Diagram for Delinquents Update #5: Drag Me to Hell, Baby

1. Diagram for Delinquents News
For today's post, let's examine the good, the bad, and the ugly.

The good:

I Think I have demonstrated, by quoting his work extensively, that Dr. Wertham's intentions were to protect children. Can we argue the merits of this cause?

His spirited monologue, which I refer to as the "Let the children live!" speech, in last week's blog clearly examples what he wants for children.

Below is another example of his altruistic vision of the innocent child.

After a lengthy explanation on the use of the Rorschach test (in which he nobly reiterates, as with all tests, the Rorschach cannot be used alone, but must be used in conjunction with clinical and other methods when diagnosing and treating a patient) Wertham reacts to a notion derived from the examination.

"The Rorschach Test is a valid scientific method. I was one of the first psychiatrists to use it in this country and published research on it over twenty years ago. In my experience with children and adults I have found it a revealing auxiliary method. But in recent years it has been too often used uncritically, interpreted with the bias of a purely biological determinism, leaving out all social influence, and given by psychologists with either faulty clinical orientation, or with no clinical orientation at all. Under these circumstances, the Rorschach Test like any other wrongly applied scientific method has given wrong results. It has been used, for example, to bolster the conception of more or less fixed psychological-biological phases of childhood development. And this is a conception which has caused parents whose children do not conform to textbooks a great deal of anxiety. It has led psychologists to socially unrealistic generalizations. A recent text on children's Rorschach responses describes as the "essence" of the average normal seven-year-old child a most abnormal preoccupation with morbidity, mutilation, pain, decay, blood and violence. But that is not the normal essence of the average American child, nor of any other child! You cannot draw true conclusions from any test if you ignore the broad educational, social and cultural influences on the child, his family and his street. These influences, of which comic books are just one (although a very potent one), favor, condone, purvey and glorify violence. The violent meaning of the Rorschach responses is not the norm for the age of seven; unfortunately it seems to be becoming the norm for a civilization of adults" ( SOTI 56).

The Bad:
Recently I have immersed myself in contemporary readings and research on childhood, media, and violence. I have some experience with it, and I certainly had my opinions about the much discussed, argued, and polarizing topic. However, I am trying to expand my view on the subject and gain a multi-frame perspective. I hope to gain a wider, clearer view of contemporary opinion, thereby giving me a richer understanding of Wertham's ideas.

My hope is that I can have a better grasp on what, at the moment, seems completely implausible and irresponsible. (see anecdote below)

Take for instance the following example provided by Wertham in SOTI:

"A boy of ten was referred to the Clinic after he had been accused of pushing a younger boy into the water so that the small boy drowned. Another boy had seen him do it, but since he himself denied it the authorities felt it was one boy's word against another and the case was dismissed as "accidental death." The Clinic was asked to give the suspected boy emotional guidance...

He was a voracious comic-book reader...

He was known to be a bully. He had bullied the boy who was drowned to such an extent that the boy's mother had gone to the authorities to ask for protection for her boy. Steeped in crime-comics lore, his attitude was a mixture of bravado and evasiveness. Nothing indicated that he had any feelings of guilt. The [Word] Association Test showed a definite blocking to key words such as drowning, water, little boy and pushing. After careful study of the whole case we came to the conclusion that the little boy would not have drowned if our boy had not pushed him in, and that our patient would not have been pushed to the murder if his mind had not been imbued with readiness for violence and murder by his continuous comic-book reading" (58-59).

That is, if ever there were, a definitive statement. That's heavy stuff. And, honestly, I need more. This statement DEMANDS that Wertham provide the evidence of the "careful study" the clinic conducted.

I am left to my own devices on determining the validity of this statement. If I am to be a responsible reader, media consumer, thinker, then I must seek out multiple interpretations of comics' influence on behavior. Right?

Then there is the following example which, to my reasoning, borders on the absurd:

"To advise a child not to read a comic book works only if you can explain to him your reasons. For example, a ten-year-old girl from a cultivated and literate home asked me why I thought it was harmful to read Wonder Woman (a crime comic which we have found to be one of the most harmful). She saw in her home many good books and I took that as a starting point, explaining to her what good stories and novels are. I told her: Supposing you get used to eating sandwiches made with very strong seasonings, with onions and peppers and highly spiced mustard. You will lose your taste for simple bread and butter and for finer food. The same is true of reading strong comic books. If later on you want to read a good novel it may describe how a young boy and girl sit together and watch the rain falling. They talk about themselves and the pages of the book describe what their innermost little thoughts are. This is what is called literature. But you will never be able to appreciate that if in comic-book fashion you expect that at any minute someone will appear and pitch both of them out of the window.

In this case the girl understood, and the advice worked" (64-65).

Ummm... Huh?

The Ugly:
At the end of the day though, I am in total agreement with the good doctor on the question of: Do I want my five and seven year old daughters reading and seeing images about murdered women, severed heads, popped eyeballs, rape, robbery, sadism, grotesque monsters, and many other wonders of the horrible?

No.

Would I be disturbed if I learned my daughters read the following comic that Wertham describes in SOTI:

"A thirteen-year-old boy told me once that he saw in a comic book a picture of gangsters tying two living men to their car and dragging them to death on their faces over a rough road. He could not remember which comic book it was in but said it was one of the most popular ones. [True Crime v1#2 and again in v2#1]

At first I did not believe him and thought that this must be his own spinning-out of a cruel fantasy, perhaps stimulated by something similar. What he had told me about was one of the cruel, primitive, bloody rites which did exist in prehistoric times, but disappeared at the dawn of history. In Homer's Iliad, Achilles, after slaying Hector, ties the dead body to his chariot and triumphantly races around the city of Troy. Homer described with repugnance and pity the bloody rite of dragging a dead body behind a war chariot - repressing the earlier, still bloodier one of dragging a living captive to his death."

[Homer's story is indeed a grisly one of anger, humiliation, and violence. And it is also one that has been depicted much over the centuries. It is timeless, a classic. The fascination for violence runs long and deep and the questions of who and what does it serve is an ongoing debate that travels through SOTI and right up to today's violence in video games debate.]

[Depictions of Achilles dragging Hector's corpse behind his chariot. (click to enlarge)]






"Could a popular comic book for children, I asked myself, return to pre-Homeric savagery to stimulate children's fantasy to such barbaric cruelty?

Later the boy remembered that he had swapped this comic book along with other choice ones with another boy, and he brought it to me. Underneath the title a little enclosed inscription reads: "Every word is true!" Then comes the picture of a car that is speeding away. Two men are tied by their feet to the rear bumper and lie face down. One has his hands tied be hind his back and the lower part of his face is dragging in the road. The other man's hands are not tied and his arms are stretched out. The text in the balloons indicates that three men in the car are talking:

"A couple more miles oughta do th' trick!"

"It better! These #-"**!! GRAVEL ROADS are tough on tires!"

"But ya gotta admit, there's nothing like 'em for ERASING FACES!"

Next to these balloons is a huge leering face, eyes wide and gloating and mouth showing upper and lower teeth in a big grin:

"SUPERB! Even Big Phil will admire this job - if he lives long enough to identify the MEAT!"

The boy who brought me the comic book explained to me that of course these men were still alive: "They may have been roughed up a little, but they are being killed by being dragged to death on their stomachs and faces." You can see that very plainly, he pointed out to me, from the carefully drawn fact that they both desperately try to hold up their heads - the one with outstretched hands still succeeding at it, the other still jerking his head up but now failing to do so enough to keep his face off the gravel road. "Corpses," my young expert explained, "couldn't do that."

Two years later this story was reprinted. This time the story was promoted from the middle of the book to first place, and the dragging-to-death illustration was the frontispiece" (81-82).

Yes. Yes, I would be highly disturbed and distraught  if my daughters saw that comic.

And so ultimately, what it all comes down to is, how am I going to handle this. How can I protect them? Therein lies the conundrum. We'll save that for the film.

2. A Curiosity (Homage to this Blog's title)
In my reading of Wertham's various books and articles I have come to the conclusion that he was not a fan/user/believer of the serial, or Oxford comma. Perhaps it was the European in him.Would he have been a Vampire Weekend fan? If only we knew.


3. It Came From the Archives!!!
Wertham kept a tremendous amount of correspondence; what he received and copies of what he sent in return.

Here is a postcard I find particularly amusing. I needn't say much on its behalf. It speaks for itself:

4. Be a Part of Getting Diagram for Delinquents Made

Getting a film produced is difficult and requires the aid of many. Fortunately, using new and creative fund-raising ventures, the internet has made the process all the more achievable.

If you've found the glimpse above intriguing, than help us bring you the rest of the story by visiting our Kickstarter site (See Kickstarter widget and the promotional video below). There, you can pledge a donation to the film and pre-order your own copy today! There are many exciting incentives to donate at various levels. Looking forward to hearing from you!

Until next week,
Robert

Diagram for Delinquents Update #4: Fredric Wertham, Shape Shifter?

1. Diagram for Delinquents News
I'd like to continue to look at provenance again this week.

While in the archives we photographed a micro-portion of the amount of newspaper clippings that Wertham had collected on comics, crime, juvenile delinquency, and violence. I wish we had the time to capture all of it.

We were lucky to have found the original article that served as a source illustration for both Wertham's November, 1953 Ladies' Home Journal article called "What Parents Don't Know about Comic Books," and later again in 1954 in Seduction of the Innocent.

It was exhilarating to come across this heavily used piece of inspiration!

The source (click to enlarge):

The "Diagram Gang's" map was first cited in "What Parents Don't Know about Comic Books."

Much of the article is later reiterated in SOTI, and there are a few points I would like to share with you as I am very interested in hearing your thoughts.The article is essentially a microcosm of the main arguments in SOTI. So my concerns and supports are just about the same for the article as the book.

As I have mentioned in the past, I am very uncomfortable with much of Wertham's comics writing because of its overwrought delivery, which comes off as completely alarmist. Almost to the point of paranoid. This alarmist delivery begins to lack credibility as there are no sources cited for Wertham's claims and examples. Perhaps this is a modern or academic perspective, but nonetheless, it's what I have trouble with most. For example, in the following statement from "What Parents Don't Know About Comic Books," does anything strike you as troubling about what's being said here:

"In the spring of 1951 a teen-ager driving a stolen car tried to run down a policeman who had stepped out of his radio car to arrest him. People wondered at such cold-blooded brutality. How can a young boy get such an idea? For comic-book readers this is a lesson of the elementary grades, described and illustrated over and over again. For instance, in a comic book on the stands in hundreds of thousands of copies at that very time:

'That was the cold-blooded way he ran down and killed one guy! And only a few minutes before that he robbed a jewelry store!'" (click at left to enlarge)

Further, I almost cannot picture this outrageous scene outside of a silent film that Wertham describes:

"Some comic books teach how to steal from the youngest tots. You pick them up bodily, hold them upside down and shake them so that coins will fall out of their pockets. Not only do I know from boys that they have learned this and practiced it, but similar cases have been reported... where children... 'turned boys upside down to get pennies from their pockets.'"

I'm sorry, but this seems like a lot of effort when you can threaten a smaller child or just reach in to their pockets yourself to pull the money out.

But then, Wertham leaps into an earnest, altruistic, and passionate, albeit slightly overwrought appeal for what he wants for children. It is hard to argue with, and I am emotionally moved by his words:

"Set the children free! Give them a chance! Don't inculcate them with your ugly passions when they have hardly learned to read. Don't teach them all  the violence, the shrewdness, the hardness of your own life. Don't spoil the spontaneity of their dreams. Don't lead them halfway to delinquency and when they get there clap them up into your reformatories for what is now euphemistically called group living.

They want to play games of adventure and fun, not your games with weapons and wars and killing. They want to learn how the world goes, what people do who achieve something or discover something. They want to grow up into men and women. Set the children free!"

And finally, Wertham often demonstrates ideas of such a progressive nature he is nothing short of a pioneer of his time:

"In reaction of my proposals I found an interesting fact. People are always ready to censor sex. But they have not yet learned the role of temptation, propaganda, seduction and indoctrination in the field of crime and violence."

And later he writes:

"Mental health is just as important as physical health. Its protection should be based on the same kind of scientific clinical thinking as public health."

Are these not continued problems, EVEN to this day?

It was a great pleasure to find the pre-press image of the "Diagram Gang's" map in the Wertham archives (above right. click to enlarge). As I mentioned in previous posts, to hold objects that Wertham held, studied, and wrote, is such a tactile and exhilarating historical experience.

The "Diagram Gang's" map is used in an example of what comic books "teach" children. Wertham juxtaposes the map with a similar illustration from the DC comic published Gang Busters #3 (left. click to enlarge). (Thank you Stephen O'Day of seductionoftheinnocent.org for confirmation on this!)

Wertham's usage of the image is summed up in a caption on an illustration page in Seduction of the Innocent. It describes, what he feels, all the images contained on that page represent. It reads, "MODERN JUVENILE DELINQUENCY INVOLVES KNOWLEDGE OF TECHNIQUE." (image below. click to enlarge.)


IN SOTI Wertham describes "knowledge of technique." He goes on to cite some nefarious examples of learned techniques. However, the below examples are tame compared to some of the more grisly examples used in violent cases he claims that were influenced by comics.

"Juvenile delinquency is not just a prank nor an 'emotional illness.' The modern and more serious forms of delinquency involve knowledge of technique. By showing the technique, comic books also suggest the content. The moral lesson is that innocence doesn't pay.

A very experienced youth counselor in the course of group therapy in an institution asked two groups of delinquent boys whether and what they had learned about delinquency from comic books. From the first group, composed of nine boys from thirteen to fifteen, everyone said that he had received helpful suggestions from comic books:

1) 'Now listen to this. If you see a bathroom window lit up you know someone is at home. If it's still lit next day, no one is at home. They leave the key in the mailbox, under mats or in corners. If you see a milk bottle and a note in it, the note gives you a pretty good idea of the house. If you keep up with the notes, you know everything. Another thing: after a bride and groom get married they have a lot of presents they keep in the house, so the only thing you have to do is get two tickets to a show like Oklahoma, cost about $5.50 apiece. You send them to the bride and groom and they're pretty sure to go. On most tickets they have a date, so that you know when they go. When they're gone, you go in and take your time and help yourself. As smart as I am, I never thought of this. I got it all from the comics.'

2) 'I got my bad ideas from the comics, stabbing, robbing, stealing guns and all that stuff. In a comic book I read two kids rob a store and steal guns and get away and grow up to be bank robbers. So I did the same thing - only I didn't grow up to be a bank robber - yet!'

3) 'I read about a perfect robbery and used parts of it. This was in a crime comic magazine and it said these three men were still at large and didn't get caught, so I figured I could pull the same stuff.'"

As Wertham puts it: "By teaching the technique, comic books also teach the content."

2. It Came From the Archives!!!
Dr. Wertham saw many patients. They ranged in age, gender, race, and class. His archives were vast. We concentrated mainly on his papers on comics, but we came across a lot of material that pertained to many different aspects of his psychiatric practice.

One curious method he used was the Mosaic Test. While this practice won't make it's way into my film, my one regret now is that we didn't photograph more of it, simply because it is so fascinating.

Wertham wrote a chapter in the book Projective Psychology edited by Lawrence Edwin Abt & Leopold Bellak in 1950. The chapter is titled, "The Mosaic Test: Technique and Psychopathological Deductions."

The test was first developed by Margaret Lowenfeld as "a valuable aid in estimating emotional stability," and was adapted and heavily used by Wertham.

The test uses three dimensional and colored squares, diamonds, triangles, and oblong circles.

Wertham describes the procedure:

"The test should be explained to the subject in a friendly manner, first in general and then specifically... In other words, it is important to have the subject start out in as good a frame of mind as possible,
on the one hand taking it not too lightly, on the other not too fearfully.

The subject is shown the pieces in a box. The examiner takes out a sample of each shape and shows it to the subject, and then a sample of each color, explaining that all the shapes come in every color, and every color in each shape...

After the subject has been shown what material he can work with, he is asked to make anything he wants to on the board before which he is sitting in a comfortable position....

The examiner should look on while the subject makes the design, but his watching should be very unobtrusive; and he should do something else (like reading) at the same time, so the patient can feel free. The verbal responses of the patient while he is making the design at least the significant ones should be taken down and entered on the chart.

Sometimes subjects want to destroy a half-finished or almost completely finished design. The examiner should not permit the individual to obliterate his original design completely. He can, however, permit him to change the design and to add to it.

When the subject has finished his design, the examiner should ask in general terms what he was thinking of when he was making it: What does it represent? What did he want to make? What does it look like? What was in his mind? Does he like it? What does he think of it?...

When the design is completed, a life-size record is made of it on paper."

The chapter's next section explains the analysis of results. The most intriguing, to me, is the following explanation:

"My method of interpreting mosaics is far more limited and at the same time felt to be more valid. In thousands of cases it has been found that mosaics represent certain basic or dominant processes corresponding to definite clinical entities or reaction types. Certain mental diseases are clearly and definitely revealed by the Mosaic Test. This has been verified in schizophrenia, for example, in hundreds of cases. I have never seen a patient suffering from a clear-cut case of schizophrenia make a normal design, nor have I ever seen a definitely normal person make a clear-cut schizophrenic design." (click left image to enlarge example of schizophrenic Mosaic Test)

It is completely incredible to me that so much can be drawn from such a simple exercise. In the section titled: "Diagnostic Interpretations," Wertham breaks down the diagnostic categories:

Normals, Schizophrenics, Paraphrenic (paranoid psychoses, paranoia, the paraphrenia of Kraepelin, and the more strictly so-called schizophrenic paranoid psychoses), Organic Brain Disease, Mental Deficiency, Manic-depressive psychosis or Manic states, Depressive states, Disorders of consciousness, Epilepsy, Psychopathic personalities, Psychoneurosis...

All of that from some little colored shapes... It's difficult for me to even comprehend the possibility of an accurate diagnosis. But, I am no scientist.

I photographed one particular Mosaic Test in Wertham's archives that captured my imagination. Who was this boy? Why was he there? What was "wrong" with him? Was he angry? Was he happy? Where is he now?

The test result (below. click to enlarge), titled: "The Olden Days" also contains a small description by the boy. "The man is imprisoned with chains."

Perhaps the most compelling part is the transcription of the test's results, which were paper-clipped to the back. The diagnosis is terse and the accompanying note is horrific.



"The mosaic definitely shows that he is not a schizophrenic."

"This boy had twenty shock therapys a year ago in Bellevue."

This small note, though matter-of-fact in its delivery, seems to possess indignation for the unnecessary treatment.

I found no evidence of the race of this particular patient, but at Wertham's Lafargue Clinic in Harlem they particularly battled the misdiagnoses of African-American patients that led to mistreatment, specifically electroconvulsive shock therapy or ECT.

By coincidence, as I was gathering material for this blog post, comics scholar, Leonard Rifas, sent me an article he recently read. Written by medical historian Dennis Doyle, "Where the Need is Greatest': Social Psychiatry and Race-Blind Universalism in Harlem's Lafargue Clinic, 1946-1958." appears in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 83:4, Winter, 2009. (Thank you Leonard.)

The essay is a detailed investigation of the philosophies and practices at the Lafargue Clinic.

The article, along with a host of new discoveries and insights, details the improper prescribing of electroshock therapy to black patients, due to misdiagnosed cases of schizophrenia in facilities outside of Lafargue.

Doyle writes:

At Lafargue, "the race-blind universalism was an integral component of the matrix of ideas and assumptions informing the social psychiatrist. A patient’s blackness was clinically acknowledged only as a physical indicator of the extra emotional stress that might be socially imposed on him or her. Thus an awareness of the social fact of blackness, in combination with the clinic’s devotion to universalism, generally shaped how Lafargue’s staff understood, diagnosed, and treated patients.



In fact, this dual devotion made Lafargue’s psychiatrists confident that they diagnosed and treated black Harlem patients with more accuracy than anyone else could provide. In particular, Hilde Mosse contended that many of her young black male patients at Lafargue had been misdiagnosed elsewhere as schizophrenic. In the March 1958 issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry, Dr. Mosse made the powerful charge that Bellevue and New York’s state mental hospitals had overdiagnosed schizophrenia among '[c]hildren in trouble for many reasons.' Analyzing sixty cases of Lafargue children an outside clinic had diagnosed as schizophrenic, she concluded that for 'practically all of them the diagnosis was wrong.' She argued that most of these children simply had behavior problems and were not schizophrenic... However, in her article, Mosse carefully resisted making the outright claim that racial discrimination had caused this mislabeling of urban black children. Still, she implied as much, concluding her article with the warning that the overdiagnosis of childhood schizophrenia was 'a threat to children living in a socially difficult milieu.' As far as her experience indicated, a poor black child ensnared within the court system was likely to be sent to a public institution and misdiagnosed as some sort of psychotic. Psychosis was, as it is now, a diagnosis that had been disproportionately applied to African Americans... Of course, Mosse believed that Lafargue’s antiracist clinicans would have been far more likely to seek and provide socially contextualized diagnoses. Mosse suggested that as long as Bellevue’s staff remained blind to the social realities that these children had to face, they would never be able to accurately assign meaning to their behavior.

Given this general awareness of black Harlem’s 'cultural pattern,' Mosse felt that the Lafargue staff was much less likely than the average clinic to overdiagnose psychosis in African Americans. An internal memorandum cowritten by Mosse asserted as late as 1956 that 'when we diagnose psychosis we mean it.' Mosse was overly cautious with this label because she believed that such a misdiagnosis could actually be 'dangerous' for black patients. Typically, long-term institutionalization and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) followed whenever a black Harlemite was diagnosed as schizophrenic. Mosse’s first Lafargue patient had been given ten ECT treatments at another clinic. Having diagnosed the patient as depressed, Mosse felt that “[s]hock treatment was certainly contraindicated and harmful.” Mosse was personally disheartened that “symptoms are frequently misinterpreted. This has serious consequences . . .'

In several Lafargue cases, the allegedly misdiagnosed patients had been given ECT. Mosse suspected that each patient’s personality and affect had been damaged by the unnecessary shock treatments. Mosse’s 1956 article in the American Journal of Psychiatry really can best be understood, then, as an attempt to spare some African American patients such a fate by at least changing some clinicians’ minds."

This is stunning evidence of Wertham, Mosse, and their associates at Lafargue as advocates and caregivers for the underrepresented, the disenfranchised, the discriminated, the casted-off.

Wertham was certainly on the same mission when he set out to protect ALL children from inappropriate and violent comics. But the question is, why has he become one of the most infamous and villainized historical figures in the story of comics. That's what we hope to present.

Additional research, insight, and conversation provided by R.H. Langan. Thanks Bob!

MINICONCEPTDOC #53: SPECIAL HOLIDAY EDITION: ST. VALENTINE'S DAY

---
In one way, I'm not much of a romantic. But in many other ways I am very much a romantic. I'm complicated, just like everyone else. I've been a bit skeptical about Valentine's Day, and have never really celebrated it in a big way.

Yesterday I wanted to test a vintage lens on my AF100, so I thought I would do a MINICONCEPTDOC. It's a been a while since I put myself to the test. Then I thought, why not make a special holiday addition.

Hmmm.... How to "MINICONCEPTDOC" Valentine's Day? That was the question. As would often happen in the past, the idea came to me when I was out for my run.

Just to clarify: I didn't make this to be cynical or sarcastic, or dark. I am not trying to be ironic. I really think the idea is a representation of love. Forever and ever and ever.

I hope you appreciate my perspective and I hope you enjoy the short. If you live in Germany, unfortunately YOUTUBE has restricted access. No love for Deutschland.



LARGER VERSION AVAILABLE AT MINICONCEPTDOCS CHANNEL, HERE

---

EMILIO CARRANZA FLIES AGAIN

A wonderful thing happened to me recently.

I have had a lot of luck with people getting the DVD for De Luxe. Usually they are train historians or enthusiasts... people that have been subscribers of this special interest topic. Someone recently, after watching De Luxe, got a copy of Goodwill: The Flight of Emilio Carranza.

I took this as the biggest compliment! This individual watched one of my pictures because of his special interest and was impressed enough that he wanted to see another one of my documentaries. I am, yes, easy to please and flattered... in the humblest of ways of course.

This sparked my interest in looking at material I had stocked away from Goodwill. It was always my intention to create a deluxe version of Goodwill with extra content. My own personal Criterion Collection version if you will.

Here is an excerpt from Goodwill:


Excerpt from Goodwill: The Flight of Emilio Carranza from Robert A. Emmons Jr. on Vimeo.


So, I went to the archives and labeled and exported some clips to share with you Emilio Carranza and New Jersey history fans.

1.) First up is the ever present "deleted scenes" clips.

The original version of Goodwill was actually ninety minutes long, just as De Luxe is. However, after watching it a few times, and at the wise suggestions of close screeners (and to try to get a sixty minute version for an interested NJN producer), it was too long. I/NJN wanted to cut it down to an hour. However, no matter what I tried I couldn't do it. Well... not without completely changing the film's approach. If I would have dropped myself as the narrator and that angle of the story, which is my personal journey in making the film, it would have been possible to make an hour long program. But I had grown fond of this particular approach to tell the story and I couldn't part ways with it. Plus, I would have had to find a new narrator and that would have taken lots of time and money. (An early attempt at that approach didn't go too well. SEE BELOW.) I could only whittle it down to seventy-five minutes. I'm happy with that.

I had to cut a few scenes, but I am only going to present a couple here. Actually, what I have here is a deleted scene and a scene that was never used. So the second clip isn't fully polished because it never made it to a final edit. But I think it's interesting nonetheless.



2.) Voice Over Narrator Test

Now this is a real gem! As I mentioned above in the beginning I struggled with the film's approach. How was I going to construct this narrative? For the most part it operated like a traditional historical documentary, like any you would see on the History Channel. After the interviewing process there were holes in the story that needed filling. There are only really two ways to connect those dots:

a. Shoot more interviews or footage that tell the missing parts of the story.

or

b. Write narration that fills in the missing information.

Considering that half the picture's interviews were shot in Mexico and I had already made multiple trips there and exhausted the budget... Narration was the choice! By the way, it took three year to make this picture. Three long, hard years of research and filming.

As I edited and resolved to using narration I sent out pieces of the script to voice over artists. I wanted someone that evoked Mexico. At first I shot big. I wrote to the agents of the Mexican-American comedian and actors Paul Rodriguez, George Lopez, and Cheech Marin. Mr. Rodriguez's agent responded and sent me his contact email. I was ecstatic! I wrote him and we went back and forth a couple of times. However, we could never make it work. I couldn't raise the extra funds quick enough and he had projects he had to move on to. So close!

After that, I thought I would try something even more ethnic, so I sent script excerpts to Mexican voice over artists that could speak English. The results of that were mind-blowing. An education indeed. It wasn't going to work.

Now as this was happening I was having trouble editing the piece and contructing the historical narrative. I was striving for accuracy, fairness, and trying to represent all of the film's constitunats as best I could. The problem was, at times, there were three different versions or perspectives on the same historical event. This was troubling. I couldn't find THE answer, THE truth in my own research so I presented each perspective as best I could and left it to the audience.

In this process my involvement in the story became richer, deeper. It was important how I came to the story, what I learned during it, and my struggles telling it. So I became the narrator. This worked for me because I now had so much obvious stake in the film. Viewers could see me and hear me. There was no separation between filmmaker and film. Audiences have responded well to it and I feel satistfied with the outcome. So much so I made my next documentary the same way. For my current film, Diagram for Delinquents, I don't think I am going to use that approach. However, if I learned anything, it's that things change.



3.) Mel Carranza Reading NYT's Funeral Cortege Article

As you may or may not know, Goodwill is a story in two parts. First, it is the biographical tale of the hero Mexican aviator Captain Emilio Carranza. It is also the story of Mt Holly, NJ American Legion Post 11 and their undying commitment to Capt. Carranza. Because they had a hand in the recovery of his body after the crash and they felt a kinship and respect for Carranza, they have memorialized his mission and death every year since that day in 1928. This year marks the 83rd Annual Carranza Memorial Service. That is a commitment, friends. If you haven't been to it, you must. It has become a truly original piece of New Jersey and American history and culture. There is nothing else like it in our country. It is a beautiful day.

As I made Goodwill I returned every year to film the service out in Wharton State Forest. It follows the same format each year, but something amazing always happens. Some years it's a surprise guest or dignitary. Perhaps a family member. Or perhaps someone comes forward with a piece of Carranza's crashed plane, "Excelsior". In 2005, Mel Carranza read an article from the New York Times that described Carranza's funeral cortege in New York City. Mel's reading is everything the memorial service is: dramatic, emotional, evocative, and sincere. Here, for the first time, is that reading:



4.) Mexico City International Airport Aviation Heroes

Every time I have visited Mexico, I am flattered and blown away by the level of respect I am treated with. I love the country. The Carranza family and the Mexican government have been extremely kind to me and have honored me in numerous ways. Goodwill is shown each year to the military aviation school cadets. Is there a bigger honor? Actually, there is. I am the first American to receive the Emilio Carranza Medal as a Messenger of Peace. The medal is typically reserved for citizens who achieve a high amount of flight hours or have demonstrated high acts of goodwill. The award was presented to me by General Gonzalez of the Mexican Air Force. I am still overcome by this honor.

From my very first visit there, it was apparent we were going to have a special relationship. When my crew and I touched down and walked through the terminal we were picked up and whisked away through the airport on a golf cart, bypassing all hold-ups and lines. We felt so important. We were taken to the airport's exhibition hall where they had the busts of Mexico's most famous fliers. We met family members and goverment and military officials. It was overwhelming and a high honor.

Here is a glimpse of the Hall of Aviation Heroes and some of the family and dignitaries we met:



The music you hear in these clips is by the Ages: Jeff Blatcher and Dave Downham. They crafted the film's score. If I didn't have their work, I wouldn't have the film I do. They were an inspiration. Keep your eye out for their new album, coming soon! Also, I have copies of the film's soundtrack. If you're interested email me: raemmonsjr@gmail.com.

I hope you find these Goodwill remnants interesting!

Diagram for Delinquents Update #3: Fredric Wertham, Daredevil (Yipee Ki-Yay!)

1. Diagram for Delinquents News
I am, for the first time, reading Seduction of the Innocent (SOTI) from cover to cover. In the past it's been very piecemeal. In fact, there are some sections I have never read. It's quite fun, especially after reading Beaty's Fredric Wertham and the Critique of Mass Culture.

The book's fourth chapter is called "The Wrong Twist: The Effects of Comic Books on Children."

It begins with, as all the chapters do, an epigraph.

Chapter IV's epigraph comes from Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana (pictured left. click image to enlarge.) and reads:

"A man who gives a wrong twist to your mind, meddles with you just as truly as if he hit you in the eye; the mark may be less painful, but it's more lasting."

It is a detailed chapter that quite explicitly expresses exactly what Wertham subtitles the section.

What I have been enjoying particularly is seeing the provenance of parts of SOTI. In fact, I think that will also be the focus of next week's blog entry! But returning to this week's... Since the very first time I read it, I was drawn to what Wertham describes as "the injury-to-the-eye motif." I think my interest comes from my personal eye obsession. When I was a sophomore in high-school I suffered a traumatic eye injury that blinded me for some days and put me in the hospital for quite a while longer. I remember talking with the doctor early on and needing all my strength to not vomit as he delivered the following speech:

"Now son, we're going to try all we can to fix your eye up, get your vision back, and make you all better. You see (ironic, huh) what's happened is, in a way when you were hit in the eye, it kind of exploded inside, and now your eye has filled up with blood (That was the freakiest part. When I looked in the mirror, my iris and pupil were flooded with blood, while the white part was fine.) (Here is the vomit inducing part.) We're going to do all we can to get the pressure in your eye down and get that blood out. We're going to try some medicine first and see if that works. However, if it doesn't, we'll have to stick a needle in your eye and drain that blood out. (Cold sweat, numb fingers, internal praying for medicine to work. And, of course, the childhood rhyme repeated itself over and over again in my head: 'Cross my heart, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye'. You can bet I don't use that one anymore.)"

I think you can now better see my fascination with eyes and their delicate nature.

In the chapter, Wertham writes:

"The injury to the eye motif is an outstanding example of the brutal attitude cultivated in comic books - the threat or actual infliction of injury to the eyes of a victim, male or female. This detail, occurring in uncounted instances, shows perhaps the true color of crime comics better than anything else. It has no counterpart in any other literature of the world, for children or for adults.

According to our case material the brutalizing effect of this injury-to-the-eye motif is twofold. In the first place, it causes a blunting of the general sensibility. Children feel in a vague subconscious way that if this kind of thing is permitted then other acts are so much less serious that it cannot be so wrong to indulge in them either.

An eight-year-old girl said to her mother, 'Let's play a game. Someone is coming to see us. I'll stamp on him, knock his eyes out and cut him up.'

But it has also a direct effect. Children have done deliberate harm to the eyes of other children, an occurrence which before the advent of crime comics I had never encountered among the thousands of children I examined. On a number of occasions I have asked juveniles who used homemade zip guns what harm they could do with so little power. I received prompt reply: 'You shoot in the eye. Then it works.'

The children of the early forties pointed out the injury-to-the-eye to us as something horrible. The children of 1954 take it for granted. A generation is being desensitized by these literal horror images.
One comic shows a man slashing another man across the eye balls with a sword. The victim: 'MY EYES! I cannot see!'

In a run-of-the-mill crime comic a man with brass knuckles hits another man (held fast by a third man) in the eyes, one after the other. Dialogue: 'Now his other glimmer, Pete! Only sort of twist the knuckles this time!'

In a Western comic book the "Gouger" is threatening the hero's eye with his thumb, which has a very long and pointed nail. This is called the "killer's manicure." He says: 'YORE EYES ARE GONNA POP LIKE GRAPES WHEN OL' GOUGER GETS HIS HANDS ON YOU!... HERE GO THE PEEPERS!'

In one comic book a gangster gains control over another man's racket and tapes his eyes 'with gauze that has been smeared with an infectious substance!' He says: 'When I get through with ya, ya'll never look at another case of beer again!

When a policeman is blinded, the criminal says: 'Well, he don't have to worry about them eyes no more!'

Girls are frequent victims of the eye motif, as in the typical: "My eyes! My eyes! Don't! PLEASE! I'll tell you anything you want to know, only don't blind me! PLEASE!'"

So, if you recall, the news this week was about provenance. Tracing the origin of an interest is like some kind of archeology. It's a dig. To illustrate the above injury-to-the-eye motif, Wertham includes a comic panel in the book's illustrations section that was particularly horrifying to me (Emmons with book illustration pictured right. click image to enlarge.)

One of the problems with SOTI is its highly anecdotal delivery (See SOTI quote above). One major argument against the book is its lack of scientific evidence. It wasn't systematic; it wasn't empirical. Wertham unabashedly states that the book is built on the clinical method, which is based upon interviewing, studying the patient fully and in context. He wasn't interested in the scientific method used by his peers at the time. He had branded his own method: Social Psychiatry. It was indeed a holistic method to studying patients.

As Wertham builds his argument and cites evidence it feels like a second hand story, hearsay. Along this line, when Wertham discussed parts of comic books, he rarely cites what comic book it came from. In his illustration section, almost none of the images are credited or cited.

The comic panel in the book image above is from True Crime V.1 #2. (click image below to enlarge)

In Wertham's archives I found two instances of the panel used above from True Crime V.1 #2.

[NOTE: Thank you Stephen O'Day for the correction on the issue appearance of the above illustration panel. Stephen is the webmaster of Seductionoftheinnocent.org. The site is an amazing resource for tracing the comics used in Seduction of the Innocent (I was silly not to confirm the source to begin with, with him!). Stephen has graciously agreed to appear in the film when we met at the archives. We are excited to talk with him and pluck all the knowledge and goodies he has!]

The first is a blown-up copy used in an experiment to see how a young boy reacts and comments on the content of the image. (click image below to enlarge)




The second is what appears to be the pre-press copy of the image with instructions on the final size of the sample. What a treat to actually touch this object. Talk about living history! (click image below to enlarge)



Finding these was like stringing together the pieces of a time-puzzle. I was watching the past create a chronology to my present. I was holding history.

2. It Came From the Archives!!!
There's no denying that Wertham was a man of bold ideas and opinions. He was also a man that did all he could to get his message out there. Though many don't know who he is today, he was very much a public figure in the 40's, 50's, and 60's. Of course he wrote for scientific and academic journals, but he was most profilic in the public sphere. Many of his articles were written for magazines read by middle 

America. Most of his books were published for that audience as well.

Wertham was interviewed in numerous magazines (another future blog entry). He appeared on radio and, of course, in the burgeoning medium of television.

I found a few curious photographs in his archives that chronicled some of his television appearances. The most interesting of them are photos of televisions as Wertham appeared on the t.v. Can we assume he or his wife took the pictures? I absolutely love the idea of a picture of a picture. It's charming... as a way to capture his appearance in a time before VCR's, DVD-R's, or DVR's.

Here's a sampling.

Wertham on the Mike Douglas Show. The 60's flower background is quite amusing:

Wertham on The Mike Wallace Interview (as photographed on t.v.):

And finally, Wertham on Firing Line (pre-show):

As a special treat for you, dear reader, I now give you a slice of Dr. Wertham in color, and in motion. Here is a short excerpt of him from the above 1967 interview on Firing Line. It's a great clip. The contrast between William F. Buckley Jr.'s intensely serious and "performed" appearance and Wertham's relaxed and passionate testimony is quite stunning. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the doctor seems to have a slight twinkle in his eye, right?



Speaking of a twinkle... there's also this. Yes. That's him STANDING ON A HORSES BACK! (click images to enlarge) And this man said comic books were dangerous!

3. Be a Part of Getting Diagram for Delinquents Made

Getting a film produced is difficult and requires the aid of many. Fortunately, using new and creative fund-raising ventures, the internet has made the process all the more achievable.

If you've found the glimpse above intriguing, than help us bring you the rest of the story by visiting our Kickstarter site (See Kickstarter widget and the promotional video below). There, you can pledge a donation to the film and pre-order your own copy today! There are many exciting incentives to donate at various levels. Looking forward to hearing from you!

Until next week,

Robert