Amputated Human Digits

I was faced with at least TWO separate instances of censorship during the original prime time run of the comic strip '42 Plain Street'. In both cases, the drawings in question had left my desk on their way to Japan without any hint in my mind that they'd be considered unsuitable - and ultimately rejected from the publishing stage. I'd never faced the cold, harsh landscape of cartoon rejection before. Well, at least not in the arena of censorship. And to be perfectly honest, after being informed of the offending episodes, it seemed more silly than serious to me.

Don't forget, these were only cartoon scribbles, with storylines limited in scope to the daily goings-on of a less than complicated family in an average neighborhood. Who knew there could be strict boundaries to bland set-ups like that. But for the record, I'll present one of those rejected strips here. First, in its complete unedited condition, before any alterations to the 'red-flagged' script had been performed, (click to enlarge) followed by the re-write. Or re-cartoon.

To save the episode (and the artwork I'd already inked in) from the scrap heap, I took the whole shebang back to the drawing board and eliminated the final 3 frames of dialogue. Then I approached the same visual ending from a new angle. Softening the blow of the amputated human digits (which was merely the sly SUGGESTION of such an outcome) with the less than satisfying remark about Jack's humour level. As displayed in its truncated form here.

It should be noted that the late Jay Kennedy of King Features Syndicate in New York (a big wig in the comic community) ALSO commented on the violent nature of this episode when it arrived on his desk with 48 other episodes of my strip for North American syndicate consideration.

I'm afraid I still don't quite get it. Whyfore the concern and rebuff? Are these 'higher-ups' worried that youngsters reading the strip will run out and try the same stunt at home with THEIR lawnmowers? I could easily understand the issue if my drawings had included the actual slicing off of wrist, lower arm and individual fingers in a fireworks display of flying body parts. That sort of ending might well have been accused of crossing some invisible line of cartoon violence allow-ability. I could live with THAT decision. But the mere implying of a possible outcome regarding the fixing of lawnmowers (without turning off the power) shouldn't necessarily be tarred with the same rejection slip. Or is I wrong on that?

We can showboat the other rejected strip on these pages at another time. There's only so much talk about severed body parts (cartoon or otherwise) that any blog reader can stand in one sitting. Or sit in one standing. I should mention though, that the OTHER rejected strip did not contain anything NEAR the disturbing mental imagery this one did. No; it's crime was related to the breakfast table and the much loved standard of pancakes with syrup. Drat, I've said too much already.