Showing posts with label porn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label porn. Show all posts

Friday, June 06, 2014

X-Men? No, X-Rated: The Secret History of Marvel Comics [pulp, westerns, & torture]

http://publishingperspectives.com/2014/06/x-men-no-x-rated-the-secret-history-of-marvel-comics/

Today, Marvel Comics may be a multi-billion dollar business built on the back of superheroes, but its past is littered with lewd, pornographic publications.

By Daniel Kalder
Secret History of Marvel ComicsAs another summer gets underway, so the nation’s movie theaters fill up with blockbusters based on comic books. So far this year we’ve already seen The Amazing Spider-Man 2, X-Men: Days of Future Past while Guardians of the Galaxy is looming. All of these films are based on characters that first appeared in Marvel comic books. 

Marvel therefore is indisputably big business—or at least, intellectual properties which first saw the light of day in Marvel comic books are big business. 
The publishing arm of the business is fairly pathetic compared to its heyday a few decades ago.

And yet however many billions Marvel characters generate for parent company Disney today, the company had inauspicious beginnings, as Blake Bell and Dr. Michael J. 

Vassallo’s recently published book The Secret History of Marvel Comics (Fantagraphics) reveals. Indeed, before Spider Man or the Fantastic Four appeared on the scene in the early 1960s, Marvel’s original publisher Martin Goodman had been churning out pulp garbage for decades. And since most of that output was completely forgettable, shamelessly derivative tosh, it has been largely forgotten—until now.

In fact, “pulp garbage” is much more the focus of the book than Marvel comics or superheroes generally. Goodman was quick to jump on the costumed hero bandwagon once it got rolling in the late 30s and early 40s, but for many years his publishing firm, operating under multiple names, churned out pretty much anything that Goodman figured he could sell, quality be damned. 

Thus, title and cover image of Captain America notwithstanding, The Secret History of Marvel Comics is perhaps better understood as literary-archaeological dig exposing decades of changing fashions in the public taste, as from the early 1930s to the early 1970s, Goodman chased trends, paid his contributors as little as possible, and shifted lots and lots of periodicals in exchange for money.

Indeed, Bell and Vassallo make it very clear that Goodman had little interest in either innovation or the quality of what he published. He was a businessman, and if he was the first publisher of characters that are now worth billions, it was almost entirely accidentally. 

Indeed, the purity of Goodman’s focus on money is striking. Aside from a personal fondness for Westerns, he was a man as little affected by romantic myths about the ennobling practice of reading as it is possible to be. Had Goodman been able to make more money selling, say, underwear instead of periodicals, it’s reasonable to assume he would have done that instead.

And what did sell? Well, Westerns, Science Fiction, detective stories, comics, stag magazines, and celebrity gossip rags all went in and out of fashion. However, perhaps the most interesting genre Bell and Vassallo uncover is what they call “shudder pulp” or as a contemporary might call it, “torture porn.”

Perhaps I am naïve but I had no idea that in the 1930s there was a vogue for graphically illustrated narratives in which women were subjected to various forms of degradation and torture. But the genre existed, and the book contains a hefty number of images culled from the magazines that printed these stories. (If you must, Google it…) It’s pretty strong stuff, and almost completely forgotten today.

It’s not all sadism however: the book is lavishly illustrated with other examples of pulp art, and here the Marvel connection is stronger, as Bell and Vassallo only select artists who also applied their talents to comics. 

Thus we see Fantastic Four and Thor artist Jack Kirby producing dramatic images for hard-boiled noir tales, Sub-Mariner creator Bill Everett illustrating war stories while it turns out that Alex Schomburg- a skilled draftsman dubbed by no less a figure than Stan Lee as “the Norman Rockwell of comic books”- was responsible for much of the torture porn.

And so The Secret History of Marvel Comics is part archeology, part luxurious art book and something else besides: a history of dodgy publishing practices in the 20th great detail all the shell companies Goodman created, highlight his habit of reprinting stories without informing readers that they were purchasing stale content and also stress his commitment to paying his freelancers as little and as late as possible. 

“He was viewed by the people who worked for him as little more than an opportunistic businessman,” the authors write, and by the end of the book it is easy to understand why.

And yet, as I read about Martin Goodman’s various schemes I was struck by one thing: he may have paid peanuts, but at least he paid. For not only did Goodman miss the potential value of the superheroes he owned, practically giving away the television rights in the 1960s, but it never occurred to him that he could have offered to pay his contributors in “exposure” instead of money… and still sell his business for a great deal of money. 

No, for that trick —and indeed that level of contributor naivete — we had to wait until the 21st century.

This entry was posted in Discussion and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Oh, so this is the new fire under Amazon's frenzied new censorship emails to we authors. And what is legally "offensive"?

Unfortunately, they're not "walling off our titles" but trying to get us to redress or censor what they've already accepted and sold, often, for years; at Kindle and at the former Mobipocket site, and the old Amazon setups of Amazon Shorts and when it used to sell other ebook types.

As if they've stopped selling Jenna Jameson or all the visual "porn". Erotica and writing "porn" are shocking, but you can stop reading, people, after all. Or firewall or set up disclaimer entries to the materials like most hardcore erotic sites do anyway. 
 


Not twist authors arms to "redress," literally, repackage titles, descriptions, and covers from materials they've accepted under contract and from which they take about 50% of income. _NS
 

Amazon removes abuse-themed [as they assume through the titles alone_NS] e-books from store


Amazon logo 
 
Retailer Amazon has removed several abuse-themed e-books from its Kindle Store after a report highlighted titles depicting rape, incest and bestiality.

Titles such as Taking My Drunk Daughter had been on sale.

Amazon and Barnes & Noble both say they are removing books found by technology news site The Kernel, but many others still remain, the BBC has found.

WHSmith and Kobo, which feature titles with similar themes, are yet to respond to requests for comment.

The BBC found that on Amazon's store, the search function automatically suggested explicit topics to users typing seemingly innocuous keywords - without age verification taking place.

Amazon has not responded to the BBC's request for comment on the issue, except to confirm that the specific books listed by The Kernel had been removed.

Barnes & Noble said in a statement the titles were "in violation" of its policy on content offered in the NOOK Bookstore and were in the process of being removed.

"When there are violations to the content policy that are brought to our attention, either through our internal process or from a customer or external source, we have a rapid response team in place to appropriately categorize or remove the content in accordance with our policy," it said.

Justice Minister Damian Green told the BBC "the government shares the public's concerns about the availability of harmful material."

Self-published

The titles can be found in the self-published section of the retailers' sites - an area where authors can offer their own work. The companies take a percentage of the sales made through their stores.

One lawyer told the BBC that the retailers could find themselves guilty of a criminal offence for allowing such content to be found without protection mechanisms.

"The directors of Amazon have a very difficult question to answer: why are they making profits from pornography which, on the face of it, seems to be criminal?" said Mark Stephens, former chairman of the Internet Watch Foundation, a body responsible for monitoring criminal content online.

However, many of the authors have taken measures to stay within the law, adding disclaimers to their descriptions, such as saying characters were "over 18" or "step-daughters".

On Amazon, guidelines for self-publishing state: "We don't accept pornography or offensive depictions of graphic sexual acts."

It adds: "What we deem offensive is probably about what you would expect."

The other retailers give similar guidance.

In July, Prime Minister David Cameron said the government intended to make it illegal in England and Wales to possess online pornography depicting rape.

But it is unclear whether the written word - currently governed by the Obscene Publications Act (OPA) - will come under the proposed legislation.

Under the OPA, publishers have a duty to protect the public from accidentally encountering material that could outrage public decency, said Mr Stephens.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers told the BBC: "Rape is a serious criminal offence which has a physical, emotional and psychological impact on victims. It's very unpleasant and distasteful to use such a harrowing experience as the basis for entertainment and enjoyment.

"Investigating offences of rape is a particularly complex process because it often rests on the issue of consent."

'Censorship'

John Carr, secretary to the Children's Charities' Coalition on Internet Safety, said parents would be "shocked" at what content was discoverable.

"At the very least there should be a certain class of material that is adult, which ought not to be universally accessible," he told the BBC.

However, others felt that Amazon's removal of some titles amounted to censorship.

"We outlaw snuff films, child porn and, increasingly, revenge porn, because actual people are harmed during their production," wrote PJ Vogt on OnTheMedia.org.

"Erotic fiction concerns fake characters who don't exist in real life."

Mr Carr stressed that he did not condone censorship, but that the content needed to be walled off.

"If this was a Soho sex shop, I wouldn't take the same view. I am concerned that this is next to things kids could search for."

Saturday, February 05, 2011

"Inappropriateness," Amazon Kindle, www.Elance.com and (Multiracial, Gay) Sex

Someone said at my facebook members only site that they "didn't have a problem with it but" thought it was somewhat "inappropriate."
-----
My statement:

Odd that Kindle has rejected a cover and book content of my new novella. they imply that it is inappropriate and maybe unredeeming hardcore porn.

It's redeemable and highly great hardcore porn/romantic erotica.

And the cover is almost EXACTLY the same_with less nudity and a condom_of the previous title in the series.

Do ...you think it's because this one's not about heterosexual incest but is about a gay threeway?

-----
My facebook group answer:

No problem. If anyone has, had a problem with my post above_just think of it as equal time for all the snapshots and "inappropriately" tagged that get posted and don't really connect with us either.

But it does reflect about the strange oddities and vagaries of "inappropriateness" of creation, whether digital art, film or publishing, that we'll be sometimes ignored, sometimes "c" blocked, sometimes censured, and sometimes greatly loved.

And there really isn't any specific logic given nor explanation, only that it is "too different," "makes us squirm," or "seems" rather inappropriate, to them, at present,etc.

=====
It seems silly since you can go to Amazon and Kindle and get hardcore porn from Adam and Eve, Playboy, etcetera. Plus they publish my stuff there and at Borders, etc through my partnership with Ingram/Lightning Source.

But, really this cover and the previous one are nearly identical. This one is "cleaner" I go rid of the lace panties girl with the condom in her hand. http://north.neale-sourna.com/

And that previous title cover is a compilation of a teen seducing her dad and learning all about sex and her horny friends seducing their friends MILF moms etc; but, have a 2 teens of age with a teach/prof, all willing go gay threeway...?

They've usually sell the titles and just block the covers of school-relatedness. And I don't really care. I just find it interesting. You just never know who at their site will glance at your stuff and go gaga.

We erotic freelancers at www.Elance.com have the same problem with them. Someone posts anything that mentions sex, erotic, etc. and it gets blocked with a vengeance. But, post a job requesting writing bids about a serial killer and how to murder or rape people violently and they never block that.