I sort of accidentally brought up a rather sensitive issue when I started a thread about women in comics. I'm the type of guy who tends to swing a bat at beehives so I figured I'd take another crack at a subject that's been irking my mind lately.

Comics, like most artistic mediums, have a long history of offensive stereotypes. What I'm curious about, however, are the artists who use these types of things in a self aware manner. There are a range of creators who utilize these dated figures of a past age to ridicule the concept of stereotype. Or, possibly, to point out the prejudgices of today with their less subtle counterparts of yesteryear.

I want to know what some of you people think about this method of storytelling. When asked about his Angelfood McSpade character, Robert Crumb stated that he didn't invent such offensive imagery. It existed all along and he was just pointing at an ugly aspect of the underbelly of America. (He also mentions that most of his critics in this regard are liberal white people. This is another interesting point for a debate like this)

Do you think that Crumb's rebuttal is valid? Does drawing characters like Angelfood McSpade make him a racist?

What about comics creators who do the same sort of thing but also belong to the race that's being stooped into caricature? George Herriman's Krazy Kat is occasionally brought up in this regard, but another good example is Aaron McGruder's The Boondocks. (Especially the animated television program based on the comic strip) Are these examples of self aware black stereotyping more "justified" than a white cartoonists'? If so then why so?

I think some of the finest artistic inquiries into racial identity have been made in the comics medium. Will Eisner's "Fagin the Jew", for example, is an excellent case study of the nature of offensive stereotypes. (It's also an indirect response to Eisner's own use of racist stereotyping in the 1940's Spirit comic) In this regard I believe comics to be much more mature than TV, cinema, music, and even sometimes literature.

Your thoughts?

...

By the way, I'm not talking about censorship here. I want to know what you think about this in terms of whether or not it's tasteful or appropriate.

swing a bat at beehives
lik dis?

this is such a weighty topic that my response can in know way be even completed in the 30 minute break i am currently on.

racism in comics is like racism in movies...its there, and rather than focus on whether the artist behind it is racist or not (and if we should lynch him or her, the racist bastards!) i think it should be first noted if there is a message behind the racism shown or not.

is it propoganda for racism or a comic making a joke about a certain race, like the comic skullbie posted? if so, then there is really no purpose for it and feel free to move along.

If there is a message being said about racism then that is what is important. racism is like violence, or sex, or any other sensitive subject material in comics or any media...there has to be a message behind it or its just pointless and irrelevant. racism can be a great storytelling tool if used correctly. it can leave a lasting impact and touch people deeply. It's something that everyone has an opinion on, so use it! but use it wisely.

I have read comics on DD that are highly racist, but I would not like to give such comics additional readership by mentioning them over providing links to them.

I think it's funny. It doesn't offend me but I'm white so being in the majority race it's hard to put myself in anothers shoes. I'm a wussy when it comes to doing those jokes myself tho. That's why I quit doing Sammy the Skunk becasue I had written a character based off "black face" cartoons of the 30s. It was satire making fun of that practice and in no way was I saying that I bought into the stereotype of the character. But I just couldn't go through with it. I posted my art on a few message boards and they all seemed quite offended. Well I still think it was pretty funny but IDK if I'll ever get the guts to go through with it and maybe ultimately that's for the best.

Air Raid Robertson
He also mentions that most of his critics in this regard are liberal white people. This is another interesting point for a debate like this

That's a pathetic, weak, idiotic defence. Apply it to other things and you'll see. It's not interesting it's bad.
-So mentally handicapped people should be solely responsible for defending themselves etc. That doesn't really work out does it? Not so "interesting" in that case...
Attacking people for defending others is a strategy racists love. In South Africa white people who stood up for blacks were called Kaffir lovers and suffered persecution, and do you remember those young Jewish men who were taken away and murdered when they went down to help support the black people in Mississippi in the 60's?

What's more interesting is that people like that choose to attack their critics as people and not address what their critics say.

-I'm not criticising you Air Raid, it's just that that line of thinking has some problems.

ozoneocean

Air Raid Robertson
He also mentions that most of his critics in this regard are liberal white people. This is another interesting point for a debate like this

That's a pathetic, weak, idiotic defence. Apply it to other things and you'll see. It's not interesting it's bad.
-So mentally handicapped people should be solely responsible for defending themselves etc. That doesn't really work out does it? Not so "interesting" in that case...
Attacking people for defending others is a strategy racists love. In South Africa white people who stood up for blacks were called Kaffir lovers and suffered persecution, and do you remember those young Jewish men who were taken away and murdered when they went down to help support the black people in Mississippi in the 60's?

What's more interesting is that people like that choose to attack their critics as people and not address what their critics say.

-I'm not criticising you Air Raid, it's just that that line of thinking has some problems.

I understand your point.

I do, however, think there's a difference between South African apartheid and a Robert Crumb comic book.

I'm certainly not going to say that white people aren't allowed to comment on what they perceive to be racism against black people. I just think it's weird when it seems like they're the only ones who do.

To tell you the truth, I've yet to read an interview with a black cartoonist where they call out Robert Crumb as a racist for his comics. I've yet to hear a black comic book reader call Robert Crumb a racist either. (I've heard plenty of "sex pervert", but that's like calling the sky blue or water wet really) I have, however, heard a lot of white cartoonists and white comic book fans call Crumb a racist.

I'm sure that there are such opinions out there, but they don't seem to be prominent whenever this debate is initiated. Why is that?

Air Raid Robertson
I'm sure that there are such opinions out there, but they don't seem to be prominent whenever this debate is initiated. Why is that?

I can't criticise crumb for that work because I haven't seen the whole thing, nor have I really wanted to. But to answer your "why is that" question:
Again, you're framing the whole idea as if it's somehow wrong for people who aren't the direct target of something racialist to be the ones to point it out.

It really doesn't matter one whit weather they're "white liberal" or whatever. What matters is weather what they're saying has merit in the first place! ;)

-----------------
If you really and truly want to know why they have the background they do and they speak out about those things, it's pretty simple:

1. It was easier for those people to speak out about such things and be listened to without just being dismissed as some disaffected, whining minority.

2. Interviewers were more likely to seek them out because of their background. Especially given that Black people make up something like 10% of the U.S. population; it was going to be a LOT easier to find a white liberal academic or cartoonist with familiarity with the work, an opinion on the matter, and time to devote to giving someone their views on it.

3. Black intellectuals working at fighting discrimination and trying to get ahead in the world at that time had a lot more significant things to face and deal with than depictions of characters in underground comic books. -That doesn't mean it wasn't important, didn't matter, or not harmful, just that many other things took precedence. :)

Women can write certain things about women that men can't get away with.
Gay people can write certain things about gay people that straights can't get away with.
Jews can write Jews, transpeople can write transpeople, little people can write little people...
...and racial minorities can write things about their own race that people outside of it cannot get away with.

When you're in a minority group, you can make fun of it. When you're not, you do have to think hard about what it is you're saying, because you're at risk of making a complete asshole of yourself.

Now, with things like Crumb's comics, he seems to be intentionally trying to cause offense to people, which is quite different from people who think they're writing excellent minority characters, only to bollocks them up.

White people are the only ones complaining about Crumb because they're the only ones reading him. Black people probably aren't picking this up in the first place. The whole thing is white culture, and it's not appealing to black people even if it wasn't full of racism. So saying the opinions of the "white liberals" who read it are invalid it wrong, and absurdly so.
"We're going to make a comic that only white people will read, and if any of those white people think it's bad, well their opinions don't matter because they aren't black, and the only people whose opinions would matter (blacks) we have removed from our readership pool before they could even take offense."

I don't think it's realistic to say that black comic book readers are universally ignorant of Crumb's work. Nor, do I think, are there a lack of possible commentators on his work.

I've actually read plenty of interviews and essays from black comics creators regarding racism in comics. I've read and listened to a wide divergence of discussion on the racial aspects of Krazy Kat, the Ebony White character in The Spirit, Luke Cage, The X-Men, Spawn, The Boondocks, and many other books.

But, well, when it comes to Crumb, I hear nothing. I think it's bizarre since he's such a significant figure in comics. You'd think his stuff would be brought up in a discussion like this more often.

And, once again, I'd like to reiterate that I don't believe that white people shouldn't be allowed to comment on what they perceive to be as racism against black people.

But Air raid, you're ignoring that this was very much work of it's time, was underground, and that crumb didn't have a wide audience. Most of the negative criticism I've seen in relation to that work was contemporary with it.

All those other examples of work you mention are either modern, extremely popular, or both.

There's a massive difference there :)

Perhaps you're right. My perspective may be skewed by the fact that my local museum just had a gallery showing of Crumb's stuff a couple of months ago. There was some noise in a couple of newspapers over the misogyny and racism of his artwork.

But, when I attended the gallery, there wasn't any sign of this "controversy". No protestors, no police presence, and nothing else of that sort. As a matter of fact, I saw lots of people there admiring the work. Nobody seemed to feel objectified by it at all.

And, well, it's not like there's a deficit of controversy in my community when it comes to art galleries. Sheperd Fairey's exhibit at the Modern Art Museum drew a lot of fire from the locals. The man himself even got arrested while attending the opening day ceremony. (Some old warrant from five years ago)

I don't wanna obsess about race in comics.

Because I'm a pro freedom of speech person and that includes the fact that people have a right to express their racist ideas in a comic. As long as its not about calling for physical violence against the target race, that's all fine.

I don't get offended when I saw the cartoons in some neo-nazi website that bashes asians. They say that we're dog-eaters and we might eat your pet dog. That we eat weird food. That we imitate the black people's gangsta ways. That we got small dicks. That we all know kung fu. That we're all nerds in Math or Anime. That our women are nothing more than sex slaves to the white man. That we're all a bunch of commies.

I don't care. Say what you want. It only gets exposed that you're idiot white supremacists who blame jews and black people for a clogged toilet. Your racism won't gain any traction. Why do you think white supremacists are the favorite guilt-by-association group (you don't like the bankers, you're pro gun, you're a christian, that means you must be a white supremacist!!!)?

Yes a white supremacist is bad. But restricting freedom of speech is the worse and more offensive issue at hand.

I don't want everyone to feel uptight about thinking whether or not they're gonna be putting in a racial stereotype in their comic.
(ex: black ghetto dialog that's full of "yo" and "you know what I'm sayin" and "ma nigga")

Just sit back, relax, and spit out whats on your mind.

This is a free country.

Yes to freedom. No to tyranny.

This is my 2 cents. :)

Air Raid Robertson
Perhaps you're right. My perspective may be skewed by the fact that my local museum just had a gallery showing of Crumb's stuff a couple of months ago. There was some noise in a couple of newspapers over the misogyny and racism of his artwork.

-Any controversy would be re-heated stuff from the 1970's. It was current then but no one is going to get too upset about it now.

It's just the same as you might get certain commentators writing articles about violence and misogyny in cinema because of a recent public re-screening of A Clockwork Orange, but no one is really going to cause a fuss apart from that because that controversy is 50 years old.

kyupol
I don't get offended when I saw the cartoons in some neo-nazi website that bashes asians.

There's a huge difference between seeing racism where you expect to see it (a Neo-Nazi site), and seeing it in a mainstream context, though. Nobody takes Neo-Nazis seriously apart from other shithead Neo Nazis. But if, say, Brian Vaughan*, a mainstream comic writer, started portraying all his Asian characters as dog-eaters, and black characters as gangstas, and Latin characters as sombrero-wearing Mariachis, it would have a way different impact.

Free speech goes both ways. In the end, writers have the same right to create racist shit as I have to call them assholes for writing it.




*Not that he would ever, ever do that.

Has anyone seen the documentary called Crumb?
It seriously made me hate Robert Crumb even thought that wasn't it's goal. Crumb's work has nothing to do with wanting to challenge peoples ideas about race as some people might say, and do defend him with throughout the movie. It's a reflection of unconscious tacit stereotyped knowledge that Crumb keeps on some level in his brain. He wrote some comics for a while on LSD. He has said time and time again things to the extent of not knowing what he's going to say when he starts a comic or drawing, he just let's it come out of him. What makes up racism is the little things, not necessarily blatant hate. So I think it's very fair to say that Crumb's art is racist.
Not to mention how incredibly sexist it is. At one point in the documentary Crumb visits his brother who tell him how he use to indecently touch women in public. He tells a story about one day when this happens, and Crumb is just laughing and not at all realizing the severity of the situation.
Damn do I hate Robert Crumb
This should be the movie http://crackle.com/c/Crumb

CaptainKickas
Has anyone seen the documentary called Crumb?

Yeah, I saw it back in art college years ago. He was a bit of a sad case really, his whole family was. Either they have hereditary mental problems, or it was just a bad family environment that caused them to turn out the way they did. It was very sad actually. At the end of the film I found him a bit distasteful, but I felt more sorry for him and his whole family rather than hated him.

ozoneocean

CaptainKickas
Has anyone seen the documentary called Crumb?

Yeah, I saw it back in art college years ago. He was a bit of a sad case really, his whole family was. Either they have hereditary mental problems, or it was just a bad family environment that caused them to turn out the way they did. It was very sad actually. At the end of the film I found him a bit distasteful, but I felt more sorry for him and his whole family rather than hated him.

Ok I was reacting to my repulsion of his comics, but the way everyone writes off his comics as artistic instead of the trash they are really presses a button with me. I'll rephrase hate to say I'm repulsed by his sexism and racism. But I agree everyone is a product of their environment and biology.

megan_rose
But if, say, Brian Vaughan*, a mainstream comic writer, started portraying all his Asian characters as dog-eaters, and black characters as gangstas, and Latin characters as sombrero-wearing Mariachis, it would have a way different impact.
*Not that he would ever, ever do that.

the thing that offends me the most about racial steretypes is how freaking tired and trite they are. I mean, go ahead, poke fun at different racial groups, but don't just rely on what other racists have already said.

Even things like 'a satiric reference to this old racist stereotype' generally don't work (at least, I've never seen them work) because they invariably end up saying the same things as the older works, but expect that by simply being read in a modern setting they'll come across differently. (that was a complicated sentence.. sry.)

I'm not for censorship either (I'm sure none of us are) but I AM for quality comics in which the creator actually took a second to come up with something original, and not re-use the same old stereotypes.

I've watched a couple episodes of "The Boondocks" and I honestly think that McGrudger is trying to show how this generation of Black-Americans are wasting the freedom their ancestors fought for. I'm not trying to say all black people are like this I personally know alot of very intelligent and civil black folks, but I see a whole lot of them that do act very similar to the stereotypes portrayed in that show, and yes even my black friends get pissed off at their behavior because it ruins the way other people think about them.

Going along with what Kyupol said You can use stereotypes to prove a point put you do need to realize when your going too far. Aaron McGrudger kind of kills his own message because he fills his show up with so much of that crap that it really does seem like a racist tirade.

Poink
Worse part: Her french teacher was A stereotype.
SHE ENJOYED SMOKING CIGARETTES AND EATING CROISSANTS AND SMELLING BAD

Did she have a hairy...

...poodle?

I remember a girl who created a comic, to prove she could get published.
It was the story of a teenager chick who had superpower.
And there were only a few characters. Her, her best friends and teachers.
And into the teachers crew
there was a FRENCH TEACHER

her name was

"Madame Bonnebonjour"
which means "Madam GoodHello" in french
Since WHEN
FRENCH teacher had to be french and had to have FRENCH words in their name?
That's like an american chick named "BADHAMBURGER" or a german guy "GUTTENTAGFRAU"
ridiculous.
Worse part: Her french teacher was A stereotype.
SHE ENJOYED SMOKING CIGARETTES AND EATING CROISSANTS AND SMELLING BAD

lolol srsly guys

ozoneocean

Air Raid Robertson
He also mentions that most of his critics in this regard are liberal white people. This is another interesting point for a debate like this

That's a pathetic, weak, idiotic defence. Apply it to other things and you'll see. It's not interesting it's bad.
-So mentally handicapped people should be solely responsible for defending themselves etc. That doesn't really work out does it? Not so "interesting" in that case...

You do realize you just directly compared black people to mentally handicapped people right?

White people have an enormous capacity to get offended on behalf of other people, and sometimes that's stupid of them.

Phillby
You do realize you just directly compared black people to mentally handicapped people right?

lol!
No, you did that.

You realise that, don't you? ;)

I however was examining the method of the arguing style, not the content.
---------------

White people? No.
I think you mean "people with both the compassion and the ability to defend others who are less able to defend themselves, for whatever reason".
It's entirely admirable and we should ALL aspire to that sort of thing, rather than a kind of passive, apathetic cynical tolerance of bullying, which becomes an aid to the bullying itself.

People will also use terms like "bleeding heart", and "liberal", to demonise those who give a damn. That sort of thing is pretty criminal in my opinion and people who do it are generally pretty sociopathic at the heart of things.
That's evil of them. :)

Crumb is generally not mentioned in discussions about racism in comics because his work isn't racist. He may parade certain stereotypes, just as he puts his twisted psyche on display, but a racist? I'd challenge anybody to look at work like this and call him a racist:
http://www.legra.org/blues/comics/blues_voodoo.htm [legra.org]
You'll find more racism in just about every American comic book on the shelf.

ozoneocean

Phillby
You do realize you just directly compared black people to mentally handicapped people right?

lol!
No, you did that.

You realise that, don't you? ;)

I however was examining the method of the arguing style, not the content.

The mentally handicaped not being able to defend themselves has nothing to do with Black people's ability to defend themselves. You commited a falacy.

White people? No.
I think you mean "people with both the compassion and the ability to defend others who are less able to defend themselves, for whatever reason".
It's entirely admirable and we should ALL aspire to that sort of thing, rather than a kind of passive, apathetic cynical tolerance of bullying, which becomes an aid to the bullying itself.

People will also use terms like "bleeding heart", and "liberal", to demonise those who give a damn. That sort of thing is pretty criminal in my opinion and people who do it are generally pretty sociopathic at the heart of things.
That's evil of them. :)

I'm not arguing that we shouldn't stand up against injustice in the world, I just think it's niave to believe that in every case it is right to be offended over something you believe may be offensive to others, especially if the potentially offended parties have have the means to complain themselves.

I'm not talking about apartheid, I'm talking about the reason they don't show speedy gonzales cartoons anymore. Or a shool not putting up christmas decorations for fear of offending non-christians.

Phillby
You commited a falacy.

I did no such thing. YOU ignored context. Surprising since I made it amazingly clear in all those posts of mine. :(

Phillby
offended over something you believe may be offensive to others

Which isn't the sort of thing I was talking about at all, but what you are saying is that same old argument about "political correctness gorn mad!"

That's something very different.
Be careful there, when people start crossing over into anti-PC arguments it's a short step towards genuine racism- "why can't we call 'em nignogs and chinks anymore? It's political correctness gorn mad!".

Being stupid about Christmas decorations and health and safety regulations isn't limited to any religion, ethnicity, or skin tone, it's not even really about political correctness to be honest (that's just what they call it), nor has it anything to do with the theme of this thread.
What THAT is about is trying to control people.

But the individuals who like to lump those typical anti-PC arguments together into discussions about racial prejudice tend to be on the nasty side of right-wing.

Yer damn right there Ozone - so called political correctness is just a notion invented by unsavoury types in an attempt to defend their unsavoury beliefs. They can't accept the fact that the rest of the world has long since abandoned such narrow minded bigotry and so they invent the idea of some shadowy beaurocracy designed to crush free speech.

We've evolved - get over it you dinosaurs.

I'll admit that I've swerved off topic, but I hardly think that I'm a neo-nazi creationist for thinking that Political correctness is sometimes a bad thing.

Phillby
I'll admit that I've swerved off topic, but I hardly think that I'm a neo-nazi creationist for thinking that Political correctness is sometimes a bad thing.

lol!
My last post 100% pointing out that none of this had anything to do with "political correctness". I rightly suspected that was where you were going though. ;)