Dear Ms. Schutz,
Forgive the somewhat formal salutation, but what I have to say here is
oppositional enough that I wish to cash no cheque on our former
acquaintanceship. I do trust this letter finds you well, of course.
How unusual, after ages and ages of reclusion, I have written not one, but two,
letters to comic books in the past two days. I must phone my sponsor, I seem to
have had what, in the vernacular, is a "slip", ahem.
I was, and remain, deeply and unusually dismayed by your (and Matt's) replies
to Mr. Chris Walker of Decatur, Georgia, USA, in regards to his objections to
racist stereotyping in issue #2. A brief reminder.
I don't know if you recall this, Ms. Schutz, but as a teenager, I received
threats from people purporting to be the klan, for may activism in civil
rights, and was subsequently shot at (and missed, Churchill was right, that's
exhilarating) by unknown assailants. Later, quite rare for a white person, I
was alleged to have some connections with the Black Panther Party for Self
Defense. I mention this not to "play the dozens" about race authenticity, but
to remind you that I do not come to this topic recently, uninformed, nor
uncredentialed by those in the know.
So, that said, allow me if you will to explain why I feared, for a brief
moment, that the letter column had once again been taken over by my (our) old
nemesis, Mr. Porta.
Your glib and oh so hip reply, reflective of a certain variety of well meaning
white folk, that we will not stop racism or stereotyping by ignoring it is a
very typical off the mark assertion. I have too much residual affection for you
to suggest you were creating a shibboleth, a straw man, a red herring, or other
rhetorical device.
Rather, I believe, albeit sadly, that you really believe that assertion.
You are, Ms. Schutz, smart enough to understand analogies. What I am telling
you is that while it is true we will not defeat racism by either ignoring or
shrinking from the stereotyping and prejudices and biases which exist, neither
will we do so by perpetuating them in the name of accurate fiction (or
journalism). Because Ms. Schutz, the analogy is to insulin for a diabetic. If a
person needs their blood sugar corrected, we must indeed expose them to
insulin. But it would be both medical and monetary absurdity to force insulin
on those who are already in balance.
Matt using racial stereotypes in this context was not an exposure of them for
progressive educations, as was the case with, oh, anyone from Sam Clemens to
Richard Wright, per examples. It was simply choosing to portray a, yes, valid,
but yes, hurtful type of person. That such exist neither ameliorates the effect
on those who must consume them, nor addresses the issue of the ratio of
misperceptions to elucidations in our popular culture and media.
And you, Ms. Schutz, are one of the few who are in a position to do something
about that, you and Matthew. And you choose to make excuses or give reasons,
rather than proactively contribute something NEW to the body of literature,
which might serve to rise and advance our spirits, to the "better angels of our
nature", rather than pandering to our valid but base sensibilities.
Or, as Goethe rather more elegantly put it, "when we show things as they are,
we make them less than they are". I wish you would sit and just think about
that one sentence for a very long time.
You might also, if you get bored, add a second. Justice Louis Brandeis,
speaking about free speech, observed that just because we have a right to do
something doesn't make it the right thing to do. A wise fellow.
It's a choice you make. I disagree vehemently with the one you made.
I would make a few more observations before speaking of the comic book itself,
with your indulgence (or without, as it happens).
It is not for white folks (not even I, though I have been told by very militant
colleagues over decades that, like Adam Clayton Powell used to say, I've "paid
my dues" and am considered something of a "brother" by people who normally
would NOT consider a white man a brother--but I claim no "droit de siegnieur"
on race here, I only speak for myself) to decide what is or is not racist, or
helpful or hurtful to race relations, civil rights, etc. The oppressor class
(whether you want to be a part of it or not--I know, I know, you never had
slaves--you must read and understand the legal principle of the "doctrine of
ill-gotten gains" which tells us that those who benefit from illegal acts, even
unaware or unapproving of those acts, have acquired such benefit illegally, and
it must be forfeit for justice to prevail) has too much of a liberty interest
to be trusted or allowed to set those standards. Nor does it have enough
experiential nature, even to satisfy Ralph W. Emerson.
It is also well to remember that an "absolute value" (if you do math) of racism
is a lie. To say that there are also white stereotypes in the comic is to miss
a major point. The existence of all stereotypes is not equal. Clearly, Ms.
Schutz, if someone calls you an insipid Canadian/American, you are not hurt as
much as if someone called you a dumb blonde, because there is less history of
hostility, hurt, and enmity in the former than the latter. Likewise, if you put
a stereotype of a white (one of MANY in use in the popular literature) next to
one of the ONLY stereotypes of African-Americans, you are not showing equality,
you are having a gun fight where one party has a .22 revolver, and the other a
howitzer, so to say. So the presence of white typing is a false defence, see my
insulin analogy above, for more on that concept, also.
As you are recommending African American literature, allow me to suggest you
and Matt (and readers) pick up an old copy of Ralph Wylie's marvelous little
book, "Why Black People Tend to Shout", and while waiting for it to arrive,
surf over to blackagendareport.com, as well. Anything by brothers Cornel West
or Michael Eric Dyson would be worthy.
We "all buy into stereotypes" is amusing, but facile. I have been told by white
people and black that "everyone has used the n-word". I am here to tell you
(and them) that in 55 years, I have never done so. So either this is a
statistical rebuttal to such absurd hopelessness, or perhaps I am your risen
king, and you must all worship. I'm betting on the former.
If you or Matt wish to make the point that fiction is entertainment, and need
not take a stance on such political matters for which I have herein taken you
to task, somewhat rigourously, allow me to commend to you a hard to find, but
worth the effort, little volume on the topic of fiction, by John Gardner.
Ironically, not the hack who wrote those abysmal 007 novels feeding off the
corpse of Ian Fleming, rather, the literary scholar who has translated such
classics as Gilgamesh, and, oh my word, Grendel and Beowulf. What a small
world! The tome in question is "On Moral Fiction" and you either agree with
Gardner's postulates or not, but it is illustrative of why I believe you have a
responsibility beyond merely showing the world as it is (shades of Bernard
Shaw, eh?).
To conclude my racial discussion, before moving on to my comic book comments,
allow me to say, harshly, that it is no wonder Mr. Porta has recused himself
from these pages--his points are lurking in spirit.
Oh, as to not wanting MP3's because you are not up to the technology, and are
into the SOUND, let me say this. Albert Finney said to Audrey Hepburn, in the
wonderful sixties film "Two for the Road": "If you want to be a duchess, be a
duchess; if you want to make love, hats off." I'd say that, a. it's amusing
that you are, re technology, such a mouldy fig compared to my avant garde, and
b. that if you want SOUND, go for vinyl, CD's are hardly the n'est plus ultra
of sound. So neither fish nor fowl.
A couple of tiny comic book comments, to earn my keep. I am unreservedly
thrilled that you finally got Wagner to do a Hunter Rose story. For all the
critical praise heaped on Grendel over the years, I have personally been most
partial to the Hunter Rose character, and not really that enamoured (oh, hush,
all you fanboys and fangirls, I don't CARE, spit or swallow on your own time)
of the rest of the Grendel saga (albeit recognizing it's technical mastery, to
be sure). Seeing Hunter Rose again is a pure pleasure. Or would be, but for one
small matter...
A long time ago, Neal Adams was pontificating (who, Neal?) on the dynamic of
comic books. He posited (and I agree) that comics have a rhythm of their own, a
sort of word-picture-word-picture-word-picture cadence. Not necessarily 50-50,
that was his off-the-cuff example. But a certain balance of the two forms. He
went on to say that when this balance is interdicted, and we get
word-word-word-picture, we find it discordant. Now can this be used for
artistic purposes? Of course. But in GENERAL, there is a cadence to comic books
just as there is to music, and to remove the w-p-w-p-w-p pattern, except for
very brief artistic reasons, would be like removing (I'm speaking here, not
Neal) the 4/4 signature with a back beat from rock and roll. It might be nice
music, but it ain't rock. I don't like all the text in Grendel, which to say.
I know others do. That's fine. Some people think the Monkees were better than
Coltrane or Miles, too. I'm merely stating one informed view here.
Well, Ms. Schutz, not quite redolent of the nostalgia and bon vivant
camaraderie of our past, but so it goes. As I said to a personal friend of
yours just yesterday, "plus ca changes, plus c'est la merde", n'est ce pas?
Domage, quell domage. But as Paddington says, "things happen".
In echoing the old Toronto joke about the grocery lad, I might ask in
conclusion, somewhat obscurely, mathematician or carpenter's wife, D.?
I remain, after all these years, your disobedient servant.
Take care, take chances,
Zanvil
--
Staring west at the same receding water line about which Hunter S. Thompson
wrote so sadly and so eloquently (even Johnny Depp knows) 02.April.2008 |
