Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
E-mail Michael  |  On Facebook: Comic Riffs  |  On Twitter: Comic Riffs  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed
Posted at 9:55 AM ET, 11/17/2009

READER POLL: Does 'risqué' 'Liberty Meadows' go too far?

By Michael Cavna


"LIBERTY MEADOWS" Enlarge Image


The reader has a provocative point.

Yesterday, 'Riffs commenter "scmonty1" had no problem with "Tank McNamara." The reader did, however, have a serious issue with Monday's "LIBERTY MEADOWS," the comic by Frank Cho (Maryland's own, natch) that runs in The Post's online comics lineup.

Specifically, "scmonty1" wrote that in taking certain visual, um, liberties, this "Liberty Meadows" is "absolutely over-the-line. C'mon, WaPost, this does not belong in the 'Comics.' Great art, cool story-line, great characters, but, in the Comics??....no way!!"

The funnypages are no stranger, of course, to putting the "strip" in comic strip: "Pibgorn," "9 Chickweed Lane" (both Brooke McEldowney productions, natch) and "Judge Parker" are well-known for their physical eye-candy. (Heck, even a recent "Zits" -- which parodied the "Love Is..." cartoons -- came in for a little "put-some-clothes-on" criticism.) Some comics fans even point back to such strips as "L'il Abner" when the topic of scantily clad characters rears it's googly-eyed head.

All that said, I pose today's "Liberty Meadows" question to you, 'Riffs reader: What's your take on this voyeuristic strip? Let the "Blinds" Taste Test begin.


By Michael Cavna  | November 17, 2009; 9:55 AM ET
Categories:  The Comic Strip, The E-Mailbag  | Tags:  Liberty Meadows; Frank Cho; Michael Cavna  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: REDSKINS POLL: Is this cartoon over the (goal) line?
Next: Would you downsize 'Dilbert'? Time to Defend That 'Toon

Comments

You do realise that you are questioning a comic that hasn't had a new 'published' strip in over 7 years?

Posted by: matt_waldo | November 17, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

ah, matt_waldo, you beat me to it. I mean, it's Liberty Meadows. DO you realize this is the cleaned up version? And I'm not even a UMD alum!

Posted by: capecodner424 | November 17, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Ah, the rest of the comment was directed at everyone who is not matt_waldo. Keyboard not obeying.

Liberty Meadows actually has a list (or had? is the website down?) of the comics that the editors wouldn't run in the print version. In fact, Cho cited the constant editing as one of his reasons to stop Liberty Meadows, if I am remembering correctly

Posted by: capecodner424 | November 17, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

>> capecodner424:

Exactly. The strip published above is one of nearly 300 that Cho said were "censored" by some feature editor or another back in the day, before -- partly out of editorial frustration -- he quit newspaper syndication in 2001.

His "LM" collections -- including his rough sketches -- are a wonder to behold.

--M.C.

Posted by: comicriffscavna1 | November 17, 2009 12:33 PM | Report abuse

DARN!!!! I thought that Mr. Cho had secretly started up LM again. And, uh--'scuse me, but any recent photo of Britney/Amy Whinehouse/Lady Gaga/Katie Price is worse than this, and most of them are on the front page of mags in the supermarket.

Posted by: FallsChurch4 | November 17, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I am a little late to the party: I hadn't realized LM was still publishing new strips. I thought the online content was all re-runs a la Boondocks. I am so freaking excited to find out there's YEARS of strips I haven't yet read. It's Christmas in November!

Posted by: ishkabibbleA | November 17, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

These are new strips? I thought Liberty Meadows was done... it always shocked me that the Post didn't offer more support for a local product. Then again they don't exactly treat Cul De Sac like royalty either...

Posted by: MarylanDChris | November 17, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Are the "risque'" strips from Cho's classic LM series any racier than the ones in the months-long story arc that ran earlier this year in another one of WaPo's online comics, staid old "Rex Morgan, M.D."?

http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComick.mpl?date=20090403&name=Rex_Morgan

http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComick.mpl?date=20090510&name=Rex_Morgan

Posted by: seismic-2 | November 17, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

OK, guys, "don't get your undies all in a bunch.." here because of my comment.
Do we have a controversy started here? If we do, you'll have to admit that it's better than a running-back controversy!
P.S. as a transplanted MDer, I only get to read the online version.

Posted by: scmonty1 | November 17, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Note:
As an indicator of just how accustomed Cho was to his old newspaper strip being "censored," here's a "LM" that plays off of that fact:
http://www.libertymeadows.com/uncengal/index.htm

[He posted this gallery in 2004, about three years after he ended "LM" as a comic strip.]

--M.C.

Posted by: cavnam | November 17, 2009 11:54 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company