(no subject)

[heidi]

At various times since the invention of the printing press, there have been attempts to control what is printed on the page, especially when those pages are accessable by children, regardless of whether the works were created *for* children.

This weekend, we talked about the comic book codes of the 1950s, which is still in place for members, although it's been refined twice since its creation in 1954.



The Comic Book Code of 1954

Section A

1) Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.

(2) No comics shall explicitly present the unique details and methods of a crime.

(3) Policemen, judges, Government officials and respected institutions shall never be presented in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority.

(4) If crime is depicted it shall be as a sordid and unpleasant activity.

(5) Criminals shall not be presented so as to be rendered glamorous or to occupy a position which creates a desire for emulation.

(6) In every instance good shall triumph over evil and the criminal punished for his misdeeds.

(7) Scenes of excessive violence shall be prohibited. Scenes of brutal torture, excessive and unnecessary knife and gunplay, physical agony, gory and gruesome crime shall be eliminated.

(8) No unique or unusual methods of concealing weapons shall be shown.

(9) Instances of law-enforcement officers dying as a result of a criminal’s activities should be discouraged.

(10) The crime of kidnapping shall never be portrayed in any detail, nor shall any profit accrue to the abductor or kidnaper. The criminal or the kidnaper must be punished in every case.

(11) The letters of the word “crime” on a comics-magazine cover shall never be appreciably greater in dimension than the other words contained in the title. The word “crime” shall never appear alone on a cover.

(12) Restraint in the use of the word “crime” in titles or subtitles shall be exercised.

General standards—Part B

(1) No comic magazine shall use the word horror or terror in its title.

(2) All scenes of horror, excessive bloodshed, gory or gruesome crimes, depravity, lust, sadism, masochism shall not be permitted.

(3) All lurid, unsavory, gruesome illustrations shall be eliminated.

(4) Inclusion of stories dealing with evil shall be used or shall be published only where the intent is to illustrate a moral issue and in no case shall evil be presented alluringly, nor so as to injure the sensibilities of the reader.

(5) Scenes dealing with, or instruments associated with walking dead, torture, vampires and vampirism, ghouls, cannibalism, and werewolfism are prohibited.

General standards—Part C

All elements or techniques not specifically mentioned herein, but which are contrary to the spirit and intent of the code, and are considered violations of good taste or decency, shall be prohibited.

Dialogue

(1) Profanity, obscenity, smut, vulgarity, or words or symbols which have acquired undesirable meanings are forbidden.

(2) Special precautions to avoid references to physical afflictions or deformities shall be taken.

(3) Although slang and colloquialisms are acceptable, excessive use should be discouraged and, wherever possible, good grammar shall be employed.

Religion

(1) Ridicule or attack on any religious or racial group is never permissible.

Costume

(1) Nudity in any form is prohibited, as is indecent or undue exposure.

(2) Suggestive and salacious illustration or suggestive posture is unacceptable.

(3) All characters shall be depicted in dress reasonably acceptable to society.

(4) Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.

NOTE.—It should be recognized that all prohibitions dealing with costume, dialog, or artwork applies as specifically to the cover of a comic magazine as they do to the contents.

Marriage and sex

(1) Divorce shall not be treated humorously nor represented as desirable.

(2) Illicit sex relations are neither to be hinted at nor portrayed. Violent love scenes as well as sexual abnormalities are unacceptable.

(3) Respect for parents, the moral code, and for honorable behavior shall be fostered. A sympathetic understanding of the problems of love is not a license for morbid distortion.

(4) The treatment of live-romance stories shall emphasize the value of the home and the sanctity of marriage.

(5) Passion or romantic interest shall never be treated in such a way as to stimulate the lower and baser emotions.

(6) Seduction and rape shall never be shown or suggested.

(7) Sex perversion or any inference to same is strictly forbidden.



So how many of those rules do we want to impose on fanfic and fanart? On the books available in a library? On the books in our local bookstores?

And what would the impact of A-3, A-10, B-2, B-4, B-5, Dialogue-2, Costume-1 and, of course, Marriage & Sex-3 be on a comic book version of, say, Goblet of Fire or Order of the Phoenix, or, in fact, a serialized verison of Prisoner of Azkaban?

Perhaps the reason we haven't been forced to endure an HP comic book serial yet is because there's no way it can comply with the Code.

Comments

[1anonymous1.livejournal.com]

A good part of that looks like nazi law or something.

[aquila1nz.livejournal.com]

Well it says its for members. Who are the members? Because surely the Buffy comics must have either been shorn of their buffyness (or their josh whedoness?) or just completely failed to live up to this.

Thinking of just the on example.

[owlman.livejournal.com]

This reminds me of comments connected with The Italian Job (the original rather than the crap new one). The reason it ends with a cliffhanger (quite literally!) is that to make a film at that time with the crooks getting away with it would have not gone done well with the ptb.

On the comics issue

[debellatrix.livejournal.com]

OK, it's been a while since I talked comics.

My first husband, who I've known since high school and am still very good friends with, was, until a few years ago, an avid collector of comic books. I remember looking through many of the poplar ones he collected through the 80s and early 90s (the Frank Miller Daredevil issues come to mind) and in looking at these codes, those comics didn't comply in *so* many ways.

I can only imagine that in the depiction of government officials, criminals, sex, torture, etc, today's graphic novels have only become more, er, well, graphic and "disrespectful". In contrast to what I remember the HP books are quite tame.

[ladylisse.livejournal.com]

*blink* I think I wholeheartedly agree with exactly one of those. The rest...yeesh. It sounds like an Onion parody or something.

[meril.livejournal.com]

I'm looking at my comics right now, for anything stamped on them mentioning this Comics Code--and none of mine have it.

The code doesn't cover all lines published by supposedly compliant publishers. There's DC's Vertigo line for example, which is what Sandman and Books of Magic were published under.

There are more comic publishers than Marvel and DC, and they don't hold to the Code either.

And, no, I don't want my material censored like this. That's why independent comic book stores are important. They kept comics as an art form alive.

[meril.livejournal.com]

Actually, edit that: Marvel no longer uses the Comics Code. They dropped it in 2001. I don't read Marvel lines, but apparently they put their own ratings on comics.

[jeanne-dark.livejournal.com]

*nodnod* The Comics Code is actually becoming a lot less important nowadays. Most people just aren't aware of what that stamp on comic books are supposed to be for, and, like others have said, it's just so confining that companies have just stopped adhering to it altogether.

As for this, from Heidi's original post:
Perhaps the reason we haven't been forced to endure an HP comic book serial yet is because there's no way it can comply with the Code.

I've actually been surprised at this for a while now, that there hasn't been an HP comic book, or, even more, a comic book version of the movies, considering that they're made by Warner Bros, and WB owns DC. But, then again, maybe I shouldn't be surprised, considering how badly they seem to be handling their own comic-based movies these days.

teensy correction

[gwendolyngrace.livejournal.com]

Sandman was published before DC decided to create the Vertigo line. When they did, Sandman was the flagship comic of the line, mostly because it was so successful, it convinced DC that it could support an entire line of mature comics.

Sorry. Not-so-closeted Sandman freak.

Gwen

Re: teensy correction

[meril.livejournal.com]

I only heard about the comic as it was ending back in 1995 so you know more about it than I would. No problem with corrections, y0.

I seem to read more self-published and small press comics than anything else so that Marvel and DC loop is kind of strange to me. ;)

[emiliap.livejournal.com]

I have to say that was very interesting to read about! Personally, I am thankful for these codes if it means we won't have to suffer through Harry Potter Comics....that would be simply terrible. Thanks for sharing :)

Hugs,
Kate

[harlequincy.livejournal.com]

Religion-1 is the only one I agree with. Oy vey, I'd leave fandom if we had to abide by those rules.

[ditsyaml.livejournal.com]

:: smocksmocksmock ::

sorry but your icon. Heh

[dragongirlg.livejournal.com]

Wow, interesting. If someone did want to publish an HP comic book, I suspect he/she probably would publish under a company that didn't follow the code in order to avoid trouble.

Thanks, Heidi!

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

Y'all have to note that date: 1954. Remember, Communist hunts, political blacklists, incredible oppression of women and minorities?

The Code started because some psychologist hack decided to rant against the comics of the day -- some of which were quite extreme (mostly the horror lines) -- and had quotes like (broad paraphrase) 'How could a young person enjoy the simple pleasure of two characters holding hands when he was used to people being thrown through windows?'

Well, because most people didn't read comics for delicate romances, dude.

So, like the music industry did in just the past decade or so, the comics publishers established their own restrictions to keep the federal government from slapping some on them.

However, like jeanne_dark said, both of the big publishers finally threw off the now-artificial, out-of-date restrictions of the Code, retaining it only for their youngest-audience titles (at least in DC's case, I think). To what I'm sure was their relief, they've had no real problems from it. Their flat-out 'adult' material (as in serious subjects, not just sexed-up) are clearly identified as such, no matter what the courts of the state of Texas think.

[kmai.livejournal.com]

i doubt that is the reason. If things like Johnny The Homicidal maniac and sell without complying to the code...(yay jhonen Vasquez!)

[klave.livejournal.com]

Ha ha ha! I love the people who wrote this! Can't you just imagine them sitting there, at their boring desks, with their anal tweed suits and declaring things such as 'If crime is depicted it shall be as a sordid and unpleasant activity' and 'Scenes dealing with, or instruments associated with walking dead, torture, vampires and vampirism, ghouls, cannibalism, and werewolfism are prohibited'. I think an uprising should be started in the fandom. We should be careful not to injure the sensibilities of the reader with uneccessary talk of evil unless it illustrates a moral point! We should not allow lurid and unsavoury fanart! We should be culturing a respect for parents and honourable behaviour in the fandom's youth! Let us rise up and overthrow the masters of masochism that have held our morals captive for many a year! Anybody with me?

Thought not.

*Huffs*