Harvey's Hi School Romances #20 & #44
My Rebellious Heart
This girl is really naive and doesn't seem to know her own mind. I can understand her seeking excitement and escape from her boring life. But she seemed to make decisions and judgements awfully quickly, back and forth.
This seemed to be a story about The Great plains' "Dust Bowl", during The Great Depression of The 1930s. But did the long droughts and dust storms actually occur as far north as Minnesota? That sounds incorrect.
The differences in the opening splash panel are interesting. Especially merely crossing a line through the words, "sordid and shameful" (describing her relationship with the wild, irresponsible, immoral "bad boy"), instead of removing them entirely, and the changing the artwork slightly to change the scene from his leaning atop her on the car's front seat, changing her dress to one more modest and less revealing.
Bargain Counter Wife
The removal of the story's opening narrative, and leaving the blank word balloons show us how very small the profit margins were in the comic book industry that having the entire Page 1 of the story to accommodate the changes made the cost effectiveness of reprinting the story to save artwork cost of printing a story NOT cost-effective.
It's also interesting to me that the editor had the heavy beard of the "wild" "new boyfriend" to make him seem less "seedy" and possibly less immoral and dangerous (which to me is being ridiculously overprotective of the young readers, to shield them from learning about absolutely EVERYTHING that might possibly be unpleasant in life). On Page 4, the removal of Francine's and Frank's word balloons that could intimate that they both might be contemplating a sexual relationship is obvious that the editor censors felt that their targeted readers were thought too young by Wertham's followers to be exposed to such potential influences. Removing, or changing, all the word balloons indicating that Francine got into the car of a "scumbag"-looking stranger, and her comments that made her appear "cheap" and "easy" (a "wanton woman") again show how very protective they wanted to be towards the pre-teen girls of their targeted market. On Page 5, the removal of Francine's word balloon mentioning that Ted shouldn't kiss her, and the narrative box mentioning that she felt "unclean" relating to her "affair" with the stranger, shows that the editors policy was intended to wipe out any idea from the reader that ANY level of sex could have been involved.
Avon's Jesse James #7 and #25
The James Boys' Revenge
Immediately on the first page of this story we see evidence of the censuring editor's efforts to remove any "glorification" of Jesse James and his gang's criminal actions. First was changing the story's original title, "The James Boys' Revenge", to placing the negative onus on someone else, as "Jesse James Meets The Lady Outlaw", intimating that HE was innocent of the crimes that will be portrayed in this story. The story's opening narrative was changed to match, ignored the real history, by stating that Jesse James was a "fighter on the side of the law", who was hired to help capture a dangerous outlaw woman, and making this story a fantasy. In addition, Jesse's name was removed from the narrative box on Page 1's last panel, describing the robber's encounter with the bank teller.
On Page 2, the editor didn't bother to change the colour of the robbing gangleader's clothing (which was Jesse James') to keep the reader from thinking it was Jesse, because every page of the story would then need to be recoloured. The narrative box, first showing the woman, now changed her part to become the leader of the bankrobber gang. And going along with the fantasy of James working on the side of the law, the editor changed HER part to robbing honest, law-abiding Jesse James, who ALWAYS just happens to be carrying thousands of Dollars in money sacks with him (working for Brinks???). THAT is already a very important story element that makes the story very, very implausible, if not impossible to believe. In the last panel, we can see the quick, non-professional, job of lettering in the 2 word balloons (including even a blotted out word), which explain that James' "gang" (not EMPLOYEES!) was only delivering the cash to someone else (ostensibly a different bank branch. But the reader has to think("What's up with the uneven handwritten dialogue balloons? And why doesn't the bank deliver the money not in visible saddlebags, but rather, inside the luggage compartment of the regular Wells Fargo stage coach?")
On Page 3, the narrative was changed to have the lady bandit's gang robbing the bank. On Page 4, the 2
changed panels are just shown in black and white, because the cost of colouring the whole page was thought to be too much. The changes just reflect that James was not part of any robberies. Final page (5) changes Jesse saying she should "return" the money, instead of giving it to HIM. In the final panel, instead of the original version's having James warning the lady not to tell anyone that the money had first been stolen by The James Gang, and that he'll be helping giver the money to those who need it (implying that he robs from the rich and gives to the poor, like Robin Hood). But wouldn't it be more just to give it back to the proper owners of the money, the actual owners of the accounts from which it was stolen?
Lawbreakers' Suspense Stories #15 and This Is Suspense #24
The first pages of the story are the same in both versions. On Page 2, the escaped convict twin brother kills his twin by accident and shoves him out of a second or third story window. Apparently, that act was deemed too violent (despite the text stating that the man was already dead). So, that panel was cropped to show only the killer still looking out of the window, but with the falling body removed, and the killer thinking that he thought a fire escape was there. That quote and weird panel configuration is a reader stopper, as it is not really connected to the new story version in any way. In the new version, the killer thinks that he didn't mean ton hurt his brother, instead of kill him (as in the original). The reader is supposed to think the villain just "placed" his brother outside the window,. but he fell some stories ton the ground, because there is NO fire escape to hold him. NO ONE would believe this, because no human would not look through the window first, to see where and how he'd place him. And IF he weren't going to kill him, why not just leave in in his apartment unconscious. How does it help the villain to have him be on the fire escape IF he's going to return to consciousness either way. In the last panel, the villain's thought about having killed his brother has been removed. Page 3 has been changed drastically, from someone knocking on the dead victim's door, and his murdering twin thinking it's the police, or gangster, Jack Crome, come to kill his brother, to the murderer finding a threatening letter from Crome that he'll kill the brother. The original story is continued with the door being opened and the murderer twin being afraid when he sees who it is. It was made into a contest, with fans writing in how the story should continue and end. The ending of this "episode" in the changed story added the possibility that the mystery entering person, who unlocked the door with his key was the villain twin's brother returning from his fall, in addition to the possibility of gangster Crome, or a policeman. Clearly, the goal of the editorial changes was to remove the act of violent murder, and the most visual portrayals of such acts. Only the threat of it is now revealed to the reader in this first episode. And I assume that any views of an attempted murder will not be excessively violent in shown scenes, and any dead body will not been seen other than in a distant view, if at all.
P.S. - I tried to find the sequel episode to this story, but it didn't appear in any of the "This Is Suspense" issues CB+ has, that follow this issue.
Author
Topic: Reading Group #340 - Ring in the New, Wring Out the Old (Read 342 times)
