Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

MAD

14:33 / 15.04.02

http://www.salon.com/comics/lay/2002/03/26/lay/index.html

Recently I've been giving a lot of thought to comics that may fly under the radar of the comic community, but have (or had) more influence or exposure in the world at large than the top selling spandex titles. Bazooka Joe, Jack Chick, Archie, and possibly the Grand Poombah of them all, Mad Magazine.

Usually a comic's worth is judged by how a small group of fervent fans perceived it, or by it's influence on it's peers, or even by it's circulation numbers. Mad had many of these things, but one aspect that it had that I can't say I've seen in any other comic (off the top of my head) was it's influence on other media and the real world. Mad brought satire of pop culture into the world in a huge way. They weren't the first, but I'd bet that they were easily one of the greatest pioneers. According to some, The Simpsons, The Onion, Adbusters, even the counter culture movement of the sixties would not have existed in the form we know them in if not for Mad. Many of the opinions held on this board may never have been formed if not for Mad taking it to the children and saying, you've been lied to, you are being lied to, and you will always be lied to.

Last year, that ended. I picked up a copy of Mad and saw an ad for Corn Nuts on the back cover. It took me two full minutes before I realized that it wasn't a parody of an ad.

Any thoughts?

16:13 / 15.04.02

I’m inclined to agree – on the importance of Mad, and probably on the fact that looking at it now, it doesn’t seem as good as memory might have suggested. Though as I think was said about Punch “not being as funny as it used to be”, ‘perhaps it never was’.

I think that Mad’s often been better than good – and its askance view of things may have been more innovative in the past than it might seem now – and a recent copy I bought in NY was all right too. The only thing that really grated was the constant use of exclamation marks at the end of each gag, as if to hammer it home.

Then again, I find that rather dates some of Jack Kirby’s writing (stop SHOUTING, Orion!) to the point that I don’t enjoy it all… though to continue the comparison, I’m equally aware of his importance in the development of things.

And the ads only partly threw me – whatever it takes to keep the title going, I guess. Kind of reminds me of the whole thing about Melody Maker where everyone bemoaned its fate and yet they weren’t out there buying it (as Frank Skinner said when News at Ten was axed due to low ratings “these people who say they miss News at Ten – they ALWAYS DID”).

If all of us (and by that I mean me too, oh yes indeedy) who claim to have fond memories of Mad were paying out cash for it every now and then, I guess they’d probably not need the ads ?

Not having a go at you there, Moriarty – just shrugging at what is, I suspect, a commercial necessity to keep the title in print.

DBC

13:32 / 16.04.02

Hey, Dave, I'm just happy someone responded!

I looked into this a bit further, and it looks like Warner Bros. started panicking when Mad dipped below a circulation of 300, 000. Either they added colour to get ads, or they got ads to add colour. Either way, I refuse to believe that Mad, by virtue of its merchandising (reprint books, CD-Roms, ties, etc), doesn't more than make it's money back, despite a decline in sales.

I'll be honest, I'm not even that big a fan of Mad magazine. My comic fandom fury has gotten to the point where I'm just interested in comics as culture. There are some aspects of Mad that I really liked, and I can appreciate a great deal of the art, both in the old Mad and the new, but I always hated the movie parodies, as an example. And I think the reason for that is also the reason Mad seems to be in a decline in sales. Mad used to corner the market on skewering pop culture, and now you can't escape that sensibility.

So, I am a little upset that Mad has ads. And I would be slightly more upset if they folded (calling Al Jaffee). And I can understand their position. It's just the end of an era, that's all.

Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo

13:47 / 16.04.02

MAD in the 50's was an amazing comic/mag. There had never been anything like it, and the comic is STILL wonderfully funny, even with the pop culture references since the team on the book were making fun of genres and conventions rather than the main thing there parodying.

When Kurtzman left and Feldstein took over the humor level dropped a bit, but it was still a funny mag through the 60's. By the 70's it was squarely aimed at Junior High kids (jokes about teachers, school food and dog poo) and the artists were the star of the show.

In the 80's and 90's it just seemed that everyone involved in the mag was tired...it had become a job instead of a bunch of non-conformists trying to sneak subversive humor into the mainstream...

Now? Now it's trying to be funny, and once in a while succeeds. I know they gave the mag an update a few years ago, but I think that instead of trying to keep their audience and looking for a target market, they need to go (my endless phrase) Back to the Basics and do stuff that makes the people in the office laugh. That's how it became a hit in the first place.