Library of Congress displays TMNT #1 in children’s comics section.

[TurtleWA]

Was watching this video and at 2:40 noticed TMNT #1. The person filming the video also mentioned the section as an interesting choice. This was a “pop-up exhibit” featuring items from the Library's collection. They had a “Milestones” table display that might have also worked for placing TMNT #1 IMO. What do you think is the children’s section alright?

[Andrew NDB]

I don't see a TMNT #1 at 2:40.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I don't see a TMNT #1 at 2:40.

Closer to 2:58 after they mention the powerpuff girls.

[neatoman]

I see it, right above the number 7, next to Bone and above Jumbo comics.

It's an understandable mistake, you could just request the library to correct it. All they would have to do is examine the contents and determine wheter or not it's suitable for children.

[Andrew NDB]

I see "Dark Knight Returns" #1 there. I don't think a little black and white blood makes it a "Mature" book or anything. I see some Green Lantern books there and there are people regularly maimed or exploded bloodily in those.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by neatoman

I see it, right above the number 7, next to Bone and above Jumbo comics.

It's an understandable mistake, you could just request the library to correct it. All they would have to do is examine the contents and determine wheter or not it's suitable for children.

Very true.

I’m not sure all the categories the library had to choose from for the displays. But I did notice titles such as: Milestones, Science Fiction, Wonder Woman, Marvel, DC and Children’s Comics.

[Candy Kappa]

It's not any worse then a standard daredevil or wolverine comic if the time. TMNT #1 is fairly tame in voilence
level

[Mutant Ninja Anole]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

It's not any worse then a standard daredevil or wolverine comic if the time. TMNT #1 is fairly tame in voilence
level

To be honest, after being told over and over how dark the original comics were, reading volume 1 struck me as less dark and mature as much as crazy mostly PG-PG-13 fun.

Later volumes were definitely more mature in their storytelling but it very much felt like a comic geared toward 14-16 year boys (not a bad thing) compared to the 1987 show, which aimed younger.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by Mutant Ninja Anole

To be honest, after being told over and over how dark the original comics were, reading volume 1 struck me as less dark and mature as much as crazy mostly PG-PG-13 fun.

Later volumes were definitely more mature in their storytelling but it very much felt like a comic geared toward 14-16 year boys (not a bad thing) compared to the 1987 show, which aimed younger.

If I had to rate vol 1 like a movie I would do PG13. But I wouldn’t say it’s “fun.” That’s just me though. I think I would say ‘entertaining’ or ‘compelling.’

For displaying it as part of comic history I think I would have picked the Milestones or Science Fiction tables over the kids table. But I can definitely understand how someone would put it at the kiddie table when considering all the other TMNT comics and shows.

[Ninjinister]

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

What do you think is the children’s section alright?

Why wouldn't it be?

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by Ninjinister

Why wouldn't it be?

I’m a little confused by your question. But I’ll interpret it as you saying your fine with the placement of the comic within the exhibit. And that’s cool, to each their own.

[Powder]

Originally Posted by Ninjinister

Why wouldn't it be?

I assume because it's a pretty violent issue. Killings, implied sexual assault, blood, blah blah blah. I assume that book is there because most people see TMNT as a kids property, even if it was not intended to be at that time. It's easy to see both sides of the "argument", IMO.

[Ninjinister]

Originally Posted by Powder

I assume because it's a pretty violent issue. Killings, implied sexual assault, blood, blah blah blah. I assume that book is there because most people see TMNT as a kids property, even if it was not intended to be at that time. It's easy to see both sides of the "argument", IMO.

Well like someone else said, it's not any worse than some of that era's "all ages"-ish comics. Marvel and DC were in the same boat. Probably some of the very issues that are right there next to it.

For all of the "dark and gritty" aura people give the Mirage books, most of them weren't too bad even by 80s standards. The "gritty" probably originally was about the underground komiks art style, in fact. Who was it here that said that Mirage wasn't "adult" because of blood and boobs, but because it dealt with mature situations like loss.jpg and betrayal and futility, like feelings and emotions instead of vices and viscera?

[Powder]

I think it was me who said that, actually.

[Ninjinister]

Originally Posted by Powder

I think it was me who said that, actually.

Fair 'nough. I don't usually associate quotes directly with people, and my memory's getting garbage anyway.

I phrased my initial statement wrong anyway. It's less of "it should be there" and more of an "it doesn't bother me that it's there".

[miru]

I would have put the Mirage #1 in “Milestones”, with putting some Archie and IDW books in the kid section. Or IDW in the sci-fi and Archie with the kid stuff.