Originaly posted at 'the Kingdom' in 'the Swamp/Working under "the heavy thumb of the comics code"....
I shared a few of my stories of running afoul of the Comics Code, and the legacy it's existence has left at one publisher. Also to be found on the original message board, stories from Steve Bissette about his experiences on Swamp Thing. Steve was one of the first to work at a mainstream company but Not under the code since the 50's. Beging with SAGA OF THE SWAMP THING #29 the rest of this series did not seek Code approval. This was seen by many as a signaling of the maturing of the comics industry, and paved the way for DC's "Vertigo" line and other adult-oriented comic books. Subsequent issues would have the words "Sophisticated Suspense" on the cover, to signify that the comic was targeted at more mature readers.
When i started doing work for Marvel in the early 90’s i was always chosen for ‘darker’ stories, so i kinda almost expected to have problems with the code, but i found the enforcement erratic at best at the time, vary arbitrary.
The one thing that i ran into frequently was the old ‘black blood’ clause, which i always found silly. I always thought that the black blood looked more ominous the red blood would have, i recall many other artists including my friend Bernard Mireault saying the same thing...but i guess they were more concerned with ‘lurid’ than ‘ominous’.
But really marvel at the time , or i suppose i should qualify - 'the editors at Marvel with whom i was working with at the time' were doing a bang up job of censoring themselves, frequently anticipating the problems that would get the code’s attention and getting rid of them before it was reviewed.
One panel that made me just laugh was a shot of the main character being pulled up through the ceiling in Saint Sinner 2, he was wearing a full body strait jacket in the previous scene but ‘mish mash’ (a rather swampy’ish character who’s body was made up of objects she absorbed from her surroundings) had freed him by absorbing the jacket, leaving him nude.
So in the panel in question you could see the protagonist's butt as he was pulled through a vortex...again not at all lurid a shot, mostly obscured by shadows, but still when the book was printed there were a pair of white BVDs on him that i didn’t draw....HA!
Also there were 3 versions of the cover for Saint Sinner book 1.
The first one that i wanted to use depicted the main character Philip Fetter lunging out at us, screaming. The demon and angel he was supposed to be possessed by appearing behind him under each arm. There was graphic blocking around his figure that completed the subliminal indication of a cross, with Phillip’s out stretched arms spread across in a familiar fashion.
It struck me as appropriate given the subject matter of the book, and it’s title, ‘Saint Sinner’.
It was nixed on grounds that it would upset christians and likely run afoul of the code...to which i remember stammering...”the book is called bloody SAINT SINNER, we’re depicting a demonic possession and a blasphemies characterization of an Angel....they are already going to hate this book! Why do we care?!”
It was only published as the cover to a Clive Barker zine that was featuring a profile of the ‘barkerverse’ (later the ‘Razorline’)
The redo i did was somewhat lack luster and i refused to do a third, so a composite of the two was cooked up by the bullpen and given one of those god awful foil jobbies.
phooy.
There were nemrous other ocasions where i was asked to make silly changes but those were the ones where the code was used as the excuse.
While they now do have a number of titles that are geared twards a slightly more mature croud, I can’t say it’s changed all that much at the big M, having recently been asked to change a scene that had some farm animals fornicating in the foreground ( a silly shot really, nothing gratuitous or obscene ).
this is the original,
and this is what we ended up with.
The code is gone (at marvel, a ratings system replaced it) but in it’s place are thousands of ‘concerned parents’ from who strongly worded letters do seem to hold sway with several centers of authority at the office, regardless if they truly represent the readers or not.
As justification for the change one such letter was offered up, having been received by email that very day...one of thousands they already get on a regular basis.
I tried to argue that they aren't likely to represent the market Marvel is read by dominantly ( in this case a self identified catholic mother who picked up the books in question - amazing spiderman - at a bizzare on free comics day to read with her children, and who was ‘shocked and dismayed’ to see spidy take the lords name in vain” - to which the editor told me he was sure that spidy did no such thing in the book in question...???!!! ) or at least that their entire line should not be geared to satisfy a single market.
I was generally agreed with!..but was told this is the way it is.
Not too sure what i think about that, but it leans heavily to ‘exasperated with humans”.
Also the key figures to who i found appeals were to be made, flatly refused to have any "pig sex" in their books! Imagine!
To marvels defense, the book was not under their mature readers banner that would allow for farmyard fornication (as are their 'Max' titles) but under the PG rating. They weren't supposed to be PG when they were conceived, but I'm told due to a 'slip up' in the office when the new rating's system was instituted, the Muties books were slated as PG along with the X titles they are most closely associated with. The PG rating pre assumes youths as fragile and innocent as 8 years of age will get their hands on the book. So NO PIG SEX KIDS!
Well i find the whole thing pretty silly. The book didn’t in this case suffer from the lack of pig sex, in fact I'm extremely proud of this one. But that there was even this much fuss at all over some dirtypigs, in a book that depicts the death of several innocent sheep is just goofy
Well back to the much more historically significant 'Saga of the Swamp thing'
I shared a few of my stories of running afoul of the Comics Code, and the legacy it's existence has left at one publisher. Also to be found on the original message board, stories from Steve Bissette about his experiences on Swamp Thing. Steve was one of the first to work at a mainstream company but Not under the code since the 50's. Beging with SAGA OF THE SWAMP THING #29 the rest of this series did not seek Code approval. This was seen by many as a signaling of the maturing of the comics industry, and paved the way for DC's "Vertigo" line and other adult-oriented comic books. Subsequent issues would have the words "Sophisticated Suspense" on the cover, to signify that the comic was targeted at more mature readers.
When i started doing work for Marvel in the early 90’s i was always chosen for ‘darker’ stories, so i kinda almost expected to have problems with the code, but i found the enforcement erratic at best at the time, vary arbitrary.
The one thing that i ran into frequently was the old ‘black blood’ clause, which i always found silly. I always thought that the black blood looked more ominous the red blood would have, i recall many other artists including my friend Bernard Mireault saying the same thing...but i guess they were more concerned with ‘lurid’ than ‘ominous’.
But really marvel at the time , or i suppose i should qualify - 'the editors at Marvel with whom i was working with at the time' were doing a bang up job of censoring themselves, frequently anticipating the problems that would get the code’s attention and getting rid of them before it was reviewed.
One panel that made me just laugh was a shot of the main character being pulled up through the ceiling in Saint Sinner 2, he was wearing a full body strait jacket in the previous scene but ‘mish mash’ (a rather swampy’ish character who’s body was made up of objects she absorbed from her surroundings) had freed him by absorbing the jacket, leaving him nude.
So in the panel in question you could see the protagonist's butt as he was pulled through a vortex...again not at all lurid a shot, mostly obscured by shadows, but still when the book was printed there were a pair of white BVDs on him that i didn’t draw....HA!
Also there were 3 versions of the cover for Saint Sinner book 1.
The first one that i wanted to use depicted the main character Philip Fetter lunging out at us, screaming. The demon and angel he was supposed to be possessed by appearing behind him under each arm. There was graphic blocking around his figure that completed the subliminal indication of a cross, with Phillip’s out stretched arms spread across in a familiar fashion.
It struck me as appropriate given the subject matter of the book, and it’s title, ‘Saint Sinner’.
It was nixed on grounds that it would upset christians and likely run afoul of the code...to which i remember stammering...”the book is called bloody SAINT SINNER, we’re depicting a demonic possession and a blasphemies characterization of an Angel....they are already going to hate this book! Why do we care?!”
It was only published as the cover to a Clive Barker zine that was featuring a profile of the ‘barkerverse’ (later the ‘Razorline’)
The redo i did was somewhat lack luster and i refused to do a third, so a composite of the two was cooked up by the bullpen and given one of those god awful foil jobbies.
phooy.
There were nemrous other ocasions where i was asked to make silly changes but those were the ones where the code was used as the excuse.
While they now do have a number of titles that are geared twards a slightly more mature croud, I can’t say it’s changed all that much at the big M, having recently been asked to change a scene that had some farm animals fornicating in the foreground ( a silly shot really, nothing gratuitous or obscene ).
this is the original,
and this is what we ended up with.
The code is gone (at marvel, a ratings system replaced it) but in it’s place are thousands of ‘concerned parents’ from who strongly worded letters do seem to hold sway with several centers of authority at the office, regardless if they truly represent the readers or not.
As justification for the change one such letter was offered up, having been received by email that very day...one of thousands they already get on a regular basis.
I tried to argue that they aren't likely to represent the market Marvel is read by dominantly ( in this case a self identified catholic mother who picked up the books in question - amazing spiderman - at a bizzare on free comics day to read with her children, and who was ‘shocked and dismayed’ to see spidy take the lords name in vain” - to which the editor told me he was sure that spidy did no such thing in the book in question...???!!! ) or at least that their entire line should not be geared to satisfy a single market.
I was generally agreed with!..but was told this is the way it is.
Not too sure what i think about that, but it leans heavily to ‘exasperated with humans”.
Also the key figures to who i found appeals were to be made, flatly refused to have any "pig sex" in their books! Imagine!
To marvels defense, the book was not under their mature readers banner that would allow for farmyard fornication (as are their 'Max' titles) but under the PG rating. They weren't supposed to be PG when they were conceived, but I'm told due to a 'slip up' in the office when the new rating's system was instituted, the Muties books were slated as PG along with the X titles they are most closely associated with. The PG rating pre assumes youths as fragile and innocent as 8 years of age will get their hands on the book. So NO PIG SEX KIDS!
Well i find the whole thing pretty silly. The book didn’t in this case suffer from the lack of pig sex, in fact I'm extremely proud of this one. But that there was even this much fuss at all over some dirtypigs, in a book that depicts the death of several innocent sheep is just goofy
Well back to the much more historically significant 'Saga of the Swamp thing'
posted by max at Wednesday, June 19, 2002
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home