I've been reading comics as long as I can remember, but it wasn't until 1979 that I read what might be considered my first graphic novel. It was actually a "video novel" that told the Hulk's origin story, as it was shown on the 1978 television show. (Well, technically, it tells the story from the two-hour pilot which aired in late 1977.)

Rather than re-work the story and get a house artist to draw, however, author Roy Thomas took about 150 still images from the show, cropped them vertically to fit a standard TPB format, and added dialogue balloons and caption boxes. Much of the text is lifted directly from Ken Johnson's screenplay. (At least, I believe it's lifted verbatim; I haven't done a line-by-line check of the entire book.)

Even though I was a kid at the time, and I was extremely excited to get the book, there were a few things that struck me as a bit odd, even back then. The actual still images chosen generally made sense and followed what was shown on screen, but some of the specific frames didn't quite work. The actors' expressions wouldn't quite match the dialogue in several cases, and others are blurred from the actors' movements. Looking back on the book now, it seems as if Thomas selected all the images himself. And while it's common to have video software on a computer now that can advance a single frame at a time that would allow you to select the perfect shot, I'm sure Thomas was considerably more limited in what technology he had available to him. I expect he would have had to have watched the show using an early VCR, jotted down the time-stamps of the frames he wanted, and requested those specific images from Universal Television, who produced the series.

Another thing that bugged me was that some of the images were re-used. There's one head-shot of Susan Sullivan, who played Dr. Marks, that's used three times. I get that it might be necessary to do that in some cases because a line of dialogue wasn't accompanied by a usable image, but it was noticeable even by my younger self.

One final thing of note that didn't really bother me back then, but kind of does now, is that all of the text is typeset in Helvetica inside perfectly rigid dialogue balloons that seem to have been created using only two ellipse templates. I'd guess that Thomas presented rough sketches laid out on Xerox copies, and one of Pocket Books' in-house typesetters did the actual work. It's very crude by lettering standards, and certainly was not the work of a professional comic book letterer.

In any event, it's an interesting approach to capitalize on the show's success, despite being a bit removed from the normal comic production process. It highlights, I think, the significance of having everyone involved with a comic being familiar with the creation process. Thomas certainly had more than enough experience crafting great comics by 1979, but he was probably the only one who touched this book that did.

There's a blurb at the top of the book cover of Framing Emmett Till that reads, "The story of Emmett Till and Mamie Till-Mobley can never be told enough. With the help of [Christopher] Benson's and [Eric] Battle's riveting books, it will never be forgotten." Honestly, I don't know that I can say anything more poignant than that with this review.

The book relays Till's story through a series of flashbacks as we see Benson himself talking with Till-Mobley and various witnesses from the time. It's structued a little like Citizen Kane in that regard, but without the conceit of having a Rosebud-style MacGuffin. Benson seems more than aware that most of the book's readership is already at least nominally familiar with Till's story, so there's no need to force a pretense like that. But the structure allows him to showcase different elements of Till's story and why/how there were contradicting accounts at the time.

What the structure also does is allow Benson to point out contemporary discussions of Till's story, and how various groups -- mostly large media outlets -- try to frame the story to fit whatever agenda they have. Movie studios, for example, talking about buying the rights to the story, but then brainstorm how they could present it through the eyes of a white activist. Or setting up Carolyn Bryant as the true victim. (These scenes, I believe, are based on actual conversations Benson had, and I can only hope he was exaggerating for dramatic effect. But somehow, I doubt he did more than shorten an hour-long conversation to a few panels.)

Benson walked a tight line in that regard, I think. By putting himself into the story and framing the book as his trying to tell the story, he runs the risk of doing precisely what he criticizes others of doing. Particularly in those scenes when he's talking with movie studio executives and publishers about getting the story out. By framing the story around his telling of the story, doesn't that pull an outsized narrative focus away from Till himself? Doesn't it make the central conflict about Benson getting the story out and not the story itself? I'll admit that I found myself going back and forth on this point throughout much of the book while I was reading it. Ultimately, there are enough discussions shown between Benson and Till-Mobley that I think it lands on the side of making sure the complete and true story gets on the record. And unfortunately part of that complete story involves decades of various third parties holding up Till as almost a mascot for their 'team.'

There's even a very pointed discussion in the back half of the book where the question is flatly asked: how much of the trial was being sought out as justice for a mother's son and how much was being sought to prevent the need for another such trial in the first place? And is there a difference? Till-Mobley had to wrestle with this because the only thing she really wanted was something she couldn't have any longer: her son.

Regardless of how familiar you are with Emmett Till's story, I think it's worth your time reading this book. The setup and framing of the narrative makes it interesting from a strictly technical perspective even if you've spent decades studying Till's life and death, and the framing of the story makes for some compelling and fascinating commentary on how the story's been told and sold over the years.

Framing Emmett Till by Christopher Benson and Eric Battle came out from Abrams' Megascope imprint just last week and should be readily available from your favorite bookseller. The hardcover retails at $27.99 US.

Today in the United States, we are having our federal elections. The Presidency is (sadly) not up for a vote this year, but 35 seats in the US Senate and all 436 seats in the House of Representatives are. So for... reasons, I am opting to re-run my review of The Day the Klan Came to Town today.

---

I think there are a number of prevalent myths surrounding the Ku Klux Klan. I think a lot of people believe that they limited their activities to the Southern US. I think a lot of people believe the only group of people they acted on was the Black population. I think some people believe stories about the Klan killing people pretty indiscriminately are overblown. I think some people STILL believe the Klan to be a benevolent, civic organization comprised of "many fine people."

All of those beliefs are bullshit. The Day the Klan Came to Town rips up every one.

Back in 1923, the KKK held a 30,000 person rally in Carnegie, PA for the express purpose of slaughtering the minorities that largely populated the area. (The total population of Carnegie at the time was around 11,500.) Blacks, Italians, Hispanics, Jews, Irish... pretty much anyone not deeemed sufficiently Ayrian was fair game. The Klan had police members on their side who steadfastly refused to protect the citizens of Carnegie, directly opposing the orders the local Burgess. The town's various ethnic groups banded together to try to halt the Klan's march through town, but that quickly led to a full-scale attack. Several people were injured, and it only ended once one of the Klansmen was killed and the group retreated.

That's the story that's told here. It focuses primarily on Primo Salerno, an Italian immigrant who fled to the United States after having been conscripted by the Italian governmnt to fight in WWI. His wife, Gianna, came over some time later (as we learn through some flashbacks) and at the time of the main story, she is heavily pregnant with Primo's child. Because of his time in the war, Primo is reluctant to fight but he readily understands the stakes involved and doesn't hesitate to join forces with the others. But while Primo and the other men of the town gather in the streets, the women move to the rooftops. Including Gianna and the elderly Irish woman, Marta, who's helping to look after her. They mostly fight with clubs and bricks, but once Primo fires a dropped pistol to help his friend Marcu, the Klan flee in fear. And while Marcu rejoices in what others will remember they managed to accomplish, another reminds him that "Americans love forgetting." The book closes with a single image of a contemporary "ethnic" woman, handcuffed, in an ICE cage noting that she was actually born here.

Writer Bill Campbell is upfront with the fact this account has been fictionalized. It to be because there are so few contemporaneous accounts of what actually happened that weren't expressly from the KKK's perspective. But the rally and subsequent attack on the "Irish and others" happened, and was soon swept under the rug as KKK-sympathizers skimmed over details that made them look bad. Which is to say, they skimmed over virtually everything. Campbell also notes that he actually grew up in Carnegie and never learned of any of this until many years later. That makes telling the story now even more important, to ensure everyone knows just how awful and racist shitbags Klan members are.

Artist Bizhan Khodabandeh does a good job with the storytelling, and ensuring characters are distinct and identifiable even among larger groups and even minor characters that have little, if any, dialogue. The drawings aren't overly detailed and tend to fall on the more cartoonish side, but I don't know that's an issue. In fact, having the more simplified figures probably helps for readers to identify with the characters.

The echoes between the events in this book and today are impossible to miss. I haven't checked, but I think Campbell even swiped some dialogue from people talking about the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville where Heather Heyer was deliberately run over and murdered. This is the history we're never taught in school. (Campbell calls what we are taught "American fanfic" -- a term I am totally going to use myself in the future!) And that we're never taught this is why so many bullshit myths get generated. It's only by confronting our own history honestly and directly that we even have a hope of overcoming its ongoing legacy.

I was actually surprised yesterday in going through some comics that a few newspaper strips -- historically ones that are famously apolitical -- used concern about this year's US elections as a topic. It was a Sunday after all, two whole days before the election, and most strips will save topical subjects for the day of an event, unless they're able to make some week-long story about it. So I thought, "OK, if several newspaper cartoonists are talking politics, then tomorrow I can start running them as a collection on my blog summarizing where their collective head is at regarding this election."

And when I got up and started checking the comics early this morning to start collecting them, I got... well, not exactly nothing but not a whole heck of a lot. And most of what I did see was more evergreen political discussion like references to the number of political ads we're bombarded with or how mainstream media is talking exclusively about politics instead of something sophomoric like celebrity gossip. So the idea for my planned blog this morning kind went up in smoke.

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

Kleefeld on Comics: Pizzazz!
https://ift.tt/elaKMrJ

Kleefeld on Comics: Javins = Shooter ?
https://ift.tt/j8dLyqt

Kleefeld on Comics: Marketing Terminology
https://ift.tt/s3HRakz

Kleefeld on Comics: Whither Zombies?
https://ift.tt/swVD5rZ

Kleefeld on Comics: Old Tom Fagan Interview
https://ift.tt/lLHC6pP

Since we're on the cusp of Halloween, I thought I'd run a piece on Tom Fagan, comic fan extraordinaire and founder of the Rutland Halloween Festival. This is a 2007 interview that ran in the Rutland Herald and, since it seems to have since fallen off the internet, is why I'm posting it here. It's more about his interest in Halloween than his work in comics fandom, but still touches on that as well. The interview was conducted by Sarah Hinckley...

Tom Fagan, 75, could be called a star among superheroes, a fan of phantoms or a heathen of Hallows Eve, but for many years most called him Mr. Halloween.

"I think if I pass over around Halloween time, I'll be riding in a casket in the parade," said Fagan outside his ghoulishly decorated room at the Loretto Home. "I'd be all for that, too."

It was Fagan's love of the October holiday that made the Rutland Halloween Parade into one of the most coveted costumed carnivals in the country. A couple from England is scheduling a visit to Vermont just to see the parade, according to one Shrewsbury inn owner.

Legendary tales of comic book characters caravanning past the marble and brick edifices of downtown were born from Fagan's passionate pen. Annually he would write a letter to [DC Comics*], creators of Batman and the like, but it was the first that got the ball rolling.

"They printed that letter and that really kicked things off," said Fagan. "I was getting letters from all over the country. Each time they printed it we would get more people and more people."

Not only did his letters draw comic book character enthusiasts to the Vermont city, it also got Fagan and the parade featured in a number of strips. In 1972, [DC Comics'] Justice League of America, made up of Batman, Superman, The Flash, Green Lantern and Phantom Stranger, featured the group battling a demon incursion at the parade in Rutland.

Fagan's inspiration came from the first Rutland parade he watched with his daughter, in which William Ciofreddi, son of John Ciofreddi, then superintendent of the Rutland Recreation and Parks Department, dressed in a comic book costume. "I maintain that he has to be the first comic book character," said Fagan about the start of the theatrical theme.

According to Fagan that first parade consisted of a couple of high school bands and an assortment of costumed children. But the man who had grown up loving Halloween wanted more and approached the elder Ciofreddi after the parade.

"That was good, John," Fagan remembers telling him, "but it could be better." So, Ciofreddi handed the ball over to Fagan, appointing him parade general chairman. Fagan recollects the theme of the 1960 Rutland Halloween Parade was "Creatures in the Night."

"You could come as you wanted," said Fagan. "The parade was very well received. That was supposed to be the night that people could be who they secretly wished to be."

As it grew, there were floats from comic book companies such as [DC Comics], Marvel Comics, Comic Crusader. Even Madd [sic] magazine had representation. Fagan recalls at one point there being as many as 181 different comic characters represented at the parade and celebration.

"You'd be going down the street and you'd see Aunt Jemima standing next to Ronald Reagan," he said.

Not only were the characters coming to town, but those within the comic book industry who penned their fates also joined the fun. Writers and artists arrived in Rutland for the parade and an adjoining party thrown largely in their honor for a number of years.

"All sorts of great things happened," said Fagan. "We kept building it up and building it up. I don't know how many bands at one time… You had bands that were nothing but Batman… All I know is that the parade grew and grew and grew. I certainly hope it will continue for a long, long time."

Fagan was given a seat in the judge's station at last year's parade. More than 10,000 people attended the event last year; a record number of floats have registered this year.

"I was just amazed at the crowd last time," said Fagan, who has yet to miss the Rutland Halloween Parade. "I've always seen 'em one way or another."

With less than a week to go before another cast of characters parades through the streets of downtown, Fagan watched a classic horror film in his room. Bats hung from the ceiling, a wolf posed to howl at the full moon perched upon a table. Other colorful decorations seem to scream out that this man is haunted with a love for Halloween.

"I've been collecting decorations since grammar school," said Fagan. "I used to leave them up (longer than the holiday), much to the consternation of many."

Fagan, hunched with age, wore a pair of black jeans and an orange T-shirt with the words, "Sleep all day, Party all night," framing a human outline sporting batwings.

Fagan's love for the holiday goes back to when he was two or three years old. He had attended a big Halloween party at the Colony House in Rutland for children of low-income families, according to Fagan.

"I even got permission to stay up until midnight because that's when the witch was going to fly across the face of the moon," he said. "I love it when it's close to full-moon time."

He slept through the witch's journey that night and remembers being upset.

When asked if that child's curiosity has ever been quenched, Fagan replied, "Out of the corner of my eye I've seen her fly."

* Hinckley repeatedly refers to DC Comics throughout the piece as "Detective Comics." I suspect this was a misunderstanding on her part; the letters "DC" do indeed come from the name "Detective Comics" but the company hasn't actually been called that since 1939. I've replaced all instances here with the company's formal name of "DC Comics."

I'm sure you've heard it said thart art is a reflection of life. Art isn't creating in a vacuum; it's created by an artist (or artists) in the context of their society and, thus, both speaks and is responding to that society. Nuclear war was on everyone's minds back in the 1980s, which is why there was such a proliferation of post-apocalypse stories for example.

Within the horror genre specifically, the types of horror stories being told and the types of monsters that appear in stories reflect the fears of the times. Mary Shelly's original Frankenstein novel reflects concerns people were starting to have about science outpacing man's ethos, and the notion of using science to "defy" nature. Vampires have been notably mutable over the generations, reflecting whatever elements of sexuality and gender that are concerning people at the time. (Part of why vampires are frequently shown as eternally youthful -- it's the younger generations that are more often seen as being "in danger" of committing waton sexual behavior.)

While the concept of zombies has been around for ages, they started gaining popularity back in the 1970s and began really taking off in the late '90s and early 2000s. In particular, the notion of the zombie apocalypse where the individual zombies were less of a threat than the sheer overwhemling volume of them. This can be read as a reaction to the notion of societal changes happening at an increasingly faster and faster pace (I've written about the notion of "future shock" more than a few times here) and it becoming more and more difficult to keep up. I once saw someone make the analogy specifically to email; that you take care of one email and there's another behind it, and another, and another, and another... and you set up more spam filters but they keep coming... and you keep trying to get to Inbox Zero, but the moment you do another shows up... and heaven forbid, you take your eyes off it for too long -- you'd be just overwhelmed!

You can also read zombies as a fear of losing your individuality and just becoming another mindless consumer, buying whatever the latest doohickey is because some corporation's ad told you to. Within comics specifically, the notion of being a "Marvel zombie" meant that you simply bought every Marvel title by default without giving thought to who the creators were or what the comic was about. (That specific concept has rather died out, I think, mostly by the financial impracticability of buying every Marvel title! I just scanned through the November previews, and it'd cost you over $50 to buy just the #1 issues coming out!)

With all that said, though, I'm not seeing a whole lot with zombies this year. Personally, I've seen none at all in people's Halloween decorations in my neighborhood. There don't seem to be too many comic titles around with zombies in them. (Not "none" certainly, but not a lot, it seems to me.) And you could argue that The Walking Dead's popularity cycle has gone on long enough that might deplete people's interest, it seems that the concept of zombies is a perfect metaphor for the AI slop we're seeing everywhere these days. Content that's human-shaped but lacking any soul. Something made from the vestiges of human ingenuity but not inherently creative itself. Something mindless that comes at you through your screen, and every time you click it away, there's another that pops out in a virtual jump scare. I should think the notion of fighting through an army of zombies a perfect analogy for trying to sort through the non-stop barrage of AI slop coming through our monitors.

But I don't see that anywhere currently.

Maybe it's just me. I've never been partial to the zombie concept to begin with, and maybe I've self-selected out of those avenues so much over the years that it just never hits my radar any more. But with Halloween right here, and seemingly everybody talking about spooky season and such, I would think the idea would at least show up a little for me.

Then again, I've never exactly been on the cutting edge of trends, and I've never quite understood how any given thing becomes popular in the first place, so what do I know?