I've been thinking, and I think that why diversity of characters in superhero comics is SO very important to it's fans, possibly above other genres even, is because only in the genre of superhero comics can every character be THE hero.
I'm not just saying A hero. I'm saying THE hero :D
In, say, a generic fictional story, being silly, or being cute, or being a woman, or being a minority, or being a wise cracking character, would make you a supporting character. That character would be used for a specific role, and although they may expand the role, the story ultimately runs through the main character.
However, in superhero comics, this isn't the case. The Flash may not be the top hero in the Justice League next to Superman, but in his own book, he is THE hero. It's HIS book, and the hero of it. He fights, he wins or he loses, and everything runs through him.
Same with Blue Beetle. Or Booster Gold. Or Supergirl.
This allows us to associate and become whichever character we feel a strong connection to, who we understand, who we want to become, or wish we were. And it allows us to be the hero, no matter WHO or WHAT we are. Whether we're male or female, gay or straight, black or white. Whether we're intelligent and quiet, or loud and obnoxious, or quick-witted and flighty, we are never the side character relegated to cute remarks, or smart-alecky jokes, or being the love interest to be rescued.
That's why diversity is important. That's why treating every hero like a HERO and not treating some heroes like objects of desire first and heroes second, is important. It's why having strong female heroes of different personalities and types is important. It's why it's important to have black heroes and gay heroes and scientist heroes and big boned heroes. It's why a Jaime Reyes is just as important as a Clark Kent.
Because there's somebody out there who sees himself or herself in the hero. And what you do to that hero, you do to them too. Because in this genre, being flighty and silly and inappropriate and witty doesn't make you comic relief... it makes you The Flash.
And when you disregard a character. When you just treat them like a nuisance, killing them off and then ignoring the death, or having them do things they would never do without a good reason, or just treating them like some bit player, it angers people. Because to the writer Supergirl might just be the ditzy blonde they hated in school, or Batgirl might just be a tool to make Robin look good, but to their fans, to us, they are who we want to be, they're the S on our chest when we take off our shirt. They make us feel that hey, we too can be heroes when it comes down to it, that really, anybody can be a hero without having to imagine ourselves as totally different.
I don't have to become Superman in my mind to be a hero and change the way I act or the who I am. I have other characters who are just as much a hero, and who are more like me. :)
And that's why superheroes are so powerful and lasting. It's why even though people always predict the end of comics, they persist, and why fans care about the characters and what happens to them.
It's also important because these fans are the ones who buy the books. And it's important to keep in mind that just because Supergirl is a blonde girl doesn't mean that the only people who care about her are guys who want her as a girlfriend.
The point is that ideally, superheroes are US. They're the BEST of us. And the great thing is that each of them is THE hero and not just a side character. B-list or C-list of F-list, they're A-list in their own adventures, regardless of their race, creed, gender, personality or sexuality.
And that's why diversity is important. Not just superficially, but also in terms of personality and in terms of background. And it's why respecting the characters is important too. It's why heroes should be treated equally. Not in that none of them should ever die or be harmed, but that they not be used as casual plot pieces and then shrugged off or forgotten.
Is that really so much to ask for an industry that depends on sustained fan readership and for a fanbase that associates strongly with its heroes?
I might have to be a damsel in distress everywhere else, but when I open my comic book, I'm Supergirl and I can save the world. :D
All I'm asking for is to give us all a chance to wear the S on our chests because we're all worthy of it. :)
Friday, May 04, 2007
I am not a plot device
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
That’s why I’ve dropped most of my superhero comics. The writers and editors just use the “lesser” characters as plot devices, as you said, to killed off or abused for their own ends. When they killed off Jack of Hearts, after they turned him into a big jerk, I said this is it and I solely pulled away because I didn’t like the trend. These jokers think that fans are only invested in the really big heroes, and can’t see the potential of the smaller guys (and gals). With all the rape, murder, and radioactive jizz, I think I’ve been proven correct. Denny O’Neil said about killing off Robin, that he didn’t realize the general public would get so mad, until he recognized that he and other writers are stewards of mythology.
But there is one thing we readers have to remember: these heroes are corporate properties. The comic folks do not have any responsibilities to the fans, only to their stockholders. If you don’t like what they’re doing, vote with your bucks. That’s the only way it will change. I’m only following one regular Marvel title myself, She-Hulk. They’ve driven me away, maybe for good. I read in a past issue of the Comics Journal that it is foolish to emotionally invest yourself in corporate properties because corporations will always let you down. Check out smaller companies and creator owned stuff. They actually care about their products because the little guys own them.
Swinebread's totally right. I felt that about Batgirl... why should we invest our emotions in these characters when the corporations only want our money? The smaller presses... the ones with independent creators who are emotionally connected to their own stories... are the way to go.
That's how literature is anyway. If comics really want to be taken seriously, they'd dump the monthlies and go to a more novelesque format. Let creators create. Have stories with definite endings. Have characters grow and change. Care about them rather than the marketing schema.
Real books are written by a single author, or perhaps by two. They care about the characters and they have a definite story to tell. Corporate comics are done by well-meaning hacks at the mercy of trademark and brand protection. Ultimately, the stories are meaningless attempts to follow marketplace trends... reversed on a whim when profitability demands.
Screw Marvel and DC. I'm done with them, except for reprints. And my own stories. Bring on the smaller press stuff! Maggie and Hopey have never disappointed me.
Also... Amy, you're right. Everything you wrote here is dead solid right. Nice!
Why should being female make you a less central character (unless it's "Wonder Woman" or "Birds of Prey") and just the support structure of some noble male character?
I don't have to necessarily identify with the characters or imagine myself as the characters to enjoy the story. But a good story does allow you to mask yourself and it doesn't matter the gender or sexual orientation. It's a matter of human empathy.
I do hate how the main characteristic of Batgirl now is to make Robin look badass. Or to provide Adam Beechen with a punching bag to work out his own pathetic frustrations.
I think this all goes back to a discussion I had with comic artist Charles Yokam a little while back. In the end we came to the thought that comics should be put into two classifications: "Comics as art" and "Comics as product."
"Comics as product" is what you should expect from mainstream corporate comics. Sure, they might be exciting and interesting to you for a while, but that isn't the goal of the work. It's there to promote concepts and icons for marketability. Granted, they CAN end up doing more, but it isn't something to be EXPECTED, nor is it the focus of the work. While "Comics as product" will always have a fanbase, it will always ever be a shifting thing, dictated by the market, profitability and pop culture of the times.
Ami used the example of Supergirl in her rant here, which is a perfect example of what "Comics as product" is all about. She finds the current Supergirl in bad taste (to put it mildly). But then, she may not be the target audience of the work. Looking at how the current Supergirl is depicted, she is obviously being aimed at the current "tween" crowd. The same ones who idolize the non-panty wearing, alcohol abusing, sex tape making lives of real life stars Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and Lindsey Lohan. I'd bet that Ami looks on those girls with the same kind of disdain she does the current Supergirl (although, I could be wrong). All of which proves the point that the current Supergirl is not being aimed at her type of audience/mentality. And this goes for pretty much any mainstream corporate comics. They will always roll with the times and profitability. If you have disdain for how some of your past favorite series and characters are represented today, odds are you have the same type of disdain for pretty much most of the entertainment media and pop culture of today. In short, the comics don't reach you, because they aren't being aimed at you (despite how it might appear sometimes).
(sidenote: It also explains why the book's editor was confused and dismayed at why more females aren't reading the series, since it's being aimed at the tween crowd of today, who look up to this type of behavior, which the current Supergirl is showing.)
"Comics as art" is more in the lines of mass media mainstream or non-mainstream works. Stuff like Bone, Blankets, Scott Pilgrim and the like. These are works aimed at a very specific audience or done in a way to cover as many possible marketplaces as they can. The work will always reflect the thoughts and ideas of the creator(s) and not much else. This is why most "Comics as art" never seem to get a lot of marketability, because that isn't the main purpose of them. Their main goal is to tell the story that the creative minds involved want to tell.
What we need to do, is not only accept these different classifications of comics, but also understand that each has it's place and role within the greater comic marketplace. They are both needed, as they do vastly different things for the comic marketplace. We need to stop trying to bend one side to be like the other and accept that as times change, we might not change enough with them to be a part of both side of the marketplace. And instead of berating one side for not being what we wish it to be, we should strive to look within the marketplace for the work which does fit our tastes. There is a vast amount of work out there, looking for someone to reading, be they "Comics as art" or "Comics as product." Rather than rail against what we don't like, we should spend that time looking harder for what we DO like. And, if there isn't enough (or any) work that does that, then we should think about perhaps creating our own. That's what some of the past legends of the industry did. Should we do any less, simply because we have the privilage of their sacrifices and foresight that's given us the current marketplace?
No, we certainly "are not a plot device." But neither are we owed or due having enterianment geared towards us, through the concepts and icon we want them from. If what you have doesn't work for you, you try something new until you find one that does. And if, by chance, you can't, then you make it yourself. That's not only the American spirit at work, that's also life.
Just some food for thought....
Hi James :)
While I appreciate the comment, it feels like that's a rant in your own journal, esp since you keep referring to me in the third person >.>;;;
Neways! :D Why does it have to be one or the other? Why does everything always have to be extreme in one direction or another?
How come some men feel like if women dun have EEE breasts then they'll be fat and ugly? Why do some people feel that art isn't entertainment and vice versa?
Can't you make money AND be intelligent?
Can't you make characters that are actual characters rather than a gimmick?
Yus, you can! :D
Lots of mainstream characters are like that and lots of mainstream comics are intelligent and interesting!
Dini's Batman for instance is an entertaining AND deep character. He's not just dark and brooding to appeal to dark and brooding teens or nething. He's very relatable and also very interesting :D
Plus the stories are good!
Why is it unreasonable to expect mainstream comics to be interesting?
How come there's always an idea that mainstream HAS to be vapid and indie HAS to be intelligent?
And how come if I want a mix of both, I'm told to go die in a fire? :(
Supergirl's not being marketted to NEBODY right now!
My argument is that heroes should be HEROES first. You can still target people and demographics. But when you target them, you have to remember that this is about them being a hero, not about them just having powers :D
I like partying too :D And I'm a shopaholic XDDD But does that mean I'd be mean and selfish and angry all the time? No >.>;;; How come I can't be a hero?
The purpose of my post was to explain why superhero comics are important, not to criticize them for being unimportant. :| And in a way also why mainstream comics are important, cuz not everybody rly wants to read indie comics for a variety of reasons.
Why is it always one or the other?
And why do both sides always insist on making you choose?
I like what I like. :) I've never been able to get into Indie comics and I still read DC cuz I LIKE the stories there, I like the universe, and I like the characters. Most of the time XD Sometimes they're not so good.
But my post was about why they're important and just some things to keep in mind :)
James is right. Pack up the blogs everyone, feedback does nothing.
Well, that would be an overreaction. There are a few problems with James' comment though. First, he seems to be making the mistake of attributing to corporations perfect knowledge of what is profitable. Now, maybe I am mistaken and they actually do have teams of diviners working non-stop to maximise profit but I rather doubt it. They may even be able to increase their profit by listening to the feedback of their customers - what they like, don't like, would like, that sort of silly thing.
Another, more serious problem: Taking James' advice and accepting the situation as it is would ask us all to become passive, uncritical consumers and stifle discussion. Not only would this deprive creators of the chance to learn what their audience is after (they might know how many people are purchasing their stories but they will not know how think it could be better if only...), we would also lose the conversations stimulated by this criticism which if nothing else can serve to deepen our appreciation and understanding of the comics that are being punished.
The other problem is, James writes as if he is lecturing an invisible class and does not actually address the people in the conversation. It is really quite off-putting and can easily put people's backs up. I agree with you Ami, this sort of comment is better suited to being posted in his own blog.
Oh. One last thing, actually. I was not aware innovation and initiative had been patented by Americans. Won't the rest of the world be surprised when they discover they have to pay a fee to use them!
Wow, who've have thought a little personal knowledge and supposition about the working of the different classifications of comics would lead to this? Anyway....
Why does it have to be one or the other? Why does everything always have to be extreme in one direction or another?
Well, Ami, the shortest answer I can give to that is simply this: Because "Comics as product" and "Comics as art" have a completely different set of goals. And to try and force one to be more like the other just doesn't work for this reason.
This is why no matter what a critical darling a "Comic as product" is, if it fails to make profitability, it stops being made. "Comics as art", though, have been known to continue one, even if they don't make a profit, simply because the creative force behind them wants the property to exist, even if they make no monetary gain (or even suffer a monetary loss, in some cases).
That isn't to say that these two classifications haven't intersected at times throughout the marketplace's history, but to EXPECT, DEMAND, or feel we are OWED it, is just wrong. We are owed nothing. No from the corporations who own many of the well-known icons, or from the creator who's works two jobs just to have the money to put out his work once in a while. Entertainment isn't a right. It isn't a freedom under the law. And since none of us own the concepts and icons we might enjoy from time to time, there is truly little we can do to change that. A harsh truth, but it's one we must learn to accept.
Why is it unreasonable to expect mainstream comics to be interesting?
But "interesting" to who? What is the standard for what equals interesting? Who gets to make the rules for that?
See, that's the trick here. You are using your own tastes as the measuring stick for EVERYONE (whether you mean to or not), and that's where so many folks go wrong.
For example, I thought Civil War was a train-wreak of a jumbled and ill-conceived mess. Yet, it sold like crazy. No matter how late it ran, or how poorly constructed the plot was. Going by how I felt, no one should have liked it (and going by what I saw written on many blogs, it would seem i was right), but obviously that isn't the case. There were way more people who did find it interesting (for whatever reason). And just because I can't find a reason for why they did, doesn't negate that. It might simply be as easy as "I'm not the target audience" for the work. Whatever the case, no matter how I personally felt about it, Civil War was interesting to many, as the sales figures point out. And that's all that "Comics as product" is going to look at. Not the emotional pleas and rationale of long time fans like me. Just how well it sells.
So, it's not unreasonable to want "Comics as product" to be interesting. It IS unreasonable, though, to expect that what WE think is interesting is what THEY need to think is interesting. Unless we are the one working on the comic, that's just not something that is going to happen.
I hope that explains it more for you. Now for tricia...
James is right. Pack up the blogs everyone, feedback does nothing.
I never said that. But feedback, espeically in the case of "Comics as product" is little more than someone on the street walking up to you and giving you advice. Sure, they can do that, they might even make a good point, but you are under no obligation to do as they say. This is no different. That's why I've always been of the mind that people who want to blog would be better served to promote and talk about what they like, over what they hate. It's very difficult (if not impossible) to change what you hate from the outside. But it is very easy to help to promote what you DO like and help allow it to continue to be produced for your (and others) enjoyment.
First, he seems to be making the mistake of attributing to corporations perfect knowledge of what is profitable.
I never said they had "perfect knowledge of what is profitable." I said that "Comics as product" being profitable is the main goal above all else. Sometimes, what they think is right won't be. The DC implosion in the 1970's is proof of that. So is the demise of CrossGen Comics (to use a more recent example). But the fact is, they will go where they see profitability. And no matter how much some might gripe about what they are doing to get it, as long as it keeps coming in, they will not change a thing. This is why the biggest power a fan has is to "vote with their dollar."
Granted, it's not a perfect solution. You and some others might drop a book, but it still won't change for a long time (or maybe even not at all). But that's just the chance you have to take.
Taking James' advice and accepting the situation as it is would ask us all to become passive, uncritical consumers and stifle discussion.
Again, I said nothing of the kind. Yes, I do feel way too much time, energy and money is wasted trying to force one of the classificiations of comics to be more like that other, but that hardly prevents thoughtful and meaningful discussion.
Every time you try a new work, there's always the chance of not liking it. And if you didn't, feel free to let me (and everyone) know why, with thoughtful and critical analysis. However, what i see more time than not, is overly demanding fans, complaining about a series or group of series, which they haven't enjoyed in quite some time (if they ever did to begin with), who speak, not to provide critical analysis for creators and other consumers, but merely to vent their own over-inflated sense of fan entitlement to works which don't belong to them and they have no control in changing.
How much is wasted with such fruitless ventures, when they could spend that time and money looking for works they DO like and could help to promote to others who might enjoy them? Or, heaven forbid, they take the gumption to actually create an original work of their own, to show everyone what they think is needed in comics.
The other problem is, James writes as if he is lecturing an invisible class and does not actually address the people in the conversation.
That's because I was merely giving my thoughts on this, as I related it from another story. As this should show, i have no problem engaging a person one-on-one. I just didn't think that was the rule, though.
I was not aware innovation and initiative had been patented by Americans.
Why do you insist on trying to put words in my mouth? I never said any such thing. I only mention "American spirit", because I'm American and that's also where the vest majority of the comic industry originated. There's really nothing neferious in what I've said.
I agree with you Ami, this sort of comment is better suited to being posted in his own blog.
Sorry, been there, done that. My blog now is only for having fun and pretty much by use of visiuals only. Stop by and check it out: http://coverbycover.blogspot.com
:(
James, I rly dun appreciate the condescending "everything I say is the truth" tone :(
And honestly, I can't agree with your cynicism :(
Also I was merely explaining why superheroes are so meaningful to ppl not saying that everything should be a certain way :)
Also James, plz dun use my blog as your own personal soap box :( I know you dun like doing it on your own blog, but that's your choice :\
I agree with you Trish :)
Esp when in mediums like comics and books, you have creators themselves visiting blogs and being very active in the fan communities (like Gail Simone :D), it's def not useless to talk :D In general it never is tho :D
Plus we pay for comics XD
*big hugs* :)
Also part of the fun with comics is being able to discuss what we liked and didn't like about them with others :D
Hi Swine! :D
I guess I just can't feel that down on mainstream comics XD
I've never rly been able to get into the smaller press :( I just haven't... nothing there rly grabs me... :\
Considering how often I say how much I LIKE mainstream superhero comics, I'm shocked that ppl keep accusing me of not liking them :(
Hi Joel! :D
I'm glad you actually read something in my post outside of "comics should be good" XD
B/c the post was mainly about how superhero comics offer the unique opportunity for all types of people to be heroes in their own book :D
Why should being a certain race, creed, sexuality or gender limit your role in a story? :O
*hugs*
I'm also glad you're around cuz I thought you died XD
James, I rly dun appreciate the condescending "everything I say is the truth" tone :(
Sorry you feel that way, Ami. I thought I was merely providing a viewpoint you might not have thought about or considered. I never claimed everything I said is the truth, but I do feel there are truths in it, which are often overlooked by many. I'm sorry if you felt that was condesending, since I was really trying not to be that way.
Also James, plz dun use my blog as your own personal soap box :(
Again, sorry you feel that way. I didn't think I was doing that. My first post wasn't much longer than Joel's was. And my second ran long, because I was personally responding to your and tricia's comments to me (something you both complained about my lack of in my first comment).
I feel I'm getting very mixed signals here. You first say you appreciate my comments, but then say I'm condesending (even though there is no personal insults or attacks made towards anyone in them). You complain about me not addressing you personally in my comments, then tell me not to act like this is my "soap box" when I do. If you'd rather I just didn't comment, please just say so. It's your blog, I'll respect your wishes. I don't like to be around where I'm not welcome or wanted.
Also I was merely explaining why superheroes are so meaningful to ppl not saying that everything should be a certain way :)
Well, I guess it's MY turn to disagree with YOU. You did do that. Just look:
"That's why treating every hero like a HERO and not treating some heroes like objects of desire first and heroes second, is important."
"It's why heroes should be treated equally. Not in that none of them should ever die or be harmed, but that they not be used as casual plot pieces and then shrugged off or forgotten."
"All I'm asking for is to give us all a chance to wear the S on our chests because we're all worthy of it."
All of these comments are certainly suggesting that superhero comics need to be done a certain way. I know this might not be the whole point you were out to make, but some of your comments do have you stating how things need to be/should be done.
But there's nothing wrong with having those opinions. You are entitled to them, just as much as I am mine. I just don't think I'd call you condesending, just because I didn't agree with them, though.
I can't agree with your cynicism
That's fine. I take issue with you, as i don't think my comments have truly been cynical, merely realistic in how the comic marketplace operates, but I have no problem with you not agreeing. Given what you originally wrote, I very much doubted you would. As I said in my original comments here, it was merely "food for thought." And I still stand by the belief that it remains so. Your miles my vary. :)
Hi James. You sure picked an odd place to complain about excessive negativity. When I read Ami's post it seems to me she is talking about something positive she likes about comics and saying she would like to see more of that.
Now, I hope you are not going to play that game where every time someone talks about the meaning of what you say rather than the exact order and words you typed you claim "but I never said that!" I know you can do better than that. :-)
For example, when you respond to a post like this by saying that we as the customer have no right to expect a company to pay attention to what we want (or want more of) and that we should instead find someone who is already putting out what we (Ami is plural now!) want, or to make it ourselves, then yes, it does seem as though you wish to see an end to criticism. If anyone is not completely happy with what is being offered? Go away. Make it yourself. But keep it to yourself. This comic is not for you.
Strictly literally you are correct. No company owes us entertainment, certainly not in any sense where it will be dissolved if Ami gives it enough negative reviews. And voting with our dollars can be effective, though as you said often not immediately and maybe not at all, but Ami is also right that the creators of comics do seem to spend a fair bit of time reading and responding to blog posts talking about their work. If they are reading our criticism how does it make sense to stop, especially when it is as positive as Ami's?
Back on the topic of distortions of what was said, the very first part of my comment, which you quote, I immediately after noted that that would be an excessive reaction to what you said, but that there were still problems with your comment. Perhaps I expressed myself poorly, I apologise. In fact, the stance I have since taken reads much closer to the phrase I took back (though it still falls short of it), so I apologise doubly for what now looks like a trap.
And besides. This blog is not written for you. It is written for me. And I like it just fine. :-P
I dun want my posts to turn into the type of back and forth arguments where ppl are politely being mean to each other that seems to happen on a lot of blogs :(
And I'm worried that's what's gonna happen :(
So if I see that happening I'm just gonna delete it (this applies to everybody XD) :\
And James, I dun think you rly understand what I was saying XD But that's okay :D
As ppl keep saying, I'm kinda hard to understand! :D
That is all.
Hi Ami! *hugs* Sorry I was so rude earlier as to ignore you. I do agree, criticism and discussion are fun and it is rather wonderful that so many authors and comic creators are so accessible thanks to the internet.
Personally, I also think Superman should wear his cape fringed with pink fur and if my demands are not met I shall fill his socks with kryptonite. ([:
*hugs Trish back* :D
It's ok :)
You ARE one of the ppl I started blogging for tho, so I'm glad you're around :)
Superman in pink would be cute XDD But Batman might not evar want to hang around him again tho :(
For example, when you respond to a post like this by saying that we as the customer have no right to expect a company to pay attention to what we want (or want more of) and that we should instead find someone who is already putting out what we (Ami is plural now!) want, or to make it ourselves, then yes, it does seem as though you wish to see an end to criticism.
Ah, I think I see the issue here. You think I mean you are never to say a cross word about a comic. That if you didn't like something, you just keep quiet and move on.
I can see that maybe I didn't clarify my point enough, for which I'm sorry. I'm not talking about an end to you reading an issue or two of a title, which didn't happen enjoy, and gave thoughtful criticisms of why you think it failed. What i want an end of is the over-blown sense of fan entitlement, which causes a person to continue to buy a book they already know they hate, as soon as they see the names of the creators on the cover, who then fire up their blog to blast the book and its creators with the constant stream of bile and venom. Something you see a lot of on many blogs.
It is that type of mentality which needs to end, as how helpful is it to a creator, to be told that they "suck" every month? And the only way for that type of behavior to end, is for folks to accept that, at some point, you just have to admit that a work isn't meant for you and move on to something else you might have a chance at enjoying.
Does this clarify things? I hope so, because i'm really trying to make sure my point is getting across.
Ami is also right that the creators of comics do seem to spend a fair bit of time reading and responding to blog posts talking about their work. If they are reading our criticism how does it make sense to stop, especially when it is as positive as Ami's?
Yes, they do read them sometimes. But then you have the other end of the spectrum. Creators who's extremely limited or stop altogether the time they spend online, because of constant negativity being slung at them, over nothing more than a work of fiction.
I know you might bring up that they are being 'thin-skinned", but lets be honest here, how many comic bloggers aren't NEARLY as positive in their criticisms as Ami is here? Furthermore, how many of us would buckle under a near daily hail of insults and overtly-negative criticisms, by people who probably should have stopped reading the work a long time ago, given how they seem to feel?
I wish most people did criticisms like Ami does. Sadly, though, the reality of it is that she's much more the exception, than the rule. Quality criticisms are a very precious commodity. Not the least of which is because they aren't as plentiful as the OTHER kinds.
I'm not some mindless bufoon (no comments from the peanut gallery, either! ;)). I noted that if you were reading a new series or trying something out for a few issue and didn't like it, that some thoughtful criticisms are something even I would welcome. But that's not what needs to end. It's the blie-spewing from the haters, who should have the common sense to know they probably shouldn't be reading that book and move on to something else they might like. That's what my comments are addressing here.
Perhaps I expressed myself poorly, I apologise. In fact, the stance I have since taken reads much closer to the phrase I took back (though it still falls short of it), so I apologise doubly for what now looks like a trap.
It's okay. Given the limitations of online communications, misunderstandings are bound to happen. I try not to take them too personally when they do. And as i said, perhaps I didn't clarify my own meanings, either, so mistakes have probably been made on both sides. Hopefully now, though, we can all see where the other person is coming from and that no one is out to stomp on anyone else's opinions.
And besides. This blog is not written for you. It is written for me. And I like it just fine. :-P
Hey, I have no problem with this blog, either. If I did, I wouldn't even bother to come here, much less comment.
I was just injecting some of my own thoughts and experiences concerning how the comic marketplace operates in regards to the type of products it makes. I really do think fan entitlement has become a problem, especially with the advent of online communications and specifically blogging. The overwhelming negativity that Ami and Joel have talked about recently is evidence of that. I was just trying to give some of my own information and opinions on how that problem could be substancially lessened.
Now if you all will excuse me, I'm going to go pass out into bed. My brain is beginning to hurt. ;)
I dun want my posts to turn into the type of back and forth arguments where ppl are politely being mean to each other that seems to happen on a lot of blogs :(
And I'm worried that's what's gonna happen :(
That won't happen, Ami, because if it started to, I'd just walk away.
As I said, I don't like to hang around where I feel unwelcome. So, it would never reach the point you fear.
Besides, I don't know how to be "politely mean" to someone. I'm either nice or mean. I don't do both. I'm not very good at multi-tasking. ;)
Now, seriously, beddy-time for me. :)
Ami, sorry to wade in at this late date - but I just wanted to say "AMEN, SISTAH!" :D
One of the big reasons Tammy wanted to write WHITE TIGER in the first place was for the chance to present a female hero who's not a) a fanboyz's sex fantasy, b) some male hero's appendage, or c) a victim-in-waiting. While all those certainly have their place in popular fiction, they're like tobasco sauce - they're best when used sparingly, rather than as the endlessly-repeated main ingredient. Tammy and I have always been huge fans of effective female heroes like the ALIEN series's Ellen Ripley, or the current HEROES FOR HIRE headliners Misty Knight and Colleen Wing, so when Marvel asked her to do something with Bendis's female White Tiger reboot, she jumped at the opportunity. She and I both feel that mainstream superhero comics need MORE effective female heroes for the women fans who read those comics, not less - otherwise, comics AS comics will cease to be the "entertainment for the masses and pop mythology" they were always intended to be (as Greg Hatcher pointed out paranthetically in a recent COMICS SHOULD BE GOOD column).
Sorry if that last paragraph turned into a WHITE TIGER advert - that wasn't its intention. ::sheepish g:: The intention is to agree w/the points you made, and to point out that "Then don't buy it!" as a response to "I don't like superhero comics that objectify female characters to the exclusion of nearly everything else!" is clearly not working as a strategy for change. Most teenage girls and twentysomething women have been boycotting comics for almost two decades (unintentionally for the most part due to their scarity outside the DT stores, but they're still not buying), and the only message Marvel and DC have picked up is the wrong one. Rather than "We've alienated women (and gays, but that's more recent) with our work b/c proportionally fewer of them are buying our product - maybe we should do something to bring them back?", THEY respond with "Our numbers are shrinking! MUST - HANG - ONTO - THE FANBOYZ - WE - HAVE - BY - ANYMEANSNECESSARY!" So yes - I definitely think blogs like this one, and articles like the one in the recent BITCH Magazine, are useful and necessary,
Best,
Tim Liebe
Dreaded Spouse-Creature of Tamora Pierce
- and co-writer of Marvel's White Tiger comic - #5 out now! :)
James seems to confuse hating a book and continuing to buy it with liking a book (or really really liking some of its elements) but hating certain aspects. The sentiment isn't "This sucks!" it's, "This would be great if only you'd quit it with this sucky part!" Why shouldn't we say, hey, I'd prefer not to have to put up with this irritating thing to get the good stuff? Obviously there's a draw for us there or we wouldn't bother reading them (and paying for them.) So the criticism says, you could expand your audience if only... Seems rather defensive to me to imagine that people spend good money and then good time on stuff they hate simply so they can bitch at the creators. Who acts like that?
Also, I think James has a very poor image of what tween girls are like and of their tastes. Sounds like he's just swallowed wholesale the worst of the media sensationalist "worry about your kids! worry worry worry" nonsense. Perhaps the same problem as the current writing staff of Supergirl? ^_~
Hi Eek! :D
I think you make some great points XD I have trouble expressing what I mean sometimes :(
But yus...
It's true! We buy stuff cuz something about it is rly good that we like but we complain about what we dun like. It's not an either/or thing. :\
We're not spending money simply to spite ppl XD We're just saying "hey this could be improved!"
Most companies would take that to heart :)
And yus... I think that IS what's happening with Supergirl :( Ppl are buying into the fear created by the news about their daughters becoming Paris Hilton and OMG THIS IS WHAT KIDS ARE WEARING NOW!!
And stuff :\ And honestly, that is NOT what's going on with the majority of teen girls xD
Post a Comment