The following letter was printed
in the January 29, 2002 issue of The Daily Texan.
Physician, heal thyself
Can the editorial board at
The Daily Texan justifiably decry The
Battalion [the campus paper of Texas A&M, which
has recently come under fire for running allegedly racist cartoons]?
Perhaps they should have reviewed their own cartoonists work before
criticizing The Battalion's offering.
Monday's Wheelchair
Ninja cartoon is a blatant example of the type of senseless
racism which the board finds offensive. The entire concept is an
attack on the racial and cultural heritage of the Japanese. And like
the Aggie cartoon, its author hides behind a pen name.
Off Campus and Salt of the Earth
are similarly racist, sexist, and offensive. In Monday's
Off Campus , the poor dateless brunette
begs the blonde for details of her date. While in Ying Di's
Salt of the Earth, the drunken good ole (white) boys laugh
about how drunk their (white) friend was and the sadistic joke played
on him. Talk about your offensive sexist stereotypes.
And how about last Thursday's
Bill and Erik? Where else but
the Texan can one read about the popularity of phrases like "dumb
as a Dutch tulip farmer" or "as criminally insane as a German"? Funny
stuff, right? I suppose it's comforting to know that this bigotry
was approved by a TSP adviser.
Is President Faulkner pleased
that the Texan represents Longhorns as bigoted,
alcoholic, sadistic sexists? Does The Daily Texan
think that because an Asian name derides white people it can avoid
charges of racism while it's anonymous cartoonist denigrates Asians? The
Texan should review its own content before passing judgement
on The Battalion, the self-proclaimed "Lapdog
of the [A&M] Administration."
Charles Tolliver,
UT Alum
Well, aren't we the little finger-pointer?
If even half of what I've read about the cartoons that The Battalion
was running is true, then I think there can be little doubt that
The Daily Texan was more than justified in their criticism of
the Aggies' school paper. There really isn't anyway to get around
the fact that using a "Mammy" is pretty damn tasteless. Obviously,
based on what Tolliver wrote, we can assume that he might agree with this
assertion. So let's move on to his other comments, shall we?
This isn't the strip that Tolliver was referring
to, but it IS indicative of the kind of humor found in Josh Bumb's
Wheelchair Ninja. It ought to be evident, but let me spell out
for you: this is not racist humor. Wheelchair Ninja's subject
matter is a derivative of the timeless "stranger in a strange land" motif
that has permeated literature, comedic and otherwise, for centuries. To
be blunt, Bumb's work is no more offensive that the contempory film Kate
& Leopold , nor is it any more indicative of "Japanese culture"
than Eastman and Laird's "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles".
The allegations leveled against my own
comic are understandable, but no less laughable. Long time readers
of OFF CAMPUS know that the signifigance of the
comic in question
derives from the fact that the brunette (who has had a
boyfriend for sometime) wants to know how the blonde's date went because
the blonde hasn't been on a date during the comic's entire run. The
irony is that rather than perpetuating the sexist stereotype that Tolliver
has read into it, the situation presented in the strip actually contradicts
this very stereotype! But like I said, I can see how he could make
this mistake.
However, Tolliver's interpretation of
Yingdi Yuan's Salt the Earth is downright ridiculous. How
anyone could mistake the characters that inhabit his comic as "good ole
boys" is beyond me. I think it's pretty self-evident as to how this
conclusion was arrived at: Tolliver was simply trying to find something,
anything, wrong with the comic. The reality is that this particular
edition of Salt the Earth had a pretty benign punch line about the
drunken pranks that often get played on college campuses.
Honestly though, it's Tolliver final
erroneous assertion that strikes me as the most absurd. He chastisizes
bill and erik author Mac Blake for writing about racist stereotypes
and, in so doing, somehow fails to realize that the entire comic's gag was
aimed at pointing out ludicrous racist stereotypes are! Seriously,
who the hell calls people "dumb as a Dutch tulip farmer?"
The bottom line here is that, if you
really want to, you can read something offensive into anything of a comedic
nature. After all, its a fairly well-known fact that all humor is
derived at the expense of someone else. As such, all comedy is going
to be offensive on some level. It is the degree of this inherent
offensive nature that is the best determinant as to whether or not a ficticious
work ought to be pulled. Thus I say, that if one reads a comic, or
a book, or a paper, or a whatever, and one is not immediately offended
by (or aware of the blatant disregard for tastefulness exhibited in) such
a work, then it's probably not a big deal.
So far, I feel that my Texan contemporaries
and I have managed to stay on the proper side of this line. And
if we ever slip up, I'm sure that you'll let us know.
Seno
1/31/02
Today's Question: Any site features you'd like to
see added?
Let me know
.
Good Shit: I finally got around to reading Terry Moore's
series Strangers in Paradise. After just one issue, I was
hooked. Great art, great drama, great everything. The series
is available in graphic novel collections. Order them
here
. Great gift for a non-comics reader.
