The Comics Code was split into four sections, covering the depictions of crime, horror, cultural depictions and language, and advertising within a comic. For the first actual review we will look at “General Standards” part A, how crime is to be depicted if the comic is supposed to receive the CCA seal of approval. Do some of their edicts make sense or are some just plain silly?
1) Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.
I liked Skeletor better when we weren’t supposed to feel sorry for him. He’s one of the few villains who can pull off “I’m evil and I love it”.
I know that I’m tired of sympathetic criminals. The point of fictional bad guys are to be bad guys. They are the representation obstacles both personally and as a community/country/species to overcome, catharsis for not being able to deal with real world criminals, terrorists, and the like. And yet, we’re supposed to feel some kind of empathy not for criminals who are forced into the business but actually want to be there. Mobsters like those in soap operas (like my mother’s favorite, General Hospital) or The Sopranos have become people we root for in one way or another. You also have games like the Grand Theft Auto series where you get to be the bad guy.
I wonder how that works with the lovable goofballs as well, like Team Rocket from the Pokemon cartoon or Gail Simone’s Sinister Six?
My big question on this one is whether or not this does include someone who is forced into the life or realizes he or she made a mistake or just wants to go legit and how to do that while staying alive? Reformation stories should get a pass, Of course, the CCA is known for not always thinking wisely when it comes to how it interpreted the Code.
2) No comics shall explicitly present the unique details and methods of a crime.
Isn’t that going to make mystery stories or some kind of police procedural story a bit more difficult?
3) Policemen, judges, government officials, and respected institutions shall never be
presented in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority.
Does that mean they can’t do a story about a corrupt official? What if they make it clear they are the exception rather than the rule? I know that rule never came into play with television or movies, even some kids productions, so I have to wonder why comics were singled out?
4) If crime is depicted it shall be as a sordid and unpleasant activity.
5) Criminals shall not be presented so as to be rendered glamorous or to occupy a position which creates the desire for emulation.
Hey, I’m all in favor of that! The Code was under the belief that these were for comics going to children after all. I put these two together because they’re part of the same idea, really. The goal is to warn kids away from becoming thieves, rapists, mobsters, gangs members, and whatever else.
6) In every instance good shall triumph over evil and the criminal punished for his misdeeds.
Pictured: criminals about to lose.
Well, that’s just good storytelling to begin with, unless you’re doing some warning parable or something. Bad guys are stand-ins for our problems so seeing evil get what they deserve is at least catharsis. Although I’m required to point out that it depends what you mean by punishment? Are we talking Batman style or Punisher style? And which era of Batman?
7) Scenes of excessive violence shall be prohibited. Scenes of brutal torture, excessive and unnecessary knife and gun play, physical agony, gory and gruesome crime shall be eliminated.
Okay, that actually rules out old Frank. Again, aimed at kids comics. (And for anyone wanting to ask about not-kids comics, that’s in the final chapter of this series.) This should immediately be a given today, much less in the 1950s. Thus far I’ve either approved or had some questions about. Now we get into the ones I have some big questions on, or outright reject as making sense. See, your patience pays off.
8) No unique or unusual methods of concealing weapons shall be shown.
So Batman loses the utility belt? Should we be glad ninjas weren’t a thing yet? Or Klingons and their concealed weapons? What about cowboy stories where they have that very small gun hidden in their sleeve, or something like that spring glove thing from The Goonies? I guess the worry is kids may hide something that they shouldn’t have but as a writer I see the potential for the hero, too.
9) Instances of law enforcement officers dying as a result of a criminal’s activities should be discouraged.
Why? Cops and agents make sacrifices to save others and that’s noble and heroic. And what about soldiers? Or even superheroes and other “unofficial” crimefighters? Are they allowed to die? Okay, maybe “discouraged” just means “don’t do it unless the story has no choice” and I know I’m a bit more comfortable with not seeing good guys die (until recently not every Batman villain lived solely to kill people or wear their own face as a mask) but it shouldn’t be ruled out if the story can revolve around it. Dead cops everywhere doesn’t have to be a default mode, either, I don’t care what the current sentiment on police officers is.
10) The crime of kidnapping shall never be portrayed in any detail, nor shall any profit accrue to the abductor or kidnapper. The criminal or the kidnapper must be punished in every case.
Again, of course the criminal should be punished. That shouldn’t even be in question in a kids comic unless you need a crooked antagonist. He should never win, of course. Using a TV example because they did appear in comics, the main villain in Wild West C.O.W.boys of Moo Mesa was secretly a crooked sheriff working with a crooked mayor and only the marshal and his deputies were a problem. And what does it mean “kidnapping shall never be portrayed in any detail”? If it means “never show a kidnapping being happened”, then that’s a HUGE mistake in a kids comic. For example, using a comic to warn kids how to avoid being kidnapped by showing how the would-be kidnapper would trick them into their car is a good thing.
The last two…are just ridiculous. It’s like they had a quota to have more entries than the 10 Commandments. They really could have stopped here, but then we get nitpicky as all heck!
11) The letters of the word “crime” on a comics magazine shall never be appreciably greater than the other words contained in the title. The word “crime” shall never appear alone on a cover.
12) Restraint in the use of the word “crime” in titles or subtitles shall be exercised.
Crime SuspenStories #22 (May 1954), cover art by Craig, was displayed at the Kefauver Hearings. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Seriously? Even the WORD “crime” is a bad thing? What? I mean that’s dumb enough, but actually insisting that the word has to be a certain size in comparison to the rest of the title? By the way, Crime is a weak name for any periodical even in 1954. True Crime Stories or Crimebusters or something makes a better title. But how do we show restraint? Did the CCA (and I fully expect they did) have a limit on how many times you could use it in a title? Who is going to title a story “Crimedy Crime Crime” and would “Crimedy” count as a “crime”? What about “criminal”? You might have something like “The Train Crime” or “Crime Under Assault” or “Crime Of Fear”…you know, something that draws the reader in. Not only do these guys not understand how good series or story titles work, I don’t think they get that seeing the word “CRIME” in big letters isn’t going to send little Jimmy into robbing liquor stores unless somebody’s doing something with subliminal messages.
Next month’s installment will take a look at part b, the “horror” section. You know, the section that damaged an entire genre of comics for decades. Not being a horror fan I’ll have to work harder to be objective. Also, I’m not sure what images I’ll have in the media library so this should be a challenge for me.
BW Media Spotlight 