Another Ridiculous MAD Fold-In

[sadoeuphemist]

This is an interesting case, because this particular Al Jaffee fold-in DIDN'T appear in the June 2013 issue of MAD Magazine. It's got one hell of a punchline, and I can see why MAD wasn't comfortable publishing it.

The only reason we even know these pages exist is because someone accidentally got sent a copy of the original issue, and posted about it online: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3551041

Comments

[wizardru]

That is pretty hardcore...but then Al Jaffee has done some pretty biting satire in his time. There was a point when Mad was considered a pretty dangerous and vulgar magazine. I don't find this funny, but I don't think it's actually meant to be, so much as it is meant to be harshly satirical.

[captainbellman]

I've read some of the old MAD archive volumes...it used to be a paragon of the same kind of humour as the Goon Show, of which I am a fan. These days it's more along the lines of something made by Seth McFarlane...cruel, vulgar, pointless, and utterly unfunny.

Having said that, this particular fold-in is at least intelligent and affecting in its' satire.

[icon_uk]

To me, I think it's perhaps exacerbated by the memory of the shooting in Aurora, which took place during a screening of a superhero movie sequel.

[featheredserpent]

You realize, this means the end of the Horse-Drawn Zeppelin!

[captainbellman]

You don't think I'd threaten you with an unloaded banana, do you?

[jlbarnett]

can that really be considered satire just because he tried to frame it as a joke?

[jlroberson]

Yes. And I think he did it well.

Satire actually has nothing necessarily to do with jokes, or with humor. There was a piece done for the Lampoon a long time ago which had the thesis that Kurtzman wanted MAD to be about satire, and Gaines wanted it to be about gags. The piece explains the distinction fairly well.

PS

[jlroberson]

I'm curious: in what way do you not think it's satirical, and if it's not, what do you think it is?

Re: PS

[jlbarnett]

I don't see the statement in this that so many others seem to. All this seems to be saying is that things that happen once will happen again. If this is satire then all satire is is phrasing offensive things as lame attempts at humor.

Re: PS

[sadoeuphemist]

Definition of SATIRE
1
: a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2
: trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly

Saying "society is hosed up because mass shootings keep repeating" is already a statement in and of itself. Meanwhile, an offensive joke like "What's the difference between a pile of dead babies and a Porsche? I don't have a Porsche in my garage!" isn't satire, because it's not targeted at anything, it's not trying to ridicule anything. It's just trying to be gross.

[mrstatham]

There is something quite witty about the image and the idea of the 'mass shooting' as a 'sequel' that has people sick to their stomachs, given that every time one of these tragedies occurs, we see the same scenes of devastated people and yet the exact same thing happens every time. As someone living in a country with a lot less gun crime, the kind of disconnect between 'a nation at mourning' and one desperately clutching to firearms every time this happens is just genuinely bizarre.

But this just seems a little bit too harsh, somehow.

[theflames]

Ditto, this pretty much sums up my thoughts on this as well.

[mrstatham]

I think part of my increasing problem with it is that I'm not entirely sure what it's meant to be attacking, or if I can figure out what it *is* attacking, then it almost feels like some sort of commentary on the capability of people to watch violent action movie sequels and yet somehow be revolted when such things happen in real life; Which - if it IS the intent - feels a little bit unfair, in some ways.

[jkcarrier]

I think it's meant to be about the U.S.'s failure to do anything meaningful to stop gun violence...and as a result, we're doomed to experience an endless string of "sequels".

[sianmink]

Actually gun crime has gone down steadily in the US over the past 20+ years, and violent crime of all sorts has been going down almost as quickly. High-profile mass killings have let the media skew public opinion into actually thinking it's becoming more violent when all actual data points clearly show the opposite.

Back on topic, I can see why they didn't publish that backcover, but it sure would have been gutsy if they had.

[bradygirl_12]

I think it's meant to be about the U.S.'s failure to do anything meaningful to stop gun violence...and as a result, we're doomed to experience an endless string of "sequels".

I agree. What strikes me most about these mass shootings is after the first few seconds of surprise (not shock anymore), I feel kind of resigned: shooting, killing/capture of the shooter (usually a lone shooter), the grieving of the loved ones, the candlelight vigils and the debates over gun control, the fading of the event until the next: rinse, repeat.

Look at how the gun lobby is fighting hard not to pass even the minimal restrictions. Everyone said after Newtown something would be done, but nothing will. Sorry for the cynicism, but mass shootings have been going on for generations now and not a thing has been done to stop them.

[sadoeuphemist]

If you read the text along the top - "after all, the aim is for already-loaded businesses to make even more money", it's indicting the gun lobby for rabidly opposing all attempts at gun control legislation, that they're willing to let the public suffer through "sequels" just to keep making money.

[jlroberson]

I don't think you can be too harsh where this subject is concerned. We're talking about people just going to see a movie being murdered because some crazy bastard was easily able to get a combat weapon in his hands. I'd say that when the facts are harsh, you should speak of them harshly.

[md84]

Am I the only one who thinks it's weird that overall gun violence (and violent crime in general) is down in the United States, while the rate mass killings are showing up seems to be rising?

The really scary thing is that nobody knows why this is happening. Every mass-killer seems to have his/her own reasons for attacking a large group of people.

[theonegalen]

I think it's weird.

[silverzeo]

Oh... ummm.. uh... yeah... not funny...

[ablackraptor]

My thoughts exactly. At first I was rolling my eyes at the 'hehe sequels suck' joke, then feeling pretty sick at the 'hehe mass shooting' joke.

[yvonmukluk]

It's not meant to be a joke.