Entries Tagged as 'MAD topics'

MAD Auction update…& a Mystery!

Well, for those who haven’t heard, the Heritage Auction of original MAD art (see posts below) was held last Friday and took in an amazing $750,000 - more than double the pre-auction estimates. Good for them! That should keep the DC/TIME, Inc. wolves away from the magazine’s door for awhile longer.

The piece fetching the highest price was, as expected, the original Norman Mingo cover art for MAD #30 (December 1956) - the first cover with Alfred E. Neuman and the phrase “What - me worry?” It sold for an impressive $203,150 (including the auction house’s commission) — which I read is the most ever paid for a piece of original comic art.

The AP story about this auction also says: “A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers.” Ooooh! I love a Mystery! Now, who could that be? My first guess was the composer of the haunting and immortal 1965 MAD ditty, “It’s a Gas!” But then I remembered the old Grammy bias against “pressed-onto-cardboard-&-stuck-inside-a-magazine” recordings, so…nix that one. Second guess - one I’m sure has already occurred to many of you –  “Weird Al” Yankovich. But, alas, this is also a “nix”: Al is actually a 3-time Grammy WINNER, in addition to “nominee,” and nobody in show biz ever UNDER-states their credits, even when trying to be anonymous! Well, those two guesses have left me tired out and in need of a nap…so how about some guesses from YOU all? Just put them in the comments, and if we ever find out who the mystery bidder actually is, I’ll present the winner with…uhh,  a virtual gold star!


ONE FINAL NOTE
directed at the winning bidders and new owners of the MAD art who may be generously considering Dick DeBartolo’s suggestion to donate them back to magazine: DON’T do it! The DC vampires would just sell them again! Donate them to Dick personally, or to someone in Bill Gaines’ family — hell, even one of the editorial interns would appreciate it more!

MAD-TV, R.I.P…

[Note: In a display of impeccable timing, here now is this blog's first post about "MAD-TV" -- the very week it's being CANCELED by the Fox Network after 14 years on the air!]

There’s never been much of a connection between the show and the magazine besides the name and few trademark characters (such as Spy vs. Spy and Alfred’s face); and the few MAD Magazine writers who ever wrote on the show (Arnie Kogen being the only one that comes to my mind). Oh, and then there’s the matter of the “chunk of change” MAD gets from the show’s production company for using the MAD name & stuff on every episode. I’ve heard conflicting stories about how much money that actually is - ranging from “eye-popping” to “eh, not much” - but whatever the amount, it can’t be good to be losing ANY revenue stream at a time when you’ve just been forced to sell off the last of your original cover art (that you swore you’d never sell, “no matter how high the offer!”)

Our first look at MAD TV, even before its premiere in the fall of 1995, was when the magazine offices sent out to all of us a preview dub-tape of a few partial episodes. Lots of people, including me, were actually quite surprised at how good it was…and also a little confused about how the name “MAD” related to this particular sketch-comedy show.

Even though there was a lot of head-scratching at first, the appeal of using the pre-existing MAD “brand” to try and jump-start a new TV comedy show is pretty obvious (if somewhat “strained” in this case). But, surprise, surprise: it soon became a case of the tail wagging the dog as MAD-TV rather quickly caught on and actually (gasp!) exceeded the magazine in popularity. Even in its worst ratings years — say, last year — the show attracted well over 10 times the number of eyeballs as the magazine, which has been bumping along the bottom with a paid circulation of around 200,000 for most of the past decade.

(To those of us associated with the magazine, the most obvious sign of its being eclipsing by the show is the total change in likely responses we get from “civilians” whenever we say “I write/draw for MAD Magazine.” Before the show, it was always either “Oh, I used to read MAD as a kid” or “Are they still around?” Ever since the show first took off, it’s been “‘There’s a MAD Magazine?!! Never heard of it.” or “Is that anything like MAD-TV?”)

One other impact of the show’s popularity: it was generally a lot more “edgy” (that word again!) than the magazine or even than its TV big-brother, Saturday Night Live — especially when it came to the subject matter of Race. I’m sure that this brought added pressure down on the magazine to be more edgy itself — that’s my own recollection, verified by a quick rifling through my old MAD papers for the sudden increase about this time in Editor’s Memos about “getting more edgy”. Not to mention the infamous Issue #356 (April 1997), MAD’s largest single leap into alleged “edginess”…and, I’m pretty sure, also its greatest “Irate-Letter-Generating” issue, to date.

David Saltzman, the co-producer of MAD-TV, is quoted in Variety as saying they’re hopeful about getting the show picked up by another network for next year. Good. I think it’s a show worth saving. If for no other reason than having something around to keep the name “MAD” alive.

MAD selling its ‘Soul?’ …at gunpoint?

More about the Heritage Auction of the LAST pieces of original MAD art that I talked about in my last post: I must be getting Old-Timer’s Disease or something - because I had read years earlier, but forgotten, that Frank Jacobs, in the book “MAD - Cover to Cover,” referred to the very same original cover art that is among those now being auctioned off as “Soul of MAD“-covers, the early iconic Alfred E. Neuman covers which would “never be sold, no matter how high the offer.” Obviously something has happened between that line-in-the-sand declaration and now. Something that, oh, I’m guessing starts with the letters “DC“…as in “DC Comics, a division of soul-less media behemoth TIME-WARNER,” MAD’s bean-counting bosses these days.

I was reminded of the ‘We’ll NEVER sell these covers‘ quote by a commenter on MAD’s own message boards at madmag.com (Hey, I’m their most loyal reader!). But what floored me even more was the response to that comment by veteran MAD Writer Dick DeBartolo (who regularly comment-responds on the site):

Frank Jacobs was slightly mistaken in his wonderful book. Those covers were not the soul of MAD, but appendics [sic] of MAD. And due to a rupture, they must be removed. The MAD offices will still feature exact copies of the originals and you can be sure we will continue to pass them off as the true originals. But in the meantime you get to bid on covers that were the very soul of MAD! Furthermore, if you’re high bidder and win them, should you still feel bad, you could always donate them back to us!

Wow. Unless ‘ruptured appendix‘ is Dick’s code-phrase for what DC is doing to them generally, that whole thing seems like an extremely nonchalant and inappropriately “make-happy” comment, given the ominous circumstances. The only wisp of a hint of the possibility that they’re being involuntarily forced to sell off the MAD “treasures” (and that they’re not happy about it), is the last little bit about the high-bidders maybe donating the art back to the magazine.

So…if you’re looking for clues about the state of the magazine in their public utterances…you’re probably out of luck. My guess is, they’ll probably be trying to make it look like everything is swell, and their future’s so bright they have to wear shades….right up until the microsecond that DC Comics issues the press release that they’re shutting down MAD for good.

The LAST auction of original MAD Art! (”Really! We mean it this time!”)

Well, I’m not sure if this news falls into the category of “alarming for the near-term future of the magazine,” but MAD is selling at auction what they say is the LAST of the original art from their vaults. (And it must REALLY be the “last,” because they said the auction 2 years ago was the “last” stuff they had.)

They’re auctioning off mostly MAD covers from the late 50s and 60s — some of the classic ones that I loved as a kid, even more so after I became a regular writer for the magazine and started comparing them to new MAD covers as they appeared. Sometime in the 70s, the archetypal “Alfred E. Neuman-as-the-hot-new Movie or TV character“-cover took over; personally, I found that trend crass and pandering in a way that the old MAD covers definitely were not. Old MAD covers usually featured just Alfred and some comical demonstration of his imbecility, or maybe a surreal, M.C. Escher-like optical illusion, and basically said to the potential reader, “Take us or leave us, we don’t care — these are the kind of covers we like, dammit!”

I’ve always thought the “Alfred-morphing” covers were the lamest (conceptually, not artistically) — especially ones where there was nothing else “there” except the Alfred-substitution and maybe a simplistic turning-around of an actual phrase or saying — the most recent lame example being the “Yes, We Can’t!” sign held up by “Alfred-morphed-into-Barack Obama” on the cover of MAD #493. Yawwwwwn. (In fairness, though, I ought to disclose that the Alfred E. Obama cover made my teenage nephew laugh out loud.)

So, definitely check out the MAD Art at Heritage Auctions. There’s some really great stuff there — including a few I wouldn’t mind trying to snag for myself, that is, IF my personal-playthings budget were 1 or 2 orders of magnitude greater than it is! The pre-auction estimates have most of these covers going for $5,000-$10,000 each. But if you’re a filthy rich MAD nut who still has “buckage” to blow after the recent economic meltdown, go do some shopping! (Heck, you might even be helping save the magazine for an additional month or two!)

(BTW: One nice little “bonus” of the previous MAD Art auctions - literally –was that we writers actually got a little taste of the action, as well as the artists, if the art sold was based on ideas or scripts written by us. Last year, I received a $600 check for art sold at the 2006 Heritage Auction that was drawn for articles I wrote years ago! I have no idea whether they’re legally required to do that or not…but either way: Thanks, guys!)

You KNOW You’re Really a MAD Writer When…

You KNOW you’re Really a MAD Writer when…you spend almost as much time trying to “game” the MAD editors as you do actually writing! Half the challenge of selling articles to them on a regular basis is anticipating what type of stuff they’re more likely to buy — before you actually waste time writing up stuff that they won’t. This task is made exponentially more difficult by the fact that MAD editors sometimes have a habit of saying one thing, but doing something else. Like, for example, periodically sending out memos to the writers that “we want new & different kinds of articles”…but continuing to buy and publish mostly the same old style of articles.

To me, the most glaring example of this “disconnect” involves the old MAD article formula, “You KNOW you’re a [blank] WHEN…” If you’re at all familiar with “classic MAD,” you KNOW they did this exact piece to death, over and over, all during the 60s, the 70s and into the 80s. Here’s just a partial list I swear I’m not making up:

  • You Know You’re Really Getting Old When…
  • You Know You’re Really Married When…
  • You Know You’re Really a Parent When…
  • You Know You’re Really Overweight When…
  • You Know You’re Really A Nobody When…
  • You Know You’re Really in Trouble When…
  • You Know You’re Really on Your Own When…
  • You Know You’re Really a Football Fan When…
  • You Know You’re Really Grown Up When…
  • You Know You’re Really Divorced When…
  • You Know You’re Really a Pet Owner When…
  • You Know He/She Is Not For You When…
  • You Know You’re in a Second Marriage when…
  • You Know Your Days Are Numbered When…
  • You Know There’s Something Fishy When…
  • You Know You’ve Really Got a Problem When…

It got so ridiculous that, in the mid-80s, even the (then) editors themselves realized they might be beating a dead premise, and they started specifically mentioning it in their Submissions Guidelines — as in ‘Don’t EVER send us ANY MORE ‘You Know You’re Really a [blank] When… pieces!!!’ And they dutifully kept on mentioning that in the writers guidelines for over 20 years…even as they kept on buying essentially the same articles!

See, what we discovered — and what became the worst-kept secret among MAD writers — is that even though the editors said they wouldn’t buy any more “You Know You’re a [blank] When’-articles…in point of fact, they DID, and would CONTINUE TO buy them — as long as you re-worded the offending You Know-title into something like:

  • Warning Signs you’re a…
  • Sure Signs you’re…
  • Sure-fire Signs that you’re…
  • Tip-Offs that you’re…
  • Tell-tale Signs you’re a…

Other than the reworded title/template…they’re practically identical in format, style of gag, etc. to every “You Know You’re a [blank] When...”-article  from 20, 30, or 40 years ago! (Prove it to yourself: take any ‘reworded special’ from the last couple decades that has “Warning Signs,” “Tip-offs” or “Sure Signs” in the title; and change it back to “You Know You’re a [blank] When…” form. Did you have any problems?)

I’m not too proud to admit I sold them GOBS of articles like that over the years, as have lots of the other guys, including my friends Desmond Devlin and, especially, John Caldwell — who, even now, gets one published in roughly every other issue; he’s probably put a kid through college just on the $$ he’s made from these kind of articles alone! (But I have to admit, John does bring more than his share of laugh-out-loud jokes, and art, to this particular dead-horse format.)

So, there you have Reason #312 why MAD Hasn’t Changed (That Much): the editors wouldn’t stop forcing money down our throats for writing the same old stuff year after year! Hee hee. (My tongue is only halfway in my cheek — if they had actually bought more of the “new & different” material than the “old, safe & familiar” kind, we would have written and sent them MORE of the former. You can bet my Bank Account on it.)

MAD Magazine & The Law; a pair of True Stories

True Story #1: During one of the 4 MAD Trips I went on (1987-93), a group of us were engaged in our favorite MAD Trip activity, sitting around drinking and talking - there was me; longtime writer Frank Jacobs; Jack Albert, MAD’s attorney for most of the Bill Gaines era; and several others. Somehow the topic of being sued by targets of satire came up, and Frank, who at this point had been writing for the magazine for about 30 years, proudly said, “Well, at least MAD has never been sued over something I wrote.”

To which Jack Albert countered, in all seriousness: “What makes you think we’ve never been sued over something of yours?”

Leaving Frank wearing the only look of total surprise I ever saw on his face. I left before he was able to pry out of Jack the full list of “legal encounters” that, thanks to Bill, he’d been completely insulated from — oblivious to — over the previous 3 decades.

True Story #2: (a story, by the way, that Lives in Infamy among the entire MAD creative community today!). A few years ago, a lawyer for MAD’s new parent company, DC Comics, happened to hear about a certain MAD article script, which had already been completely written and bought, and was in the pipeline for future publication. This lawyer had the article “killed” — not over an actual lawsuit or a pending lawsuit or even a letter threatening a lawsuit, but for the mere reason that they thought it “might” (MIGHT!) get MAD/DC Comics sued.  (!!!)

“$4.99 - Cheap” — are they MAD?!!!

People often fling the epithet “out-of-touch Media Elites” at us in the entertainment/publishing world — well, I don’t know how “elite” I am, but I’ve definitely been out of touch with the economic “pain” of the everyday MAD buyer, over the last 25+ years of getting my copies free from the editorial offices. Now that I’m “MAD’s Most Ostracized Writer and have to buy my own issues — yikes! It’s really $4.99 a copy?!! Both MAD and MAD KIDS?!! Good Lord!

When I was a kid-MAD-reader back in the 1960s, for the longest time, a copy of the magazine cost exactly the same as one large dipped-cone at Dairy Queen, 35 cents. Which was well within the reach of any kid, even those with extra-stingy allowances. For just one less ice cream cone every month and a half, you could experience the semi-subversive pleasures of MAD Magazine! I don’t know what the DQ cone costs today, but I’m 100% positive (without even looking) that it’s nowhere near $4.99! (To look at it another way: inflation in general, measured by the Consumer Price Index, has gone up a little more than 500% since 1967, while the MAD price has gone up, uh-oh, 1,425% in the same time — and that’s WITH their accepting advertising the last several years!)

But wait: something else is going on besides just the price-gouging! (And I’m amazed I haven’t brought it up until now — this struck me as one of the more slimy DC Comics “initiatives” when I first heard of it; and one of the things the MAD editors themselves complained about — that is, before they succumbed to a case of The Stockholm Syndrome!) As the MAD guys told it, a few years ago, DC Comics decreed that there shall be fewer and fewer pages with wholly original writer & artist content in MAD; and more and more staff-written, “recycled-art” (or NO art) pieces. If you’ve ever wondered about that new waste-of-space regular feature called, “What the Heck is the Difference [between 2 slightly different versions of an old MAD cover]?“, that’s exactly what this is. So, too, with “The Darker Side of the Lighter Side,” which is just old Dave Berg spreads with new editor-written word-balloons, at about half the page-density of the originals. And pretty much anything else you see in MAD without both a writer and artist byline. When I last talked with any of the editors 6 months ago, they were being pressured from above to do even more of this!

You have to admit: from the perspective of a businessperson, this sort of “content-shorting” is absolute GENIUS; on the other hand, for MAD readers (not to mention MAD writers & artists)…it kinda SUCKS!

And, just think: if all of the above trends continue…according my calculations, by about the year 2016, a newsstand copy of MAD should cost $149.99 and have NO original content whatsoever!

MAD Trips, Part IIb: 1991 Bermuda Cruise, “the continuing trials of Andrew S.”

In the long history of MAD, there have been a lot of practical jokes & pranks played by MAD guys upon each other, office staffers, even complete strangers. There was MAD Publisher Bill Gaines pretending to be his own evil twin-brother back in the 60s; the entire MAD group on a MAD Trip to Haiti (I think) showing up, unannounced, to beg the lone Haitian subscriber to renew his subscription;  the famous recreation of the stateroom scene from the Marx Brothers’ “Night at the Opera” for the sole benefit of Gaines (on this very same Bermuda Cruise) and many others. [BTW: If you're curious about these or other MAD-insider tales and haven't already done so, check out the excellent books by MAD writers Frank Jacobs (1972) and Dick DeBartolo (1994)]

But, to me, the greatest (and surely longest-running) MAD practical joke involved the aforementioned intern-turned-staffer Andrew Schwartzberg - starring as “The Butt of the Joke” - and a vital sub-chapter of it transpired on this 1991 MAD Cruise to Bermuda.

First, the back-story: As some MAD readers know, there have been lots of pseudonyms used as writer and artist bylines in the magazine, for various reasons. One such pseudonym is J. Prete - who is actually one of the MAD staffers (I won’t say which, in case he plans on being pseudonymous again). Everyone in the MAD offices knew J. Prete was a fictitious name — that is, everyone except for the new guy, Andrew! One day, after several months of getting to meet or talk on the phone to most of the real MAD contributors, Andrew asked about Prete. Thus, a “fish” was born…and the guys played him hook, line & sinker, doing everything possible to make him believe there actually was a live human being named J. Prete…for several years!

In the beginning, they concocted fake cover letters from Prete that were then paper-clipped to his script-submissions making the rounds of the MAD office, being sure that Andrew got to read them. They enlisted the vocal services of someone outside the staff (unknown to Andrew) to make calls pretending to be Prete, even had him gradually build up a casual, passing relationship with Andrew via the phone. But the upcoming 1991 MAD Trip presented a golden opportunity to kick it up another notch or two.

By pure happenstance, there were going to be an odd number of smokers on the trip, and since I was an out-of-town Smoking contributor who hadn’t met Andrew (or Prete, of course)…I was elected “Prete’s roommate.” Months before the trip, the editors briefed me on the entire history of the hoax, and we drew up plans which included me “dressing up” the empty half of my double-occupancy cabin to make it look, uh, “Prete-occupied.”

Once on the cruise ship for the trip itself, I unpacked my extra suitcase and stuffed the extra shoes & clothes I’d brought along into Prete’s side of the cabin. I messed up his bed. On “his” little desk & nightstand, I set out: a half-written postcard and pen; an almost-empty beer can (with spilled-beer rings nearby - Prete was obviously a slob!) - even a pack of a different brand of cigarettes from my own, with several “pre-smoked” butts in the ashtray. My favorite “touch” - made possible by a call from Andrew’s (real) roommate down the hall telling me he was on his way - was to have a fresh one of Prete’s cigarettes lit and still burning away in the ashtray. When Andrew came and asked for Prete, I had my toothbrush in hand and pretended to have been in the bathroom; I invited him in and acted surprised when Prete wasn’t there in the middle of my just-created stage-set, smoking and finishing up his postcard. “Hmm. Well, he was here — I was just talking to him. [theatrical head-scratch] He must’ve just went to one of the other guys’ rooms.” I chatted with Andrew for a few minutes (“Oh, yeah - Prete was saying he was looking forward to finally meeting you.”); and he gave up on waiting and asked me to tell Prete that he stopped by.

Since most (or all) of the other MAD trippers knew about this hoax, they were prepared to say they either had or had not seen Prete whenever Andrew brought up his name. Some even had elaborate stories about what they and Prete had done together while on the ship or the island of Bermuda.

But it was Bill Gaines himself who delivered the coup de gras, the piece de resistance: At the first dinner on board ship after departing Bermuda (before Andrew had much of a chance to start getting suspicious about still not having met up with Prete) a headwaiter strode officiously to the table occupied by Bill (and, 2 chairs away from him by prearrangement months earlier, Andrew). The Best-Supporting-Actor/headwaiter presented Bill a folded piece of paper on little silver platter. He took it and pretended to read it, then exploded in a snarling, table-pounding mock rage: “Goddammit!!! That son of a bitch Prete missed the boat!!! If that shithead thinks I’m paying for his goddamn plane ride back to New York, he’s out of his fucking mind!” It was a magnificent acting performance! And it cemented the concept of the actual existence of Prete into Andrew’s mind, for future episodes of the prank….which, according to Andrew, included a climactic appearance by the “Prete-pretender” in the MAD offices at 485 Madison, yelling and screaming about suing the magazine over something Andrew had done to one of his articles. (Don’t worry: Andrew was quickly “backed away from the window ledge,” so to speak.)

It wasn’t until after Andrew left MAD, and moved out here to Arizona to attend college, that he finally learned of the NON-existence of J. Prete, and the elaborate “punking” of him…from my stepfather Bob, who had heard all the stories and, one holiday gathering, couldn’t resist spilling the beans. Oh, well.

Actually, Andrew told me he had already had his suspicions earlier - but the beauty of this particular hoax (besides its @ 4-year duration!) was that there was always enough “evidence” to make it believable AND to make disbelief of it seem unreasonable. Think about it: when was Andrew supposed to have given in to his suspicions: when listening to the legendary Al Jaffee talk about his bar-hopping with Prete? Or Sergio Aragones recounting how he and Prete went snorkeling yesterday? Or when a “real” Prete was standing right in front him, threatening to sue his employer over something he had done?

Andrew has continued to do some writing for MAD, and remained friendly with the guys in the MAD offices, visiting them when he’s back in New York. And I’m pretty sure that he’s come to recognize it was actually kind of FLATTERING — all the sustained effort all those people they put in over the years, just to “trick” little old him. But it wouldn’t surprise me if, somewhere, deep down inside…he’d still like to kill them.

Why M*D M*gazine h*sn’t ch*nged (th*t m*ch)

There was a very curious thing in the July 2008 (#491) issue of MAD that I’ve been meaning to write about, because it just struck me as particularly emblematic of “What’s wrong with MAD — Chapter VII: Why hasn’t MAD changed that much over the years?” It’s a piece entitled “G*d Damn America” [not a typo] - a lyrical lampoon of Barack Obama’s “Rev. Wright problem” of several months back, written, to the tune of “God Bless America,” by MAD’s unparalleled comic-versifier Frank Jacobs (whom I’ve always suspected must be the reincarnated soul of W. S. Gilbert, I’m so jealous!). Anyway, the piece itself is actually quite good and succinct; the thing I find “curious,” as you may have guessed, is the asterisk in the word “God” in the title, and all other occurrences of the word in the text (a decision by the editors, not something Frank, or any writer, would’ve done!).

“G*d Damn America.” Hmmm.

Now, my own recollection of the Rev. Wright story first hitting the news earlier this year was that almost EVERY news outlet used the actual words “God Damn America” rather than MAD’s “self-censored” version with the asterisk…and a recent Google search confirms my recollection: only @ 360 hits for Rev. Wright & “G*d Damn” [or "G*d D*mn"] vs. 112,000 for Rev. Wright & “God Damn” (including not only EVERY mainstream media/web outlet, but nearly every traditionalist/conservative one such as National Review, Fox News Online, Christian Science Monitor, Pat Robertson’s CBN.com (!!!), and even the LDS-owned Deseret News).

Pardon my impertinence, but this raises several questions:

  • Exactly who was MAD even aiming to “protect” with “G*d Damn”…when virtually all the mass media — including a Mormon newspaper in Salt Lake City! — had already used “God Damn”?
  • Is there anyone over the age of “fetus” who is incapable of deciphering a lame attempt to disguise “God Damn” by replacing one letter with an asterisk?
  • Can a magazine of Humor/Satire in 2008 America seriously claim any aspirations to “edginess” if its editors aren’t willing to go even “as far” as a news event it’s satirizing…OR 99.998% of the rest of the media?

Put your pencils down, you don’t need to answer those questions - they answer themselves. (I designed them that way myself. Hee hee.)

In my opinion, there are lots of reasons that MAD, despite sincere efforts, hasn’t really changed much over the years (And I’m talking REAL change, not just cosmetic design & layout changes; the kind of change where “The Simpsonswouldn’t be able to keep making dead-on jokes about MAD’s dated and “softball” humor). In my opinion, this particular “G*d Damn”-case illustrates just a couple of the reasons:

1) the persistence of lots of seemingly random “over-sensitivities” & “sacred cows” among the editors — religion being only one of them. (Another example of oversensitivity to religion that springs to mind is how late MAD was to the “Pedophile Priest gag”-party (so to speak), and how little, if anything, they ultimately “contributed.” I personally know of 2 such premises - mine and another writer’s - rejected for the stated reason of not wanting to risk offending Catholics, rather than whether they were funny or not.)

2) the also-persistent MAD demographic of very young readers with parents constantly monitoring the “suitability” of MAD-content. Parents who like to deluge the MAD offices with outraged letters and threats to cancel subscriptions  — AND even some actual cancellations! Has that threat made MAD too “gun shy” about tackling truly “edgy” topics and transitioning to a more hard-hitting, “adult” style of humor? My vote is “Yes.” (Of course, all magazines have to be somewhat sensitive about possibly offending the paying customers; but, I’m sorry: I think that in this case, the MAD editors veered way, way, WAY off to the timid, “conservative”-side of the road — I mean, really: a humor magazine being more cautious about the words “God Damn” than the Christian Broadcasting Network’s website!? Good grief!)

90-Day “Most Ostracized Writer” Update

Well, it’s been 3 months since I started this here blog, so it’s probably time to revisit the topic of whether or not I am actually entitled to use the moniker “MAD’s Most Ostracized Writer.” When I last posted about it, the first week or so, my main evidence for The Ostracization was the complete silent treatment from all the MAD Editors — leading to suggestions from some commenters (“sock puppet” or otherwise) that the idea I was being ostracized was a figment of my imagination or a phony controversy pumped up out of nothing just to drive eyeballs to this site. (Man, it’s a tough Internet out there!). So let me bring you up to date with everything on the “persona non grata front,” and what makes me suspect they might be giving me the permanent cold shoulder:

  • The Silent Treatment continues; since my emails informing all the MAD editors about this site 3 months ago, I still haven’t heard a single thing from them. (Which, come to think of it, is almost indistinguishable from the preceding several years of trying to write for them! BTW, fellas: I’m still awaiting word from you on at least 2 scripts from over 4 years ago. [The first sentence in parentheses is an exaggeration; the second is not.])
  • My complementary advance copies of every issue of MAD, regularly mailed to me by the editorial offices since the early 1980s, suddenly stopped after the appearance of this blog. (So, now I’m having to do something I haven’t done in over a quarter century — gasp! — actually BUY my own MADs! I hope they appreciate my financial support!)
  • An entire comment-thread about me and this site just up and disappeared from MAD’s own message boards at madmag.com. What are the odds? (They acknowledge that it’s totally gone, but deny having anything to do with it. So, let’s wish them good luck on their O.J. Simpson-like search for “the real censors!”)
  • Second-hand accounts of what the editors have actually said and done, RE: me & this blog — which I can’t be more specific about without tipping off the identities my sources, who still have to work with/for them. (Sorry if this seems like a “weasel-out” — but in my mind, these accounts leave NO doubt whatsoever, even absent the other things above.)

So, there it is. Unless somebody can come up with a benign explanation for the totality of the above…or another member of the Usual Gang finds a way to get The Boys even more riled up at them…then I’m sticking with my “Most Ostracized Writer!” It’s mine. I earned it. I’m keeping it.

UPDATE 9/16/08: In addition to the 4 things listed above, in the Fundalini section of MAD #494, they have a new installment of “my” long-running feature, “Celebrity Cause-of-Death Betting Odds” written by someone else (I’m guessing one of the editors). Now, they’re legally entitled to do that — they buy ALL rights to everything! — but there’s always been an unspoken (and unbroken, until now) MAD Rule that whoever originates a premise or concept gets “first dibs” on writing all future episodes of that concept. So, at least part of their running a new installment of “my” feature, not written by me, at this particular time…is their sending me a little passive-aggressive “message.” (Either that, or they imagine they’ve driven me to gnashing my teeth and calling a lawyer over the “lost” $150.00 micro-fee they’re paying for those tiny Fundalini pieces!)  Regardless of which it is…it still counts as “Ostracization”…so I’m finally having the business cards printed up, dang it!