Surprisingly dark moments in pre-Crisis DC

[The Darknight Detective]

I worked in a hospital for many years. I've seen much worse.

I can't see any reputable institution doing that then or now.

[The Darknight Detective]

Big whooop, they're bare legs. That's not shocking nor gratuitous to me.

We're not talking about Fiona at the beach or even in her undies in her bedroom. There's absolutely no reason I can think of why she should be dressed that way, other than to titillate the reader. BTW, if I had a female family member presented that way to me, someone would need to hold me down.

[Jon Clark]

We're not talking about Fiona at the beach or even in her undies in her bedroom. There's absolutely no reason I can think of why she should be dressed that way, other than to titillate the reader. BTW, if I had a female family member presented that way to me, someone would need to hold me down.

You might want to rephrase that

[The Darknight Detective]

You might want to rephrase that

Heh. I'm pretty sure you knew what I meant by the context.

[Jon Clark]

Right after the Crisis, Roy Thomas found himself with a dilemma. His period piece, Young All-Stars, had as a starring character Dyna-Mite who had his adult partner killed in the first issue. Since the book was set to have a year's worth of tales cover roughly a month of "real time", he either had to have Dyna-mite get over the tragedy far too quickly from a real-time view or else have the character spend years of stories adjusting to that death (if the book had run 12 years you'd just be getting to the 1st anniversary of the death).

Thomas chose to quickly brush the death aside and note in the letter column that he had thought about it.

Anyone think a modern comic writer gives that much thought to how their characters would deal with death? They either brush it aside because the characters have so many deaths occur or they drag it out interminably because they have the characters derive motivation from a long vengeance period.

[Razor Tiara]

Do you know how a straight JACKET works? It doesn't cover those panties or the need for her legs to be chained akimbo.

The point of a straight jacket is upper body restraint. If she had to be restrained like this by the legs, which she wouldn't, her upper body would need restraining fully, rather than her being able to thrash from side to side in a straight jacket.

They restrain patients by the corners of the bed, not the corners of the room.

N.B. This comic was released In the 80s. The 20s has no relevance.

Oh but it does, the things you white knights protest as "gratuitous" are nothing compared to pre-code Hollywood. (Yeah I watch a lot of TCM.) You're so shocked by simple things, that your great, great, grandmothers wouldn't have batted an eyelash at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_in_film.

This was decades before the sexual revolution, which was a few years before the picture in question takes place.

[Razor Tiara]

Do you know how a straight JACKET works? It doesn't cover those panties or the need for her legs to be chained akimbo.

The point of a straight jacket is upper body restraint. If she had to be restrained like this by the legs, which she wouldn't, her upper body would need restraining fully, rather than her being able to thrash from side to side in a straight jacket.

They restrain patients by the corners of the bed, not the corners of the room.

N.B. This comic was released In the 80s. The 20s has no relevance.

Yeah, straightjackets are for upper body restraint, but most have straps that go between the legs, preventing anything untoward from happening to a patient restricted by them.

[Pharozonk]

Oh but it does, the things you white knights protest as "gratuitous" are nothing compared to pre-code Hollywood. (Yeah I watch a lot of TCM.) You're so shocked by simple things, that your great, great, grandmothers wouldn't have batted an eyelash at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_in_film.

This was decades before the sexual revolution, which was a few years before the picture in question takes place. This leads me to believe you're a bunch of restrictive prudes.

I'm far from a prude and don't mind the occasional slice of cheesecake in a comic, but that shot of Fiona is just ridiculous. What reason is there for her not to have pants on in that panel?

[Buried Alien]

Part of the difference is how the "darkness" is executed. In the old days, most things were done off panel or the actual blood itself was heavily toned down. Now everything is shown to the reader in graphic detail, like the Joker cutting off people's faces or Superboy Prime punching off Pantha's head.

Back then, there was a Comics Code Authority that limited what writers/artists could get away with; they didn't self-limit because they were necessarily more decent or tasteful people (maybe they were and maybe they weren't; that's beyond our ability to know). We must bear in mind that writers and artists can get away with much more today than their predecessors could thirty or sixty years ago. Who knows what the artists of the Silver/Bronze Age might have presented us had no CCA been enforced in those days.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Razor Tiara]

I'm far from a prude and don't mind the occasional slice of cheesecake in a comic, but that shot of Fiona is just ridiculous. What reason is there for her not to have pants on in that panel?

What's the reason professional volleyball players or Olympic gymnasts don't wear pants? Don't get me wrong, Ed Benes has drawn some things I thought were way out of line, but I honestly don't think this is.

[Jon Clark]

Back then, there was a Comics Code Authority that limited what writers/artists could get away with; they didn't self-limit because they were necessarily more decent or tasteful people (maybe they were and maybe they weren't; that's beyond our ability to know). We must bear in mind that writers and artists can get away with much more today than their predecessors could thirty or sixty years ago. Who knows what the artists of the Silver/Bronze Age might have presented us had no CCA been enforced in those days.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

And even where you might be able to infer what certain creators might have done without the CCA, you are left with how the publishers may or may not have handled it. There may have been editors who simply would have rejected anything they felt was too graphic and there may have been editors who would have passed on work from people they felt were too tame.

And then you have to factor in how DC/Fawcett/EC/etc evolve in that world.
It's possible DC follows the same path it originally did and any editor or creator is now bound by DC's company wide internal version of the CCA. It's possible DC would have gone hog wild and shown Superman cutting down foes by the hundreds- but with names we never heard of editing, drawing, etc because guys like Mort, Boring, Swan, Hamilton had different careers now.
It might be that EC comics pushes Horror Comics and the decline of Superheroes never reverses itself.

[The Darknight Detective]

Oh but it does, the things you white knights protest as "gratuitous" are nothing compared to pre-code Hollywood. (Yeah I watch a lot of TCM.) You're so shocked by simple things, that your great, great, grandmothers wouldn't have batted an eyelash at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_in_film.

This was decades before the sexual revolution, which was a few years before the picture in question takes place.

Yes, I know all about that and possibly found out about it even before you were born, too (I don't know how old you are). Again, not the point. Explain to all of us a logical reason (not a half-baked rationalization) why she's dressed that way other than to get young boys motors running or for the artist's own sexual gratification (or both). That's why I used the word "gratuitous," because it is. I have seen countless men in comics fully dressed while wearing a strait-jacket, but the gorgeous woman has her panties exposed. There's only one (and only one) explanation as to why.

[HsssH]

I'm far from a prude and don't mind the occasional slice of cheesecake in a comic, but that shot of Fiona is just ridiculous. What reason is there for her not to have pants on in that panel?

To hint that her life is really screwed up now?

[Razor Tiara]

Yes, I know all about that and possibly found out about it even before you were born, too (I don't know how old you are). Again, not the point. Explain to all of us a logical reason (not a half-baked rationalization) why she's dressed that way other than to get young boys motors running or for the artist's own sexual gratification (or both). That's why I used the word "gratuitous," because it is. I have seen countless men in comics fully dressed while wearing a strait-jacket, but the gorgeous woman has her panties exposed. There's only one (and only one) explanation as to why.

The institution doesn't have air conditioning?

[fmvgamer]

Lex Luthor killing a poor innocent woman - angela blake , then make a clone of her , wiped his own memory , become a good guy and make himself fall in love with the clone , all in order for a sinister plot to destroy superman (what else ?). What's worse , superman figured out the plot and still let the good luthor turned back to evil luthor and the poor bride of luthor banished into the phantom zone , all in order for him to lecture and mock luthor. Imagine all the good luthor could have done with his genius but a-hole superman being the bastard that he is , still feel the need to gloat over luthor so let him turn back to evil.