Discussion: Newfound Gay Heroes And Grown-Up Comics
A brief interview with Darwyn Cooke has been making the rounds recently, where he discusses the pitfalls of modern comics storytelling, maligning the mature themes and drastic character modifications, supposedly because these actions take the fun out of the industry and make them less accessible for everyone. Numerous threads have gone up in arms taking offense to his statement, which deserves a careful examination.
I don't want to see characters getting raped in the ass. I don't want to see characters who have been straight for sixty years becomes lesbians overnight because the writer's too stupid or uncreative to come up with something decent. I want to see new characters for a new time.
Most commentators see this as an attack on Rucka's Batwoman, though I see no indication of this; Kate Kane is a new character, not an old figure shoehorned into the gay scene. She's written with sincerity and realism. And regarding the stated intent of his words, I completely agree that unconvincing, BRAND-NEW retcons are ham-fisted attempts at attracting new readers, but I don't find anything wrong with the desire to have grittier storylines, provided that the execution suits the title and honors the characters' history in an attempt to move it forward. The "Brother's Keeper" arc in Green Lantern, to list some spoilers, saw Kyle Rayner powerless to prevent a homophobic hate crime. It was never a superhero saving the day from bigotry, it spoke about a the hatred in humanity, and how, after his fallout with Ion, the beating left Kyle with universal-scale misanthropy. Relevant to the existing universe, gritty without a gore fixation, and managing adult themes with an honest capacity, even though Terry's sexual orientation hadn't been the object of attention in preceding issues.
Cooke's statement wasn't homophobic. If there's a character who's 'made' gay with an intent other than making an honest contribution to their expanding personality and history, they're not worth reading. Cooke followed up on his statement on 4thletter!, very carefully saying,
I think gay characters are an important and welcome part of any contemporary expression. What I want is to see creators and publishers creating new characters that are gay and lesbian, and spend the decades needed creating and supporting stories about these characters. It strikes me as opportunistic and somewhat wrongheaded to take someone else's creation and after decades of established character action make that drastic a change. I've always believed that if another creator's character can't bear the spectrum of expression I need to reach, then I don't use that character. Find another or create a new one.
Where I disagree with the statement is with its utopian ideal of bringing back comics stories for kids. You can't say that writers shouldn't do a bloody Green Lantern tale, because it's been done, excellently at times. Sure, there's lot's of noir in comics that's often sloppy and inconsiderate, but to hope to remove this modern fixation with broken psychologies and questionable intent would mean erasing lots of potential great stories from the scene. DC and Marvel both have imprints with the intents of stratifying the maturity of their readership, and though it lacks a clear-cut refinement, it's a damn fine way of keeping the medium open to anyone.
Rubber Justice
Posted to editorial on 1 September 2010
· Comments (7)
Other stuff like this: gay characters, Homophobia, mature
Out of curiosity (and because I presume you know a bit more about comics than I do, I'm new to 'em) who would you say Cooke *is* referring to when he makes the comment about a 60 y/o character becoming lesbian overnight?
The consensus from most other sites who dismiss Kate Kane seems to be that he's referring to Renee Montoya, who only has a 60 year old history as a legacy character for the Question, but nonetheless was not an out lesbian upon her creation. Cooke has done sketches of Kate Kane as Batwoman, so it would be highly insensitive for him to bundle all the women under that mantle into one.
I have no particular problem with reborn gay characters. An old character that gets turned gay is much more likely to stick around than some new character that gets forgotten in a year or so.
Especially now that DC has stopped being legacy and started trying to match Marvel in the character ressurections.
And while I disagree that there shouldn't be more mature storylines, I'm getting very annoyed with gory unnecesairy deaths that are put in solely for shock value.
Which to be honest is also something I find DC to more guilty of.
Its weird, I only hear this argument when it comes from DC writers complaining about how someone had the audacity of making some random barely fleshed out character gay as a violation of the initial understanding of the character. Considering how many people I know who've come out later in life...it strikes me as rather oblivious to assume that sexuality is either column A or column B. How many of us have done the conventional thing as teenagers because its whats expected.
Actually, my creators were rather furious about my retconning their interpitation of my sexual orientation too. Haven't quite come to terms with my not being who they envisioned I was.
When it comes to sexuality in a exteremly hegmonic, status quo conforming genre such as comic books (even now), these arguments serve to remind us of how little diversity is actually appreciated. Because, really, how many "new characters" actually stick in popular comic series?
[url=http://tzdrt.com]aghrt[/url]
[url=http://tzdrt.com]aghrt[/url]
[URL=http://autoruni.freehostia.com/]welcome auto insurances...[/URL]