War Comics 17 17

[MrBedrock]

 

DC had no problem depicting anti-Nazi covers during WW2 and long thereafter in all of its war titles.

I think your premise definitely has some merit but I will disagree with a couple of your assumptions. First, while DC did depict Nazis on the covers of some of their comics during WWII those war cover were definitely exceptions for DC. Especially when you compare their frequency to those of just about any other publisher of the time. Just go through the Gerber and count the number of Nazi depictions on any given title. On most it would be less than five for the duration of the war. Timely would have more Nazis on one cover than DC would have for the whole war. Same for Nedor, MLJ etc. etc. etc. And that was for a "popular" war. After the war, with the subsequent exposure of the evils of the Nazi regime, there was nothing controversial in depicting the heroism of good versus evil. The Nazis became emblematic of all things evil and as such were used by DC war writers as such.

 

That leads to the second assumption, that the Korean War (or the war in Vietnam for that matter) would be considered a popular enough war to include depiction in "children's literature". There was no consensus at the time on whether or not the Korean "Conflict" was a necessary endeavor for the US Government. It was a controversial war at the time, much as many wars are when they are still being undertaken. WWII was an exception. I think there is more to the story but I do think in its simplest form DC didn't depict the Korean War to avoid controversy. DC didn't depict the Vietnam War to avoid controversy. DC doesn't depict the War in Afghanistan to avoid controversy.

 

I love the original question you posted, and love this kind of discourse. It really would be cool to find out exactly what was on the minds of the DC execs at the time. Thanks for posing the question (thumbs u

[buttock]

It's a great question. To speculate a bit...

 

Korea wasn't a very popular war, and quickly went the wrong way. DC may not have viewed this as worth featuring.

 

McCarthyism was dead in the water at this point, so any discussion of the "Red Menace" may have been considered too political or too similar to a witch hunt.

 

Although McCarthy wasn't an anti-Semite, Kanigher, Kubert, etc., may have viewed the anti-communist rhetoric as a little too similar to what the Jews had just gone through.

 

As previously noted, DC didn't have much of a penchant for involving the Nazis in their storylines -- which may reflect a general avoidance of reality/politics in their storylines. Keeping things more "kid friendly".

 

 

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

[AtlasFan]

Thanks for you comments guys!

 

I will add that there were never as many comics published at any time as there were in the late 40s and early 50s. And that a large portion of the audience was not juvenile -- there were a lot of GI's that read comics during WW2 and Korea.

 

It just seems odd that DC did not "jump on the anti-Red bandwagon" when so many movies, TV shows and books used these themes as major plot points. Heck, even hard-boiled detective Mike Hammer took a break from the pushers & pimps to fight Soviet spies!

 

Why didnt DC didn't vilify the Reds as so many other outlets did in popular culture at the time?

 

As a side note, EC mentions the Red Menace in many of its best tales -- only these stories are really more anti-McCarthy as they really focus more on the persecution of "innocent" Americans rather than the Red Menace.

 

I would suspect that Timely/Atlas' overtly anti-Communist stance was just a reflection of the times...as Atlas was notorious for jumping on any popular trend (and usually after everyone else)...

[thirdgreenham]

Does anyone know who was actually answering all those letters in Sgt. Rocks Combat Corner?

[buttock]

Does anyone know who was actually answering all those letters in Sgt. Rocks Combat Corner?

 

Sgt Rock... duh.

[thirdgreenham]

Sale coming up this weekend if all goes well. (thumbs u

 

 

[Scrooge]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

I believe that perception is due to the intensity of Atlas publishing schedule of these War books. Starting circa June 1952 through early 1954, Atlas, as usual, swamped the market with these anti-reds books. They were blatant on their covers. Once the war is over, a bunch of Atlas War titles get cancelled and the attitudes inside gets tamed down. You find more "buddy stories" at that point as well as a greater mix of time periods, i.e. the stories now span from the Revolutionary War to the Korean War, weaving in Civil War, World War I and World War II stories.

 

Therefore I wouldn't say per se that Atlas was extremely anti-communist with great intent, they were just reflecting the demand at the newsstands.

 

As for DC's lack of involvement, I liked the idea of pressure from on high as being part of it, as we know the founders were somewhat more involved than Martin Goodman and we know where DC's founders proclivities were. But, I also believe that the preponderance is that, while it was OK to villify an enemy against which there is an open and declared war, "attacking" an enemy in a shadow war was tougher as an editorial decision.

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

I've been enjoying this discussion, please continue.

[Sanj Mitra]

Sale coming up this weekend if all goes well. (thumbs u

 

 

 

Best of luck Andy

 

What time will you be listing?

 

Cheers

 

Sanj

[comick1]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

Actually, I'd say that's anything. . .everything else BUT ironic.

Definitely NOT ironic.

Communism was and remains a taboo and unthinkable approach to government in the minds of myriad Americans of virtually every imaginable stripe, but especially those who view it as a threat to their religious freedoms. Don't mistake me. I'd say that many of the events that led to various societies about the globe embracing communism in the last 100 years provided reasonable impetus for sweeping social change. However, the way it's played out on the ground amongst the most prominent communist nations hasn't exactly made a strong case for it; but then, it has been loosely adapted by almost all such states.

A political science major I ain't, but I'd say that much of the political backlash from people who vilify communism originates less from its actual failings throughout the world than because of its threat--perceived occasionally and legitimate in many cases--to religious freedom.

During the McCarthy era, the U.S. added that little "under God" bit in to the pledge of allegiance. . .and it's stuck for nearly 60 years now with precious few voices to protest the obligatory nature of its inclusion in public school curriculum. Despite a pretty clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, there is an overwhelming degree of public support for the government promoting the phrase. Though people assign varying degrees of religious significance to the phrase today, I think few would dispute that the inclusion of those two words derives in no small part from fears of a godless communist state.

In that vein, Treasure Chest was a comic with a fairly explicit religious agenda. According to Overstreet, it featured an ongoing series called "This Godless Communism" which I've admittedly NOT seen, but I suspect the title says it all. There's a long and well-established interplay between religious interests capitalizing (pun intended) upon the fears associated with restrictions of religious liberties, so it comes as absolutely NO surprise to me that Treasure Chest (published by Catholic Guild) was a vocal opponent to communism. And there is considerable evidence to suggest that these comics would have reached a VERY receptive American audience--one that appears to be as vehemently passionate today as it was then (though comics would appear to be a very limited delivery medium for said political message today).

Edited May 14, 2010 by Comick1

[Jeffro.]

Sale coming up this weekend if all goes well. (thumbs u

 

 

 

*opens wallet, moths fly out*

 

NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

Oh well. It'll be fun to watch.

[Scrooge]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

Actually, I'd say that's anything. . .everything else BUT ironic.

Definitely NOT ironic.

 

 

You are correct that my word choice was poor. I should have: "On the other hand, it was no surprise that Treasure Chest was more vocal than DC." I do understand the background and motivation behind Treasure Chest's decision. I did not know though about the timing of the "unde God" addition. (thumbs u

 

After all, one should remember that radio carried such a show as: I was a Communist for the FBI As per the wikipedia entry (to save me more research), "The film and radio show are, in part, artifacts of the McCarthy era, as well as a time capsule of American society during the Second Red Scare. The purpose of both are partly to warn people about the threat of Communist subversion of American society. The tone of the show is ultra-patriotic, with Communists portrayed as racist, vindictive, and tools of a totalitarian foreign power, the Soviet Union."

[thirdgreenham]

Sale coming up this weekend if all goes well. (thumbs u

 

 

 

Best of luck Andy

 

What time will you be listing?

 

Cheers

 

Sanj

 

Not exactly sure, Sanj, but please check it periodically. I'll probably bother all of you fine readers and make one more post here as soon as it's ready to go. (thumbs u

 

Thanks,

 

Andy

[thirdgreenham]

Sale coming up this weekend if all goes well. (thumbs u

 

 

 

*opens wallet, moths fly out*

 

NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

Oh well. It'll be fun to watch.

 

Going to take a tip from Comics General, time payments are accepted.

 

Moths, however, will get you nothing.

[AtlasFan]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

Actually, I'd say that's anything. . .everything else BUT ironic.

Definitely NOT ironic.

 

 

You are correct that my word choice was poor. I should have: "On the other hand, it was no surprise that Treasure Chest was more vocal than DC." I do understand the background and motivation behind Treasure Chest's decision. I did not know though about the timing of the "unde God" addition. (thumbs u

 

After all, one should remember that radio carried such a show as: I was a Communist for the FBI As per the wikipedia entry (to save me more research), "The film and radio show are, in part, artifacts of the McCarthy era, as well as a time capsule of American society during the Second Red Scare. The purpose of both are partly to warn people about the threat of Communist subversion of American society. The tone of the show is ultra-patriotic, with Communists portrayed as racist, vindictive, and tools of a totalitarian foreign power, the Soviet Union."

 

Granted McCarthy used American's fears of an atomic war in an effort to advance his own career, don't forget, at that time that there was a real threat of Communist infiltration in the Government, academia, business, and the media.

 

The cases of Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, etc are well documented facts of Communist Americans spying for the Soviets.

 

Comics like TREASURE CHEST and others were keen to make Americans aware of a very real threat. Its a shame that the lasting impression from that era are "black lists" and "witch hunts". While those things did happen, the greater good was that a lot of traitors were exposed and that resulted in the nation being a safer place.

 

[comick1]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

Actually, I'd say that's anything. . .everything else BUT ironic.

Definitely NOT ironic.

 

 

You are correct that my word choice was poor. I should have: "On the other hand, it was no surprise that Treasure Chest was more vocal than DC." I do understand the background and motivation behind Treasure Chest's decision. I did not know though about the timing of the "unde God" addition. (thumbs u

 

After all, one should remember that radio carried such a show as: I was a Communist for the FBI As per the wikipedia entry (to save me more research), "The film and radio show are, in part, artifacts of the McCarthy era, as well as a time capsule of American society during the Second Red Scare. The purpose of both are partly to warn people about the threat of Communist subversion of American society. The tone of the show is ultra-patriotic, with Communists portrayed as racist, vindictive, and tools of a totalitarian foreign power, the Soviet Union."

 

Granted McCarthy used American's fears of an atomic war in an effort to advance his own career, don't forget, at that time that there was a real threat of Communist infiltration in the Government, academia, business, and the media.

 

The cases of Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, etc are well documented facts of Communist Americans spying for the Soviets.

 

Comics like TREASURE CHEST and others were keen to make Americans aware of a very real threat. Its a shame that the lasting impression from that era are "black lists" and "witch hunts". While those things did happen, the greater good was that a lot of traitors were exposed and that resulted in the nation being a safer place.

 

 

Does anybody else feel the volcano trembling?

Bill, I'd be willing to debate that one off-thread, pilgrim.

(Don't want the current trajectory of this one to get ANY of us well-mannered war folk ejected.)

 

Edited May 15, 2010 by Comick1

[AtlasFan]

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here...this is the WAR THREAD"!

-- adapted from my favorite film of all time DR STRANGELOVE.

 

Mick, I would enjoy engaging in a friendly discussion about cold war issues, offline, if you like...no problem!

 

But, let me revisit the original question: Why didn't DC use the "Red Scare" as a plot devise in its (war and other) covers and stories at a time when all other media was doing so?

 

My original hypothesis was that the executives at DC may have been sympathetic to those causes and, for that reason, held off making Communists the antagonists in their stories.

 

Now, since this topic came up, I have been doing a little research. ALTER-EGO is a treasure-trove of interviews with folks who lived through those days and have first-hand knowledge. After digging thru my stash and reading interviews with the likes of Jerry Robinson, D ick Dillon, Robert Kanigher and others, unrelated interviews do show that there was a consensus that the DC offices (in the 40s-60s) were mostly liberal D emocrats (nothing wrong with that), with a few editors who may have had some extreme leftist views.

 

The latest issue of ALTER-EGO (#93) has a wonderful 2006 interview with the late DC editor George Kashdan. Kasgdan was an editor at DC from 1947 to the late 1970s. Embedded in this lengthy article, Kashdan talks about the politics at DC and points out that senior editor Jack Schiff did have radical left-leaning views. The article does not say specifically that any stories depicting Communism in a bad light were squashed, but it does leave that impression. This is a 2 part interview, so I am hoping that the next issue may address this directly.

 

I had only heard of Schiff with regards to the SKY MASTERS lawsuit with Jack Kirby (which resulted in Kirby leaving DC and to go to Marvel). After doing some looking, I learned that Schiff was at DC from before the beginning. Schiff had written and edited some of the "Spicy" pulps that company (that would become National/DC) had published in the 30's. Schiff was also very close to DC's owners. The point is that Schiff had a lot of editorial power at DC and may have been a driving force in suppressing any Red Scare themes.

 

I will continue looking thru my ALTER-EGOS this weekend (it sure beats yard work!).

Bill

 

Edited May 15, 2010 by AtlasFan

[buttock]

Now the converse of this is, why was Atlas SO vehemently anti-communist?

 

It is ironic that during that late '50's period, little old Treasure Chest was more vocal than straight War comics from DC.

 

Actually, I'd say that's anything. . .everything else BUT ironic.

Definitely NOT ironic.

 

 

You are correct that my word choice was poor. I should have: "On the other hand, it was no surprise that Treasure Chest was more vocal than DC." I do understand the background and motivation behind Treasure Chest's decision. I did not know though about the timing of the "unde God" addition. (thumbs u

 

After all, one should remember that radio carried such a show as: I was a Communist for the FBI As per the wikipedia entry (to save me more research), "The film and radio show are, in part, artifacts of the McCarthy era, as well as a time capsule of American society during the Second Red Scare. The purpose of both are partly to warn people about the threat of Communist subversion of American society. The tone of the show is ultra-patriotic, with Communists portrayed as racist, vindictive, and tools of a totalitarian foreign power, the Soviet Union."

 

Granted McCarthy used American's fears of an atomic war in an effort to advance his own career, don't forget, at that time that there was a real threat of Communist infiltration in the Government, academia, business, and the media.

 

The cases of Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, etc are well documented facts of Communist Americans spying for the Soviets.

 

Comics like TREASURE CHEST and others were keen to make Americans aware of a very real threat. Its a shame that the lasting impression from that era are "black lists" and "witch hunts". While those things did happen, the greater good was that a lot of traitors were exposed and that resulted in the nation being a safer place.

 

 

Does anybody else feel the volcano trembling?

Bill, I'd be willing to debate that one off-thread, pilgrim.

(Don't want the current trajectory of this one to get ANY of us well-mannered war folk ejected.)

 

All politics aside Mick, I think you're in for a losing battle here. Communists perpetrated massacres that put the Shoah to shame, I can count three off the top of my head.

 

Yes, some anti-communism propaganda was religious, but that probably reflects higher levels of organization more than anything. If other groups had been as large you'd have seen the same thing. Virtually the entire country was united in an anti-communist sentiment from the 50s on.

 

People who were pro-communist were generally hold-overs from the 30s & 40s. At that point it was en vogue in left circles to sympathize with the communists because they were the only thing standing against the fascists in the Spanish civil war. But by the time the detestability of what the communists were doing in Europe & Asia became public knowledge most had to peel back due to the sheer evil involved.

 

And ultimately, that's what it boiled down to. It wasn't religious groups piping an agenda, it was a free nation reviling plain old evil.

 

 

[thirdgreenham]

The sale will be tonight, most likely around 8:00 PM EST.

 

Andy

[bigfiver69]

It's an interesting debate, with parallels in our times as well.

 

Without a doubt, communism in its practical 20th century forms - Stalinism and Maoism - were amongst history's most murderous and dictatorial regimes.

 

And without a doubt, from 1948-49 on, Soviet communism posed an existential threat to the west, and the US in particular.

 

Strategically, the US and NATO policy of containment has to be viewed as THE major strategic success of the post-war era. Yes it cost the west a lot of money. Yes, it meant engaging in Korea and Viet Nam and dozens of proxy wars worldwide. But considering the fact that the west was able to wait out the Soviets without going to WW3, well, that really was something.

 

But for ever success, there are failures to match. To wit, the witch hunts of the early 1950s.

 

Wihtout a doubt, the USA over-estimated the threat of domestic communism in the 1950s. True, the US was the victim of well-planned and executed espionage by the Soviets... but the over-reaction that bred McCarthyism, the John Birch Society, etc. was exactly that... an over reaction. And in my view, the establishment of the time played right into the Russian's hands by starting a 'Communists in ever office' witch hunt. There's 50 years of CIA and FBI documents on 'threatening personalities' ranging from Nancy Reagan to John Lennon - effort which should have gone against the KGB and its cyphers, not normal people who 'didn't think like us'. The paranoia of the era cost the US untold time and treasure in the pursuit of destructive witch hunts, rather than legitimate intelligence.

 

When we look back, how many voices raised up against McCarthyism - in itself a strange totalitarian phenomenon - and fought for the truth of your great Constitution? Very few. Eisenhower was silent. The New Deal establishment was silent. In the end, it was the common sense of the American people (and the lonely voices of people like famed broadcaster Edward R. Murrow) who helped bring down McCarthy and the extreme conservatism of the 50s, and lead the US out of that sad chapter of your nation's history by voting for more liberal candidates in years that followed.

 

Shep

 

 

[comick1]

You guys are all awesome. Definitely agree with parts of ALL of your statements.

Agreed that horrible evil was perpetrated against countless millions in the name of communism. Again, as I stated earlier, those forms of communism were highly diluted. . .particularly when adding totalitarian military regimes into the mix.

 

I'd say that there WAS an overreaction to it in America as Shep stated. It might be true that religious forces were organized in a way that other smaller organizations couldn't muster, but I'd say it's also true that while most of the rest of the world seems to have moved on to bigger and more tangible threats, many if not MOST of these same religious forces in America seem preoccupied--decades after communism fell in most parts of the world--with the phantom that has replaced the very real threat that communism used to pose. Or maybe they're less preoccupied than they appear to be and really just interested in supplying their followers with a daily dose of fear. Fear's pretty good at uniting the flock.

 

I know, I know. There IS China, but they're communist in name only. Human rights problems abound, but I'd say that it's fairly safe to state that they're better at the capitalist game than America at this point in history.

 

By the way, Bill, Strangelove is MY favorite film of all time, too. Part of that is because it underscores the buffoonery that existed (and exists today) around windmills that people wanna go joust with because they're worried about one or another liberty getting stomped on (Sterling Holloway is, at once, brilliantly funny, tragic, and terrifying--something few other actors could pull off. It's one of the great performances in film history. . .and then there're the multiple Sellers performances. Man, I love that movie). As a card-carryin' member of the ACLU, I can relate. It's just that a lot of these same voices are a bit--shall we say--SELECTIVE about which liberties they get hot and bothered about getting stomped on?

 

By the way, I WAS doing yard work all day. I dig it (pun intended) as much as comic book discussion. I gotta go read those Alter Egos. Sounds like some seriously good reading. Didn't know that about Schiff. A happy yard means I can be at the ready for Andy's sale tonight!

Thanks for the great discussion, guys!

Edited May 16, 2010 by Comick1