Comic Fandom Monthly, No. 2 (October 1971), page 18-19

fandom010.jpg

Dublin Core

Title

Comic Fandom Monthly, No. 2 (October 1971), page 18-19

Description

A continuation of previous articles.

Creator

Joe Brancatelli

Source

Comic Fandom Monthly, No. 2 (October 1971)

Date

1971-10

Contributor

Wally Stoelting
Steve Jenkins
Fredric Wertham

Scripto

Transcription

FANZINE WATCH, cont.
on! Also included in Anomaly #2 is the sec-
ond part of a Robert Kline portfolio on Rob-
ert E. Howard. There is also a Kline strip
which is very good. An excellent offset buy.
Flashback #1: Wood and EC. Same address
as The Buyer's Guide. $l per copy. This is
the first in a series of Golden Age reprints
from Alan Light. The second contains the Sub
Mariner battling the Torch. The first issue
sports poor reproduction, but the material
more than makes up for it. This is where Mr.
Mood was at his best, so if you're interes-
ted in great art (and can't afford the EC
originals] the price is pretty cheap.
COPYRlGHT©. EC PUBLICATIONS, 1955

THE SQUEELING WAS COMING CLOSER NOW! A STAM-
PEDING MASS OF COUNTLESS MOKOS BORE DOWN UPON
THE RETURNING HUNTERS! THE HYDROGEN BLASTERS
WERE USELESS! THERE WERE FAR TOO MNAY TO STOP

Yandro, lastly, a non-comics zine. From:
Robert Coulson, route three, Hartford City,
Indiana, 47348. This is basically a science-
fiction fanzine. From my meager experience
with science-fiction zines, I can't really
say if this is average, poor or what. On its
own merits, Yandro fills me with mixed reac-
tions. Contains: reviews, letters and more
reviews, big in science-fiction fandom, co-
ver about twenty-two of the forty pages.
This is here mostly to find out if any of
you want science-fiction fanzine reviews at
all! Let me know.
Send all fanzines to review directly to
me at:
Wally Stoelting
Room.115
No. Converse, UVM
Burlington, Vermont, 05401
I apologise for some of my English this
issue, but will try to do more beater next
time. Checkmate King 2.

FLASH GORDON,CON'T

They battle back and forth until Flash
jumps through a window just before Zarkov is
to be eliminated by a heat ray. Barin de-
cides to stop beating on guards long enough
to break the ray's timer (I guess he wasn't
a chicken after all). Ming fights back, of
course, his guards using what appeared to be
bazooka guns. Dale and the kidnapped girl
rake their faces, however, and Ming's once
fiendish grin turns dour. If you're wonder-
ing what ever happened to Zarkov, well he's
tied to a couple of pillars, yelling to Gor-
don and company to buzz off because he does
not think old Merciless will hurt him (odd
thing to say from a man who almost got dis-
intergrated). well, Flash and the Barin lis-
ten to Zarkov, but mug a couple of guards on
the way out, and take their uniform for fu-
ture use.
After Flash's departure, Zarkov and Dale
are taken to their chambers. Flash, using
those swiped uniforms, rescues both Zarkov
and Dale in short order, knocking off sever-
al more guards in the process. On the way,
Zarkov stays behind and saves the Earth by
planting the earth-saving device on Mount
McKinley. why they chose McKinley I don't
know, but the height may have been a factor.
One might think that old Ming was out of
tricks, but he snaps right back with a brand
new menace. Now he's got a fire bomb guar-
enteed to blow up earth, unless, of course,
earth decides to surrender. Zarkov immedi-
ately begins work on a counter-bomb. Mean-
time Ming sends a letter to Prince Barin de-
claring his intention to test the bomb in
Mongo's wastelands. Ming does say, though,
that theres a force on earth capable of dis-
mantling the bomb. Once again irony butts in
to make things easy. Apparently, it'll take
some twenty-four hours before Ming demonst-
rates the bomb. Flash needs exactly twenty-
four hours to get the neutralizer. And in 24
hours, Flash has done it. Zarkov, never idle
in this flick, has also invented a suit in
which Flash will be protected. Unfortunately
for the bunch, a machine fails and as chap-
ter six ends, Flash, Dale and Barin are ap-
parently blown to bits.
As the chapter ended the night's showing,
I realized how utterly impossible the serial
would be to make today. Techniques, costumes
and other assorted stuff would be better, I
am sure, but it just wouldn't be Flash Gor-
don any more. The serials are dead, long may
they live.
If this has whetted your appetite, try a
copy of Comic Crusader #11, 50¢ from Box l32
Dedham, Mass., 02026. Marty Greim's zine is
devoted strictly to Flash Gordon this issue!

for mathematical proof that can be expressed in graphs and curves. Meanwhile
they are Just being magnanimous. Try to tell that to an adolescent boy on whose
understanding, after all, this whole rating system must rest.
The crucial point is that the exclusive emphasis on protection of youth is used
successfully as an excuse and justification for unbridled license for a profusion
of brutality, violence, murder, torture, cruelty and sadism. You need only label
it “For mature audiences only” and you can produce a surfeit of all this in any
setting you want. (The label used to be “adult entertainment”) This is pre-
sented to us under the guise of “freedom of artistic expression.” It implies that
society approves of violence without limitation. It legalizes operations that func-
tion on the fringes of legality. All you have to do is to “classify.”
How does it work out in practice? We apply the same rule to a boy of seven
and a young person who is almost eighteen! When we forbid boys of 16 or 17
to see a movie that we enjoy, we don’t protect them, we slap them down. This
procedure is not only absurd, it is anti-social. Instead of protecting society we
either cause resentment or contempt for our rules—with cheating invited.
Some time ago I conducted a seminar in the sociology department of a high
school. The rating system of movies came up for discussion. The students ap-
proved of it wholeheartedly. The X rating, they said, showed them which films
were the most exciting to see. Getting into the theatre was no difficulty. (Later
they described to me how it was done.)
Recently on the same day the New York Times had two big advertisements
for violent movies. One movie was praised in large print with such descriptions
as “climactic orgy that progresses from sex to wild mindless destruction,” and
the ad closed with the punchline “X (persons under 18 not admitted).” The
other advertisement informs us that this violent movie is showing in 44 movie
theatres in the New York area, praises it as featuring “PERVERSION, SAD-
ISM,” and ends with the same punchline about the X rating. This is not admoni-
tion, it is advertising.
It is now 22 years since I first stated under oath that the saturation with
violent images by the mass media has clinically demonstrable bad effects on
young minds. It is 15 years since I concluded from my continuing researches (in
Seduction of the Innocent) that these effects may be long-lasting, and refuted
the harmless-outlet-of-aggression thesis. It is encouraging to see that-although
it took a while—this has now been oflicially acknowledged. The President’s Com-
mission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, in a statement dealing specifi-
cally with television but applying also to movies, reported recently in the identical
words that I have been using for years, that the preponderance of available’
research evidence shows that screen“ violence has adverse effects; that the harm-
less-outlet theory is wrong; that attitudes are affected; that it is a contributing
factor; that it is time to stop the “not proved” argument.
The makers of the classification system have not caught up with this. They
say they are still entirely uncertain about whether movie violence can do harm
or may actually be beneficial and cathartic. Of course this uncertainty is nothing
new. Producers of films in pre-Hitler Germany were also uncertain about whether
it might have an adverse effect on the German population when they made