The innocent American tradition of Sunday morning comic strip entertainment, seems to be to most psychoanalysts anything but innocent. Like any form of artwork the stick-figured and large-faced characters carry out a meaning much deeper than the obvious. As discussed in the seventh chapter of Signs in Contemporary Culture, by Arthur Asa Berger, there are several connotative meanings that one can interpret from these colorful creations.

As children we merely look to the "funnies" in our local newspapers to the extent to which the name pertains. Are we subject to a virtual false advertisement at such an early age? The topic discussed in the chapter designated as "Denotation and Connotation" merely takes a glimpse into such comic legends as "Dick Tracy," "Spiderman," and even the harmless "Little Orphan Annie" to find the political and social implications created by the artist. One other main point in this particular chapter is the focus on the American culture and almost the ideal environment as presented in the example of "Dick Tracy."

This dress-to-kill detective dealt with all that was bad and sinister in a productive metropolitan city. The focus on his heroism and determination to right the wrong has become the standard for most semiotic analysts' criticism. The assumption for many has been that the American people are pressed with the guilt towards its role within the society. They feel ashamed for not taking a crucial role in the prevention of violence, and when the character Dick Tracy battles against these forces, he helps to handle the aggression felt by most Americans.

Orphan Annie also portrays an ideal America. Detail is placed on her values being of small-town, conservative nature. Berger characterizes the "Little Orphan Annie" cartoons as being a comic "pantheon" because of Annie's admitted spirituality.

What can we, as the students of semiotics, make of all of these accusations in Signs in Contemporary Culture? An obvious conclusion is that any form of art has a hidden meaning. If you really think about this, it is very true. After all we communicate in signs and art is a definite tool used for conveying messages. The comical characters have intended messages for everyone exposed to them. Now, granted, not everyone catches on to these intensions, but they are there. The artists of contemporary works such as "Li'l Abner," "The Phantom," and "Krazy Kat" have a hidden agenda and the images they use aid them to get their opinion public. Think about it… the newspaper is the most effective medium used in advertising. In a sense, the political and social beliefs used in the "funnies" can be seen as a form of advertising the artist's beliefs. How many people have been persuaded into believing these societal implications presented by the comic strip artist?

I am absolutely intrigued by this phenomenon introduced to me, by Berger. I've never actually considered the "funnies to be serious," and now after reviewing this book, I am thoroughly convinced that they hold political and social implications. My only objection to this essay is to the actual influence efficiency that occurs (if any), to the comic strip audience. I personally look to comics as being entertainment and just simply that. What's so wrong with cartoons having only one intention---to be funny!!!