The Comic Code Mistake

So I recently reviewed Adventures into the Unknown, an anthology of comics from the late 1940s, and commented briefly on the effects of the Comic Code Authority.  I wanted to take a moment to expand a little on it; what it is, what it did, why it was a huge misstep.  Quick background: in 1954, a German-American Psychiatrist by the name Fredric Wertham published a book titled Seduction of the Innocent, which expressed his concern that comic books were a negative influence on the youth of the day.  A congressional subcommittee was formed with the sole task of determining what was acceptable material in comics.  A number of comic book publishers came together in order to form a self-governing body as an alternative.  The CCA was the result of that body’s efforts.  Thanks a lot.

Now let’s be fair, before I rip into this code’s many shortcomings:  there was a valid reasoning behind the formation of this code.  A government regulation system is much harder to modify than something they imposed on themselves, so deciding to make their own code at least gave the power to the publishers.  Not only this, but there was a legitimate risk that the comics industry would not have survived without some sort of code restricting content, as many cities across the nation like Oklahoma City and Houston had already banned crime comics. Some even went as far as holding public comic burnings.  I will go on record saying the comic industry needed something; they just chose the wrong “something”.

So what do I think the comic industry should have done instead?  They needed a relative level system like the Motion Picture Association of America’s rating system (1968) or the one used by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (1994).  Admittedly, neither of these existed yet, so it’s not like they could have looked at them and thought, “Hmm, works for movies/videogames.  Why not us?”  But such a system would have allowed parents to make their own decisions about what their kids are or are not allowed to read without destroying a large portion of the comics being made at the time.  Instead, they just listed a number of things no comic could do.

First off, there is a section regarding the portrayal of crime, criminals and law enforcement.  Crime is to be shown “as a sordid and unpleasant activity” which does not promote emulation.  Criminals shall not be shown in a sympathetic light and law enforcement must be shown as trustworthy and respected.  Presumably, the idea is that children and young teens would see criminals as the more relatable and glamorous characters of a comic and follow a life of crime.  I don’t know about you, but when I watched the Dark Knight, I didn’t leave the theater going “I want to drive a bus into a bank!  It worked for the Joker and he doesn’t have any superpowers either.  Besides, at least he has fun with life unlike Bruce “Depression” Wayne!”  Of course not.  Why?  Because I’m old enough to understand that stealing, murder, and destruction of property are wrong.  Some kids don’t have the cognitive ability to fully understand this concept yet, so punishing the criminals makes it clear that what they did was wrong and should not be copied.  That being said, eventually most people learn how to behave, and the ‘wrongness’ of the crime should be able to stand for itself.

The second part of the code covers horror elements such as the undead and scenes of excessive gore or torture.  The words “horror” and “terror” were specifically prohibited from comic titles, and “unnecessary knife and gunplay” was banned as well.  There was even an edict against displays of “evil” unless used to make a moral point.  I have never understood why this is in the code.  The point of the code was to deal with a rise in youth delinquency.  Can someone explain to me how reading about vampires makes you go out and rob a store?  And while blood and gore can be too graphic for young children, it is a drawing, and at a certain age, one should be able to handle a bloody doodle.  How does the title of the comic cause a problem at all?  I mean, considering the PR nightmare the comics industry was in, they probably didn’t want to name a comic “Go Rob a Bank, Here’s How to Do It”, but “The Terror from Beneath”?  Hell, “The Terror from Beneath” could be the next Bunnicula story for all you know! And by the way, what is “evil” anyways?  Is murder “evil” or just “wrong”?  Who gets to decide that?

The last section is about sexually charged material.  Nudity was forbidden, as was rape, incest, fetishes, and the mere suggestion of these things.  Again, this is an age thing, just as it is today.  I understand not wanting your ten year old bringing home a comic full of people getting raped, but if someone in their teenage years wants to look at a picture of a naked person, I think they’re old enough that it’s no big deal.  Statistical odds tell us they’ve likely seen the real thing before.  The one part of this code that we probably would have done well to keep was “Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.”  We put a lot of blame on models in magazines for ruining young women’s self images, but Wonder Woman, Power Girl and Psylocke don’t help girls and women feel more confident about how they look either.

The worst part of the code?  It was only effective because comic book stores didn’t want to lose customers by offering “profane” materials.  Many series died off because of this, and sometimes entire comic book publishers were pushed into bankruptcy.  Crime comics were the biggest sellers at the time, and there wasn’t a company that wasn’t hurt on some level by the code.  Slowly, starting in the 90’s and in the first years of the twenty-first century, comic publishers began to bother less and less with following the code, as comic book stores were more open to selling comics that were not CCA approved.  As of January 2011, the last of the major comic companies abandoned the Comic Code.

The code used a poor structure (it really should have come in levels or degrees, like what many comic companies are using today), and its bans were in the end unnecessary. And in some cases, these bands were completely unrelated to the social pressures that supposedly fueled its birth. Again, I’m certainly not saying that everything they banned was appropriate for children, but just because it’s not child friendly, doesn’t mean it should be eliminated entirely.  Think of all the movies not rated PG.  Or all the games not rated E.  The code was much too restrictive, plain and simple.  It was moronic and served no purpose other than to ruin a great many comic publishers.  So to you, CCA, I say good riddance.

Matthew Bryant, aka Baker Street Holmes, holds a grudge against the CCA for the great many comics which never were because of it’s “evil” reign.  He is also pretty sure “The Terror from Beneath” would be about an adorable vampiric mole.  You can find him on Twitter at @BStreetHolmes or e-mail him at HMCrazySS@gmail.com.