Cartoon Violence: (was Why Canceled?)

From: Paul Kemner <pkemner_at_bright.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 13:38:11 -0400 (EDT)

The mysterious one shouted, about ted:
>> I ASKED HIM THAT QUESTION ONCE AND HE REPLIED.
>>"WHILE DOING A SHOW REVIEW (EVERY NOW AND THEN HE WATCHES THE SHOWS AND GIVES
>>HIS OPINION) IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE SHOW WAS EXTREAMLY VIOLENT.
>> TOO VIOLENT FOR SOME OF OUR YOUNGER VIEWERS"

Frank Fuller fumed:
>*wince* Ow... please don't use all caps, its painful to the eyes. :) And
>Kats ain't near as violent as some stuff, not graphically, anyhow, most Kats
>weapons weren't designed to outright kill, only capture...

A point that I've made before (in a discussion with KevinK on the Dominion
Board <come back, KevinK!>, and <I think> Edo) is this:

On most American-pattern cartoons, violence has no permanent consequence.
Either

1) Characters get blown up (with the result that they get sooty and their
hair gets mussed), hit with anvils or other heavy objects (and get driven
into the ground, flattened like a pancake, etc.), shatter and collapse into
a heap, or other similar fates a'la Buggs Bunny and many other classic
WB-era 'toons. In the next scene they're back with no damage or soreness
whatsoever! - these cartoons were made for a theater audience- adult, and
often meant for WWII servicemen. I watched and loved them as a kid in the
50's, and they "never did me no harm" <except for facial tics, muttering and
occasional blackouts> but they *are* violent, and don't show any consequences.

2) Old semi-realistic adventure shows (Old Jonny Quest episodes and the
like-) were often violent. Monsters would sink ships, eat/shred characters,
etc. None of the Quest party would ever get shot, blown up/ injured- but
some innocent "tentacle or blaster-fodder" *would*, as well as some of the
bad guys at the end. At least *something* bad happens to folks when things
go wrong. so- some consequences, but none of the main characters ever gets a
hangnail. QJ was made for kids, and I was in the original audience every
Saturday!

3) "Modern" adventure shows fall into a couple of different categories- One
has "A-Team" violence- with human opponents. Thousands of rounds of ammo are
expended, bombs go off, lasers fry- but nobody (good or bad) gets hurt! In
my opinion this is the most dangerous type of stuff to show to kids! If you
find a gun, go ahead and shoot it! It's fun, and nobody will really get
hurt! It's an example of a well-meaning idea (kids shouldn't see too much
violence) having a bad effect (giving kids the idea that nothing bad will
happen if they cut loose with a .45 they find).

3a) The other adventure cartoon is a type with dead or mechanical bad guys.
Skeleton Warriors and the like are in this class. Either you blow up the bad
guys and they re-assemble, or there are robot minions that you can shoot up-
the robots may be gone for good, but they can be replaced with an endless
supply of identical ones. Maybe 'robot cannon fodder' isn't quite as bad as
the "A-team/GI Joe" shows, but they still promote a 'go ahead and shoot'
mentality.

In some anime, however, there *are* consequenses. Even main characters can
get killed when they are in dangerous situations. Could this be a reason why
modern Japanese society *appears* to be less violent than in the US? I don't
know, but it may be one explanation! (BTW: did you ever hear about
historical Japanese street gangs using tobacco pipes to kill/maim their
prey? It's quite bizarre!)

Another example from outside the world of cartoons: I've seen a study done a
few years ago that concluded that kids that had responsible weapons training
were *less* likely to use guns in a crime, or to get in trouble with guns.
Even kids from poor/bad backgrounds. (as far as I know, this was *not* an
NRA study, either, though it is widely ignored) A kid that has had to go
through all the saftey training, learn to assemble/disassemble, and clean a
gun (what a chore!) looks at it like a tool, with responsibility that goes
along with it. That kid may grow up to like 'em, collect 'em, do sport
shooting, etc. but he (or she!) is less likely to rob a liquor store with
one (that study said that they're more likely to use a knife!) The kids that
were never allowed to have toy guns are a different matter, however. To
them, the gun is a magic power talisman. Anyway- my point is that sometimes
when you shelter kids too much, it ends up having the opposite effect.

I'm not saying that cartoons for kids have to be grim gore fests! I think it
*is* possible to have fun kid shows without having a lot of violence or
being sappy! But if you're making action/adventure shows, you should
consider what messages you're actually sending. I do think that the BS&P may
be causing the very social problems that they're trying to prevent.

Now the Kats- as Frank mentioned- most of their weapons are designed to
stop/disable (like the cement machine gun). Razor also tends to fire
less-lethal stuff (like octopus missiles) first. (They *are* vigilantes,
and I think they're very careful to not act as executioners.) The Razor's
Edge ep. was also pretty instructive, about how badly he felt about
(supposedly) hurting some bystanders. A while ago I was trying to see if I
could get somebody to check the eps for a body count: i.e. how many kats do
the bad guys/monsters kill in each episode? Do Razor and T-Bone kill any of
their sentient adversaries? (I don't think so!) I think it would make an
interesting discussion point about this violence issue...
=^^=
<Paul steps off of the soap box before he falls and hurts himself. >


Received on Thu Jul 04 1996 - 14:39:58 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Feb 22 2016 - 19:57:26 PST