Skip to main content

Race in Comics

In the readings Christopher Priest kept mentioning how “institutionalized” racism, the racism you don’t even realize you are performing. And while he gives very interesting examples of how he has been discriminated against, there seems that there maybe a possibility that he is looking too deep into the race issue. When is it okay to joke about race, and not be considered a racist? Also, he is very annoyed that the comic book industry will not recognize someone as the first black editor, first black writer, etc. And while I can see where that would something meaningful who is actually in the industry, I rather wonder at its importance as a whole. As a reader of comics, I never really look to see who the author is, much less know their race. To have a position recognizing the first black person, the first woman, the first whatever, seems rather superfluous in practically any industry. Overall, it seems like he is much too sensitive about the issue of race. I did appreciate, however, that he admitted that there were very few black people in the comic book industry and therefore few minority writers were assigned major established characters or gained higher-up positions.



In the news paper article about the emergence of black characters in comic strips, I rather liked the character Franklin in “Peanuts.” It was cool that the writer was trying to write in a positive character of a black person into his comics. It makes sense though that the character doesn’t appear all of the time. If the children are living in suburbia, which was not originally open to the minority population, it is possible that they would have very little contact. Having this introduction of Franklin at a public beach is an opening for interaction. I must admit though because the comic is in a more abstract and less realistic style, I didn’t actually realize Franklin was black until I read it in the article. I just thought he was standing in a shadow or sunburned or something.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why blame comics for societal failure?

Why blame comics for societal failure? Society blamed comics for the societal failures because it was a fairly new industry, and as things seemed to go “wrong” they figured it must be comic books. When a child grew up during the war, his father was probably killing people and the military and his mother was probably making things in factories to help kill the opposition. The only things kids had to “babysit” them was comic books, and they read many different kinds. So when kids starting acting differently in this new generation the figured it must be the comic books. Society didn’t want to believe it may have been the internal and external scars war causes on the soldiers and their families. Also the fact that young unattended children are reading these comics may not be able to differentiate between fantasy and reality. When society fails it always needs a scapegoat then it was comic books next it was rock and roll. Society naturally resist change.

Mythology and Superheroes in Comics

Ohhh my goodness... When I decided on trying to analyze the mythological origins and references in superhero comics, I had no idea the can of worms I was opening up... On the one hand, it was awesome to see just how many connections there were between superheroes and psychology/mythology/philosophy, but all the information also made it terribly difficult to distinguish what I should be using and how to tie it all together. When I was talking to one of my sorority sisters about it she said, "Oh yeah, well, research essays are kind of like putting together puzzles..." and I think that really sums up what writing this paper was like for me. Fortunately, I was really interested throughout the whole process and I very much enjoyed writing the paper. Being a psychology major, I was especially interested in reading about the Jungian archetypes that had a lot of parallels with major modern comic books superheroes. I was also able to incorporate Joseph Campbell's "hero cycle...

The 1950s are often portrayed as a period of social cohesion. Why is this misleading?

When we think of the 1950's, most people think of similar things such as "Leave it to Beaver", very conservative and cliched pop music, and high patriotism. Our view of that time is one of social conformity to conservative values, with a traditional nuclear family where the father worked and the mother stayed home, where a majority of people attended church, where crime was relatively low, where a majority of American citizens were extremely patriotic, and where entertainment media emphasized these same conservative values and were subjected to censorship if they did not conform. This is misleading because while these things were all true to a certain extent, the world was obviously not perfect and not everyone was conforming or upholding traditional values, even if it seemed like they were. The 1950's were actually a very tumultuous time period, with the end of World War II leaving Europe war torn and in debt, the outbreak of the Korean War and the clashes of opinion...