1、中文 3400 字 本科毕业论文（设计） 外 文 翻 译 原文： Government policy and comics The article discusses the role of government policy in the societal process of producing definitions for art and in becoming established as an artistic field. The discussion is based on an empirical case which demonstrates the complex rol
2、e of public policy in defining a certain area as one of the arts and as eligible for government support for the arts. The analysis makes use of the concepts of artistic classification systems introduced by Paul DiMaggio and artistic fields by Pierre Bourdieu. It traces the encounters of the Finnish
3、field of comics and government policy during a time span from the 1950s to the present day. The case of comics shows the development of one area of cultural production from a suspected criminal case to a state supported field of art, and demonstrates the various roles different areas and measures of
4、 government policy can take in the development of an emerging artistic field. Under suspicion When comics first appeared within the realm of government policy, it was not in connection with cultural policy but with legal policy. The issue was not whether comics could be defined as a form of art, but
5、 whether the production and distribution of comics should be defined as a crime. In the background of the issue was a campaign against comics launched in the USA. Fredrick Werthams book Seduction of the Innocent (1954) became a handbook for the campaign against comics, which expanded to Europe as we
6、ll. According to Wertham, comics were harmful to children and increased, among other things, juvenile delinquency. In the USA,the campaign resulted in an agreement to voluntary self-censorship by the publishers. The principles of this censorship were documented under the name Comics Code.4 The cause
7、 of events can be characterized as a moral panic, in the sense defined by Cohen (1980). In Great Britain, a similar campaign led to an Act of Parliament, which made publication and distribution of horror comics illegal.5 The episode presumably influenced public attitudes toward comics for a long tim
8、e, especially in these two countries. However, also in several European countries on the Continent,the contents of comics were at the time circumscribed either by voluntary agreements of publishers or by legal action.6The campaign against comics was also felt in Finland, where an abbreviated version
9、 ofWerthams book was published in the Finnish version of Readers Digest (Valitut Palat). In 1956, when the Finnish Parliament passed alterations to the law against the distribution of obscene publications, it also asked the Government to bring in a motion for restricting the distribution of so-calle
10、d comics of inferior quality,7 because these could be classified as morally harmful as well. As a result, the Ministry of Justice started negotiations with publishers, the aim being voluntary self-censorship. The negotiations, however, did not lead to the desired result, and in 1961 the Ministry nom
11、inated a committee to consider action in the issue. The case demonstrates well the specific authority of the state in the field of cultural production, and its power to bestow and also to deny the right of the actors to their positions and actions. In its report, the comics committee nominated by th
12、e Ministry of Justice stated that even the subject matter of comics was often morally harmful and inclined to lead the readers in the direction of wrong attitudes towards the society. It also feared that comics could supersede real literature. However, the committee came to the conclusion that, acco
13、rding to the prevailing legislation, the production and distribution of comics could not be considered criminal. Nor did the committee recommend new legislation to that effect, since it was not possible to avoid a certain amount of inaccuracy in defining the characteristics of the crime. (Sarjakuvat
14、oimikunnan mietint 1962, pp. 38). Consequently, no legal action was taken to prevent the production or distribution of comics. In the realm of cultural policy, the 1960s witnessed the formulation of a state arts policy in its present sense. The objectives of this new systematic policy for promoting
15、the arts were defined according to the principle of excellence and in terms of traditionally defined high culture.9 It was quite clear that comics did not belong to the realm of the arts policy. The report of the committee formulating the principles of the new arts policy particularly emphasized the
16、 importance of making a distinction between real art and inferior, superficial and cheap substitutes (Kom.miet. 1965, pp. 4849). For the representatives of the artistic fields and the government officials constituting the membership of the committee, what to include in the area defined as art, and w
17、hat to exclude from it, seemed relatively self-evident. At this stage, the policy definitions of art clearly excluded comics. The position of comics outside the realm of arts policy was so self-evident that there was no need to make it explicit. For government authorities, comics belonged to the jur
18、isdiction of legal policy, not cultural policy. In the realm of the (legal) policy definition concerning comics, the issue was whether comics could be defined as a criminal offence. This can be considered a case of regulative classification, in which regulatory government policies affect ACS indirec
19、tly. Although the final verdict in the case was not guilty, the procedure contributed to making it clear that comics did not belong under the auspices of arts policy. Qualified acceptance Meanwhile, during the 1970s, the field of comics had experienced several changes that were inclined to make the
20、field more acceptable in the eyes of cultural policy makers and the art world.One of these was the emergence of markets for comic albums, sold at bookstores. This change brought with it comics made for adults and also raised the status of the authors. It was easier to accept comics of the new type t
21、han the traditional magazines and comic books at news stands or strips in the newspapers. The development introduced the concept of quality comics (Heikkinen 1991, pp. 3032.) The transformation was to a large extent based on the advent of translations into Finnish of new types of comics albums, especially of French origin. It resulted in widening the prevailing concept of comics from the traditional Anglo-American imagery towards more artoriented and varied continental ideas of the
