Will any Vertigo characters like Swamp Thing or Constantine appear in the DCU? DiDio said that he didn't want any mature reader books to cross over, because of the all-ages nature of the DCU's audience.I agree with this sentiment -- in part. I do believe that the DC Universe should be, for the most part, all-ages territory. If we want to get kids hooked at an early age, like so many of us life-long readers were, then the comics need to be something their parents feel comfortable buying for them or at the very least feel comfortable with their reading. There's plenty of places for comic with more adult content, both in other avenues within the Big Two and from other publishers. But I think in general, the main books with the iconic superheroes should be somewhat kid-friendly -- and by that I don't mean that they need to be "kiddie books," but kids should be able to pick them up and not be subjected to graphic sexuality and violence.
The problem with DiDio's "all ages" statement is that it does not represent the DC Universe as it stands right now. Not as much as the statement might imply, anyway.
Case in point, or case which is pointedly on my mind: Justice League of America #6.
You can certainly argue that Brad Meltzer isn't writing this book with kids in mind. For one, he's a novelist more used to writing fiction geared toward adults, but even more to the point, with this series he's writing for himself and people roughly the same age he is. The current JLA is aimed squarely at the people who grew up reading comics (specifically DC comics) in the seventies and eighties and who now are thirty- and forty-year-olds with (theoretically, debatably) more sophisticated tastes in story theme and structure. But what that means is the current JLA is not friendly to kids. (I don't believe sophistication or maturity has to equal kid-unfriendly, but in this case it does.)At that point in the story, the Red Tornado had achieved his long-held desire to be human. His robotic consciousness and powers had been transferred into a human body, so he was able to experience all the sensory highs of being human -- and, of course, the sensory lows. And it's in JLA #6 that Meltzer lets Reddy really feel those lows. Solomon Grundy beats the holy hell out of the Tornado, pummeling him nearly to death, breaking his ankle and other body parts...
...and then he rips the Tornado's arm off just below the elbow. Very, very graphically. We get Ed Benes' lovely depiction of de-meated and de-handed bone stuck out from the stump of Red Tornado's arm as he (Reddy, not Benes) screams in agony. (For bonus points, Grundy then eats the hand, though at least that act happens in shadow.)
This, in Dan Didio's "all ages" DC universe.
(Also, good times in Justice Society of America #3: as neo-Nazis tear apart a family reunion, little kids included. Not quite on par with the hand-eating in JLA, but a bit disturbing nonetheless. And let's not even touch on the amount of gratuitously graphic violence in Infinite Crisis.)
Look, I'm not squeamish when it comes to violence in comics -- Preacher is one of my all-time favorite series, and the sorts of violence routinely featured in that book far, far outpaced the recent events in JLA or JSA. But Preacher was in no way intended for kids and it didn't feature the big recognizable DC icons. Books like JLA and JSA should be treated as gateway books, comics that new readers (including kids, especially kids) interested in mainstream superhero books can pick up and get hooked by. Same goes for the main Avengers books, Teen Titans, the main X-Men books (just to touch on teams). There's plenty of places for the more mature, more graphic storytelling, even within the mainstream Marvel and DC lines.
Also, I'm not saying that violence shouldn't be part of JLA and its ilk. Violence is a large part of the tapestry of mainstream superhero comics and always has been. But the violence can certainly be treated a little differently, can't it, in certain books? What Grundy did to Red Tornado was thematically central to what Meltzer was doing with that story -- that scene might have been the central point of "The Tornado's Path." I believe, though, that the theme would have been as well served with, say, a shot of the Tornado on his back on the ground, Grundy clearly having him pinned and gripping his arm; appropriately disturbing sound effects; later shots where it's obvious that Reddy is missing part of his arm. The same events, the same meaning to Red Tornado (and therefore to the audience), but done in such a way that's at least closer to being truly an all-ages book. Less visceral, perhaps (in more than one sense), but still effective.
I'm a parent. I want my kids to read comics. I've already gotten my girls hooked by buying them their very own issues of Krypto the Superdog, based on the animated series. My older daughter loves to try to find comics from my stack I can read to her, but I'm very careful about what I let her look at -- y'know, one of my main responsibilities as a parent. When I was a kid, probably eight, nine years old, Justice League of America was one of my favorite books, one of the few I bought every month without fail. I don't remember anything in those issues my dad would particularly have objected to. But no way in hell would I want my kids reading something like the current JLA #6 until they were teenagers, and I think that's a shame and a disservice to a book which I think should be a way into comics for younger readers.
Am I wrong here? Am I being entirely too old-fogey for my own good? Do we just say "Well, there's the Johnny DC line and the Marvel Adventures line for the kids -- let us adults have our bloody arm-severings in our mainstream superhero comics?" Or are we assuming that kids aren't reading these books anyway, so we don't even have to worry about making them kid-friendly? Would all be made well if Dan DiDio just gave up on the myth that the DCU is truly all-ages and admitted that DC's mainstream output is geared toward adults? I'll readily admit that I could be wrong on this topic and that my views could be outdated or outmoded -- I'm really curious to hear what all seven of our readers have to say on the subject.
3 comments:
I find myself pretty divided on this issue. On one hand, I think it's the responsibility of the parent to supervise the literature his/her kids have access to, not so much "the industry." I'm not a big fan of censorship. And that type of corporate censorship just pushes all kinds of buttons.
But that said, I think there should be some kind of formula in place, a label, something that qualifies each book for its audience, if for nothing else than as a guide to help parents decide what is and what is not appropriate for their kids to read.
I do believe there should be some titles that are expected to maintain a certain level of age appropriateness, and those should be consistent. And writers should adhere to those guidelines.
I think some of the superhero titles, especially, should remember that there is an art to storytelling, and that subtlety can be used instead of the graphic uber-violence we have to endure in so much of our pop culture in order to access "story."
I'm not a big fan of censorship. And that type of corporate censorship just pushes all kinds of buttons.
Oh, I hate censorship. That's one of my biggest hot-button issues.
But saying "maybe this presentation isn't appropriate for this particular comic" isn't censorship, corporate or otherwise.
And I certainly agree that it's the parents' responsibility to watch what their kids are reading/watching/experiencing, but there should be some level of trust in the makers of the products being read, watched or experienced. Most comics from DC's Vertigo imprint say right there on the cover: Mature Readers. But if I were a parent and my nine-year-old brought home an issue of JLA, I wouldn't think for a second that I'd need to watch out for that comic, and would've gotten a serious shock when I flipped through it and saw Red Tornado... unhanded.
I have devoted much space to this exact subject on my own blog. My sons have become majorly interested in DC superheroes. It was easy enough to pick up old issues that I was familiar with - single issues or Showcase collections or whatever - but I had tuned out of mainstream comics 15 years ago because I wasn't happy where they were headed.
I decided to check out what was out there and appropriate for 11 year olds and I was pretty amazed that the violence has gotten more graphic, the sex has gotten more gratuitious, the presentation of women more sexist and general outlook of the books to be needlessly grim and sadly sensationalistic.
The problem is that superheroes are still sold as a children's medium out there in the mainstream, with toys and t-shirts and coloring books and cartoon shows. In the actual world of the source material, however, very little beyond the comics specifically based on cartoon shows are appropriate for those kids eating up the rest of the merchandise.
Though there are plenty of people who don't want to face up to it, superheroes WERE a child-appropriate medium until somewhere in the 1990s when the industry realized how many guys my age were out there ready to drop money and began catering to them. The mantra at the time was the comic books weren't just for kids anymore, but I don't see how that needed to be translated into what resulted. Imagine if one day it was decided that booze was going in all the candy in existence. "Candy isn't just for kids anymore."
Great. So what exactly do kids have when grown-ups co-opt their entertainment?
The irony is that as the comic book industry pulls away from children, the publishing world discovered that in the realm of both picture and chapter books, the kid market is a gold mine - and you can actually create well-crafted, intelligent, non-pandering product and get sales. AND you can gear things towards girls and get more sales! Amazing!
The mainstream comics industry largely ignored this, though. Now they attempt to talk up pretty sad circulation numbers. By cutting out kids from the majority of the market - and therefore, stifling the most important part of being a comic book fan, the weekly habitual run to the comic book store - they've killed any meaningful possibility of market growth.
There may be a future in graphic novels, but once the bookstores catch on that just because it has Batman in it doesn't mean it's appropriate for children, there is going to be hell to pay. It happens to every medium that shills violence to kids in the mainstream, you know?
So, yes, I entirely agree with what you are saying and I add that I think it is bad business - and bad craftsmanship. Making some kid appropriate does not mean making it stupid.
Thankfully, there are still scores of old comics that I can get my kids and that they love.
Post a Comment