F you grew up in the United States in the
three decades after World War II, chances are Mad magazine was
at some point (most likely your second year in high school)
your main source for anti-establishment laughs. From "Spy vs.
Spy" to those back-page "fold-ins" to Don Martin's flap-footed
caricatures, Mad has been poking American culture in its eye
for half a century.
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
Mad no longer holds the sway it once did; its circulation
now hovers around 300,000, down from a 1973 peak of 2.8
million. In today's irony-drenched age, Mad's broad, if
pioneering, brand of subversive humor seems weirdly out of
touch. Nonetheless, Mad soldiers on, determined to prove that
subtlety is the enemy of parody and that the funniest joke is
one told on oneself especially if it includes the word
"moron."
William M. Gaines, Mad's publisher, and Al Feldstein, its
editor, once wrote, "We reject the insinuation that anything
we print is moral, theological, nutritious or good for you in
any way, shape or form." The readers of Mad are happy to echo
that sentiment, insulting themselves and their favorite
magazine with equal relish.
With the 50th anniversary issue now on newsstands, here are
some past love letters to Mad. The last writer's suspicions
notwithstanding, the editors swear they are real.
From the start, some readers seemed to think Mad might
be truly dangerous:
Educational, entertaining, humorous? No. your "brain-child"
is none of these. In fact, it is plain rot.
Mrs. C. Peterson, Oakland, Calif.
(Issue #4,
1953)
Mad is neither funny nor witty. It doesn't make sense. It
is not educational, inspirational. It's as poor and cheap an
effort to lure nickels as I've ever seen. May it have no
success.
Paul M. Dubbs, Bellefonte, Pa. (#6, 1953)
I have always credited myself with being a fair and pretty
broad-minded mother in having to raise a son in today's world
. . . , but if I thought all he had offered to him was the
likes of what you people had to offer in reading matter, I'd
gladly do away with him and myself.
Mrs. Harriette K. Vandenbaum,
New Haven (#14,
1954)
But soon enough, Mad found a loyal audience that set
out to top the magazine's own standard jokes, one of which is
that Mad is a loser:
I would like to say that you have one faithful reader who
never misses an issue. I'm not him, but I'm sure you have one
somewhere!
Clay Bryant Jr., Kennesaw, Ga.
(#68, 1962)
I read every issue of your magazine cover to cover. Nothing
in between. Just the covers!
Harry Plewa, Jamaica, N.Y. (#121, 1968)
I recently purchased your June issue of Mad, along with two
pieces of gum. I truly enjoyed the gum!
Dave Mosher, Phoenix, N.Y. (#153, 1972)
Another is that its readers are losers:
What you publish is cheap, miserable trash! Fortunately, I
also am cheap, miserable trash!
Anonymous (#18, 1954)
I read Mad's "Updated Children's Books" in issue #276, and
it really makes me feel good that I'm illiterate!
Dana Rodman, Boston (#278, 1988)
Your page 48 memo "from the desk of William M. Gaines" in
issue #312 says the Mad staff should never use the words
idiots, morons, imbeciles, dolts and clods because they
describe Mad readers and might alienate them. Well, we're Mad
readers and we're none of those. We're boneheads!
Nick Bevis, Chris Egoff, America, U.S.A.
(#314,
1992)
A variant: Mad turns its readers into losers:
I was once a miserable but fairly intelligent human being.
But since reading your magazine, I have changed into a happy
little moronic beast. While I am on the subject, I would also
like to mention the transformation in my physical anatomy. I
now have three eyes.
Shirly D. Blieden, no address (#11, 1954)
Hey! I was
bored out of my skull at work, so I picked up issue #319. Now
I'm no longer bored; I'm suicidal. Thanks!
Scott Maiko, Los Angeles (#321, 1993)
My next door neighbor recently had brain surgery. His
doctor suggested plenty of stimulating literature, so
naturally I gave him my Mad collection. Enclosed is the last
picture we ever took of him.
Shane McMullen, Loveland, Ohio
(#294, 1990)
Another variant: The Magazine is a synonym for
stupid.
The other day a friend of mine said to me, he said, "That
Mad isn't fit for idiots." I stuck up for your magazine. I
said that it was.
Connor Markey, Rye, N.Y. (#28, 1956)
I know this is the stupidest magazine published, but you
don't have to keep on proving it all the time.
Tommy Le Clair, Ludlow, Vt. (#48, 1959)
I can't stand your nauseating art work, your idiotic ideas,
your infantile humor or your disgusting magazine. But since
you got no letters last month, I thought I'd write to cheer
you up.
Patti Johnson, Palm Springs, Fla.
(#92, 1965)
Today I read Mad #138. It topped off an already dull,
boring, uninspired day!
Alan Greenspun, Oakhurst, N.J.
(#140, 1971)
In fact, Mad's readers can be sticklers for
detail.
I found one mistake in "The Mad Students Hate Book." The
line about hating to be the smartest kid in the class is
something most Mad readers wouldn't know a thing about.
Jeff Hartan, Kinosha, Wis. (#234, 1982)
For your information, the common house fly does not belong
to the genus Diptera. The house fly is a member of the phylum
Arthropeda, the Class Hexopoda, the order Diptera, the family
Muscidae, the genus Musca, the species Domestica. I realize
this might sound trivial to you, but I assure you the fly
feels quite strongly about it. How would you like to be called
something you are not? Like "journalist," maybe?
Richard W. Nagle, Washington, D.C.
(#54, 1960)
One question seems constantly on readers' minds: Is Mad
worth the newsstand price?
I have been reading Mad for several years now. Mainly, the
first issue I ever bought. I just couldn't see wasting a
quarter on another.
Ben Quinlan, Liberty, N.Y. (#78, 1963)
I see Mad is now 35. I realize that the New York City
sanitation men recently received a wage increase, but I never
expected this piece of garbage to go up accordingly.
Laurence Halpern, Flushing, N.Y.
(#121, 1968)
Mad magazine is much cheaper than sex but not as funny.
Brian Baer, Monroe, Calif. (#251, 1984)
Some readers have chided the editors for missing
opportunities to insult themselves:
"Misery is a Cold Hot Dog" was wonderful and nostalgic, but
you left out one important "Misery," mainly: "Misery is a Gift
Subscription to Mad."
Tom Rasley, Spokane, Wash. (#82, 1963)
I think your "Mad One-Time-Use Products" article should
also be put on the list of "One-Time-Use Products."
Gwen Urdang, Providence, R.I.
(#200, 1978)
"A Downer Is . . ." talking your mother into allowing you
to buy "Playboy," but when you get to the newsstand, all
that's left is Mad.
David Davis, Asheboro, N.C. (#174, 1975)
Finally, if any proof is needed that the letter writers
share Mad's idea of a joke, some have gotten their letters
published by making the letters column itself a part of their
insult:
Every time I write you a letter, you never print it. So
this time, I just won't write you a letter.
Steve Holmes, Washington, D.C.
(#36, 1957)
Why don't you make your whole magazine into one huge
"Letters Department"? Your readers' remarks are much funnier
than the tripe you write yourself!
Larry Kayser, Forest Hills, N.Y.
(#75, 1962)
Why don't you guys admit that you make up all your
"Reader's Letters"? In fact, you even made up this one,
too!
Julia Leino, Finland (#230, 1982)
