Site Contents © 2020 Monsterwax
|
|
Welcome to the Museum's Memory Lane! A collection of correspondence on Chick tracts. To view older letters & memories, click here. [Please Note: Curator's remarks are in bold type.] Remarks are from the middle to end of 2000
I received a letter from chick with a sample tract and order form. In the letter it says that "IN THE BEGINNING" is #1 of 25 Bible story tracts. Thus the #1 on the front page below the title. According to the book "WORLD HISTORY ACCORDING TO JACK T CHICK" it list some tracts questioned as to their extinct. One is called operation somebody cares submitted to the book based on memory. I have a tract called "WHAT IS YOUR LIFE" by operation somebody cares (I only have one though). It's basically "this was your life" by chick tracts with different artwork. It's copyrighted 1992 W. Cosby, with panel-per-panel matching the chick tract in content. -SAMSON 12/31/00 Hey Samson, 1 of 25 Bible tracts? Sounds like Jack isn't going to
be retiring any time soon! The next tract in these series (#2) is called
"IT'S COMING" (about Noah's Ark). No telling what the other 23
will be... Thanks also for the info on the "WHAT IS YOUR LIFE"
tract. Everyone loves to copy Jack's ideas, don't they?
Dear JTCM, Chick tracts are alive and well in the penal systems. I was once "a guest of the county of Los Angeles" for driving on a suspended license (10 days) And that is where I came upon my first Chick tract and made my decision to accept the Lord. During "my stay" I encountered a rather large and mean looking Black inmate who I saw was reading a tract, I approached him and offered him the one I had been reading over and over (Big Daddy) He reached in his pocket and handed me three of his to read. But insisted that I return them to him. We became friends over the next couple of days and he saw to it that no harm came my way. So I know they're out there doing some good. -God Bless, Johnny G. 12/28/00 Dear Johnny, Great Story! But now you've got me wondering what the OTHER three tracts that he gave you to read were? [JOHNNY'S RESPONSE] Of the three tracts I read in jail, I can only remember one since this was over ten years ago. I think it was titled "who cares or somebody cares". Long time ago! Ah yes, I bet that was "Somebody Loves Me". A Chick classic!
Too funny. I thought Jack Chick was dead? If not, tell me where he lives. . . I'll go find him. blessings, David D.S. 12/25/00 Dear David, Jack Chick is very much alive and still near Rancho
Cucamonga, where he's been for decades. He's over 70 years old and still
going strong. He continues to draw the cartoons for his tracts, reserving
the talents of Fred Carter to work full time painting for the upcoming Story
of the Bible animated movie. (It's been ten years in the making, and should
be finished within a year.) Chick can be reached at P.O.Box 662, Chino CA
91708-0662. Any responses are usually signed by his secretary, but if you're really lucky, you may get a personal reply.
Great cite! I'm a Catholic and I love Chick Tracts, just because they are so stupid. Haw Haw! What is Karl Keating so bent out of shape about? Last Rites is laughable and about as persuasive as Clinton's "I didn't inhale". The way I see it, if Jack's against my religion, I must be doing something right! Keep up the good work. -Nmag 12/22/00 Dear Nmag, Thanks for the endorsement. I hope we can count on your
continued support during the upcoming Inquistion. (Haw-haw-haw!) But
seriously, Chick tracts really do offer something for everyone, even those
who don't agree with them but have a good sense of humor. You should also
get a charge out of THE DEATH COOKIE- one of my personal faves!
Hello and God bless. I was curious why does Mr Chick say things we believe like the worship of statues when we don't teach that and never have. I myself am becoming a Jesuit. If you have any questions on what we believe or just something you wanted to know more about I can provide you with some information on it.Take care and have a safe and Merry Christmas. In Christ Jesus Robert 12/20/00 Dear Robert, I know it's frustrating to Catholics who read Chick tracts and feel they misrepresent what Catholicism is all about. (My Catholic sister is one of them!) However, most of these tracts are based on testimony of ex-Catholics, especially Alberto and Chiniquy. Should Chick ignore their claims because they are offensive? From Chick's perspective, Catholic churches are filled with religious statues and people praying before them. That certainly looks like Idolatry. I'm sure they claim they are praying to the saint the statue represents, not the statue itself. (But so does the worshiper of Buddha or any other idol.) Chick also has problems with people praying to saints instead of God directly. Jesus is a personal savior, he died on the cross for your sins. What more does he have to do to prove he cares so much that you don't need an intermediary to plead your case? And what Biblical basis do Catholics have to pray to dead sinners when Jesus specifically said "I am the way" (not Mary or any other Saint)? These would seem to be legitimate theological questions. Taking an opposing stand on them shouldn't label Chick as a bigot. (Something other Catholics have claimed, not you.) I appreciate your offer to take a swing at these and
future Catholic questions. But there's another favor I really MUST ask:
After you become a Jesuit, PLEASE don't murder Chick... (Just kidding!) [A response to the above]
Dear JTCM, Great site! I read Dark Dungeons through your site... it brought back memories. That tract scared the hell out of me when I was eight or nine and had just begun playing D&D. (I guess I was exactly the target audience: Christian, young, and impressionable). Thankfully, my mom talked me down after I got really worried, and I've been a happy little gamer ever since. Anyway, in the copy I read, I remember the preacher character specifically asking people to throw their Tolkien and C.S. Lewis into the pagan-book-burning bonfire at the end of the piece. However, the on-line version linked through your site doesn't contain any mention of Tolkien or Lewis. Are there panels missing from the online version, does Chick alter his tracts, or am I misremembering things? It's also possible that this was text written on the outside of the tract, instead of being in one of the cartoon panels... -Fbush 12/14/00 Dear Bush, The references you refer to were foot notes on page 19 in the original version. The recent reissue, however, has replaced them with Biblical references (John 4:4 & 8:36). It would seem Lewis and Tolkien have been removed from Jack's list of Satanic influences. It still remains one of Chick's more popular tracts, especially among gamers. (Bush's Response:) Considering that they were both staunch Christians, this doesn't completely surprise me. Lewis actually wrote some Bible-based sci-fi, including a trip to a prelapsarian Venus. Of course, being nominally "Christian" doesn't really mean much to Chick, as we all know. Haw-haw-haw! Good point. Here's another response to your Lewis & Tolkien comments from Theo: Yeah, both authors were Christians and their fantasy (and, in Lewis' case, sci-fi) tales show this influence very strongly. But on the other hand, Tolkien was a Catholic and Lewis, though Anglican, showed strong ecumenical leanings, tending to tolerance of various versions of Christianity and even, mostly by implication, other religions. This alone should make them pretty suspect according to the rules of Chick. Not to mention that both held a romantic, largely positive view of the Middle Ages (which were certainly Dark Ages in the Chick version of history). And "That Hideous Strength", the concluding book in Lewis' 'Planetary Trilogy', although containing some themes that have faint echoes in the Chick mythology - mainly its conspiracy of evil scientists who are actually the pawns of fallen angels - also features a sympathetic portrayal of the Druid Merlin, and some intense though entirely and admittedly fictional depictions of occult ceremonies. (Though the book may sound weird - and I guess it is - I do recommend 'That Hideous Strength' and, for that matter, more or less everything else Lewis wrote.) One can't help but wonder, however, if any writers of Christian-based fantasy fiction are OK with Chick? Or is it just as hopeless as rock'n'roll? (Hey, I wonder if we haven't an idea for a new tract here... ;-)) -Theo, Sweden Thanks Theo! Ramon had some insights on CL Lewis also. Here they are: I haven't read much J.R.R. Tolkien (I did read one review of Beowulf by him in which he dismissed the idea that "monkish interpolators" had injected Christian elements into what was allegedly a pagan story), though I am getting into C.S. Lewis's material, such as The Joyful Christian, Mere Christianity, and The Problem of Pain. In addition, I read as a pre-Christian child, the entire Narnia series, back when I was in the fantasy fiction phase and would read works by Piers Anthony and others. I so far haven't noticed any granting of validity by him to non-Christian religions, and the closest to ecumenicalism I've noticed him travel is through his refusal to defend one particular Christian denomination in Mere Christianity. I've known both scholarly ritualistic Catholics and more well-read hard-core fundamentalists who both found nothing truly heretical in Lewis' theological fiction (such as The Screwtape Letters) and non-fiction. But there is some dispute about the validity of some works,
published after Lewis's death, that have been attributed to him, such as The Dark Tower, which was billed as a "missing" fourth
title in Lewis's space-travel trilogy. This is analyzed in great detail
by Kathryn Lindskoog in her book, Light in the Shadowlands: Protecting
the Real C.S. Lewis. She describes the reactions of people, including
a few friends of the Lewis family, who simply could not reconcile the haunting
atmosphere and the overall writing style of The Dark Tower with the
trilogy it was supposed to be attached to, nor with everything else indisputably
written by Lewis. I'd recommend this book to any Lewis aficionado with an
interest in these "Gospels of Thomas" of the C.L.Lewis canon. Thanks Ramon!
Dear Sir, Is it okay to print tracts off the Internet and pass them out? I mean the "sample" tracts. Because I don't really have enough money to buy the tracts I want. I will not do anything until you send me an answer. If you say yes, I will use them for God's glory. Just wondering! - Preteen Christian Dear Preteen, I have no affilation with Chick Publications, so I have no authority to answer your question. However, the material is copyrighted so Chick could not okay your request without risking losing that protection. I doubt they care if you make copies for your own collection, but keep in mind the tracts are only .13 cents each. By the time you add up all the computer paper and ink you've spent making one (not to mention time) it's cheaper to buy it from Chick! Their number is (909) 987-0771.
Dear JTCM, Being intrigued with the weird fascination of Chick for years (ever since I first stumbled upon references to "Dark Dungeons" in a role-playing mag - after that it was some years until I actually read it), I've really enjoyed your site. But what happened to the 3rd review page (the one with the guest review of "The Poor Revolutionist" and some other stuff)? Even when it was around it was pretty hard to find, the only link was from the alphabetical Chicklist - and now even that seems gone. Keep up the good work! Theo, Sweden Dear Theo, Thanks for calling this to my attention. I appreciate any problems of this sort being pointed out by readers as soon as possible. I too, love Dark Dungeons. I also think the guest review of Poor Revolutionist is hilarious. I hope more readers contribute additional reviews of equal caliber.
Hey, what's happening, I just happened to notice your site when a search-engine pulled it up while searching for lyrics for a song I like. It caught my eye and I read a few of the pamphlets. I just wanted to know whether or not you believe what they are saying; are you just putting them on the web out of respect for a man who has dedicated his life to his beliefs, for educational purposes, because you really believe them or a combination thereof? I am a Roman Catholic myself, and while I won't advocate my faith, I will say that a great portion of the tracts seem (to me) a bit lacking in substance. The first thing I noticed was that the antagonist, after having heard the word or God, is so willing to convert. This occurs in many tracts ie in the tract "Allah has no son", a muslim seems quite ready to give up a religion that he has been devoted to for what appears to be more than 40 years, after a mere 40 seconds of preaching. In the evolution vs. religion (i think the name is Big Daddy or something) a scientist is massively over-zealous for science at first, then after a kid (whose arguments are, while factual, greatly outweighed by other facts -- he even admits evolution exists himself when he claims "5 of the 6 evolution theories have not been observed" i.e. 1 has) talks to the class, the teacher immediately takes the opposite extreme. I personally take a more passive approach to religion -- I believe what I believe; you believe what you believe, it's all good, and when it comes to spreading the religion, I prefer to inspire by example rather than to actively preach. But I digress, what I want to know is what religion are you? -WW
Dear WW, Do you really want to waste time on me instead of Chick? After all, I'm BORING compared to Jack. The Pope doesn't have my picture on his dart board. No Jesuits have tried to kill me. My work hasn't been banned anywhere (that I'm aware of). Besides, the purpose of this site is to focus primarily on the tracts. Chick's personal information is only included to better understand his work. I will say that I respect Chick a lot. He had an unpopular viewpoint and he promoted it in a very successful and lucrative way-- despite tremendous opposition from critics. He is the most widely read underground (independent) cartoonist ever. And he did it all with cut rate cartoon tracts. It's amazing. I agree some of his tracts strain credulity. I personally find it to be one of the more humorous and enjoyable aspects of his work. It's often campy, like the 1960s Batman TV show. The heroes are completely pure while the villains are 100% bad. The Dick Tracy-like labels (e.g., "bat computer", "atomic pile", "Gothem City 14 miles") are replaced with voluminous Biblical footnotes... just in case we start to doubt Chick's basis in scripture. But to be fair, what do you expect in a 24 page comic tract? There's not really enough space to present three dimensional characters. Regarding your "passive approach" to religion, brace yourself. As you read more Chick tracts it will become painfully obvious that Jack despises silent support of Christ and the public toleration of sin (like homosexuality). His newsletter is called Battle Cry and it's clear that Jack (a former WWII vet) believes in FIGHTING for his beliefs. He also believes it is the sacred duty of Christians to witness to their friends and enemies. Chick feels you are not being polite or compassionate by letting non-Christians (especially Catholics who think they are Christians but have been systematically deceived) drift through life without ever having a personal relationship with Jesus. Instead, you are condemning the ignorant to hell through your silence. Chick doesn't think all religions are the same, but that the devil encourages such attitudes to rope in gullible souls who are afraid of what their friends might think if they committed themselves to God and showed it. I'm not saying these are my views, but I believe they accurately represent Chick's and his strict interpretation of the King James Bible.
Hi, I wrote an e-mail to you a few minutes ago, and have since viewed more of your site. By now I have figured out that you are a "staunch fundamentalist". Thats fine with me -- but I want to ask you one question: Why does Jack Chick and other fundamentalists rely so heavily on the Bible? The Bible was inspired by God, true, but it was written by man -- does that taint it? I mean, is God's word coming from the pen of man not sacriligous? Or did God take complete control of the person at the time, so it truly was only His word that was being written. Additionally, what makes the Bible a more valid source than Koran or even the Torah. All three of these books say that they are the path to salvation -- which is true, or all they all true to some degree? Heck, the Bible is composed mainly of writings that were made before the birth of Jesus -- doesn't that mean that Jesus isn't as important as the other parts of the christian faith? Jesus himself was never even "Christian", he was a devout Jew! If Jesus, your personal savior was Jewish shouldn't you be too? Know that I am challenging my own faith with these question just as much as I am questioning yours -- not a day goes by where I don't wonder "is this really what I believe, or am I just going along with the crowd". Again I digress. I hope I have given you something to think about, I know I will be thinking and questioning myself. Let me leave you with part of my own personal philosophy "there are many roads by which to get to heaven and each person much choose his or her own. Each road is different, but they all have one thing in common: Love of God" One day, far from now, we will meet, my friend. I pray that we are in the same place, and Jesus is with us. -WW Dear WW, I get accused of all sorts of things-- one moment readers think I'm a Creationist, the next moment a liberal, and now a staunch fundamentalist! Actually, I'm none of the above. But that's okay. If my personal beliefs are not apparent, then perhaps I'm doing my job well. This site is dedicated to Chick's views, not mine. In answer to your questions: Chick and other Christians rely on the Bible because it's the most direct communication God has provided. Back in the Old Testament days, God used to speak to prophets directly (via burning bushes or whatever). But man took advantage of this familiarity and God stopped. Finally, he sent his only son Jesus. The New Testament was based on his words as recorded by his Apostles. Most of them are considered to be pretty trustworthy (with the obvious exception of Judas). Chick and Protestants in general don't accept the Catholic claim that the Pope is "God's representative on Earth". A divinely inspired representative would never order inquisitions or allow the corruption that the Vatican indulged in. These are actions more in keeping with the devil's representative on Earth. And that is precisely what Chick believes is the force behind the Catholic Faith: Satan. (See The Death Cookie tract and The Force comic book.) The devil uses Catholic dogma and traditions to run interference between god and man. Chick points out that Catholics are not born again and use all sorts of intermediaries when they should speak directly to Jesus. Chick also blames the Vatican (Satan's representative) for starting Islam (see The Prophet comic and The Deceived tract). Admittedly, it's one of Chick's more outlandish claims! Finally, Jesus was a Jew. He was fulfilling Jewish prophecy when he appeared and was rejected (and crucified) by the Jews themselves. At this point, the true followers of God's word (the Torah/ Old Testament) were no longer the Jews. True believers recognized the Messiah/ Christ and became known as Christians. God promised to protect Israel as long as they honored his faith, but when that sacred covenant was broken by the Jews and they spurned their own Messiah, General Titus was dispatched to destroy Israel and the Jews have suffered ever since. Chick believes Jews will return to Jesus in the end times, as Messianic Jews already have. His message to Jews is simple: "Your messiah is already here. You only need to open you eyes (and hearts) to him." It's the same message Chick directs to all his readers. [Additional response by Ramon w/ relevant Links]
I really like the new look of the site. I've meant to ask you concerning some codes you have used. I don't know what they mean. For example: S/370-1'5/610 , G/370 , 11'5/610 , Code G. Thanks, John
Hey John, I believe the codes you referred to are on the back
covers of the actual tracts. Keep in mind I don't make the tracts, I only
collect and review them! The codes tell Chick Publications what version
and date they were made. The alpha letter tells him which version it is:
A (1st) B (2nd) C (3rd) etc., etc. That tradition was eventually replaced
with double numbers: 11'5 would mean it was published the 11th month of
'95 (or '85 if that decade). The other number (like 370) is the catalog
number of the tract title and has been consistantly used for decades. Hope that helps! * * * * * My sister (the Catholic convert) pointed out the following Chick Memory within the Catholic Apologists book Surprised by Truth 2 by Patrick Madrid. The following three paragraphs are from pages 168-169. Over several weeks, Christi's parents and their circle of Evangelical Protestant friends presented me with a variety of biblical challenges to my Faith: "Mary worship," the Catholic Church's alleged "false gospel of salvation by works," the heresy of infant Baptism, the Pope and his outrageous claims of being infallible, the magic of sacraments, especially the issue of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist -- these and other arguments against the Catholic Faith were thrown (smilingly, of course) in my face. Such arguments were often accompanied by a venomous anti-Catholic "Chick Tract" dredged up from a seemingly limitless supply that came from a hidden stash somewhere in their house. I read these garish anti-Catholic comic books carefully. Time after time, I could see that they offered slick but bogus arguments against the Catholic Church. It was obvious that the wild, angry charges these tracts made against Catholicism weren't true-- and I was able to check scripture to see this for myself. I soon began to refuse these anti-Catholic literature that Christi's parents proffered. Once, I even had the gumption to invite them to come to Mass with us, so they could see what the Catholic Church taught and that it resembled nothing like the caricatures in the tracts they gave me. I recall one particularly tense conversation about the Eucharist with Christi's parents. Her dad said, "Hang on a minute" and went into the house. He came back with a Chick Tract called "The Death Cookie," which he handed to me with great seriousness, asking me to read it prayerfully. I was asked repeatedly if I had "been saved." As a Catholic, they regarded me as a "lost soul," an "unsaved" person who still needed to "find Christ" (even though they let me see their daughter, for which I give them credit). Patrick never got the the girl. They eventually broke up and he went on to become a full time Catholic apologist. He founded Envoy (a Catholic magazine) and also works with Catholic Answers-- an activist group that often attacks Jack Chick and labels him a "venomous anti-Catholic" bigot. A typical example is their recent mailing. Other examples have been compiled by Ramon and listed here. I e-mailed a letter to Pat regarding the above book. You can read it here.
Dear Whoever, I couldn't help but notice that you have a very flawed perception of science. You seem to be under the impression that creationism is a plausible theory, but it is evident that you are unaware of the methods used by real scientists to determine natural events. The hypothetico-deductive method is the only possible way to conduct a scientific inquiry, and this is not carried out by creationists. Creationism begins with the unsubstantiated assertion that the world was created 6000 years ago, in it's present form. It is therefore not possible to create testable hypotheses from this, which is required to be classified as a field of scientific study. Just examine any issue of Nature, or Scientific American, and you will see that creationism is not an accepted science in the major fields. Peer-reviewed journals are essential to test a scientific assertion. To continue to hold beliefs in this pseudo-science, one must disregard all relevant research in the fields such as astronomy, geology, biology, chemistry, and physics, all which have been tested and recorded in credible resources. Regards, Brian L., Biotechnology Student, Brock University
Dear Brian, I hope you're a better scientist than you are a mind reader, because you certainly misread me. I am not a Fundamentalist Creationist. (But I believe in presenting their side accurately with an open mind.) You are also mistaken about my ignorance about "methods used by real scientists to determine natural events". I am not only aware of these methods, I agree they are the most effective way to determine scientific fact. However, if you believe Evolution is FACT and not theory, then you have compromised your scientific objectivity and replaced it with a "faith" of your own. It so happens that I believe Darwin's theory of Natural Selection, but I recognize that when Darwin's book The Origin of the Species is extrapolated to explain the origin of life, it is clearly a hypotheses that cannot be proven. No one was around taking notes when life on Earth began, and we can only theorize what happened based on fossils, DNA evidence, carbon dating, etc. etc. But notice, the operative word here is theorize. So am I really the one who is being unscientific? Let's have a look at the definition of "theory" and "fact" and you judge for yourself which you think best describes Evolution. (The following is from Websters, unedited.) Fact- Anything actually done or existing. Theory- A belief not yet tested in practice; the general principals in which a science is based and built up; a hypothesis; something that is assumed as a starting point for scientific investigation. If you've proven Evolution is the origin of life, then let me be the first to congratulate you for turning this theory into fact. Otherwise, we need to stick to the actual meaning of words and not exaggerate or stretch their purpose. (This is especially important in the precise study of science.) You said yourself that Creationism is bogus because the hypothesis cannot be tested. Yet this same criticism applies to Evolution. Science has never created life, let alone, repeated the experiment. You need to apply the same standards to your own beliefs as you do to others. There are many scientists who are Christians. Their faith does not make them less brilliant or intellectual hypocrites. They simply believe that God (instead of random chance) is the force that created the Universe, the planets, and the science you so love. You may want to be a little more careful before you presume to know all the answers about the origins of life. Some of these unenlightened Christians may even be your teachers...
Hey, Guys! LOVE your web-page so much I'm giving you a Link on my new web page, which should come out sometime in November (check out www.blackcelts.com) or thereabouts. Also, since "The Poor Revolutionist" was one of my earliest experiences with JTC, I decided to write a review when I saw you had none. I hope it isn't too long to print, but snip what you must if you need to. Otherwise, I hope you can include the whole thing. I'll be writing you a review for "Holy Joe" very soon. Lob and Peas, Terrible Tommy p.s. Would you like a list of scientific refutations to "Big Daddy" and its unscientific nonsense? Also, would you be interested in some Links for Kent Hovind, the guy who supplies Chick with the majority of his Creationist "proofs" and some sites debunking "Dr." Hovind and his bogus $125,000 claim? Here they are:
WILD, WILD WORLD OF KENT HOVIND
BUDDIKA'S 300 CREATIONIST LIES (Based on Kent's own material.)
KENT HOVIND'S CHALLENGE TO EVOLUTIONISTS
LENNY FLANK'S "CREATION SCIENCE DEBUNKED" PAGE
Dear Terrible, Thank you for your review and I've added it to our archive complete and unabridged. But when it comes to Evolution, some Creationists have another theory that explains away the existence of the fossil record that you may find interesting. It goes like this: God created the world 6,000 years ago, just as the Fundamentalists interpret his word (by counting back the ages of all the characters in the Bible). Lucifer was tossed out of heaven and allowed to tempt humanity with his lies and deceit, because God so loved mankind that he gave us free will (see Genesis). Although not as powerful as God, Satan does have the ability to manipulate reality and create fossils and other "scientific evidence" that convinces millions of "educated people" to forget their faith in God's holy word. Just as in Eden, tempting us with the fruit from the tree of knowledge is always Satan's favorite trick of turning mankind away from God. Most humans will betray God every time if they think it will make them a little smarter. It's a theory that kinda makes you think... After all, believing the universe exists completely by chance isn't the easiest explanation to accept either. Another Chick tract that deals with evolution is the recent release of In The Beginning.
Dear Curator, It seems to me that there was a tract - I believe it was "That Crazy Guy" which was distributed in the early 70's and the girl did not get AIDS but got Herpes - also "normally" uncurable. Aids was not around at the time, or just barely. Do you recall this or if it was a different tract? If not, then it seems there are 2 versions of That Crazy Guy. I rememeber it well but don't own it. Thanks. Dave Dear Dave, Your Chick Memory is correct. The earlier version gave little Suzi herpes and the later version gave her AIDS. (I guess she didn't learn the first time around). Both tracts have the same title, but the first panel of the earlier version has the boyfriend-to-be promise "It's going to be a crazy disco night", while the later version has him say "I'll show you how to be a real party animal". If you need either tract, I have both and will be happy to trade.
I just discovered your site and love it. There are a couple of discrepancies. The link to Big Daddy shows a copyright of 1992 when the link itself takes you to the 2000 version. Also Doom Town still links to the 1973 version. Doom Town was revised in 1999 to replace some of the signs that the crowd is holding. Some thought that the signs might validate some over-the-edge people to go out and kill homosexuals. Sincerely, John H. Thanks for your note, John. I'm sure it would help if I started posting the multiple copyright dates. So I'll start right away. If anyone else sees similar problems, please bring them to my attention. I strive to provide as much Chick information as possible, but it's a massive task and any help is always appreciated. Regarding the changing signs of Doom Town. I would like confirmation of this, as I have not noticed such a change. The only copyright dates I have for that tract are ©1989, 1991, and 1999. Only the later two copyright versions feature the gay rally. But I still don't see the changing protest signs. They have completely different artwork on pages 20 & 21 though.
[John's RESPONSE] After recieving your e-mail, I went back to the link and to the Chick homepage. The on-line tract has a date of 1973 next to the cover, but if you look closely on the first page they have a copywrite of 1991. My mistake on that (Chick needs to correct that). Anyway, I also have a 1991 and 1999 version of Doom Town, I am looking at them right now. Page 2 (1991) signs say "KILL THE BIGOTS!", (1999) "HATE is NOT a family value". Page 3 (1991) sign says "Civil Rights or Civil War!", (1999) "God is Love". Page 4 (1991) sign says "Accept us or DIE!", (1999) "Stop the Religious Right!". Thanks for the specifics John. I have a ©1991 version
that has none of the changes you describe. So I guess that's yet ANOTHER
variation! If anyone has a spare 1991 version with the harsher protest signs,
I'd like to trade for that one.
Hello. I came upon your site and viewed it. It was laid out very well I might add but was full of misiterpretations and lies. To me it seems that mr. Chick needs to learn more about us. There are many things that I came across that were false. Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth is a site that may help you see what we rely are or why we do the things we do. But also in rev it says many will turn agaist the church as it looks like it has. Take care and read that God bless in His devine mercy, Robert Dear Robert, I take it that when you say "us", you refer to Catholics. Yes, Jack pulls no punches when it comes to criticizing the Catholic Church. But you have to remember that millions of Protestants were murdered under orders of the Pope during the Inquisition, and although Jack may have forgiven the Vatican, he hasn't forgotten its history. If your religion were the victim of similar atrocities, you would likely view the organization responsible as "evil" instead of "holy". Revelation 17 also talks about the False Church (The Whore of Babylon) and Jack believes (as do many Fundamentalists) that this refers to the Catholic System which elevates Mary and the Pope to godlike status. Protestants left the Catholic Church out of protest (hence the "protestant" name) and I expect most of them still disagree with Catholic dogma. Many Fundamentalists feel the Catholics are being lead astray by Satan via the Pope and try to convert Catholics --not to be mean-- but to save them from damnation. (So at least their motives are pure.) However, I'll include your link for others to read both sides of the issue and decide for themselves.
(Regarding the Baby Talk tract.) I really feel that Jack should have continued with the final panel some more. "Oh Nathan, my life wouldn't have been the same without you. I'd have gotten an education, then would have had to get a job. Now I can stay at home all day and make lots of babies because that's what women do." It's also delightful that there is still that belief that people should marry out of fear of 'god' rather than true love. I wonder if he realizes anyone with a brain that has already made their decision isn't going to be influenced by these silly tracts. They only affect those unsure of their beliefs, blindly grasping for someone to lead them along. I have to admire his tenacity however. He isn't going to stop, no not ever. We can only 'pray' that 'god' will 'call him home' soon. VERY SOON... ~Crunchie Dear Cruchie, Thank you for your comments. (I'm sure they will generate comments of their own.) However, I couldn't disagree more with your desire to see Chick leave Earth sooner rather than later. I personally hope he sticks around irking PC types for a VERY LONG time! Not that I have anything against the programed masses-- it's just that I find Chick's tracts more entertaining than most the Politically Correct alternatives. Whether you love him or hate him, I bet we're ALL going to miss those new tracts every 90 days once JTC is hauled upstairs and forced to review his life on that heavenly movie screen.
I noticed that you'd deleted this e-mail the first time, and I'm assuming it was inadvertently, so I hope you don't mind my resubmission: Subj: My Insights on Chick's Happy Hour Good morning. Before I comment on some things you overlooked in your review of Happy Hour, I would like to first commend you on the outstanding start with which you've launched the Chick fan club. Though my package seemed to take forever to arrive (about two months in retrospect), what I did get was far more than I expected. The effort you expended in getting The Wicked Magistrate reprinted was probably rather sacrificial assuming that you haven't yet signed up 100 members, and it does cost quite a bit to order retired tracts that have to be special-ordered in bulk, but I do appreciate it. I was, for my meager discount membership fee, expecting just the tract and a short form letter, and instead I was handed a fancy official membership certificate, complete with fancy lettering, as well as a membership card and a custom Monopoly Chance card, both of which fit nicely inside my wallet for portability (my co-workers whom I've shown the Chance card to love it). The button is very cleverly worded, and makes a great conversation piece. I've already punctured my leather jacket with it, and it's raised quite a few eyebrows at work. All right, that's it. Though you strike me as a liberal who perhaps isn't as offended by Chick as, say, Psycho Dave or the folks at Revolting are, you've got a great website that's surprisingly charitable toward Chick and his fringe philosophy (and I'll bet Chick wouldn't have it any other way, for wide is the road to hell), and it seems like it's always updated whenever I pay it a biweekly visit. I hope the fan club proves successful, but even if it doesn't, I've already received more than my money's worth. It's a pleasure to collect variant printings of each tract, not to mention out-of-print tracts that can only be resuscitated by special-orders of ten thousand. I have two different versions of Doom Town and Big Daddy, in English, and have noticed that the Spanish version of Big Daddy features not, as some liberal commentator described, a blonde-haired and blue-eyed Aryan Youth rebelling against the evolutionist professor, but a student with black hair (except on the last two panels for some odd reason). Bob Fowler (thanks for promoting his interesting manuscript about Chick and his works) provided me a small assortment of tracts that included a couple of very collectible keepsakes: a pagan parody, The Other People, and a foreign version of This Was Your Life with completely different and more detailed (and better) art, featuring all black characters. I now buy all-tract assortments once every couple of months not only to distribute duplicates around town, but also to sort through in search of any unannounced modified tracts that belong in my growing collection. This is much more exciting and less expensive a hobby for me, and one far less contradictory to my beliefs, than the secular comic collecting, from both mainstream and independent publishers, that I spent 15 years pursuing. These tracts of Chick's deserve the "underground comix" appellation every bit as much as anything by Gilbert Shelton or Robert Crumb (the latter surprisingly agreed, as cited in Fowler's book), and prove that diversity exists even in this niche market. Chick is truly an American icon, even if this nation won't know what it's missing when he finally does perish and go to heaven. Though it's obviously in God's hands, I hope Chick is still around long enough to squeeze out at least a few more of his unique tracts. He never fails to surprise me. Enclosed are my additional comments on Happy Hour (posted right below the regular review). -Ramon Dear Ramon, I'm glad you re-sent your letter, because I don't recall getting the first submission. If I deleted it, it was by mistake. (I might have deleted it thinking it was another "free cruise" to the Caribbean.) I try to respond to every letter, so if you don't hear from me, please follow up. Sorry your membership took so long to mail out, but you can blame CHICK for that. They took extra long printing THE WICKED MAGISTRATE because it had to be translated first. So a two week E.T.A. turned into two MONTHS! I'm glad you enjoyed the other items. It was a labor of love and although I'm nearly a thousand dollars in the hole, it was well worth it. Thanks for joining! (The rest of you should join before the first hundred slots are filled and the discount expires.) Thanks also for your Happy Hour review.
Hello, I live in Houston Texas. We have a local radio station here that is very liberal, and promotes all sorts of un-Godly ideas, like homosexual rights, atheism, etc. Every month they have an "open house" where they invite members of the community to stop by the station and visit. I recently attended one of these open houses and left a stack of Chick Tracts out in an area they had marked for "Community Publications". They were still there when I left a little while later. I also did this during an open house at the local Lesbian and Gay Community Center. It's been my experience that most "community" type places have an area where people can put things out. It's also been my experience that the people in charge of these buildings don't usually censor what is there. Thus, these become perfect venues for Chick tracts! -Endora Thanks for the comments Endora, Sounds like a typical NPR station! But they never admit to being liberal at all. (That would jeopardize their taxpayer subsidies.) They instead claim to be "mainstream" and middle of the road, despite the fact polls show a majority of Americans still consider homosexuality immoral and Christianity as our most popular religion (views commonly dismissed by NPR). During the 2nd debate, I noticed Al Gore referred to his religion (carefully avoiding the "Jesus" word) as his "tradition of faith". Does that mean it's more a tradition than a faith? And Bill Clinton always quotes the Old Testament, never the New Testament. I guess Jesus is the PC kiss of death! (Those politicians... Gotta love 'em!) View Chick Memories 1 (from when we first began, up till mid 2000) |
Content copyright 2020 ChickComics.com | |
