Given the events of this past weekend, a lot of people have brought up this idea that Nazis have always been bad, and we literally fought a war to stop them, and so on. The general message being that America has always hated Nazis and Nazism, and that we would never tolerate their shit. Which is a great sentiment but it's not really accurate.

Let me state in no uncertain terms: Nazis, the KKK, and white supremacists are fucking assholes. Their hatred is a pestilence on humanity. Every single one of them can fuck right off.

The part that's inaccurate is America's tolerance for Nazis.

Comic fans like to point to Captain America punching Hitler on the jaw on the cover of Captain America Comics #1. Or Daredevil and his companions battling Hitler on the cover of Daredevil Comics #1. Both of which pre-date the attack on Pearl Harbor by several months.

But that's the thing: Pearl Harbor brought the United States into World War II, but it's a war that had been going on for YEARS before the US became officially involved. World War II officially started in 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland! Germany annexed Austria in 1938! The Nuremberg Laws that officially sanctioned the murdering of Jews in Germany was passed in 1935! Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany in 1933 and became it's Führer in 1934! He wrote Mein Kampf in 1925! The Nazi party was actually formed in 1920!

Granted, news moved a bit slower back then, and you could debate at precisely what point it would've made the most sense to act, but my point is that America tolerated YEARS of Nazism before taking a formal stand.

What made these comics visually advocating the punching of Hitler significant is precisely because it was not yet US policy. Yes, Jack Kirby absolutely wanted to go over and kill Hitler. As did Charles Biro. And there were indeed like-minded people who saw those comics and agreed with the sentiment. But it wasn't a universal one.

There's a famous anecdote about the Simon & Kirby offices receiving death threats after Captain America Comics #1 hit the stands, and that New York City mayor Fiorello LaGuardia personally promised police protection to the studio. But that was only after Simon & Kirby received a bunch of hate mail, and Kirby himself stormed down from the studio to take on group of Nazi sympathizers who were threatening him from the lobby. (They had run away before Kirby made it down to the first floor.)

In 1941, nine years before his first book was published, Dr. Seuss was a political cartoonist for PM, a New York newspaper. Many of his cartoons poked fun at the "America First" crowd generally and those who advocated for an isolationist approach to Hitler. But these weren't just vague ideas that he thought someone might hold, these were ideas championed by specific individuals with media platforms, and Seuss called them out by name: pilot Charles Lindbergh and popular radio host Father Charles Coughlin to name two.

The United States didn't enter World War II because of Hitler. We entered World War II because we were bombed by Japan. We wanted revenge on Japan first and foremost. That Germany and Japan were allies meant that Germany was the US enemy by proxy. We sent soldiers to Germany but we dropped atomic bombs on Japan. Unnecessary atomic bombs. We rounded up and put Japanese-American citizens in concentration camps, but left white supremacists and Nazi sympathizers roam free. We were in World War II for revenge against the Japanese.

Let me reiterate. Nazis are bad. If you're advocating the death of an entire group of people because of their skin color or religion, you absolutely deserve to be punched in the face. But saying that America has always hated Nazis and what we're seeing recently is somehow new simply is not true. While a lot of people have hated Nazis for a long time, a lot of other people thought it was better to deal with Nazis by looking the other way.

Which is why we still have to hit them in the face.

Yesterday, I attended a new convention called RETCon. (Fantastic name, but I can't seem to find if the "RET" portion stands for anything. It's frequently capitalized like it should, but I can't find anything spelling that out. Perhaps it's only meant to suggest it's designed as an older style convention.) Their stated intent was to have a smaller convention that focused on diverse comics specifically, and not tons of ancillary stuff. It felt a little sparsely attended when I was there, but most of the tabling creators I spoke with seemed to be doing reasonable well despite that.

But, as always, I try to keep my eye on the way things are run to check the show out from more of a business perspective and I found some interesting things here.

As I said, it was sparsely attended from what I saw. It was a lovely day, so I doubt anyone was dissuaded from coming by the weather. I did see signs in/around the building itself, so it seems unlikely that people couldn't find it. So I'm wondering if their pre-show promotion game was a little lacking? It did come across my Facebook feed, but I don't recall seeing anything else. (To be fair, I haven't been to any of the retail shops that were set up at the show, and I expect they had some promotion in their respective stores.) I'm also not hyper-local to the show (it was an hour-plus for me to get there) so there may have been more neighborhood ads that I missed.

When I got there and parked, I asked the security attendant about parking fees and the show and he directed to an open, nondescript door. That led to a few steps that popped me right at the back of the show floor. It was clearly NOT the main entrance, but it also seemed pretty well unsupervised, meaning anyone could casually stroll in and out without having to pay an admission fee. As I did. I strolled up towards the front of the hall in an earnest attempt to pay but the one place at the front of the hall that looked like it might serve as an admissions table was empty. I saw a photo after I got home that looked like the setup was actually by another one of the building entrances, but I didn't see anything like that while I was there. I don't know if the show lost any potential revenue (besides my $15) from people "sneaking" in the back entrance, but it seems like a review of the show's layout (if it remains at that location) might be warranted.

The show was in an auditorium, with the creators and retailers on the main floor, a raised stage at one end that was used for panels, and a kids' activities section on a balcony overlooking everything. Panels were conducted on the stage in full view of the rest of the convention. They were a little hard to see if you weren't seated on the stage, but you could still hear everything pretty easily. I liked that everyone could essentially "sit" in on the panels while they were still perusing the main floor, but at the same time, having conversations with creators was a little more challenging at times. I'm not sure where most people would fall on that topic.

One of the most interesting tidbits I overheard was that the convention was providing volunteers for creators to monitor their tables if they had to run to the restroom or grab something to eat or whatever. I don't know what stipulations or limitations might be placed on that perk, but it's a really clever idea, I think.

Interestingly, while there were a reasonably diverse selection of creators there, it wasn't focused exclusively on comics. Some -- not many, but some -- of the creators didn't have any actual comics to their name and were just selling a selection of prints. And on both days, one of the stage shows was presented by Acrobatica Infiniti, where they basically performed a variety of acrobatic routines while dressed in cosplay. They were mostly dressed as comic based characters at least, but there was one I didn't recognize at all. They were good, but seemed to me a bit far removed from "bring[ing] the comic book back to the forefront."

It might seem like most of this has been complaining about the show, but I honestly enjoyed it a great deal and was disappointed I only got to spend a few hours there. I think most of what I've talked about are issues stemming from this being their first year, and finding their convention legs. I met several new creators I'd never seen at CAKE, C2E2, or other local cons so the show's intention to highlight "diverse, up-and-coming writers and artists who are not currently featured in the mainstream comic industry" was certainly achieved as far as I'm concerned. But I think the issues I cited show that running even a small a convention isn't easy, and there are tons of things to consider that might not be immediately obvious. In any event, I hope the show did well enough to warrant a sequel next year.

Here are this week's links to what I've had published recently...

Kleefeld on Comics: On Business: The Changing Nature of Tabling
http://ift.tt/2vbR55f

FreakSugar: Fanthropology: Internal Strife
http://ift.tt/2veTydJ

Kleefeld on Comics: On History: Sparky Moore
http://ift.tt/2hFKoUx

Patreon: MTV Geek Classic: Kleefeld on Webcomics #20: Comics by Committee
https://t.co/geK7cq5sNS

Kleefeld on Comics: Weekly Comics Links
http://ift.tt/2wI8cd2

FreakSugar: Webcomics Wednesday: Long or Short?
http://ift.tt/2wImx9w

Kleefeld on Comics: On -isms: LCS Accessibility
http://ift.tt/2vS4bGK

Patreon: MTV Geek Classic: Kleefeld on Webcomics #21: The Speed of Thought
https://t.co/geK7cq5sNS

Kleefeld on Comics: On Strips: Kid President + Snoopy
http://ift.tt/2vWTMbE

I missed this last year, but apparently Kid President spent some time at the Charles Schulz Museum and did a Peanuts-themed video. It was tied to and something a promotion for the Peanuts movie that came out around that time, but it was still more focused on the strip. Given the uplifting tone and demeanor of the video, I thought it might help folks smile a bit after another long, excruciatingly painful, and generally terrifying week of news. I'll point to the accompanying Bonus Video, too, because it gets even more directly into the comics themselves, with Kid President talking with Schulz's widow and their son, Craig. It's not as uplifting as the previous video, but it does, as I said, dive deeper into the comics themselves.

I've noticed over the past few years an increase in the number of wheelchair-bound fans attending comic conventions. At almost any good-sized convention any more, you can generally expect one to see at least one young fan who had a devoted and clever parent come up with a unique way to incorporate their wheelchair into a costume design. I suspect some of this is due to better technology giving them more mobility than before, but conventions too have recognized these fans' interest and have started making better accommodations.

I was thinking, though, I don't know that I've ever seen someone in a wheelchair even attempt to maneuver through a comic shop. I'm sure it's been done, but in the past 30-some years of going to comic shops, I don't recall ever having seen a single wheelchair in any of them.

In fact, there are more than a few comic shops I've been into where a wheelchair simply wouldn't make it past the entrance. The one closest to my home has so much crap near the front door, I don't think a wheelchair could make it all the way through door itself. (Seriously, I can't see how that place isn't a fire hazard.) Many of the other shops I'm familiar with are difficult to navigate as an able-bodied individual; I can't imagine how challenging they would be for anyone less mobile.

I'm sure most shops are complying with the letter of the law, and have exactly as much space available as is required by federal and local requirements demand. I mean, there are inspectors who come by to check precisely these types of things. (Not as frequently as they should, but you can only do so much when you're criminally under-funded.) And I know, too, that space is at a premium, particularly for low-profit enterprises like comic shops that rely heavily on having a lot of physical stock on-hand. So it's not surprising that most shop owners try to cram as much as they possibly can into their stores. I'm sure they'd fill their shops even more if they weren't required to have minimum aisle widths and the like.

Have you ever stayed in a hotel room that was specifically designed to be accessible? Personally, I find that they're simply better rooms because the things they change to make it accessible are just a better fit for humans of all types. Everything that's easier to get to from a wheelchair is easier to get to without one too. There's actual thought put into the design decisions made for an accessible room that, I think, are simply "that's just how we things are done" decisions for other rooms. My stays in accessible rooms have always been more enjoyable than in their non-accessible equivalents.

So I'm wondering if comic shops might take the same idea. By making the store itself more accessible, would it not become a better environment for able-bodied customers as well? As I think back over the years, most of the better shops I've been in were indeed more spacious and didn't feel the need to cram every inch of space with stuff. I wonder if such a change would alter the clientele, or would it simply bring in more people? (All other things being equal.)

Something to think about if you work at a comic shop...

• CSUN Today has a piece on Charles Hatfield's upcoming course on “Studies in Popular Culture” with an exclusive focus on Batman.
• On the show Lit Happens, Danica Lorer spoke recently with Elaine M. Will about some of her work.

My brother pinged this weekend asking about the pricing of a Sparky Moore page of original art. He'd apparently stumbled across one at a yard sale or something, and wanted to see if it was worth picking up. It occurred to me that I'd never really looked at a page of Moore's art for sale and didn't know any specific guidelines for pricing, but I was pretty sure the seller's $15 asking price was good deal, even though it was apparently his later work from the Winnie the Pooh comic strip, which ran from 1978-1988.

Even though Moore garnered a little attention last year when he passed away in September, I thought I'd run through a short biography since I think he's still relatively unknown.

Born in 1925, Richard Thomas Moore grew up in Philadelphia and served in the Navy during World War II earning the nickname Sparky as a radio operator. After the war, he married a friend's sister and enrolled at the University of New Mexico. They soon moved to California and he continued studying at Art Central in Los Angeles. It was this training that helped him land a job with Western Publishing in 1951. Although often uncredited, he did work on a number of popular characters like Rin Tin Tin, Tarzan, Robin Hood (Disney's version), Zorro, The Three Stooges, and Roy Rogers.

Much of his work from the mid-1960s through the early 1980s was specifically created for non-US markets, further keeping his name in relative obscurity here in the States. He did, however, work on the Scamp newspaper strip beginning in 1973 and worked on that until he was moved over to the aforementioned Pooh strip in 1978. (In both cases, the strips were generally credited to Walt Disney himself.)

Throughout the 1960s, Moore also did a fair amount of work in animation, mostly as a layout artist. He again worked on a wide variety of popular characters including Huck Finn (some sources mistakenly state Huckleberry Hound), Space Ghost, Johnny Quest, Captain America, Spider-Man, Clutch Cargo, and Skyhawks. His daughter says that he was also one of the courtroom sketch artists at the Charles Manson trial, although I can't find any of his work from that online.

He bought a ranch in Templeton, CA in the mid-1980s where he continued to herd cattle well into his retirement from art. His wife died in 2005, and he remained close to his five children and their children, who all lived within ten miles of the ranch. Moore passed away at his home in 2016 at the age of 91.