My review, as posted in Tintin Books

Written at the request of his editor (and in spite of Hergé's desire to take Tintin to America), 'Tintin in the Congo' betrays a patronising attitude towards Africa and its inhabitants that was typical of Europe in the 1930s. Herge came to regret his opinions in this work, but defended himself by stating that he was working from the opinions and writings of his society. In future redrawing of the work, Herge removed many of the overly colonial references to Belgium, as well as some of the less animal-friendly sequences (such as using dynamite to blow up a rhinoceros solely for hunting purposes). The album still remains controversial to this day, however, and is often banned. By this point, Herge was beginning to meticulously research his works, and it would not be long before the pace of his albums would slow down as Herge dedicated time to creating albums of marvellous high quality.

The final version of this album, as published, is vividly drawn although the background work has nothing on Herge's later masterpieces. However, the racial issues do tend to dominate this work - at least from a Western perspective - and beyond that it is little more than a series of cliffhangers of increasing unlikelihood. (Something it shares with the next book, [b:Tintin in America|790192|Tintin in America (The Adventures of Tintin)|Hergé|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178382359s/790192.jpg|2874939]).

Herge had a long way to go. ( )

Second book in the series is way, way better than the first one (Tintin in the land of Soviets) in both graphical presentation and consistency of the story.

Story itself seems to be a popular view at the time of Africa, European African colonies and native people. Especially of Congo, Belgian colony, that was ruthlessly exploited while ran as personal fiefdom of Leopold II, king of Belgium, until it was, at the end of first decade of 20th century, made part of Belgium state territory.

With that said portrayal of native people is very simplistic and will definitely be offending today (although to be honest as far as I can see this volume was found to be offending even in 60's and 70's). Keep in mind this was written in 1930's and story reflects the period with all its racial stereotypes and prejudices.

Second element that remained controversial with this book is approach to wildlife - Tintin is presented as a big-games hunter that came to Africa to hunt down every signature animal from Africa (lion, rhino, elephant) for his news report. Again this is part of the story that will be offending to many today but at the time big game hunters were celebrities (and let us not forget that unfortunately this practice continues even today with hunt-safari's).

So if you are aiming at politically correct works then this one is not for you.

Improvements over the volume #1 are in art (we can see the art becoming much better and comic is starting to look like Tintin we know today) and consistency of the story. Although nature of comic (serialization in newspaper over the months) is more than obvious, story itself is much more cohesive and does not read like just a collection of short gags.

All in all much better book than volume #1 and one that shows bright future for Tintin. ( )

This book is racist. There’s no other way to say it. Tintin has been an enduring loved comic book character for decades. These adventures brought the bumbling detective to life and made them a part of our lexicon. But sometimes classic characters in fall to the changing of time. The illustrations are in typical black face. Not drawing a black person is a black person but drawing them as a monkey painted black as you would see in old vaudeville acts. Completely inappropriate. Then add the language barriers, and how none of these black characters speak proper English. It’s all broken or comical, or made to show more differences then should be relevant. Then add the white saviorism. Tintin has gone to the Congo to write about his adventures with the great apes and acts like an unneeded hero. Whether it’s fighting lions, riding crocodiles, or saving a group from a different man, Tintin wants to be the hero. I know this book is a product of its time, but this is not one a library should have on their shelves, unless the library specifically keeps collections of old children’s books for purposes of study. Tintin can do better. This book has been banned. I agree with the ban in this case. There are better books and better characters. ( )

More or less the same as the previous book. Well, story-wise, it's certainly an improvement: there are regular characters, and Tintin's actually able to stay in one place for more than 2 pages. The art also improved considerably compared to the previous book: I didn't bother mentioning this in my previous review, but I kept a couple of funny snippets of Tintin poorly drawn. His beady, stupid-looking eyes, and all those wibbly jigs he'd start doing. They were less apparent in this novel (a mixed blessing all things considered).

But, even with all these quality-of-life improvements, I can't say it was an enjoyable read. Especially with the um, the um, well, to be fair nothing about Africa was exactly portrayed positively in the '30s.

All in all, a rather poor point in history, with an unexceptional story to boot. ( )

I'm expecting this one to be even more racist than the last! Woo, colonialism!

***

Wow, painful! Even expecting the racial caricatures, this one was just too much. Also, the plot was so much thinner than later adventures and much closer to Soviets than in America. ( )