TBH, I barely leafed through Congo, as I was already turned off by the way various animals were callously treated in the beginning. Not surprised that it got even darker from there. I guess then that my updated argument is that Tintin is still an excellent modern (while also stretching many decades in time and length) representative of BD, WITH the qualification that the earliest stuff is much less so, just as with many, many other media from the period.
Collaborating with the occupier during WWII to get published also didn’t earn him any good boy points and actually got him banned from publication for a spell.
From what I’ve read, “collaboration” isn’t a very fair accusation in the overall sense. More than anything else, he evidently wanted to keep making his comics for a living, and had to make certain compromises in order to do that with the war situation as it was. So yes, like many others afterwards, he got hung with that reputation for a while, but I don’t believe the existing BD community ever really bought in to that, nor the long-term scholars. As I recall it, he suffered for a while as the spotlight was trained on him, but managed to pass that test, with his reputation not really suffering in the end.
…it’s important to keep in mind the flawed and narrow worldview of its author.
That’s all well and good, but let’s not also forget that the man’s work (and presumably himself) grew in many ways over the years, with plenty of both overt and subtle critiques of authoritarianism appearing in his work, along the way. Also, I’m not going to blame him for being ‘narrow-minded’ in a way that most everyone else was, at the time. Generally-speaking, I find that a low-quality way to judge others from afar.
Indeed, part of the very reason I like recommending Tintin is because of HOW MUCH it grew and became more self-aware over the years.
Fair!
TBH, I barely leafed through Congo, as I was already turned off by the way various animals were callously treated in the beginning. Not surprised that it got even darker from there. I guess then that my updated argument is that Tintin is still an excellent modern (while also stretching many decades in time and length) representative of BD, WITH the qualification that the earliest stuff is much less so, just as with many, many other media from the period.
From what I’ve read, “collaboration” isn’t a very fair accusation in the overall sense. More than anything else, he evidently wanted to keep making his comics for a living, and had to make certain compromises in order to do that with the war situation as it was. So yes, like many others afterwards, he got hung with that reputation for a while, but I don’t believe the existing BD community ever really bought in to that, nor the long-term scholars. As I recall it, he suffered for a while as the spotlight was trained on him, but managed to pass that test, with his reputation not really suffering in the end.
That’s all well and good, but let’s not also forget that the man’s work (and presumably himself) grew in many ways over the years, with plenty of both overt and subtle critiques of authoritarianism appearing in his work, along the way. Also, I’m not going to blame him for being ‘narrow-minded’ in a way that most everyone else was, at the time. Generally-speaking, I find that a low-quality way to judge others from afar.
Indeed, part of the very reason I like recommending Tintin is because of HOW MUCH it grew and became more self-aware over the years.
Thanks for your comment!