 |
| All images copyright their respective owners |
This is a post about American politics, but it is not POLITICAL. Of course, we can no longer discuss politics anywhere without it becoming nasty.
I received several “comic” books in the last two months that are political and now history. People, even cartoonists, write about what affects them and what they care about. Sometimes that is politics. So when does politics become history and something we can discuss?
The Dick Tracy books feature a character that is strictly “law and order”. Those are his words, not mine. Chester Gould (Tracy's creator) was openly against many of the court reforms given to suspects and those show up in his stories. (The Dick Tracy strip above is from 1971.)
Walt Kelly, in Pogo, takes a “liberal’s” look at the 1960 presidential race. Pogo was incredibly innovative and well-drawn… and well-lettered. Both Gould and Kelly showed their political interests throughout the run of their strips.
March (2015) is the three volume graphic novel set that won an Eisner Award. It is about Congressman John Lewis, recounting his life in the civil rights movement of the 1960s. He was the son of an Alabama shareholder who went to a segregated school. As shown here, Mr. Lewis received beatings from state troopers during civil rights marches and became a congressman.
Finally, last month I got Captain America Truth (2003). The Tuskegee Ex-periment (1931-1972) was a clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service. The purpose of this study was to observe the destructive path of untreated syphilis. The African-American men in the study were only told they were receiving free health care from the United States government, but were unknowingly infected with this horrible disease. And they were denied the cure, penicillin, when it was released. Captain America (by Robert Morales and Kyle Baker) adapts this real story to show the terrible effects of the super-soldier serum as it was experimented on using unsuspecting African-Americans.
I really got all these books within a few weeks. Even the ones created recently are looking back at past events. When we let them, comics can give us an interesting view of our own history. And current events.
11 comments:
I've made comments similar to Barry's on my blog. While I think art is fundamentally non-political, art also subsumes everything that's important to both artists and audiences-- and that includes politics. My general feeling is that I'm not opposed to seeing an artist represent a POV alien to my own, as long as he does a reasonably good job setting forth his principles. The death of political discourse in art comes about whenever artists surrender to the temptation not to argue, but to preach.
Well observed comment, GP, but do you think it's possible that 'preaching' is sometimes the best way to kick-start discussion on both sides of the 'argument'? Hopefully Barry will contribute his observations.
https://www.cbr.com/superman-smashes-klan-real-story-behind-comic/
I’m reading the three issue story now. The radio show was Superman vs the Clan of the Firey Cross and based on the 40s Superman radio show. Anti - Chinese American discrimination believe it or not . Also note how back then they had the call them Clan not Klan . Also hey Klan with a C? Don’t besmirch my Scottish friends !
I hear rumors they are making a movie out of the real incident.
I have a follow up story if you want to hear .
Of course we want to hear, PS - you don't even have to ask. Here's a question for you. Having lived in both the UK and US, if you've experienced discrimination, in which country was it worse?
Here's my short answer:
"My short answer is that I don't think that the strategy of preaching usually sparks greater discussion. Preaching is the purest form of rhetoric, in which the speaker starts from the assumption that he's tapped into some unassailable position, and everything he says from thereon is just support for that position. One can argue against a preacher, and maybe even refine one's own position better, but you can't really get the preacher to concede any important ground. That's why I don't consider (for example) Steve Ditko to fit this paradigm. He takes a position and can't be swayed from it, like the preacher-type. Nevertheless, Ditko presents arguments, not preachments. Some of his arguments are strong and some are weak, but there's a quality of rational debate in his work that makes me esteem it, even if I would never validate Ditko's beliefs."
I then went on to give a negative example of the preacher-type in the rest of this essay, which builds on our previous discussion of Good Ol' Freddy Wertham.
https://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2020/03/back-to-wertham-well.html
Stay frosty.
Oh, I wasn't suggesting that you can get a 'preacher' of any subject to change their mind, but I do think that taking the 'preaching' approach can often generate discussion on the topic being 'preached' on. As for Ditko, I never really felt that he was 'arguing' his position - he just seemed to be 'preaching' to me. I'll take a look at your link. Thanks for commenting, GP. Always welcome.
Alas the racism in the U.K. was worse but bear in mind-
1. It was the 70s/early 80s and the country wasn’t as diverse
2. The UK has gotten better
3 racism has gotten worse in the U.K. recently
4 I’m in a part of the US that’s very diverse and there’s still racism (but I haven’t seen it myself. Some of this is due to how people travel and interact here. Everyone drives and goes to places they want to go. In the U.K. I used public transport so you can’t coccon yourself).
A few years ago we were at a talk given by Laura Siegel Larson ( Jerry Siegel’s daughter). My son asked her if threats from the Right wing were taken seriously by th creators of Superman she said yes. My son really couldn’t believe it . Now here we are a few years later I think he understands a political climate that’s not friendly.
So yes politics does weep into comics sometimes deliberately mostly just a sign of the times.
I should also state my incidents of real racism in the UK was probably - less than a half dozen .so less than one a year which is really pretty good . Probably the same as being called four eyes for wearing glasses . Only one ended in a fight and that was with my schoolmate- who was American .
Fascinating, PS. And it's interesting that one of your nastier experiences involved a 'fellow' American, not a Brit. I wonder if adults had the same type of experiences as kids, what do you think?
kids are definitely little devils but usually only imitating their parents. In a sense I don’t fully blame them. Many grow out of it. The real problem is when they are adults and still racist. That’s when the violence happens. It’s no longer hey hey shove . It’s sucker punch on the street with intent to harm or kill.
Adults can usually cocoon themselves but when incidents happen they tend to be far worse don’t you think ? Name calling in school is one thing. Assaults on total strangers on the street is bad news.
I’ve been thinking . Comic creators tended to be more lefty than comic strip newspaper artists because comics were the bottom rung of pop culture while newspapers paid really well and were part of the establishment. ( in general). What do you think ?
I mean clearly many of the golden and silver age creators were fairly left. Apart from Eisner I can’t think of a left comic syndicate creator off the top of my head (who had politics you could clearly see in the strip).
I'd agree that adults are generally worse and usually set the pattern for their children's prejudices. Your question about comics creators is a good one, PS, but unfortunately, I don't know how to answer it. You see, I don't see myself as either left or right (how others perceive me is probably a different matter), and not being political, such distinctions are lost on me. Which only proves my ignorance in that regard I suppose, but hopefully your question will inspire others to respond.
Post a Comment