It's a MAD world

The History of MAD "magazine" as it came to be,  was a very surprising part of the readings this week for me. I grew up reading MAD thanks to the influence of my older brother who eagerly awaited each release when we were children (and thanks to our mother who gave in to our every whim during our visits every two weeks). I had no idea that 1) it had been around so long and 2) it was such an influential and controversial publication. It must have taken some real "gusto" to take on McCarthy in such a satirical manner, given the craze that the Wisconsin Senator gave rise to, in the form of a communist witch hunt. Arie Kaplan credits MAD for such future works as The Daily Show, Saturday Night Live and The Onion, all definite favorites of mine.  I find it even more surprising that as they faced these "morality committees" that these men chose to SAVE the publication by changing it from a comic book to a magazine so that it didn't have to follow the new rules being laid out. This was a truly creative solution. THANK GOODNESS for us that these men were smart enough to see what a good thing they had.   Considering that the group was more focused on the thriller/fright comic genre, it seems a bit miraculous in fact. This same group of men were responsible for creating another favorite of mine, Tales from the Crypt, which, in its TV format has kept my attention for years, and yet, I never knew of its comic book origins. I am ever amazed to learn each semester, how very little I know about the world I live in, even when it comes to things that I am genuinely interested in. (Side thought- can a person simply stay in college forever?)

I haven't picked up an issue of MAD magazine in years, in fact, the last issue I read was gifted to me in order to "lift my spirits" during a hospital stay over 6 years ago. However, in light of the things that I've read this week I feel compelled to seek out old copies of this magazine, and to re-visit my love of the funny stories and ads with a new adult perspective on the world, not to mention trying to pick out the writers' subtle (or not) tributes to their Jewish culture. As a child, I certainly could not have understood what the writers were attempting to portray about the world we lived in, it was simply a humor packed magazine with funny drawings that caught my attention. I find it even more surprising that I never really thought of MAD magazine as a comic book publication. I guess this goes back to the whole debate about what is a comic book, and what is a graphic novel? Apparently it is still unclear to me. With its lack of Super Heroes and dramatic themes, I simply didn't categorize this publication with the rest, and yet, as I look at the images in "Krakow to Krypton" it is clear to me that this is a comic book. I wonder what I would get out of reading these magazines today? I can't wait to find out, and I can't wait to plead my case to my husband that a subscription to MAD magazine will be beneficial to my learning experience in college this fall.

The Golden Age?

The Golden Age? While amazing characters were drawn and incredible stories written, it is disheartening to learn of so many people robbed of their artistic rights over the characters and stories they had written. The comic book industry was very young, so I hope that I learn going forward, that these were just blips, mistakes made in childhood and learned from with age.  It is this issue of "credit for works" that struck me the most throughout this week's assigned readings from Arie Kaplan's "From Krakow to Krypton: Jews and Comic Books."

I wonder...

Did these companies simply not take the new world of comics seriously, did they not think it would have staying power and therefore not consider what they were doing at least in a serious way? Or did they knowingly take advantage of a young group of artists and writers?   It seems to me that these companies struck gold and the people responsible for the works were afterthoughts.  Did the fact that many of these young writers and creators were Jewish make it easier for them to get away with such a thing, or am I simply misunderstanding the time in which these things took place and was this kind of thing rather common place? I guess these are the questions I am left with after this weeks readings.

  On a side note...I've been very sick this week. While resting up and in between school reading, I took the time to sit down with another of Eisner's comics. I found a  gem of a  book at Appleton's "Half Price Books." It is a POP-UP version of a "The Sprit" comic, in which The Spirit knowingly lets a villain get away because she was his childhood sweetheart. I'm not a huge fan of comics, I'd say I started to have a bit of a "crush" on the genre after reading Spiegelman's Maus I & II, followed by Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis, but I am not by any means an avid comic book reader.  But after reading these past few weeks a bit about the idea of Super heroes in comics, during our course readings, I am eager to learn more about Eisner's "super-hero" The Spirit, because he is so different. Not the super power wielding super hero, but the average Joe Super Hero. Is this why The Spirit lets the villain get away in this book? Because he's human? Would Superman let her go or would he demand that justice be served? If anyone is interested, Half Price Book's in Appleton had quite a few copies of this Pop-up version of The Spirit, and they seem to have a relatively good selection of comic book works and graphic novels. I picked up quite a few. I used to skip this section of the store during my regular visits, however, I'll be sorting through this area as well now.

Will Eisner: A Contract With God " A look at Story 3, THE SUPER

            While all four of the stories that encompass Will Eisner’s A Contract With God, are unsettling in some way, it is perhaps the third story, “The Super” that was most disturbing to me. At different points of the story one finds themselves sympathizing and/or being disgusted with each of the main characters. The story is an amazing depiction of what life in the tenement style housing of the 1930’s in the Bronx was like; crowded, everyone struggling and everyone knowing each and every neighbor’s business. The story shows the struggle between the rich and the poor, those with power and those without and how these groups can be pitted against each other. At the most basic level, this is a story of a German Super, who is lonely and poor and tired of the complaints of the tenants that reside in the building for which he is in charge, and a Jewish household who simply wants some hot water. It is difficult to discern exactly what Eisner was hoping his readers would get out of this story, is there a message or is he simply telling a tale of something he witnessed?

            The reader is clearly not meant to care too deeply for the Super, he is depicted as somewhat of an Ogre, an angry man who curses his tenants and clings to pornography to cure his loneliness. However, it is important to note that the Super really does nothing wrong until he is propositioned by a tenant, a 10 year old Jewish girl, to “take a peak” for a nickel. The gut reaction of the reader is to hate the Super, how could he do this with a 10 year old girl? However, this is not your average 10 year old girl. Eisner depicts her from the very beginning as seemingly old for her age and very sly. In fact, it is the young girl who tempts the Super, then kills his dog (his only companion), steals his money box and runs, accusing him of wrong doing, knowing very well that no one will believe him over her. In the end, the Super kills himself and the young girl sits greedily counting the money she stole from him. So, if this story is telling us something, what is it exactly? Are we to infer that the young girl is evil, or the Super? We discussed this in class and I got the impression that most found the Super to be a bad man for sure, but the young girl was the one most declared “evil.” Personally, I think the moral of the story is that the times these people lived in were hard, that lonely people will do unthinkable things given the right circumstances, and that even the young can be capable of terrible acts of cruelty in the face of poverty. I don’t believe that the author wants us to take either of the characters’ sides. I believe Eisner was just providing an example of life in this setting which he describes more than once as a “ship anchored in concrete” as well as its residents whom he describes in the introduction as being “imprisoned.” The image of the “crowded and tight ship” along with the idea of being “imprisoned” even if only economic bonds are the ones doing the shackling, gives me a sense that Eisner is simply trying to convey that seemingly inhumane acts can become the every day norm, when living in such conditions.

Will Eisner: A Contract With God " A look at the title story"

This week I had the pleasure of reading Will Eisner’s A Contract With God. The novel contains four separate stories. The title story, A Contract With God, is truly a heartbreaking tale. The idea of a contract or a covenant between God and the Jewish people, is not a new idea by any means, in fact it is a theme that is seen over and over throughout the Hebrew Bible. What makes the contract of this story different is that it is a contract that is initiated by Frimme Hersh, the main character of the story, and not by God. In fact, it is important to note that from the point that Frimme makes this contract with God, the reader is never led to any conclusion one way or the other as to whether or not God agrees to Frimme’s terms. Never the less, after the death of Frimme’s adopted daughter Rachele, Frimme declares to God that He broke their contract, and because of this Frimme changes the way he proceeds to live his life, becoming hard and cold and greedy and less concerned with doing good works. It is this theme of "the contract" that caught my curiosity the most.

            When thinking about covenants made by God in the Hebrew Bible, immediately the story of the Flood comes to mind, and the promise that God made to never flood the world again. After I had read the story of Frimme Hersh, and as I was revisiting Eisner’s amazing illustrations, this is the covenant that came to my mind. I wonder if Eisner may have been alluding to this promise, through his images, in the very beginning of the story. Eisner tells us that on the day of Rachele’s burial, it rained quite heavily, in fact, he uses the phrase “without mercy” to explain the sheer amount of rain that fell, and we see that the streets are in fact flooding. The image of the rain falling so mercilessly, is particularly striking on Page 7, as we see the weary Frimme Hersh climbing the front stairs to the tenement. At first when I read the story, I was more intrigued by the increase in the fury of the storm when Frimme curses God for breaking their contract. It wasn’t until my second look that I was reminded that the rain had started long before Frimme argued with God. Perhaps this downpour was a reminder that God kept this promise, this agreement, to never flood the Earth and the contrast is that God made this promise, it was not a promise that man made and then God agreed to. Perhaps the story is telling us that this is not how it works. This point is perhaps made clearer towards the end of the story when Frimme attempts to create a new contract with God and dies of an assumed heart attack, at the exact moment a bolt of lightning strikes and an “angry wind swirled about the tenements.” One might conclude that the author is relaying that God could simply take no more of Frimme's demands and curses.