While we're still paying deserved tribute to the awesome creative force that is Mort Walker, I thought I'd bump this one up to directly follow our post devoted to Mort Walker and voice actor Doug Young. It just seemed appropriate.
Anyone who read comics in the 1950s - or, more likely, collected them afterward - is familiar with the "Dell Comics Pledge to Parents"!
This self-proclaiming blurb of assurance was intended to "calm" parents who were needlessly alarmed by self-serving politicians and know-it-all psychologists in a concerted effort to demonize comic books as a cause of juvenile delinquency.
Well, comic books have since been marginalized down to cult status on the mass entertainment scale - and the overall behavior of American citizens has become worse then ever... So how'd that idea turn out, eh?
Nevertheless, Dell played the game with its expected dignity, issuing "The Pledge" at every available opportunity...
...Such as at the end of this back-cover gag from Dell Comics' UNCLE SCROOGE # 13 (1956). (Click to Enlarge!)
We'll probably never know if Carl Barks was asked to draw this as a seven-panel gag, or if there was an EIGHTH panel that was cut for "The Pledge". Fortunately, cutting one panel of Scrooge saying "Mush!" would not impact the gag!
However, "The Pledge" didn't always fit as neatly into every gag, as it did above!
Consider its odd placement in this gag from the inside back-cover of Dell's BEETLE BAILEY # 12 (1957)! (Click to Enlarge!)
Yes, the gag is ACTUALLY INTERRUPTED for Dell's important announcement!
...But, at least the parents who purchased this issue of BEETLE BAILEY for their children could sleep confidently in the knowledge that it "...contains only clean and wholesome entertainment"!
DELL COMICS ARE GOOD COMICS! ...And Dooon't You Forget it! - As that guy below would say!
Such an animal character would be unheard-of at Camp Swampy, until some years later when Sarge's dog OTTO would join the cast!
But, hey... That mouse is showing the kids the importance of washing regularly... talk about "...CLEAN and wholesome entertainment"!
UPDATE: February 10, 2018: Our diligent friend Debbie Anne Perry earns some Extra Credit by bringing to my attention another odd placement of the Dell Comics Pledge to Parents in Dell's THE THREE STOOGES # 7 (Cover Date: December/February, 1962).
We've already seen The Pledge tacked-on to the END of a gag, and INTERRUPTING a gag in progress... but this THIRD VARIATION has The Pledge INSERTED INTO THE ARTWORK OF A GAG!
I wonder if artist Joe Messerli was asked to leave room for The Pledge, or the empty space (which a canyon scene should have anyway) was just fortuitously used for that purpose?
Dell Comics, it would seem, are not only "Good Comics", they're also efficient ones!
25 comments:
That is one odd mouse, and an odd place to put their Pledge. Some, of course, would argue that this was already a weird gag, since it involved Mosquitoes going after a Beetle.
As for the Carl Barks gag, if I may hazard a guess, perhaps there was originally a title panel? The placement of the Uncle Scrooge logo on the "first" panel seems a tad awkward. Bah, who knows.
Or maybe Barks had again drawn something outrageous involving Goldie (we are in Dawson), and the publishers had no choice but to stamp the patented P.L.E.D.G.E. (Parents, Let us Explain why Dell is Good and Excellent) to cover it up.
But I doubt it.
Otto and Snoopy both began as slightly caricatured, but basically realistic, dogs. Both became more and more anthropomorphic over time.
I had Four Color #641 (Steve Canyon), and that was the first time I ever saw Dell's Pledge to Parents. At the time, all comics I had seen were Gold Key "funny animal" stuff (Bugs Bunny, Yogi Bear, Donald Duck), and DC and Marvel superheroes (Superman, Justice League, Captain America, Thor, et al.), which were pretty tame even for an eight-year-old kid in third grade. So I didn't really understand what the fuss would have been about.
Years later, I finally saw reprints of comics like EC's Tales From the Crypt and Shock Suspense Stories, and began to see how there could have been a controversy in the early 1950s. No, I am not siding with censors or with do-gooder activists, but I do see how well-intentioned people might be a little hesitant to let their youngest kids read the pre-Code horror and crime stuff.
And I never understood why Dell and Gold Key didn't simply join in with the Comics Code Authority, as did DC, Marvel, Archie, and Harvey. Or did Dell really think that the CCA was too lax, so they needed their own code that "eliminates entirely, rather than regulates, objectionable material"?
Slightly OT but tangentially related: have you ever seen the Dean Martin & Jerry Lewis comedy "Artists and Models"? The plot actually involves the anti-comic book crusade of the time. But, if the movie was intended to have some sort of anti-comics message, it undermined itself. (1) the crusading activists come across more like blue-nosed prigs, snobs, and busy-bodies (which a lot of them undoubtedly were) than sincere concerned citizens, and (2) the second half of the movie, in which Dean and Jerry get mixed up with foreign spies (who mistakenly think Jerry knows the formula for a top secret rocket fuel) is just as far-fetched and silly as any comic book story.
I agree that the Dell disclaimer (or is it a "claimer"? Or just a "claim"?) often got placed in odd locations.
Not only that, their claim to "eliminate entirely, rather than regulate, objectionable material" is really in the eye of the beholder. Some of the humor in the Beetle Bailey comics seems aimed more at comics-reading young privates than civilian boys. Gags involving pretty girls, the breaking of army regulations, violence or threats thereof, incarceration, and insubordination to superior officers, to name only a few, occur readily in many of the Beetle Bailey comics. While technically there's nothing much there to disturb a child, there are many hints at, if not outright examples of, humor that is somewhat adult in nature. (I'm referring of course to the kind of "adult humor" found in popular sitcoms of the day or in popular movies of the 40's, 50's, and very early 60's--not the rampant "adult humor" that abounds pretty much everywhere today.)
Another comic book that skirts this fine line is Harvey's Sad Sack comics--especially many of the earlier issues, which contained humor that seemed to be aimed at those with at least a smattering of knowledge about life in a military camp. While the younger set can certainly laugh and be amused by these stories, it would take someone with some real knowledge of what is being parodied for the humor to be appreciated fully. (The later Harvey Sad Sack stuff got very juvenile, but at the same time it never fully lost its "edge" that might appeal, especially, to young military males in their teens and twenties. Women, too, possibly, although both SS and BB seem to this writer to be aimed more squarely at male readers.)
As a kid reading these comics, I learned quite a bit about army rules and regs, although probably not much that was accurate. I guess there was quite a bit of post-World War II interest in military escapades, judging from the popularity of Beetle Bailey, Sad Sack, and sitcoms such as "McHale's Navy" and "Gomer Pyle USMC". Even the "Dick Van Dyke Show" had its share of military-themed episodes.
Other Dell comics that could get slightly "adult" from time to time included the Tarzan comics--mostly wholesome but with threats of violence always peeping around the corner, the western comics such as The Lone Ranger, and even The Flintstones, which in the Dell incarnation certainly was aimed more squarely at the show's television demographics than most of the issues from later publishers--although for a time the Gold Key comics followed suit from Dell and included more adult humor. Many of the early Flintstones gags are ones that adults are more likely to "get" than kids.
Not to say that Dell (or Harvey, for that matter) truly ever "violated" their code--technically, at least--but there are a few individual issues here and there that might receive more scrutiny if printed for children of today. (Ironic, because while society seems more determined than ever to protect kids from "objectionable material" the overall level of "acceptable" humor has gotten more raunchy than ever.)
But wasn't it great that, in Dell's heyday, even with occasional adult-type humor mixed in with the more juvenile stuff, it was all material that adults or kids could read and enjoy? And without feeling patronized or censored?
I guess my main point is the disclaimer was somewhat unnecessary, and occasionally it was somewhat (but only somewhat, never totally) inaccurate.
Achille:
“Mosquitoes going after a Beetle”?!
Consider yourself complimented by this inveterate punster! Congratulations!
…And, as if to GO WITH that “odd mouse”, we have a swarm of odd and outrageously outsized mosquitoes!
As I said, I doubt we’ll ever know what was, or wasn’t, cut in the Uncle Scrooge gag (…or the Beetle Bailey gag, for that matter – perhaps there was another “mosquito panel” excised there as well), but you’ve gotta love the ice and snow forming on Scrooge’s dialogue balloon in Panel 4!
I SOOOO didn’t want to go there, but I can’t help myself… Perhaps Scrooge was *running away from* “something outrageous involving Goldie”! …NO, NO, NO! Stop thinking those thoughts! Remember “Dell Comics are Good Comics”! …The again, “this particular person, place, or thing” didn’t happen in a DELL comic, did it? …Nope! Their good record remains intact! …Whew!
Finally: “P.L.E.D.G.E. (Parents, Let us Explain why Dell is Good and Excellent)”?!
Fess up, Achille… You ARE a member of the Junior Woodchucks, aren’t you?
TC:
I think I liked Otto – and I especially liked Snoopy – BEFORE their respective transformations! And, as I was discussing with someone just last week, I liked Snoopy (…and PEANUTS, in general) all the more before the introduction of Woodstock – and by extension Spike(?) and other bird characters – except the ones that Linus “patted on the head”!
Not, just to TC, but to everyone reading this… Please don’t think I am, in any way, mocking the Dell Pledge to Parents in this post, or in any of these comments!
Quite the opposite, actually! I feel that Dell reacted to a very unpleasant – and misguided, if not outright vindictive – crusade against the comic book industry with (as I mentioned in the post) the trademark “dignity” with which it had always conducted itself!
It is the politicians, psychologists (led by one infamous crackpot, in particular) and the general “torch-carrying-run-of-the-mill-do-gooders” that I mock and hold in complete disdain. The latter of which, would eventually decide that we should also live in a world without The Three Stooges, The Road Runner, and Tom and Jerry, and later Ralph Bakshi’s Mighty Mouse… or don’t you remember the seventies and eighties, folks? ...Everyone in animation, comics, etc. (…and hopefully, by extension, in real-life), simply had to work together and “get-along (gang?)” in perfect harmony.
I’ll be the first one to admit that ALL comic book content of the 1950s (and all the more so NOW) was not suitable for children… but why MUST it be? If parents provided PROPER, and not over-reactive, guidance and publishers properly warned of “Mature Content”, there would be no issue. If it didn’t apply to movies, TV, books and other magazines, music, etc., why were comic books so unjustly singled out?
And the adult Americans that spent their “formative years” in the sanitized utopia created by these do-gooders? Seriously, in view of the shootings, violence, and other abhorrent atrocities that have become almost daily occurrences in today's United States, and how did THEY turn out?!
…And how can we continue to blame comic books (no longer significant in children’s lives in ANY way, alas) and animation for this? …As long as there’s power to be seized, and a buck to be made for the opportunists to grow fat on! That’s how!
…And, besides, we all know it’s not comic books and animation… It’s video games! :-)
WHEW! PUFF! PANT! Gotta rest the old ticker after that rant! Never saw the Martin and Lewis film but, if it touches on that particular subject, even in a silly way, I should seek it out.
Scarecrow:
I’m still emotionally drained from that last reply, but here goes! :-)
I think that, for the time it was issued, the Dell Pledge was upheld and adhered-to, to the publisher’s best abilities – and to the standards OF that time!
The problem is that those same “do-gooders” (or, by now, their danged descendants) – on both the left and the right, I must point out in all fairness – continue to “move the goal posts”, and change their standards of what is acceptable, almost by the day!
And, unfortunately, that “Zone of Acceptability” continues to get smaller and smaller as a result.
As translators and dialogue writers, we always have to change, or creatively “dance around”, things that were perfectly acceptable when the original stories were written – but are NOT acceptable now! I’ve seen standards of acceptability change WHILE I am actually doing a job! Oddly, it’s become some sort of perverse fun for me to try and anticipate, and “out-sanitize the sanitizers” when I take on a script… I might add, for stories that have already appeared in many countries, in their original forms.
To your final comment: “… the disclaimer was somewhat unnecessary…”, it may not have been “necessary”, in view of Dell and Western Publishing’s diligent and effective self-policing, but IT WAS VERY NECESSARY to allay the fears of the paranoid, stoked by the “usual suspects” mentioned above.
Again, I feel they handled the matter extremely well and with the aforementioned great dignity… the occasional odd placement of The Pledge, notwithstanding!
It's something out of Monty Python - "We interrupt the beginning, middle and end of this book to assure you that this comic isn't rubbish and you won't regret buying this instead of that bubble gum!"
That mouse might be a rare occasion of Mort Walker's assistant using his own art style to design a cartoon mouse because Walker didn't have any cartoon mouse design in his style guide handy..I'm assuming you have not heard of Walker-Browne Amalgamated, the factory that churns out all the comics credited to Dik Browne,Mort Walker and sons, as unveiled at Comics Curmudgeon ( http://joshreads.com )?
It's not as confusing as George Gately's nephew, Peter Michael Gallagher, writing & drawing "Heathcliff" as "Michael Gallagher" to avoid confusion with actor Peter Gallagher, but still creating confusion with HIS brother, comic book writer Michael Gallagher, who wrote Heathcliff comic book scripts for Marvel.
There's a reason for everything. I remember reading Mark Evanier explain the reason why comic book often featured prose stories and one-page gags, sometimes featuring unrelated characters in the superhero books: so that they could be classified as periodicals and be shipped as second-class mail according to U.S. Postal Service guidelines. That's why the 1st issue of Batman had a 2-page "Ginger Snap" comic.
‘Rehab:
I *ALWAYS* bought the comic book over the bubble gum!
Result? I have a large comic collection… AND all my teeth!
Yeah, I kinda figured the mouse was the product of some “Walker Assistant”, as all the “Big Time Cartoonists” had a bunch of uncredited worker-bees buzzing around drawing backgrounds, doing lettering and, in many instances, outright ghosting for their own “Mr. Big”.
That Postal Regulation you cite was also the reason we got the Gyro Gearloose stories in UNCLE SCROOGE, the Goofy stories in DONALD DUCK, the O.G. Wottasnozzle stories in POPEYE, Tweety and Sylvester (…and later Cool Cat) stories in BUGS BUNNY, Chilly Willy stories in WOODY WOODPECKER, The Hounds and the Hare stories in THE FOX AND THE CROW… and the list is endless.
The BEETLE BAILEY title, as readers of the Dell and Gold Key incarnations know, had “Vinny the Vet” – who, oddly, was neither a veterinarian, nor a Military “vet” (which would have seemed appropriate for Beetle Bailey). Instead, Vinny was a bumbling newspaper reporter who, by his looks and general demeanor, must have been yet another heretofore unknown relative of Beetle’s! I don’t know of this character having appearing anywhere else, beyond these particular BEETLE BAILEY comic books, but I could be wrong.
With the end of “Second Class Mail Subscriptions”, sometime in the 1970s, the formal practice ended, and “Guest Stories” (as I call them), and any “Text Pages” that had not evolved into Letter Columns, were simply used to fill available space as needed, as opposed to being required.
For your work as a dialogue writer, not only are you working with material from another time, but also from another country, where things that would be considered inappropriate here aren't necessarily viewed as such in their country of origin.
All true, Deb… but the standards seem to be “evolving” more and more rapidly than ever before! It’s become a true “moving target”!
Great post as always, Joe. Re: the fifties controversy regarding comic books, I'm currently reading a recent LIFE magazine issue on the history of the superhero genre. It touches upon the fifties controversy, noting in particular the role played by that "infamous crackpot." One truly bone-chiliing, blood-curdling thing I learned: There were actually comic book burnings organized by the American Legion. Yes, the American Legion actually encouraged kids to burn their comic books. Book burnings. In America. After World War II. As one famous Donald (though not "The Donald"... in my book, that distinction goes to a duck) would say, "Sad!" In all seriousness, though, reading about this (and seeing a picture of it) really, really shocked and angered me. For the American Legion to burn books as if this were some sort of expression of Americanness... I mean, I have no words.
I'll tell you one thing: there's nothing like seeing books you love on the burning pile to make you fully appreciate the First Amendment.
Comic books (and animated cartoons) have always been unfairly maligned by many. They've always been seen by far too many as somehow being lesser art or not even art at all. Why that is I have no clue. I, for one, would rather have an animation cel on my living room wall than a bunch of scribbles called a modern art painting. Anyway, this disdain for comic books as an art form has, I suspect, a lot to do with why comic books in particular were singled out. For some reason, there was widespread concern during the fifties that comic books were keeping kids away from reading other books, or somehow retarding kids' literacy. That, of course, is hogwash. As anybody who has actually read comic books knows, comic book stories are remarkably complex and are often very educational, whether through the use of rare and unfamiliar words, or through the inclusion of historical and cultural facts in the narrative, etc. As Stan Lee once said, the comic book's unique combination of images and text is the highest form of artistic expression!
Jaime:
Your thoughts echo my own SO PERFECTLY, there’s nothing I could possibly add in response!
Well said, my friend! Consider me in complete and total agreement!
They've always been seen by far too many as somehow being lesser art or not even art at all. Why that is I have no clue.
I, actually, do have a clue. It's a quarrel as old as storytelling (look at Greek theatre), but the opposition's point of view is summed up in four timeless words: True Art Is Angsty. As long as comics and animations aim primarily to entertain rather than pose deep, seeeerious socio-philosophical conundrums, some people will just never acknowledge the stuff. Look at poor Alfred Hitchcock — most of his movies were relatively light-hearted (just look at the comedy masterpiece that is Who Killed Harry?), or at least humorous in a black-humor sort of way, but his only movies that critics today constantly cite are The Birds and Psycho. Because comics (I'm talking about Beetle Bailey-, Donald Duck- or Franco-Belgian-style comics, for now, laying aside the superhero/horror/western stuff) have a humorous artstyle and most often a comedic tone, these same people thought it could never be worthy of anything.
All this being said, I'll drop it by that in France and Belgium, ever since Lucky Luke creator 'Morris' coined the term, comics (or BD, as we call it) are popularly known as the Ninth Art.
And Brothers of the Spear (and, later, Leopard Girl) in Tarzan, Blue Beetle in Captain Atom, The Question in Blue Beetle, Professor Harbinger in Doctor Solar, Flash Gordon in The Phantom, Secret Agent X-9 in Flash Gordon. As you say, the list seems endless.
FWIW, I never saw Vinny the Vet anywhere but as a back-up strip in Gold Key's Beetle Bailey.
There was some controversy over so-called "objectionable material" in movies and TV, resulting in self-censorship similar to the Comics Code Authority. Movies had their Production Code (aka the "Hays Code") and TV had the Broadcasters' Code. Both of which, like the CCA, sort of became obsolete and faded away. But it does seem like comics got singled out, or, at least, were the target of more hysteria than other media. My guess would be that it was because comic books were widely perceived (with considerable justification at the time) as a children's medium.
There may also be some elitism and snobbery involved. TV, movies, and comic books were/are readily available to middle class/working class people, the basket of deplorables in flyover country, clinging to our guns and religion. You never hear activists worrying about the violence in "legitimate theater," e.g., grand opera and Shakespearean tragedy. The audience for those being the upper class intelligentsia.
Sad Sack began as a feature in "Yank," an armed forces newspaper during WWII, so its main audience was soldiers, specifically, junior enlisted men (i.e., privates). When Harvey bought the rights in 1957, it became a children's comic, and was considerably bowdlerized and simplified. (Although, as noted above, it sometimes pushed the envelope a little).
In the 1950s, though, there were a lot of veterans who had served in WWII and/or Korea, so Sack and Beetle Bailey may not have been as esoteric as they might seem now. (Today, over 90% of Americans under 65 have never been in the military). Back then, even if you were not a veteran, you probably knew people-friends, family members, employers, co-workers-who were. (My late mother was a secretary, and never served in the military, but her boss was a former Army officer, so she learned a lot of the slang, e.g., calling the waste basket "file 13.") So I would assume that a lot of people had "at least a smattering of knowledge" about the subject.
Achille:
“The Ninth Art”? I like that!
The term so intrigued me that I found THIS ARTICLE from “France Today” in which, of all things, a history instructor from a college that *I* attended is quoted!
I’ll just pull out this paragraph and, to paraphrase the great Rod Serling, submit it for your approval:
“The bande dessinĂ©e, [Comics – Adds Joe here!] often called simply BD, is not just popular, however. It is also widely accepted as a legitimate art—the “ninth art”, according to a term used since the 1960s. It’s been enshrined as such in the CitĂ© Internationale de la Bande DessinĂ©e et de l’Image in AngoulĂªme, a cultural center that includes a museum, the MusĂ©e de la Bande DessinĂ©e, along with a specialized library, a bookstore and a cinema. The museum is designated as a MusĂ©e de France, putting it in the same category as the Louvre—which, as it happens, held an exhibition of BD in 2009 in connection with the comics publisher Futuropolis. “It’s hard to think of a more striking example of how the French have embraced BD as an art form than putting it in the Louvre,” says Vessels.”
Ya know, America… I think we could learn something from these fine folks!
TC:
I want to thank you for a FAR-REACHING AND VERY INFORMATIVE contribution to our discussion! I just continue to take more and more delight – and outright PRIDE – in the high caliber and quality of the comments we get here! …Just look around the Internet and you’ll see how rare this can be!
Naturally, there was the Hayes Code and its profound effect upon the Hollywood film industry. I’ve discussed that elsewhere on this Blog – in one of my classic “Loooong DVD Reviews” – and may have also mentioned my interest in “Pre-Code” films somewhere as well.
But, THIS matter smells of something different, more insidious, and specifically targeted in its discrimination, because it hides behind doing something for “The Good of the Children”!
As I pointed out, it DIDN’T STOP with the tragically needless destruction of E.C. Comics and the institution of the Comics Code – and the self-proclaimed and superior Dell Code. And again, Kudos to Dell for their handling of a delicate situation with class and dignity!
Once that battle was won, these same “know-better / do-gooder types” next imposed their self-righteous standards on television – and animation has never been the same.
First, they came for the Superheroes! Then, they came for The Three Stooges (a live-action cartoon, if we’re being honest)! Then, they came for Bugs Bunny! Finally, Tom couldn’t chase Jerry, Popeye couldn’t hit Bluto, and Yogi Bear couldn’t swipe pic-a-nic baskets anymore! …But those Snorks sure could swim up a storm!
The sad truth is that, when you look at the overall behavior of American citizens today – let’s say close to 50 years since this misguided mentality took hold and never let go – that the general conduct of all Americans has declined to the sorry state reflected with alarming regularity on our nightly newscasts. And I mean EVERYONE, from the top levels of government, to the so-called “mean streets”, and every socio-economic stop in between! Bad, if not outright dangerous, behavior is everywhere!
So, exactly WHAT did these true-believers accomplish? Other than demonizing formerly acceptable aspects of our rich popular culture for their own ends, this is?
With further apologies to the good people of the State of Pennsylvania, and to anywhere else this may apply… Never mind “guns and religion”, it’s my DVDs and OLD COMICS that *I’M* going to “cling to”!
…Oh, and say – How about those “giant mosquitos” in that Beetle Bailey comic, anyway! Ya think enough of them could take on Atom Ant?
…WHEW! That last paragraph sure felt GOOD!
I love that mushing gag!
ANd it was great timing since we're in the middle of mushing season. My wife is constantly on the computer checking for updates on the Yukon Quest. Just because the winner (Allan Moore -- not the comic guy who has one "l") has come in doesn't mean the interest is over.
Who stayed to help whom...who got a concussion...who isn't even at Dawson yet...
One dream we share is some year going to Whitehorse or Fairbanks to volunteer at the finish line.
In a couple weeks she'll be turning her attention to the Iditarod which, while more popular, doesn't interest her as much. Maybe that volunteer job will be in Nome.
Thanks for sharing that gag!
That's great, Marc!
I never know exactly what's gonna grab someone - and while we've kinda gotten off on self-proclaimed "crusaders" in the comments this time, it's nice to know that you appreciated something else.
That gag was written and drawn by the great Carl Barks (1901-2000). Yes, he lived until 99, and was still actively creating (though only occasionally, as one would expect at that age) until about age 95! That's what *I* wanna do!
Carl Barks created and set all the rules - and created many of the major characters like Uncle Scrooge that Walt Disney didn't create himself. He's the guy we all strive to be - even today!
Personally, I love the "ice forming on Scrooge's dialogue balloon"! That is a "uniquely comics" type of gag!
Achille:
I think it’s awesome that comics are so highly regarded in France and Belgium! I’m very happy to learn that there was an exhibit on comic books at the Louvre. As Joe said, we in the States most certainly can learn something from y’all. I think we’re slowly making progress on that front, but we have quite a ways to go. Like Joe, I love the term “The Ninth Art.” I can’t help but wonder, though, what the Eighth Art is.
As to the meat of your reply to me, Achille, I think you’ve touched upon something very important. To further illustrate your point, let's look at the world of animated cartoons. Which cartoons *do* have a wide degree of mainstream acceptance as art? The Walt Disney full-length features, such as "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves." And, surely enough, like great novels, all of the Disney full-length features have their share of angsty moments.
This also, I suspect, helps explain why virtually everyone knows who Walt Disney was, but only cartoon geeks like the folks who read this blog know who Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Tex Avery, Bill Hanna, Joe Barbera, etc. were, to say nothing of the men and women who played indispensable roles in helping these directors produce their masterpieces. (Speaking from personal experience, I can say that many non-geeks of all ages casually watch and enjoy "Looney Tunes" or "Tom and Jerry" cartoons, but if you mention any of the above names to them, they give you puzzled looks). Of course, there are many other reasons for Disney's far greater notability, not least the fact that he had his own company and named it after himself ("Hanna-Barbera Productions" is not really the same thing as "The Walt Disney Company," as the old crack about the Hollywood star honoring "a female actor named Hanna" shows). Other major factors in the equation are Disneyland and Walt Disney World. But the far greater critical acclaim accorded to Disney's feature-length works as opposed to most animated cartoons has got to be a key factor.
(cont.)
Of course, the fact that art critics seem to think that "True Art is Angsty" hardly means that funny cartoons cannot be seriously analyzed. And it hardly means that funny cartoons don’t have an angsty side that is often overlooked. Earlier today, for example, I watched "Tex Avery: The King of Cartoons," a 1988 document about (you guessed it) Tex Avery. In one scene, an animator who worked with Tex at MGM made an interesting comment. He said that it's noteworthy that so many of Tex Avery's cartoons involve the introduction of violence into otherwise peaceful situations. This animator speculated that this preponderance of violent gags reflects something about Avery the man. He said he wouldn't call it "a touch of evil" but that nevertheless this facet of Avery's cartoons "cannot be overlooked." Another animator (or maybe this was an animation historian, as he seemed noticeably younger than the other gentleman) noted that the violent gags in Avery's cartoons are funny because they cannot possibly happen to someone in real life. Folks realize this, and so laugh heartily at the gags. (Regrettably I didn't catch the names of either of these men. I'm a cartoon geek, but a relatively inexperienced one, and so I have a long way to go in terms of attaining the knowledgeability of, say, a Don Yowp, a Jerry Beck, or a Thad Komorowski).
Anyway, I think the insights of these two gentlemen are profound and speak to a fundamental truth about life, which the psychologist Jordan B. Peterson (who I’m a fan of) frequently emphasizes: that life is, at its core, suffering. Suffering is, unfortunately, the only thing one is guaranteed in life, and the one thing all humans have in common. This, I think, is one reason why the violence of Avery-produced and Avery-influenced cartoons is so appealing to us: impossible and zany as it is, the viewer can relate to it, for, on some subconscious level, it reminds the viewer that he or she is not the only one who suffers. In other words, it’s comforting. Cartoon violence consoles us, partly because we can metaphorically relate to it, but crucially also in part because we realize it is impossible in the real world. This, I would think, is partly why animated cartoons (and comic books) were so popular among soldiers during World War II and later wars. (Speaking of soldiers, Joe, I had no idea you were a Vietnam veteran. Thank you for your service. I can only imagine the hell you and your comrades-in-arms went through).
Jaime:
You write: “…virtually everyone knows who Walt Disney was, but only cartoon geeks like the folks who read this blog know who Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Tex Avery, Bill Hanna, Joe Barbera, etc. were”
HEY, who’s a “cartoon geek”?!
Oh, no, wait… Sorry! Um, moving on…
However, in support of your comments, there was the case of my father, who was decidedly not a “cartoon geek”. He once saw “li’l me” reading THIS FLINTSTONES COMIC BOOK. It’s important to note – and that’s why I have a link to the Cover Image – that it says “Hanna and Barbera’s The Flintstones”… because when he saw it he remarked on how amazed he was that “these two women” made all these things! …Then again, it was 1962 and he probably had more important things on his mind, so I’ll give him – and, by extension, his entire generation – the benefit of the doubt.
I also have two very separate and distinct groups of friends – the comics and animation group, and the film group. (…And a third group with whom I enjoy sports, but we’ll set that aside for the purposes of this discussion!) The film group, while they enjoy the artifacts of classic-era animation I occasionally present to them, is hardly versed in WHO the creators of these cartoons were, despite the fact that virtually every one of those creators worked in the era of theatrical shorts that (ironically) played alongside the very films that they know so much about!
Esther also knows little to nothing about these things, though you can hardly find anyone more thoroughly steeped in world and national events! She will recognize an occasional name that I may mention, but that’s pretty much it. Still, I’ve been in love with her less than 30 minutes after meeting her… and always will be!
…(Very) Long story short, you are correct! And, hopefully Achille will tell us that it’s very different in France!
Oh, and please understand this… No, I am not a Vietnam veteran, nor am I a military veteran of any kind! Quite the opposite, actually, as I was of draft age while the conflict was still ongoing, and even had a Draft Lottery Number that I prayed would not come up. In those days, I spent an inordinate amount of my teen years convinced that I would meet my inevitable demise in that conflict. My utmost respect goes to those who did serve, while I was home reading comic books, and my greatest sympathies go to those (and the families of) those who met the fate I so obsessed over!
“ but only cartoon geeks like the folks who read this blog know who Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Tex Avery, Bill Hanna, Joe Barbera, etc. were”
— Well again, it's different in France. Nearly everyone knows Tex Avery, and a good chunk of people would say that "Hanna-Barbera" and "Chuck Jones" at least ring a bell.
French cartoon industry was never as flourishing as the American one, though — interestingly, most important French cartoons and animated films were offshoots of comics, whereas the opposite happened in the U.S.A. For instance, our longest-lasting animated film franchise are the AstĂ©rix films, and the greatest (in terms of output) Franco-Belgian animation studio, Belvision, was created by the editors behidn Tintin, AstĂ©rix and Spirou, and most of its films and TV series were adaptations of comics.
Achille:
“— Well again, it's different in France. Nearly everyone knows Tex Avery, and a good chunk of people would say that "Hanna-Barbera" and "Chuck Jones" at least ring a bell.”
…Again, it’s you folks who got it right! …More’s the pity for us!
Joe:
Sorry for my delay in responding. That's a funny anecdote about your father. Whether or not he said that in one of those fits of absent-mindedness that we are all prone to, I can certainly understand how someone who is not a cartoon geek... I mean, uh, a cartoon nerd... wait, that doesn't sound good either, scratch that... đŸ˜‚
Let's try that again, shall we? I can certainly understand how someone who is not well-versed in the history of animation (now that's more like it!) might mistakenly think that Hanna and Barbera were female creators, or that Hanna-Barbera was one female creator. After all, "Hanna" is a female given name and "Barbera" looks very similar to another female given name.
Come to think of it, I seem to recall wondering the same thing myself when I was a little kid reading the copyright notices on Scooby-Doo and Flintstones Valentines I received in school (though I wasn't at all confident in my hypothesis, given the dash in "Hanna-Barbera"). It was not until I was watching "Scooby-Doo, Where Are You!" on Kids' WB a few years later that I noticed that the ending credits read "Produced and Directed by Joseph Barbera and William Hanna." Then it dawned on me. "Oh!," I thought. "Now I finally understand what the name of this company means!" That is one of my most cherished "a-ha moments." (As I've said, Hanna-Barbera cartoons were (sadly) not a *major* part of my childhood, but there were (happily) *a* (tiny) part nonetheless!)
By the way, I love the gag on that Flintstones cover. Thanks for sharing it. It's amazing how they were able to come up with so many prehistoric animal gags. I never cease to be impressed by the creativity of these gags.
Lastly, I apologize profusely for my misunderstanding re: Vietnam. I confess I was somewhat confused by your comment about this in your previous post. You said you were not pro-military during your childhood and teenage years, which made me think you were too young to have fought in that conflict, but then you wrote "my fears and anger were actually directed toward those who commanded those troops to fight in Vietnam (where I spent far too many years of my life....", so I thought, "Maybe he served in the final years of the war. It's possible." Anyway, thanks for clearing that up. I'm relieved to learn that you did not have go through that horror (no disrespect intended to those who were not so fortunate).
Don’t give it a thought, Jamie.
Written exchanges such as these are always more open to misinterpretation, because the reader’s eye may process something differently than the writer might intend. There are no inflections or tones-of-voice for the reader to clue into and, because of the time-lag between comment and response, neither party can interject before said misinterpretation is fully formed.
WHEW! How’s THAT for analysis!
And, on the subject of “misinterpretation”, being much closer an observer of the cartoons than was my father, I saw the same credits that identified both Messrs. Hanna and Barbera as male and, thus, never fell victim to that misinterpretation.
Though, at that more tender age, I did tend to verbally refer to the pair as “Hanna-Barbara”, as in “Barbara Streisand”.
One additional observation… It was not uncommon for someone of “my father’s generation” to know or care little or nothing about such “trivialities”. It certainly appears to me that anyone who came of age before the 1960s was (…and this is a very awkward way of putting it, but it serves the purpose) “…way too concerned with being a grown-up” to be associated with the type of things I’ve always loved and celebrate on this Blog.
It is my belief, based upon living (as a young person) among a generation that is rapidly disappearing, and also being part of the succeeding generation that embraced and outright enshrined its icons of comics and animation culture (rather than discard them as disposable fluff), that my generation was the first to WHOLEHEARTEDLY become “fannish”, “nerdy”, “geeky”, or whatever term you choose to apply to this state of being! …We DIDN’T EVEN HAVE A WORD FOR IT back then, ye durned whippersnappers!
Of course there were exceptions – but I set this Line of Demarcation at the point where, when it came to animation, comics, and the like, one generation was “just doing a job” – and the next generation onward got into these pursuits because they were FANS of those folks that were “just doing a job”!
…And that’s how we got to be where we are today! GOLLY, I’m just brimming-over with analysis today, aren’t I?
Post a Comment