A COMIC CONTROVERSY:
CENSORSHIP & FREE SPEECH IN AMERICAN, JAPANESE, AND FRENCH COMICS RYAN BREWER OLENKA BURGESS ALYSSA GNALL
Comics are a unique medium to study, as they are equal parts artform, commodity, and cultural artifact.
Though comics continue to gain cultural legitimacy, critics have always suspected them of negatively impacting the morality of youths. Controversies around comics have become more complicated with the evolution of social norms and the complications of free speech laws.
We’ll look at how comics in the United States, Japan, and France have been shaped by their country’s history country’s response to modernity, commercialism, politics, and artistic heritage.
We’ll examine the economic and political forces that shape the laws, and how these laws in turn influence the medium itself. Sometimes the result is war—between art, expression, and decency.
French and American comics share a lineage with British satirical cartoons dating back to the 18th century.1 All three countries influenced political cartoons in 19th century Japan, though Japan’s first cartoon can be traced to a 12th century scroll depicting Buddhist monks as animals.2
French comics matured during the French Revolution, becoming a powerful symbol of free speech and a weapon against corruption. Throughout the regimes that followed, however, political caricaturists were persecuted, and strict laws stifled their actions.
In the United States, Benjamin Franklin used the medium to unify Americans under the revolutionary cause. By the mid-19th century, comics were a dominant force in journalism, where artists used them to attack corruption.3
AMERICA
1934: The American comic book as we know it is born. The format gained popularity in 1938, with the official debut of Superman.
Educators, churches, and civic groups are among the first to protest against comic books, claiming their “immoral” content (and youths’ freedom to seek it out) lead to juvenile delinquency.4
America’s entry into WWII spawned the Golden Age of Comics and the rise of the superhero genre. Caped crusaders soothed national anxiety about the global conflict, and Jewish creators were prominent in the industry at the time, so many comics of that era responded directly to the Nazi threat.5
Postwar, mental health experts joined the fray over comic books’ affect on young people, claiming that kids would imitate the violence they saw their favorite ‘heroes’ carry out. Notorious among these experts was Dr. Fredric Wertham.6
At first, Wertham’s campaign against comic books lacked support, but in 1954, he published Seduction of the Innocent, in which he derided comics and claimed that “the effects of these pulp-paper nightmares is that of a violent stimulant.” This time, the government backed him up.7
In 1954 the US Senate investigated the link between comics, juvenile delinquency, and violent crime. The Senate advised the comics industry to create a system of self-policing to avoid negative effects on youth. The Comics Code Authority was born.8
The Code focused on depictions of graphic violence but also included sexual content and innuendo. It forbade the words “horror” or “terror” in titles, and the word “crime” was subject to strict scrutiny. Portrayals of vampires, werewolves, ghouls, and zombies were also forbidden.9
As social attitudes changed, so did comics. When Stan Lee published a run of Spider-Man comics about drug abuse, creators realized the Comics Code Authority had lost its bite. The Code was revised to reflect a new era, but by 2011, the Code was dead.10
If you thought these arguments for censorship of comics were a thing of an uptight past, think again. In 1991, creator Mike Diana was picked up by the FBI because his comic Boiled Angel closely resembled unsolved serial murders in Gainesville, Florida, about two hours from his home.11
Diana’s blood sample cleared him as a suspect, but Diana was still charged with three counts of obscenity, for publishing, distributing, and advertising material the courts would later claim influenced Danny Rolling, the serial killer known as the Gainesville Ripper.12
Diana was fined $3,000 and given a three-year probation, but the case granted him notoriety in the underground comics scene. In 1996, the Gainesville Ripper’s murders were sensationalized in the cultclassic Scream, which was also censored.13
In 1995, an anonymous complaint to an obscenity watchdog group led to a raid on comic book store Planet Comics for allegedly selling child porn. Despite the comics “neither depicting nor involving a human child,” co-owners Michael Kennedy and John Hunter were labeled “dangerous criminals,” and faced a combined 43 years in prison and $20,000 bail. Planet Comics was evicted and permanently closed a year later. Despite strong legal arguments in their favor, pursuing their 1st Amendment rights would negatively affect their industry, and the two were forced into a plea deal. They each received a $1500 fine and a three-year deferred prison sentence.14
Boiled Angel and Verotika both contain graphic images of sex and violence, but in 2014, Jillian and Mariko Tamaki’s beautiful graphic novel This One Summer was shortlisted for the very prestigious Caldecott Medal. Though the book contains no explicit content whatsoever, it is intended for ages 13 and up.15
Many Caldecott Honorees are for children under eight, and a parent in Seminole, Florida, was shocked that her third-grader got it from their school library. Rather than acknowledge the intended age range of Caldecott Honorees or the book’s value to older children, officials moved to ban it.16
The Comic Books Legal Defense Fund has thus far been successful in preventing the ban on This One Summer, but the American fear that comics are corrupting our youth is alive and well.17
JAPAN
Woodblock printing flourished in Japan starting in the early 17th century. The term manga (whimsical drawings) was coined in the early 19th century by the iconic printmaker, Hokusai—you know, the waves guy.18
Popular prints of the era depicted everyday people and well-known entertainers of the era, but depicting authority figures was forbidden by the feudal government. Political satire existed but was typically couched in symbolic imagery to avoid censorship or prosecution.19
Erotic prints were also banned as early as 1661, but ineffectively so: they continued to flourish for centuries, and demonstrated early characteristics of contemporary “ero� manga, such as exaggerated genitals and nonhuman partners.20
Governmental instability and pressure from the West led to more overt political critique. In the mid-19th century, Japan was forced out of national isolation and sought to rapidly modernize and restore imperial rule.21
As Japan continued on its path of modernization and as the imperial government and military gained  power, the government implemented a series of increasingly stringent limits on publishers.22
While prosecution of government officials had become established as fair game, critique of the emperor and national goals were not. In the years leading up to the war, even comics formerly critical of the government turned into propagandists.23
After the war, Japan was forced to adopt a constitution drafted by the US. Article 21 of that constitution guaranteed freedom of expression and banned censorship (though in practice, the occupation censored Japanese political output for years).24
However, Article 175 of Japan’s 19th-century criminal code prohibited the distribution of obscene documents, drawings, or other objects. Until recent years, even Japan’s ancient erotic prints were only viewable in museums outside the country.25
Prior to 1960, most Japanese comics were fairly innocuous, but over the next few decades they shattered every imaginable taboo—incest, bestiality, gruesome violence, and child sexuality among them.26
In practice, the obscenity law prohibited depictions of pubic hair or genitals, but Japan’s rich history of symbolic representation and its recovery from a long history of censorship fostered the creative display of subversive sexuality.27
2002–7 marked Japan’s first obscenity trial for a manga: this one featured explicit, brutally sadistic sex and gang rape.28 Importers of Japanese comics abroad have also faced legal repercussions: in 2009, in order to avoid jail time, a manga collector in Iowa pled guilty to possessing obscene representations of child abuse.29
Critics within Japan and internationally are pushing to expand the definition of child pornography to include manga, but comic artists are resistant since no real children are harmed in a cartoon and the aesthetic of manga characters is age-ambiguous. Where do we draw the line?
FRANCE
By the conventional definition of American freedom of speech, bande desinée (comics) and other media in France—on the surface at least—seem to enjoy considerably greater freedom than in the United States.
But really, the issues are just different. France has had its own level of regulation (often to promote nationalism) and unique historical circumstances that helped guide its maturity, allowing for comics to become culturally accepted quicker than in the United States.
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
Early foundations of these rights were drafted during the French Revolution in The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789), which was inspired by America’s own Bill of Rights.30
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
Article 10 states that no one may be disturbed for his opinions, even religious ones, provided they do not trouble the public order. This basically legalized religious blasphemy.31
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
Article 11 states that the free communication of thoughts and of opinions is one of the most precious rights of man, and guarantees citizens the right to speak, write, and print freely.32
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
Inspired by Article 11, the Law on the Freedom of the Press aimed to liberalise public discussion and dismantle restrictions enacted by over 100 years of Republican and Monarchist rule.33
However, while this law abolished the previous crimes of opinion, tighter restrictions were placed on defamation, insulting high-ranking officials, and outraging public morals.34
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939
A decree amending the 1881 law prohibited defamation or insult committed against a group of persons by origin, race, or religion and designed to arouse hatred among citizens or residents.35
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939
France’s strict anti-hate speech laws were born.
The beginning of the twentieth century saw Communists and Catholics waging a war of values for the loyalty of future generations. Journaux enfants (children’s weeklies) were highly influential, some, like Couers Vaillants and Mon Camerade, were selling up to a 200,000 copies a week.36
Anti-American sentiment was slow burning. Forced to compete with successful hebdomodaires (weeklies), trade unions attempted to restrict American content to no more than 25% of all comics in illustrated journals.37
Some even argued that using American-style word balloons negatively affected literacy and cheapened the artform.38
Fueled by media sensationalism surrounding a postwar juvenile crime wave and studies allegedly proving that 88% of juvenile delinquents read comics in 1946, the new Commission InterministÊrielle de l’enfance dÊlinquante (CILD) was charged with enacting policies to combat it.39
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939
1949
After years of debate, the CILD drafted the the comics censorship law of 16 July 1949. Among its complex nuances, “hatred” and “cowardice” were on the list of things that warrant censure.40
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939 GAYSSOT ACT 1990
1949
In 1990, France passed the Gayssot Act, making holocaust denial illegal, also heightening intolerance for anti-semitic speech.41
Indigenous comics thrived after the war, and intellectual circles began to embrace them in the late 1960s. With the establishment of the Centre Nationale de Bande Dessinee Internationale (CNBDI) in 1991, comics were locked into place as an essential part of French artistic heritage.42
A legacy of seemingly progressive free speech laws paved the way for magazines like the outspoken, far-left-wing satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, infamous for its bold critique of right-wing politicians, racism, and religion. But not everyone agrees with its method of expression.
On the morning of January 7, 2015, two gunmen opened fire in the Charlie Hebdo offices, killing 12 and wounding 11. Among the murdered were five cartoonists, an economist, a maintenance worker, and two police officers.43
The attackers had targeted Charlie Hebdo for their depictions of the prophet Muhammed. This was not the first time the paper had experienced troubles—its offices were firebombed in November 2011 for its satirical response to the return of sharia law in Libya and the victory of the Islamist party in Tunisia.�34
Since reforming in 1991, Charlie Hebdo has been involved with nearly 50 lawsuits with far-right groups, media and journalist groups, Catholic and Muslim associations, and Harkis, a term that is sometimes used to describe all Muslim Algerian supporters of the French presence during the war.45
Data courtesy of Le Monde
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939
LOIS SCELERATES 1893
GAYSSOT ACT 1990
ANTI-TERRORISM 2014
1949
In the wake of the attacks, French officials have used loopholes in hate speech and antiterrorism laws to arrest dozens of muslims for “defending or glorifying terrorism.”46
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND CITIZEN
ARTICLE 10
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF PRESS LAW 29 JULY 1881
ANTI-HATE SPEECH 1939
LOIS SCELERATES 1893
GAYSSOT ACT 1990
ANTI-TERRORISM 2014
1949
How can one set of laws protect one group of people while another set of laws can punish another group for doing the exact same thing?
Because of their diverse audience, rich history, satirical potential, and fusion of text and image, comics may be the perfect medium through which to explore the boundaries of free speech.
Comics that veer toward the fringes of propriety challenge us to think critically about our own comfort levels, the state of society at large, and the very nature of free speech itself. After all, as the venerable Judge Learned Hand proclaimed, “Our dangers, as it seems to me, are not from the outrageous but from the conforming; not from those who rarely and under the lurid glare of obloquy upset our moral complaisance, or shock us with unaccustomed conduct, but from those, the mass of us, who take their virtues and their tastes, like their shirts and their furniture, from the limited patterns which the market offers.�47
ENDNOTES 1. Joel E. Vessels, Drawing France: French Comics and the Republic (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2010), 229. 2. Frederik L. Schodt, Manga! Manga! (New York: Kodansha, 1983), 28. 3. David Copeland, “‘Join, or die’: America’s Press During the French and Indian War,” Journalism History 24, no. 3 (1998), 112. 4. Amy Kiste Nyberg, “Comics Code History: The Seal of Approval,” CLBDF.org, last accessed March 18, 2016, http://cbldf.org/comics-code-history-the-seal-of-approval. 5. Jesse Schedeen, “Marvel Comics and History,” IGN.com, March 7, 2011, http://www.ign.com/ articles/2011/03/07/marvel-comics-and-history. 6. Nyberg, “Comics Code History.” 7. Jamie Coville, “Seduction of the Innocents and the Attack on Comic Books,” the website of Integrative Arts 10 at Pennsylvania State University, last accessed March 18, 2016, http://www.psu.edu/dept/ inart10_110/inart10/cmbk4cca.html. 8. Ibid. 9. Amy Kiste Nyberg, “Comics Code History: The Seal of Approval,” CLBDF.org, last accessed March 18, 2016, http://cbldf.org/comics-code-history-the-seal-of-approval. 10. Ibid. 11. Marc H. Greenberg, “Comics, Courts & Controversy: A Case Study of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund,” Loy. LA Ent. L. Rev. 32 (2011), 121. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid., 150. 14. Ibid., 153-54. 15. “Case Study: This One Summer,” CLBDF.org, last accessed March 18, 2016, http://cbldf.org/bannedcomic/banned-challenged-comics/case-study-this-one-summer/ 16. Elle Collins, “Florida Schools Panic About Tamakis’ ‘This One Summer’,” ComicsAlliance.com, February 9, 2016, http://comicsalliance.com/florida-this-one-summer-school-ban/?trackback=tsmclip http:// comicsalliance.com/florida-this-one-summer-school-ban/ 17. “Case Study: This One Summer.” 18. Nicole Fabricand-Person, “Hokusai’s Manga,” Princeton University Library, December 16, 2014, http:// library.princeton.edu/news/2014-12-16/hokusai’s-manga. 19. Kurt Illerbrun, “The Japanese Political Cartoon: Development and Decline,” (Master’s dissertation, University of Oxford, 2005). 20. Ibid. 21. Ibid. 22. Frederik L. Schodt, Manga! Manga! (New York: Kodansha, 1983), 55.
23. Ibid., 56-60. 24. Kirsten Cather, The Art of Censorship in Postwar Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2012), 12. 25. Frederik L. Schodt, Dreamland Japan: Writings on Modern Manga (Berkeley: Stone Bridge Press, 1996), 54. 26. Schodt, Manga! Manga!, 120-34. 27. Ibid. 28. Cather, Art of Censorship, 226-27. 29. “CBLDF Case Files—U.S. v. Handley.” Website of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. Last accessed March 17, 2016. http://cbldf.org/about-us/case-files/cbldf-case-files/handley/ 30. Frede Castberg, Freedom of Speech in the West: A Comparative Study of Public Law in France, The United States, and Germany. (Oslo: Oslo University Press, 1960), 9. 31. Ibid., 10. 32. Ibid. 33. Ibid., 48. 34. Ibid. 35. Michael Herz and Peter Molnar, The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Rethinking Regulation and Responses, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 155. 36. Vessels, Drawing France, 65. 37. Ibid., 62. 38. Ibid., 65. 39. Ibid., 117. 40. Ibid., 140. 41. Jeroen Temperman, Religious Hatred and International Law: The Prohibition of Incitement to Violence and Discrimination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 281. 42. Vessels, Drawing France, 14. 43. “Charlie Hebdo Attack: Three Days of Terror,” BBC, January 14, 2015, http://www.bbc.com/news/ world-europe-30708237. 44. David Jolly, “Satirical Magazine is Firebombed in Paris,” New York Times, November 2, 2011, http:// www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-magazine-in-paris-is-firebombed.html. 45. “Charlie Hebdo, 22 ans de procès en tous genres,” Le Monde, January 8, 2015, http://www.lemonde. fr/societe/article/2015/01/08/charlie-hebdo-22-ans-de-proces-en-tous-genres_4551824_3224. html. 46. Lori Hinnant, “In Crackdown on Hate Speech, France Arrests 54 for Defending Terror,” The Boston Globe, January 14, 2015, https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2015/01/14/crackdown-hatespeech-france-arrests-for-defending-terror/exzmOcyRHLEPPWKJIVcHYK/story.html. 47. Suzy Platt, Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations Requested from the Congressional Research Service, (Washington: Library of Congress, 1989), 47.