Anne Rubenstein

In Bad Language, Naked Ladies, & Other Threats to the Nation: A Political History of Comic Books in Mexico, Anne Rubenstein argues, “The postrevolutionary period did, in fact, see cultures in conflict. But [she] disagrees with the idea that one or another of these cultures won. Mexico’s cultures all continued to exist in opposition to each other, while individual Mexicans moved among them as their situations (and imaginations) warranted. The state kept the peace by keeping all of Mexico’s cultures in constant conflict with each other and, simultaneously, acting as the mediator among them” (pg. 6). Rubenstein complicates Antonia Gamsci’s concepts of hegemony while using comic books as the locus of her examination. Those familiar with the history of the comic book moral panic in the United States will find in Rubenstein’s account a far different and more nuanced story occurring in Mexico.
Rubenstein argues that comics paralleled other forms of media. She writes, “Individual comics, after about 1950, stopped trying to reach all semiliterate Mexicans. The new comic books reached toward a readily definable group: fans of bullfighting, ranchera music, romantic stories, or specific movie stars; young boys interested in science; women who wanted fashion advice; and so forth” (pg. 19). Publishers also tapped into ideas of nationalism, both to increase readership and to forestall complaints. Discussing those who studied comics, Rubenstein writes, “The experts who examined and described comic book readers were all participating in a broader project: the development of a critique of Mexican modernity from within the discourse of modernity” (pg. 45). Rubenstein addresses gender, writing, “The ability of female characters to maneuver within a seemingly severe code of gender expectations depends on their places within a class hierarchy and a family circle” (pg. 57). On the other hand, “The male characters are less free than they appear. They have only as much autonomy as is conferred on them by their places in nongendered hierarchies of kinship and class: their behavior is controlled by their age, their family responsibilities, and their social status” (pg. 57). While concepts of modernity played a role, Rubenstein writes, “The argument over comic books was not a struggle between the sexes, but it only makes sense in the context of a wider debate over the representation of gender during this period” (pg. 83).
Even when the Mexican president authorized regulations on comic books, “it did not ‘purify’ comic books; moreover, it seems that this was never its intention. The new Comisión Calificadora had no clear powers of enforcement: it could levy fines, but not require that the judiciary collect them; it could ask that publishers submit to interviews, or even be arrested, but could not compel the police to make these arrests” (pg. 95). Despite this, Rubenstein argues, “The commission did perform three crucial roles for the Mexican state” (pg. 127). Rubenstein writes, “First, it helped articulate and preserve the discourse of cultural nationalism, emphasizing lo mexicano and resistance to international cultural forces” (pg. 127). She continues, “Second, by raising barriers to translated U.S. magazines that were slightly higher than those faced by local publications, the commission helped prevent cultural imperialism even as it formulated the argument against it. Third, the classifying commission provided a mechanism by which conservative protest could be channeled and co-opted by the state” (pg. 127). Examining comics’ reaction to the government, Rubenstein writes, “Even before the founding of la Comisión Calificadora, publishers of comics and other morally questionable periodicals maintained strong connection with the Mexican government in order to stave off censorship initiatives from the public” (pg. 141). Even when la Comisión threatened sanctions, the threat alone often worked without follow-up. Rubenstein concludes, “The interpretation – the use – of comic books enabled their most fervent critics to create a series of oppositional moments, if not an oppositional movement; to find a language in which to express dissent; to locate a political battled on a relatively advantageous terrain; to keep their disagreements alive through the height of Mexico’s political consensus around ‘revolution’; and most of all, to plant a counter-narrative of tradition within the field of modernization stories” (pg. 165).… (plus d'informations)