Say what now?
After watching this video this morning, I was forced to ask if most Americans really know so very little about today's comic books. Of course, logic immediately told me that yes, that was probably the case, and that in this instance FOX probably just needed a filler story and something sensational that would scare/mortify their conservative target audience. That's well and fine. What really irks me is how they twist the words of their interviewees and blatantly disregard relevant facts. They state, right smack dab in the middle of the bit that the comics are meant for teens+. So they take it to a middle school, where the kids are what? 10? 11? Maybe 12? Those aren't teens. At the very youngest, a child is only considered a teen if they are thirteen. You can tell, because "teen" is right there in the word. This is the way that we distinguish children from teens at the library, both by privileges and materials. The kids THEY exposed the comics in question to (btw, they chose the two most controversial issues of DC's New 52 to use), were NOT old enough for them. That action was wrong on several levels.
Another thing I find interesting is how they use the words of the store owner and the "comics fan". These two men only state simple facts. The fan says that today's comics have sex, homosexuality, and gory violence in them. He doesn't seem upset or appalled by this, he's just telling it like it is. It's the editing of the segment that make his words seem condemning. Once again, the store owner says that the books should not be read by children. And then they briefly, for maybe a half second, scan over the children's section of comics in his store. HELLO!? Basically, the story should be done and over there. 1) The company acknowledges that the material isn't for children. 2) Those with expert knowledge say they shouldn't be read by children. 3) DC and every other large publisher releases materials specifically for and marketed towards children that is widely available. Case closed, imo.
I mean, really, that's the part that burns my buns. FOX could have used this opportunity to inform parents about the many great titles that are appropriate for and could in fact enrich their children's minds, but they neglect to. All they want is to cause a stir. As a librarian, I know that comics, as well as illustrated chapter books (Diary of a Wimpy Kid, The Invention of Hugo Cabret, Captain Underpants, etc...) can help immensely in learning to read. Illustrations in chapter books ease the way to reading comprehension without lessening the reading level the way a picture book would. And there are many talented graphic writers who are producing these books today. But I guess adding that in would have ruined the tone of FOX's story.
 |
| Above: Conspicuously missing from this fair and balanced report |
The real problem here is the American population's ongoing perception of comics. Superhero stories were not originally meant for children. It wasn't until the 50s and the Comics Code Authority that all graphic mediums in the U.S. were basically neutered, at which point they became only suitable for children. This prohibited comics from publishing gory material (no blood or realistic fighting) and no "subversive" content. The word subversive can basically be manipulated to mean anything, including: sex, homosexuality, feminism, etc... Hell, the original writings protested to women wearing pants and being outside the home! Basically, without the artistic freedom to tell the stories they wanted to, they could only provide harmless (i.e. mindless) entertainment for children. The thing is, that these are the comics that most Americans remember, and the fact is, that major comics started abandoning the Code as early as the late 70s, and by the end of the 80s, pretty much no one was paying it any attention. For true comics fans, the CCA is basically a bad memory. So, when mainstream America catches up to changes that the rest of us have been aware of for over 30 years, yeah, it kind of flusters me.
No matter what we do, it seems comics will always be the outsider. To "serious intellectuals" it will always be kiddy nonsense and power fantasy and to conservatives, it will always be pornographic/gory hedonism. But, at least to the informed, comics are moving in amazing directions, producing stories in ways that neither novels or movies have the ability to, and in a scope comparable to either.
To the parents out there, I strongly urge you to make a visit to your local children's library, and check out the graphic novel section. Check out the Amulet series by Kazu Kibuishi, the Oz retellings by Eric Shanower, or the brilliant and engrossing MouseGuard series by David Petersen. Girls are often fond of Baby Mouse by Jennifer Holm, or Peach Fuzz by Lindsay Cibos. For the academically-minded, there is also a wide variety of graphic adaptations of literary classics. We even have several versions of a comic Bible. No matter who you are or where you stand, there are graphic novels and comics that are appropriate to and good for your children.
No comments:
Post a Comment