Big Props to News and Observer
I think we have an ally in the N&O's features page. Last week they reprinted a WSJ article about the troubles with the old timey strips. The week prior, they ran an interview with me! (I did not post, because it was nothing y'all hadn't heard me say already). And today, this on "comic nepotism." An interesting read. (you may need to register -- free -- or go to bugmenot.com to pick up a login).
Question: If so many people feel as we do, and even the professionals think there's a problem, why does nothing change?
Question: If so many people feel as we do, and even the professionals think there's a problem, why does nothing change?
posted by big al at 8:42 AM
5 Comments:
Maybe it's time we and everyone else we know wrote all the "Life" or "Entertainment" editors in our area and told them what's being said in those articles and this blog.
I did try to get George featured in some local papers on a weekly basis but of the 11 local papers I sent a letter to, only one responded, and they said they weren't planning on changing their lineup for a long time.
Why does nothing change? I think a large factor is the 50+ crowd. At least that's how it is in my city. Our newspaper carries twenty-three comics, only three of which I enjoy on a daily basis ("Get Fuzzy", "Pearls Before Swine", "Real Life Adventures"). Our newspaper overhauls its comics section every three years. The readers get to vote on their favorite strips, as well as on possible new strips. You'd think we would have a kick ass comics section thanks to this, but no, not at all.
The problem is that the people who mostly vote are in the 50+ group, so the comics section reflects what they like. So, our comics section is cluttered with tired, worn out strips like "Blondie", "Beetle Bailey", and "Hagar." All three of those strips are consistently in the Top Ten when the poll results are printed. The newspaper always does a Top Five breakdown by age group. The differences between the 50+ group's chart and the charts of the other age groups is astounding. The younger readers prefer strips like "Zits", "Luann", and "Get Fuzzy", but the comics page is dominated by the preferences of the older readers. The older readers have time to fill out fourteen ballots, but a twelve year isn't going to do that.
About nine years ago "Fred Bassett" was voted out of the comic pages. The older readers threw a huge tantrum and flooded the Opinion Page with letters. The newspaper put Fred back in. He's still there and he still sucks.
What amazes me is how resistant older readers are to change. They constantly complain that strips like "Get Fuzzy" are crude and unfunny. Their suggested replacements? "Nancy", "Andy Capp", and "Alley Oop". And, their letters of complaint always end with "the comics aren't just for the young'uns". Hell yeah. The comics aren't for the "young'uns" at all because they're stuck reading crap that wasn't funny in 1952 and manages to be twenty times less funny today.
These strips are still hanging around partially because editors consider them "safe". But, in my opinion (and experience) they are mostly around because older readers pitch a hissyfit if they go away. Because, you know, after the 299876355 times it's still funny when Sarge beats Beetle to a pulp!
Thanks to Emily's "Hott Date" post, I'm abrogating (is that the right word?) posting responsibilities tonight, but thought I'd comment on this.
Now, my main point with the blog is to actually try to be a little humorous when it comes to the comics, which sadly lack humor. But since I've made this a 5-6 times a week activity, I've actually started to give it thought (more than just, "how can I make fun of this crap again?").
Anonymous poster above has, I think, really hit the nail on the head.
The bottom line is that the comics work differently than the other entertainment media. I doubt people are cancelling their newspapers because Hi and Lois sucks. On the other hand, once upon a time, CBS was the "old folks" network, they were losing money and viewership in droves, and now we have CSI, Survivor, etc. The comics work differently.
Doesn't mean I have to like it, though. And I just find this phenomenon endlessly fascinating. The comics are hopelessly, sadly, and terribly outdated. My least favorite are their OUTMODED views on family life. The "dad can't cook" joke is LAME-O.
Baby Blues is a more modern strip that still sticks to the stay-at-home mom construct (gotta stay safe!). But I'd be willing to bet good money that there's never been a "dad can't cook" joke there. They've figured out how to update the traditional family strip. On the other hand, I saw a Dennis recently where he and the mom were visiting an old lady. The mom was all decked out in a skirt, heels, and pearls. Do real people visit like that anymore?
I agree, BUT . . . how bout we say the bad guys are in the 70+ range. I'm in 50+, and trust me, when Gary Larson left the funnies, I did, too.
It's stuff like this that gets me fired up and wanting to write to every comics/entertainment editor in the country and berate them for letting these crappy old comics live.
Post a Comment
<< Home