it forced big name comics to try to make comics that anyone could read without being offended.

Trying to find a comic you can read with a child that isn't offensive but is still intereing would have been far more difficult without the Comics Code.

For those of you with small children, I recommend that you try to acquire the earlier issues of Marvel's "Power Pack" (unfortunately it eventually got darker too).

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Bull. There was nothing good about the CCA. It was a product of unfounded fear-mongering and it almost destroyed the comic industry (and effectively neutered it for a decade after, while killing off great books like EC's horror line, or turning Batman into unreadable camp).

Comics have recovered now from the CCA's regime of censorship (mostly because the CCA is practically dead now), but it took decades.

It's crazy to think you have the CCA to thank for kid-friendly comics. If the CCA never existed, you'd still have comics you could read with your kids. They did have Disney comics in the '40s you know.

 

[SuperFerret]

Uh... yeah. It's been known that Wertham was a damn liar for a while now. As for the CCA, I have mixed feelings about it. Yes, it nearly killed the medium as a whole, but it also paved the way for superheroes to become as popular as they are now (although that may not be the best thing in some people's eyes either).

 

[Sundancer]

or turning Batman into unreadable camp).
.

Batman was fairly campy long before the code. I don't think he really got dark until I think the 70's. His pre-Robin stories are dark but they're aren't many of those.

 

[SuperFerret]

Also, the camp isn't unreadable. It's not modern storytelling, but it's not unreadable.

 

[redmarvel]

Bull. There was nothing good about the CCA. It was a product of unfounded fear-mongering and it almost destroyed the comic industry (and effectively neutered it for a decade after, while killing off great books like EC's horror line, or turning Batman into unreadable camp).

Comics have recovered now from the CCA's regime of censorship (mostly because the CCA is practically dead now), but it took decades.

It's crazy to think you have the CCA to thank for kid-friendly comics. If the CCA never existed, you'd still have comics you could read with your kids. They did have Disney comics in the '40s you know.

I've tried reading the Disney comics. They don't have good story lines. They don't have continuity from one comic to another. They are pure pablum for the mind.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

I've tried reading the Disney comics. They don't have good story lines. They don't have continuity from one comic to another. They are pure pablum for the mind.

That's besides the point. My point was you'd still be able to have kid-friendly comics if the CCA had never come into existence. Do you really think huge businesses like Marvel and DC would exclude a huge slice of the market by neglecting PG or G rated books aimed at kids? No, of course not.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Also, the camp isn't unreadable. It's not modern storytelling, but it's not unreadable.

Yeeeeaaaaaaaah.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[redmarvel]

That's besides the point. My point was you'd still be able to have kid-friendly comics if the CCA had never come into existence. Do you really think huge businesses like Marvel and DC would exclude a huge slice of the market by neglecting PG or G rated books aimed at kids? No, of course not.

So... before the CCA, how many "kid friendly" comic titles did Marvel / DC / or any other comic company put out that were truly "readable". Remember, if you don't enjoy reading it, your kid probably won't either.

I don't believe in talking down to kids. Adult vocabulary should be used in the comics, if we want the kids to learn to read properly. So, WB fails with the Wascally Wabbit and I taut I taw a putty tat.

Writers should be able to write a good story without blood, gore, swearing and sex appearing on the page. It can happen "behind the scenes", as it does in some of the better movies. If all a story has going for it is "explicit violence & language" then it probably isn't a very good story in the first place.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

So... before the CCA, how many "kid friendly" comic titles did Marvel / DC / or any other comic company put out that were truly "readable". Remember, if you don't enjoy reading it, your kid probably won't either.

I don't believe in talking down to kids. Adult vocabulary should be used in the comics, if we want the kids to learn to read properly. So, WB fails with the Wascally Wabbit and I taut I taw a putty tat.

Writers should be able to write a good story without blood, gore, swearing and sex appearing on the page. It can happen "behind the scenes", as it does in some of the better movies. If all a story has going for it is "explicit violence & language" then it probably isn't a very good story in the first place.

Let me put this more simply; I think there'd be a 'Powerpack' with or without the CCA.

I also don't believe in watering down mature content in order to appeal to all ages. Yes, good stories can happen without blood and sex. But what would Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen be like if they'd been CCA'ed for an all-ages audience? Sorry, but your comments seem a bit prudish. A lot of us enjoy our mature entertainment. Stories aimed at kids, and stories aimed at adults can co-exist. They shouldn't have to be one and the same, as you believe.

 

[Roadkill]

What are you talking about? Without the Comics Code we would not have experienced the sheer awesomeness of the Legion of Super-Pets. Imagine a world without Beppo the Super Monkey! t:

 

[redmarvel]

You're not getting my point. The CCA may not be needed anymore and I will grant that there should be comics with mature content now.

However, back then, the CCA were needed, at least for a while, to give the major comic distributors a good shake and remind them that their comics needed to cater to a larger audience.

Now (hopefully) they will continue to produce a variety of types of comics and clearly label the comics (the way movies are labeled) to allow parents to easily buy the titles that are appropriate for their kids. Also (hopefully) they'll remember that crude and/or distrubing content is not needed to make a comic that adults enjoy.

 

[Par Avion]

You're not getting my point. The CCA may not be needed anymore and I will grant that there should be comics with mature content now.

However, back then, the CCA were needed, at least for a while, to give the major comic distributors a good shake and remind them that their comics needed to cater to a larger audience.

Now (hopefully) they will continue to produce a variety of types of comics and clearly label the comics (the way movies are labeled) to allow parents to easily buy the titles that are appropriate for their kids. Also (hopefully) they'll remember that crude and/or distrubing content is not needed to make a comic that adults enjoy.

Basically, you're saying that the comics code was, perhaps a blessing in disguise that the industry has long since outgrown. We often think of the comics code as restrictive (and it was), but perhaps it forced (for lack of a better word) more creative solutions that allowed for a more "easily accessible" product, that in turn allowed for a more widespread readership.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

You're not getting my point. The CCA may not be needed anymore and I will grant that there should be comics with mature content now.

However, back then, the CCA were needed, at least for a while, to give the major comic distributors a good shake and remind them that their comics needed to cater to a larger audience.

Now (hopefully) they will continue to produce a variety of types of comics and clearly label the comics (the way movies are labeled) to allow parents to easily buy the titles that are appropriate for their kids. Also (hopefully) they'll remember that crude and/or distrubing content is not needed to make a comic that adults enjoy.

I pretty much disagree with everything you said. You're entitled to your opinion, but in my estimation (and I'd wager the majority of professionals in the industry, whether on the creative side or business side) the CCA did not do anything good for the comic industry. It stunted it and denied us many great stories that would have been told otherwise, and destroyed the careers of many great talents. Thankfully, the damage was ultimately reversible, but it took decades. I think it's silly to say the "CCA was needed", because kids needed to be catered to more. Kids were being catered to plenty in the years before the CCA. Would you really have a problem reading a golden-age Batman or Captain America with your kid? If you think the CCA was needed, then you also buy into the Wertham charge that comics were damaging kids at the time it was introduced.

 

[Par Avion]

I pretty much disagree with everything you said. You're entitled to your opinion, but in my estimation (and I'd wager the majority of professionals in the industry, whether on the creative side or business side) the CCA did not do anything good for the comic industry. It stunted it and denied us many great stories that would have been told otherwise, and destroyed the careers of many great talents. Thankfully, the damage was ultimately reversible, but it took decades. I think it's silly to say the "CCA was needed", because kids needed to be catered to more. Kids were being catered to plenty in the years before the CCA. Would you really have a problem reading a golden-age Batman or Captain America with your kid? If you think the CCA was needed, then you also buy into the Wertham charge that comics were damaging kids at the time it was introduced.

I can see where you are both coming from. If the CC had never existed, perhaps the medium would have been given more opportunity to "mature" more quickly- and most likely, the entire comics industry would be something completely different than what we are familiar with today- but on the flip side, we also might not have a great many of the stories and characters that we hold dear today. It's impossible to say.

 

[Mee]

How many parents paid attention to the code anyway?


It's like today with video game ratings. Does the big M and 17+ really stop a lot of young kids from getting a game like Call of Duty? Judging from all the kids I know, no it usually doesn't (unfortunately).


So at the height of comic book popularity, was having a little code marker or not going to make or break the sale of something like Batman or Fantastic Four? I'd guess probably not.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

It doesn't matter if parents paid attention or not. The censors were still there, hungry to sanitize and butcher any comics that crossed their desk (hence, the comic companies eventually learned to self-censor).

 

[Mee]

It doesn't matter if parents paid attention or not. The censors were still there, hungry to sanitize and butcher any comics that crossed their desk (hence, the comic companies eventually learned to self-censor).

Yeah I'm saying that in terms of "protecting children" or whatever, kids were going to be buying or being bought comics anyway. It should be the responsibility of parents to keep track of the media kids are taking in.


The code meant much more to the creators and companies making the comics than it did the readership.


But as a society there's always someone with a public voice looking for an outlet, a scapegoat to say "well THIS is why _______" Back then it was comics.

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

i would love the family of the creators of ec comics to sue all hell

not gonna happen but they deserve something the cca screwed them over royally

 

[redmarvel]

Basically, you're saying that the comics code was, perhaps a blessing in disguise that the industry has long since outgrown. We often think of the comics code as restrictive (and it was), but perhaps it forced (for lack of a better word) more creative solutions that allowed for a more "easily accessible" product, that in turn allowed for a more widespread readership.

Yes!
I think that at the time the comic code came out, it was needed.

Think of it along the same lines as the radio industry not being allowed to use sexually explicit lyrics for generations. Since that was in place we have some songs with beautifully executed innuendo instead - I love innuendo, I do not need to hear a song say it explicitly to get the picture. Neither do I need my comics to show me explicitly how bloody, nasty, voilent or crude the world can be - I can picture what is NOT in the panels shown.

 

[redmarvel]

Yeah I'm saying that in terms of "protecting children" or whatever, kids were going to be buying or being bought comics anyway. It should be the responsibility of parents to keep track of the media kids are taking in.


The code meant much more to the creators and companies making the comics than it did the readership.


But as a society there's always someone with a public voice looking for an outlet, a scapegoat to say "well THIS is why _______" Back then it was comics.

Wait, you're saying that you want your mom to go shopping for Comic books with you when you're 10, 11, 12, 13, and so on? Until she decides you're old enough to know what you should read?

Frankly, I'm glad I didn't have my mom along when I went to buy comic books - she would probably have told me to spend my money on other stuff.

 

[Marvolo]

Why do comics need to be censored in the first place? Its crudely drawn still motion cartoons. Can little Timmy not handle some cartoon violence without his mind snapping like a twig? Even in modern comics Ive never seen anything that needed to be censored. Sure bestiality, pedophilia, canabalism and other crazy **** shouldnt go in superhero comics, but no sensible company would allow that kind of depraved **** in their comics in the first place so imo the CCA was entirely pointless. DC/Marvel and all the other comic publishers didnt need someone bearing down on them forcing them to censor.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Wait, you're saying that you want your mom to go shopping for Comic books with you when you're 10, 11, 12, 13, and so on? Until she decides you're old enough to know what you should read?

Frankly, I'm glad I didn't have my mom along when I went to buy comic books - she would probably have told me to spend my money on other stuff.

No. That's not what he was saying at all. He's saying if parents, such as you, care about what their children read, then those parents should monitor their purchases. If they don't care, they should be hands off. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you want to monitor what your children read for its content, or you should be hands off and let them buy what they want. But then when they buy something with mature content, don't complain about it.

 

[Sundancer]

Yes!
I think that at the time the comic code came out, it was needed.

Think of it along the same lines as the radio industry not being allowed to use sexually explicit lyrics for generations. Since that was in place we have some songs with beautifully executed innuendo instead - I love innuendo, I do not need to hear a song say it explicitly to get the picture. Neither do I need my comics to show me explicitly how bloody, nasty, voilent or crude the world can be - I can picture what is NOT in the panels shown.

Well, that's you. Anything else is censorship. There are times I enjoy my comics code approved Avengers and times I want to read the Punisher.

This goes back to the old argument of some people wanting to change the world instead of recognizing diversity.

It's an old argument, and this thread won't go anywhere.

My original point of interest was that a doctor, a scholar, fudged the facts and created a milestone in the world of comics based on personal beliefs instead of actual research..and the nation didn't seem to question him much then.