The Boston Globe from Boston, Massachusetts • 87

THE BOSTON SUNDAY GLOBE NOVEMBER 10, 1996 Interview ym pattern your life after? A. My mother and father. No question about it, especially my father. He was my role model. He was hard-working, Christian, always upbeat and optimistic.

He never limited himself to his surroundings. He was never bothered by it. He simply worked hard enough to move away. The same thing about my mother. She was the glue of the family.

She was totally supportive of whatever I wanted to be. As I grew up, I loved Joe Louis. I loved what he did for the collective self-esteem of black folks. nating affirmative action, in California was an angry white reaction to tlx Simpson verdict? A. Maybe there are some people out there really hard-core about teaching blacks a lesson.

But let me tell you something. That anti-affirmative action law was going to pass anyway. These conservative sentiments were present long before the Simpson case. And anyone who didn't see that coming is not being totally honest. The whole affirmative action debate is ludicrous.

Black people are not asking for any hand ''KWMjS WiTtillllTlTMiaittflMftvaiiitii'ir-iillii 1 1 MfMtm 'For those who told us that police brutality was an aberration, the Lord sent the Rodney King video. For those who told us that police manufacturing evidence and lying on the stand were aberrations, the Lord sent us the Furhman tapes. For those who told us that racism at major corporations is an aberration, the Lord sends us the Texaco tapes. The country must get out of this comfort zone of denial and deal with things which are far from being Then when Jackie Robinson came along, he became my hero. After that, Thurgood Marshall.

Q. How has, your life clmnged since 0. J. A. Obviously, I have received more attention, more notoriety.

It gives me a forum to talk about race in America and race within the criminal justice system. It also gives me a chance to talk with young people about being an advocate of the system and trying to make a difference at a time when it's popular to say that those accused of crimes have too many rights. I explain to them that if the system doesn't work for one of us, then it doesn't work for any of us. Q. What is your response to criticisms that you played the "race card" during the Simpson trial? A.

The race card is a demeaning term for a number of reasons. But let me say this: We played a credibility card. Let's be honest. What am I supposed to do, not go after a witness who was a liar or a out or any special treatment. We want the opportunity.

And the notion that white males are suffering in this country is preposterous. They have 95 percent of the top management jobs in coporate America. I'm never going to believe that. Its baloney. Q.

How does a such a godly man work in such a godless profession? A. There is a much more consistency than people think. No matter what, you still try to do the right thing. Let me give you an example. I very much believe in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, where it talks about things like "All men are created equal endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Sometimes I stop and think, "Wait a minute, which Creator are they talking about?" The fram-ers of that wonderful document used that langugae but then turned around and had slaves.

I deal all GLOBE STAFF PHOTO TOM HERDE Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. talks to students at Harvard Law School Thursday 'Competence comes in all colors' Johnnie Cochran simply believes in God and hungers for justice As the lead defense lawyer in the 0. J. Simpson trial, Johnnie Cochran Jr.

received international attention and secured his standing as one of the highest profile lawyers in the country. But long before Simpson, Cochran had built a successful firm, handling not only the cases of celebrities such as Michael Jackson, Snoop Doggy Dog and Queen La-tifah, but of countless young black men who had brought brutality cases against the Los Angeles Police Department. Cochran details his life and work in a new book "Journey to Justice" (Ballantine, $26), in which he describes his upbringing in the Deep South and his work defending often voiceless citizens against the police. He also offers a behind-the-scenes look at the Simpson trial. Cochran talked last week with the Globe's Howard Manly over lunch at Harvard Law School.

The following is an edited version of their conversation. Q. Given all the books about the 0. J. Simpson trial, what did you want to accomplish in yours? A.

First of all, I didn't want anyone else defining my life or, worse, having my work reduced at my funeral to a sound bite such as "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." I wanted to talk about about my 33-plus years of being an advocate for the system. I thought there were some principles that all Americans needed to be reminded of, things like the Bill of Rights, the US Constitution. Those things were here a long time before the 0. J. Simpson trial.

They were not devised for him. He was simply representative of any of us that were -unfor was before Simpson. What the Simpson case did was reveal the stuff that had been swept under the carpet. Now, whites and blacks are not going to be able to coalesce around the Simpson verdict. What we can coalesce around is the fact that two Americas, one white, one black, looked at the same evidence and saw something entirely different based on their life experiences.

That is something that we as a nation should be talking about. If there is going to be moral leadership in this country, the Simpson case provides an opportunity for change. It is not enough to criticize the Simpson case. We have to take the next step and find some common ground. W.

E. B. Du Bois said it back in 1903, that the problem of the 20th century would be the problem of the color line. He was right but, unfortunately, race will be the problem of the 21st century, too. The majority of Americans are in denial, and denial is no cure.

So unless we can talk about it and confront it, we will always have the same problem. And this is where Providence comes in. For those who told us that police brutality was an aberration, the Lord sent the Rodney King video. For those who told us that police manufacturing evidence and lying on the stand were aberrations, the Lord sent us the Furhman tapes. For those who told us that racism at major corporations is an aberration, the Lord sends us the Texaco tapes.

The country must get out of this comfort zone of denial and deal with things which are far from being aberrations. Q. Do you think, as some have argued, that recent passage of Prop 209, a measure elimi tunate enough to be on the criminal docket. But there are these principles, among which is advocacy. I am an advocate, which means that you stand for something or, as Dr.

Martin Luther King Jr. says, "you fall for anything." Another thing that I wanted to do is show that there was a lot more that the defense team tried to do in this case than a lot of people were willing to give us credit for. We had an actual strategy. We had a lifetime of battling forces of injustice. Quite frankly, you have to understand the Los Angeles Police Department, and the things that they were capable of, to understand why the department was such a vital part of our defense.

The last thing I wanted people to know was that competence comes in all colors with no respect to race, age or gender. I wanted everyone to know that a person could be black and lead the defense team and strategize and use our minds. One of the things that I am most proud of is that black professionals come up to me and say that the country will never again see black professionals as stumbling and bumbling caricatures. In my case, people may not love me, or they may not agree with me, but they respect me. The best compliment people have paid me is saying, "I don't know if I like Johnnie Cochran, but if I am in trouble, I want him to defend me." Q.

What did the trial do for the racial climate in America? A. The 0. J. Simpson trial and verdict didn't create racial tensions here. The church bombings, for instance, were before Simpson.

The attack on affirmative action department known for its incompetence? If anything, we played a history card. And what is particularly galling about that ci.irge is that it came from Shapiro, who brought up the issue in the first place. Q. What is next for Johnnie Cochran? A. I'll go back to practicing law.

Quite frankly, as a Christian, it's much more gratifying to do civil stuff. The rewards that come from a civil case transcend an individual defendant. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing more basic than defending someone. But if you defend one guy, it's great for that one guy. But if you can do something systemwide, like eliminate choke-holds by the LAPD, then you are really doing the Lord's work.

I might also try to combine my practice with some form of work in the communications field. I've talked about the media a lot. So I want to do my part to bring a different perspective to the media. I want to lead by example and show them about things like "objectivity." And besides, if you can't beat them, join them. the time with these internal contradictions.

What I have found is that in the toughest of times, I can count on the Man upstairs. I can't count on Robert Shapiro or Robert Kardashian. I know I have someone in my corner who I can count on. The Lord walks with you, talks with you and tells you that you are going the right way. Even during the trial, I could feel it as a Christian that there were things about to happen.

For instance, the finding of the tapes. Only God could have done that. Fellow Simpson lawyer F. Lee Bailey had asked all these questions about the use of racial epithets by Furhman between 1985 and 1995, and lo and behold, we find these tapes that are between 1985 and 1995. You can't tell me that God didn't have a hand in that.

My belief in God has kept me humble. That is why on bad days I never get too down, and on good days I never get too excited. I know it's a continuum. Q. As a child, you grew up in Louisiana during the days of Jim Crow.

Whom did The comics fading to gray screen. Another factor contributing to the anemic state of contemporary daily comics is the propensity of newspapers to target their "product" at readers much in the way that politicians use focus groups to pander to constituents' so-called "needs." Daily comic strips are regularly subjected to popularity polls to determine who reads what. Too often, as a result of low numbers, an interesting or controversial strip will be dropped. Editors and publishers who lament their narrowing readership are only contributing to this trend by choosing to target, even on the comics pages, the lowest common denominator. Not everybody has to like "Doonesbury" for it to have a valid spot on the comics (or, in many cases, the editorial) page.

Is the idea of diversity only to be en-courged in other areas? Recognizing that one person's "Beetle Bailey" is another's "Bizarro" can only be healthy for the survival of the species. Outside-the-mainstream comics could actually help to bring back those demographically treasured under-fortysome-things, who flip channels now the way they used to flip newspaper pages. Of course, compelling comics on newsprint do exist For the most part, though, they're found in the pages weeklies, not dailies. Strips such as "Julius Knipl, Rea Estate Photographer" (Ben Katchor), "Troubletown' (Lloyd Dangle), "Story Minute" (Carol Lay), "Life ii Hell" (Matt Groening) and "Red Meat" (Max Cannon are all noteworthy examples. There was a time about 10 years ago when i seemed possible strips like these could find their wa into daily syndication.

But through a combination syndicate timidity and cartoonists' lack of faith in th flexibility of the daily strip world, not much happened There are a few lively, well- drafted dailies bobbinj bravely in a sea of blandness. "Mutts" (Patrick McDon nell) stands out, as does the venerable "Doonesbury (Garry Trudeau) and the occasionally adventurous "Bi zarro" (Dan Piraro). These and a few others are, howev er, exceptions to the rule. Can readers drifting toward brain death from om too many "Garfields" ever be expected to enjoy th charms and subtleties of the quirky Katchor? Odie cai rest easy on the daily comics page. He won't be seeini competition from the likes of Julius Knipl for a long long time.

And that's too bad. reward the reader. Unfortunately, both cartoonist and reader have gone a bit flabby over the decades. Does it have to be that way? Perhaps, with competition from video games, CD-ROMS, special effects movies and plain old TV, comic strips are fighting an uphill battle for attention. On top of that, they play out their role in the archaic print medium, soon to be relegated to the communications boneyard, according to conventional wisdom.

But in this case, wisdom is not necessarily true. Just as the automobile did not replace the bicycle, the over-hyped Internet will not replace newspapers. Newspapers will simply adapt to a different purpose. "Slate," the on-line electronic magazine, recently came out with "Slate on Paper," a real newsstand magazine. Why? Because people like print.

Not to mention the fact that Slate cartoonist Mark Alan Stamaty's strip looks a lot better on paper than it does flickering on a computer COMICS Continued from Page Dl host of other classic strips from the teens to the 1950s. Does a contemporary strip such as "Cathy" (Cathy Guisewite) draw our eye to its spot on the page? Do the characters come alive in the way characters from good fiction or film do? Or are they simply caricatures of life, flat, stereotyped and two-dimensional? Some of today's comic strip readers get what they deserve. Long since psychically kidnapped by the gaudy, mindlessly hyperactive world of TV, they no longer demand or expect comic strips to be compelling, challenging, or even interesting. Enter "Cathy." And "Dilbert." Sure, comics are still funny. It's just that the humor has almost no nutritional value.

In the tiny space alloted to them, daily strips have all too successfully adapted to their environment. In this Darwinian setup, what thrives are simply drawn panels, minimal dialogue and a lot of head-and-shoulder shots. Anything BE XT-SELLER PRINCIPLE" "Sit -rteFuH win 6ET AWIPJJ LAuV, CUflCLM NW. AW aSAUi i HW ACE Lira ufu THE OAV. i UH I more complicated is deemed too hard to read." A full, rich drawing style is a drawback.

Simplicity, even crudity, rules. And when the graphics have been dumbed down, the writing follows in short order. What we're left with is the depleted shell of a once-vibrant medium. Comics is a language. It's a language most people understand intuitively.

If cartoonists use a large and varied language to entertain their readers, those readers will usually come along for the ride. It's not a problem of the audience's expectations having been hopelessly lowered but of the cartoonists' ambitions needing a boost. Even within the geography imposed on them today, comic strips can be more than filler. Given the user-friendly, low-tech intimacy of the printed page, the newspaper comic strip still has the potential to involve and What does the future look like for the dail, strip on the centenary of its birth? Som among them many comics syndicate execu tives, believe the brave new world of comic will have an exclusive on-line address. Forge about the chore of having to visually scan th comics page for your favorite strip (and, pei haps, not finding it there).

Just click on "Pe nuts" with your trusty mouse and catch up Charlie Brown's latest trials and tribulations. But what will be lost in that rosy scenario i what's already disappearing as digital suf plants analog the gestalt of the comics pagei the fun of 30 or so different (one would hop art styles vying for the viewer's attention. I the best of all possible daily strip would be a genuine kick to see Akhbar and Je (from "Life in give Dilbert a run for hi money..