An e-mail response I just sent to a reader (and to the papers to which he wrote):

Dear Mr. Guest,

Thank you for taking the time to write about “Candorville.” First of all, I’m impressed. You felt so passionate about this that you’ve written this same exact note to every newspaper you avidly read in each city in which you and your parents all happen to live. A sampling: Here’s what you wrote today…

“Dear Folks,

I am an avid reader of your newspaper, as are both of my parents. We find the topics in Candorville disgusting and inappropriate. They not only blatanlty partisan,
but the main reason we would like them removed is that the strip lacks any humor value whatsoever. I have read it every day and I dont even snicker, and I laugh at just about anything.
For instance, there was one strip whose subject was regarding torture. The punch line was “Well sir, you know the way to keep these crimes from being commited again is to not prosecute them and let them go”. Now what is funny about THAT? I really, truly hate to use this word, but it IS stupid!
I am of the opinion you should remove the strip until the writer can get a sense of what kind of humor will at the very leat make a person smile, or snicker, let alone get a big laugh. Thank you.

Matthew Guest
Seattle, Wa./Washington, D.C. ”

…and here’s what you wrote yesterday:

“I am an avid reader of your newspaper, as are both of my parents. We find the topics in Candorville disgusting and inappropriate. It’s not only blatanlty partisan,
but it lacks any humor. I have read it every day for a week now and I dont even snicker, and I laugh at at all the other comic strips. I would ask the powers that be to read a few and ask yourself if you think it is humorous.
For instance, there was one strip whose subject was regarding torture. Not only is the subject of torture not funny, but the punch line was “Well sir, you know the way to prevent crime is to not prosecute them and let them go”. Now if I wrote to you and said “The best way to keep a roof from leaking is to not fix the hole where the rain come in”, would you laugh? Unless you were on something, then I doubt it.
I am of the opinion you should remove the strip until the writer can get a sense of what kind of humor will at the very least make a person smile. Thank you.

M. Guest
Marin County, Ca.”

Mr. Guest, funny is in the eye of the beholder. What you find painfully unfunny makes others double over in laughter, and you can be sure there are plenty of people who despise whatever comics you happen to enjoy. “Appropriate” is also in the eye of the beholder. My grandfather believes “Matlock” is vulgar and strange, but my niece believes “Married With Children” is old-fashioned and tame. All of this is why the newspapers in every city in which you and your parents reside each carry many different comics — they all have diverse readerships with divergent interests and tastes. You’re free to read what you like and skip what you don’t like.

As for the “torture” comic strip you referenced, no, of course torture is not funny. Neither is breast cancer, war, death, or any of the other serious topics that have always been explored on the comics page ever since the dawn of comics. Comics like Candorville are modern-day court jesters, cutting through the niceties and evasions that otherwise hinder honest discussion of sensitive issues. And this particular issue has been tip-toed around for far too long. It’s time to speak in stark, unequivocal terms about an issue that, if left unchecked, can subvert everything this country stands for. If you don’t want to notice the discussion, you can always skip it and read Family Circle or Beetle Bailey.

Candorville’s subject matter is by no means new to the comics page. Before Candorville there were The Boondocks, Bloom County and Doonesbury. Before them was Pogo. Before that, Little Orphan Annie. All the way back to the very first comic strip, “The Yellow Kid,” the comics page has been a mix of light-hearted family humor, gags, and heavy politics & social commentary. Aside from the diverse readership I’ve already mentioned, one reason for that is that the comics page is supposed to be a gateway drug for the rest of the paper. Smart editors and publishers came up with that idea over 100 years ago, and smart editors and publishers continue to use the comics page for that today. The young and the apolitical can read Garfield, Peanuts and Dilbert, but some of them will eventually venture into the political/social satire comics. Many of them will want to know what the comic is talking about, and those people will start reading the front section to figure it out.

In any case, I do believe I may have found the problem with that particular “torture” strip you referenced. What you’re describing as the “punch-line” wasn’t a punch-line at all. As the editors you’re writing to at all those papers could tell you, it was what in cartooning parlance is called “the setup.” I’m a traditionalist in that I tend to put the punch-lines at the END of the comics, not the middle. If you keep reading ’til the end instead of stopping in the third panel, you might find it to be at least a little wiser, if not funnier.

Thanks again for taking the time to write. And to write, and to write…

Best regards,
Darrin Bell
Cartoonist, “Candorville”