Ben Seeman Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 http://www.herogames.com/news/news20030804.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Ugh. Too bad. Anyone who thinks that comics are only intended for children, obviously hasn't opened a comic book in the last 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Agreed. I'm saving my really venomous statements about the idiocy involved for the Non Gaming board thread on this. Don't want to disrupt the 'good vibes ' here. However, I think it goes without saying (I'll say it anyways) this is a travesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Wow. Yet another reason to avoid Texas like the plague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocMan Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Shouldn't the headline read something on the order of "Supreme court upholds Jesus' Conviction" There may be injustice elsewhere in the world, but only in America can a man be convicted of committing an act which is not a crime. Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobGreenwade Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Originally posted by DocMan There may be injustice elsewhere in the world, but only in America can a man be convicted of committing an act which is not a crime. Not quite true. It happens quite frequently in Vietnam, Sudan, and various other places. America's supposed to be someplace it never happens, though. I'm about as opposed to so-called "adult" comics (that is, the pornographic ones, as opposed to those dealing with serious topics in a mature way) as anyone can be, but this is The Wrong Way to go about getting rid of them. The prosecutor's argument is an idiotic travesty (especially the part where he urged the jurors to ignore the evidence and testimony that didn't agree with his position), and the appellate court decision is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Heine Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Paiting a Target On My Forehead, But... Hmm. I'm not familiar with the case beyond what is stated in the article. And I'm probably painting a big target on my forehead, but here goes with my initial impression... (I'm thinking off the top of my head hear, and I'll admit to having a bit of a "devil's advocate" response to that article.) What is the difference between an "adult comic" and pornography? Certainly there's a difference, but where do you draw the line? Hey, I'm the first one to say that comics aren't just an artistic storytelling medium for children. In fact, I hardly see any kids in comic stores these days. And if comics were limited to children, how in the world would Hollywood justify movies like X-Men, Spiderman, Daredevil, the Hulk, LXG, etc.? On the otherhand, there is a big difference between a comic book with themes targeted at a mature audience and a comic book targeted specifically at a customer of pornography. I'm a bit unclear at exactly what kind of book Mr. Castillo was selling. Let me push the discussin a bit further. Like it or not, comic books have a history of being a kid-targeted medium. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that comics attract the interest of children, or even that some comics are specifically geared for kids. Hey, I grew up on Batman, Green Lantern, and the rest, and my own kids get a kick out of watching Justice League on T.V. But there are some comics that are certainly not appropriate for children. (Don't get me started on post-modern ideas that morality is entirely relative here; standards of tolerance and moral complacency are certainly slippery in our culture today, but I think it's possible to intelligently argue for definitions of cultural decency.) What's more, the blur between kid-targeted comics and "mature themed" comics is pretty blurry. As a parent of 3 kids, I look at a comic shop differently than I did 20 years ago. That female superhero isn't just an intriguing character anymore; she's often a piece of pin-up art. Heck, what comics fan hasn't had a discussion about how some of those women keep from falling over from being top heavy? And we're not talking about simply drawing characters in physically idealistic (or even unrealistic) ways; we're talking about poses on posters and covers that are clearly conceived to be seductive. So where does the comic book cross over from being "kid-friendly" to being "mature themed" to being "pornographic?" It can't simply be a matter of nudity, because so much heroic art is practically painted skin as it is. It's also a bit naive to lump it all together as protecting First Amendment rights here. I'm not saying that someone's right to produce a certain type of comic should be limited in the least. But our culture undeniably has a long history of curbing distribution of products to appropriate ages, and I'm all in favor for putting guidelines for how different material can be presented to the public. If my neighbor decided to post an 8-foot tall photgraphic cardboard cutout of a nude couple engaging in intercourse in his front yard as a lawn ornament, I'd say he has crossed the line of decency in the public presentation of his art. I don't doubt his legal freedom to produce such a product, nor do I want to take away the rights of someone who wants to view such a product. But I don't want to extend to him the right to display his product in a manner that I have to see as I drive down the street, and certainly not in a manner that my kids can see at all. Of course, this raises the issue of where we draw the line. At one point does something become inappropriate for certain approaches to public display? That's a tough issue, and I can't think of a better approach than leaving it up to the decency laws of local communities. That being said, the state prosecutor in this case takes the matter too far for my own comfort; to say that the content of all comics should be acceptable for all ages just doesn't sync with reality. The logic of his argument is faulty, because the medium can be used to communicate stories to different audiences. Frankly, I don't know enough details about this particular incident to know if Mr. Castillo was acting in a proper manner with distributing the material in question, or whether he was crossing the line (and perhaps the local laws) of decency in the way he presented the merchandise available in his shop. The CBLDF perspective throughout the article merely offers us one angle on what happened here. Personally, I'm a bit weary with the plethora of artistic cries against this whole idea of "censorship." I don't want to censor anyone. But I do want to retain some control over what my own children can be exposed to, especially in a setting that is targeted at their interest (i.e., a comic book shop). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Long Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Excellent points, Scott, rationally (and non-confrontationally) put forward. Excellent points by others, too. However, since none of this really relates to Champions beyond the need to make the initial announcement, I've closed this thread. If you want to continue the discussion, please do so in "Non-Gaming Rants." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts