Underground Comics

This week I read The Book of Mr.Natural by Robert Crumb and Tits and Clits which was a very interesting combination. It was interesting to read a feminist comic that was made by women, for women and then see the blatant misogyny of Mr.Natural immediately before. It seemed to magnify the experience of both works. Mr. Natural is an interesting character that I think is supposed to be more symbolic than an actual character. He seems to flip from being an insightful guru to utterly debase. Crumb uses him to convey whatever idea he needs rather then constructing Mr. Natural as a rounded character with personality and motivations. It was an interesting way to use a character. Mr.Natural was interesting and enjoyable enough if only for shock-value but my perception of the comic changed after I read Tits and Clits. Tits and Clits is a comic written and illustrated by various female artists and the stories revolve around feminism and the experience of being female. Both Mr Natural and Tits and Clits were pretty perverse with nudity and sexuality both each comic used that nudity and sexuality in contrasting ways. Tits and Clits used nudity to show variety in female body-types to break down the typical mold of female body image that is portrayed in nearly every other form of media. Sexuality was used to express the validity of queerness and the idea that women should be allowed to be sexual just like men are allowed to be sexual and empowered women if they did choose to be sexual. However, Mr. Natural had the same amount of nudity and sexuality but used it in the opposite way. In Tits and Clits, women are active, sexual beings. In Mr. Natural they are passive sexual objects. It made me question the point of Mr. Natural. It was clear what rhetoric Tits and Clits was pushing but I was unsure what Robert Crumb's purpose was with Mr. Natural. Some parts of Mr. Natural were clearly satire but the misogyny seemed to fall flat. The misogyny presents in Mr. Natural is presented as an extreme which is the start to any typical satire but I think (at least in what I read of Mr. Natural), it fails to make a point which is ultimately where it fails. The extremeness of the misogyny of Mr. Natural relies on the reader already knowing how misogyny affects society and its problems for the satire of misogyny to come across. It makes me wonder if Crumb's use of sexuality and misogyny has any purpose at all or if it is just indulgent. I understand that Crumb's work was a first of its kind and that it established the possibilities of comics but the irresponsible misogyny makes me wonder if being the first of its kind even matters or if it should be applauded. I personally haven't yet seem the worth of Mr. Natural and part of me thinks I just don't get it yet and then part of me thinks the fact Mr. Natural is applauded despite its misogyny is misogyny itself at work. Perhaps this is because that as a woman, I know just how dangerous misogyny can be, an is in modern reality. And I know that media perpetrates misogynist ideas as commonplace and excusable.