Why would Marvel Comics need to redraw women for its UK editions?
December 5, 2019 2:00 PM Subscribe
I recently stumbled across the video for the Pet Shop Boys song "Heart," in which Ian McKellen plays a vampire. (Yes, this is relevant!) And once I picked my jaw up from the floor, I went on kind of a Pet Shop Boys jag. While reading Neil Tennant's Wikipedia article, I came across something that confused me.
To wit: "In 1975, having completed a degree in history at North London Polytechnic (now part of London Metropolitan University), Tennant worked for two years as London editor for Marvel UK, the UK branch of Marvel Comics. He was responsible for anglicising the dialogue of Marvel's catalogue to suit British readers, and for indicating where women needed to be redrawn for the British editions"
Umm, what? Why would comic book women need to be redrawn for the British market?
To wit: "In 1975, having completed a degree in history at North London Polytechnic (now part of London Metropolitan University), Tennant worked for two years as London editor for Marvel UK, the UK branch of Marvel Comics. He was responsible for anglicising the dialogue of Marvel's catalogue to suit British readers, and for indicating where women needed to be redrawn for the British editions"
Umm, what? Why would comic book women need to be redrawn for the British market?
Comic Book Urban Legends Revealed #64 (2006) mentions "If you visit the official website of the duo, there is a section on the group's history, and it details the situation as thus: [In 1975,] After completing a degree in history at the Polytechnic of North London, Neil takes a job at Marvel Comics, anglicizing spelling and indicating where over-risque women needed to be redrawn decently. "
posted by readinghippo at 3:02 PM on December 5, 2019
posted by readinghippo at 3:02 PM on December 5, 2019
Mod note: OP is aware of that quote -- they're asking why -- whether there's some official decency requirement that exists in the British publishing world or what.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:46 PM on December 5, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:46 PM on December 5, 2019 [8 favorites]
Possibly to avoid running afoul of the Obscene Publications Acts; see some notable late 1960s/early 1970s (underground) comics-related cases.
posted by Iris Gambol at 3:53 PM on December 5, 2019
posted by Iris Gambol at 3:53 PM on December 5, 2019
Best answer: At the time, Marvel Comics was owned by Magazine Management, which was also publishing comic magazines aimed at an older audience. The magazine format allowed the company to bypass the Comic Code and publish racier material.
Meanwhile, Marvel UK was repackaging US Marvel comics (which are published monthly) into weeklies, like The Mighty World of Marvel, which contains parts of 4-5 different comics. During Tennant’s time at Marvel UK, Magazine Management was trying to expand its UK audience and maximize its IP rights by including some of its “comic magazine” material in the weeklies. Since the comic magazine material like Dracula Lives! would appear alongside more youth oriented superhero stories like Spider-Man, Tennant had to make sure the racy and violent bits got toned down
posted by chrisulonic at 5:38 PM on December 5, 2019 [6 favorites]
Meanwhile, Marvel UK was repackaging US Marvel comics (which are published monthly) into weeklies, like The Mighty World of Marvel, which contains parts of 4-5 different comics. During Tennant’s time at Marvel UK, Magazine Management was trying to expand its UK audience and maximize its IP rights by including some of its “comic magazine” material in the weeklies. Since the comic magazine material like Dracula Lives! would appear alongside more youth oriented superhero stories like Spider-Man, Tennant had to make sure the racy and violent bits got toned down
posted by chrisulonic at 5:38 PM on December 5, 2019 [6 favorites]
Response by poster: Okay, there we go! The language I originally found didn't even specify that they were being redrawn "for decency," so I had no idea what was going on. The decency angle seemed the most likely, but I was surprised by the idea that portrayals that had by definition passed muster in the US wouldn't in Britain. If anything I would have thought standards would have been a bit more prudish in the US, not less, especially given the Comics Code in force at the time.
But if they were slicing and dicing monthly US issues into weekly collections for the British market and throwing in material that had been specifically designed to slip through loopholes in the US code standards, then it makes sense. They would have been getting things (Savage Sword of Conan comes to mind) with considerably more "racy and violent" bits than if they were just doing one for one adaptations of Avengers and Spider-Man stories.
posted by Naberius at 7:12 AM on December 6, 2019 [1 favorite]
But if they were slicing and dicing monthly US issues into weekly collections for the British market and throwing in material that had been specifically designed to slip through loopholes in the US code standards, then it makes sense. They would have been getting things (Savage Sword of Conan comes to mind) with considerably more "racy and violent" bits than if they were just doing one for one adaptations of Avengers and Spider-Man stories.
posted by Naberius at 7:12 AM on December 6, 2019 [1 favorite]
« Older Tall women’s pantsuits or maybe a unicorn? | Emergency Elder Care Resources requested Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by vrakatar at 2:13 PM on December 5, 2019 [1 favorite]