Search

KL!

Tag

kate kane

.031 – Girls Rule, But Don’t Tell Them, They’ll Get Uppity

I’ve been home from Dragon*Con for four days and I’m already biding my time until next year. The con is, as I will explain to any brick space people who are silly enough to ask, my favorite weekend of the whole year. It’s like coming home, really. For five days that slice of downtown Atlanta is host to many musical acts, performers, fans, industry reps, artists, and academic experts across almost any field or genre you can think of. It’s a safe space for enthusiasm that will also make you think if you let it. I’d been looking forward to con with extra zeal this year due to some sharp downturns in my personal life, and con did not disappoint. Or rather, it didn’t disappoint until 11:30AM on Monday, which has kind of put a damper on the whole madcap experience.

The Comics and Pop Art track at D*C is one of my favorite tracks. It’s presented like a mini academic conference within the confines of the larger convention, and you’re just as likely to find an in-depth study on the feminine pose in comics as it relates to art history as you are a panel devoted to the literary wells we draw our comics ideas from. The attendees are usually as curious and well-read as the presenters. The Gender and Race panel I attended earlier in the weekend was standing room only, and it made me incredibly happy to be there as someone asked about the inherent issues in writing a minority character from the side of the majority. These are things I think about quite a lot as a writer and I’m always put a bit at ease when I see other people think about them too. I’m telling you all of this because I don’t want you to think that my issue here is with the con or the track, but with a specific group of panelists and with the moderator who was not prepared and who couldn’t get a handle on her panel.

The 11:30 Monday morning panel was called Girls Rule! and the blurb said that it would be a “discussion of the many incredible female characters and creators who are capable of kicking butt.” I know, right? Doesn’t that sound amazing? Doesn’t it sound like a place where you can get together with like-minded people and talk about Captain Marvel and the Carol Corps? Kate Kane and how she resonates with all of us queer comic loving ladies? Kelly Sue DeConnick and Gail Simone and Becky Cloonan and the rest of the accessible, intelligent, creative, and inspiring women who work in the industry and fight for us every day? That would have been such a great panel! That was not the actual panel.

During the actual panel I got to sit in a room that was about 75% female and watch in shared disbelief as a panelist held up the picture below and, without a hint of irony in his voice, explained to us that this character was a good, strong female character because she was armed to the hilt. She can totally defeat the vampires! Look at all these weapons! Think about what she could do to vampires with them! And while you’re thinking about that, be sure to ruminate on how conveniently attractive and improbably built she is! This is a woman who refuses to be held down by the patriarchal idea of functional clothing! Her tits defy you! They’ll defy you long time!

Image

[Lady Van Helsing, as proposed for their upcoming Unleashed event.]

Sorry, I got a bit carried away there, but you see where I’m coming from, I’m sure. This particular image is one of the characters from Zenoscope Entertainment’s Grimm’s Fairy Tales comic line. She’s their answer to Van Helsing and I can’t help but think that way too many of her important arteries are exposed for effective vampire fighting. This is a line of comics that I have been warned not to read by a male employee at my local comic shop because of how dreadfully misogynistic it is. I had picked up the book to flip through it, because I love both fairy tales and sexy ladies and I’m not opposed to the Skinemax version of Fables on principle as long as the stories are interesting. In this case they’re not. Some books actually are just what they say on the tin. When the panelist in question was asked about the functionality of her wardrobe and the overtly stylized design he deflected by telling us how women of all stripes read these books and dress up as the characters. That’s…nice, but it doesn’t answer the question. Another non-answer we received is that his wife tells him things about ladies sometimes, so he’s justified in this presentation of them. I’m not even going to touch the ignorance in that.

I am also not going to bash cosplayers or people who enjoy these books. Personal preferences and tastes vary and that’s integral to the way the world works. This company is filling a demand in the market and kudos to them for being able to exploit everything at work here. However, I am going to call into question the mindset that can’t quite comprehend the fact that it’s problematic that we need to ask these questions at all. There is a dangerous fallacy at work here, and that fallacy is that brute force and artillery can stand in for strength of character. They can’t. They can inform it, but there needs to be something better under the surface.

In response to a similar question about the importance of character design in inclusion one of the female panelists told us that if we wanted our characters portrayed differently we needed to vote with our dollars (which is a bit of common sense information I got from my Economics teacher in high school), but she seemed to entirely miss the point as well. The point of these questions, and supposedly the whole panel, was that this common representation of women in the comics industry does a poor job of reflecting not only individual women, but the subset of women as a whole. What we learned throughout the hour was that at least a part of the comics industry acknowledges that people want this and will purchase it, but that they’re too lazy or bored or untalented to give it to us.

I resent being told that there are totally character driven comics with lady leads if I just dig for them. I shouldn’t have to dig for them. Fully realized women make up more than half of the population of the planet. I’m not asking for something niche and gauche that society looks down on. Or, on second thought, maybe I am. Look, I know if I just want tentacle rape and yuri with werewolves that La Blue Girl is a thing, and I find it disturbing that it’s easier for me to get my hands on that than it is to get my hands on a realistic portrayal of a woman reflected in my media. I double resent the fact that there was a woman telling me this, because when women say this to other women their opinion is often used as a way to write off legitimate complaints. We’re told, but this woman likes it, so why are you still mad? It’s almost like these writers and artists don’t see women as individuals. Oh, wait.

It wouldn’t be hard to create the kinds of characters we’re asking for. The things we love about Captain Marvel and Batwoman and Wonder Woman are not the extraordinary things about them, it’s the ordinary things. We know women like this. We know women who are strong and capable and who fight for what they love and what’s right. And yes, sometimes those women really love heels and cleavage and red lipstick and men, but it’s reductive to treat them as if these are the traits that define their character or drive their plot. A lot of comics still treat female characters as if this was the case. That is the problem. Books like Grimm’s Fairy Tales are part of the problem.

One of the men in the audience raised his hand and stated rather smugly that he didn’t know what the big deal was, because men are sexualized too. Don’t women get enjoyment out of men in spandex? Why do we complain when men get to benefit from this enjoyment as well? Half of the panel enthusiastically agreed with this statement. I tried to remain passive. I really did, but I have never rolled my eyes so far back into my head in my entire life. I think I uncovered some hidden childhood memories while they were back there. You’re reading this on the internet, some of you might even be here via Tumblr, so I don’t think I need to break down the willful ignorance of this statement for you. Instead I’m going to talk about a comic character I’ve loved for as long as I can remember: Dick Grayson.

Image

[From Nightwing #20, May 2013]

I have this joke with myself and a few of my friends where I will refer to Dick Grayson as a Strong Female Character. Dick Grayson spends more time swooning than poorly written Regency romance heroines who wear extra tight corsets on hot days. Dick Grayson is often drawn in that dreaded/celebrated boobs and butt pose for the sole purpose of calling attention to his assets. (They’re fine assets. If I was Dick Grayson I’d spend all of my time in front of the mirror and never get dressed enough to leave the house.) In fact, when asked about that particular Nightwing ass shot, penciler Brett Booth said:

“I thought that was required of all Nightwing pencilers? I remember seeing the Nicola Scott image and thought that was a ‘thing’ you do when drawing Nightwing. So I decided to do one and I wasn’t going to do it half…. baked. I was going all in! .. Wait, that sounds bad… Full Monty?… no… I’m very tired…”

I don’t have any such images easily accessible, but I would bet you a each cup of chai that there are completely canon images of Dick Grayson wrapped around a woman and sitting at her feet as if he was being subjugated. Dick Grayson’s milkshake brings ALL OF EVERYONE to the yard. He’s tied with Vince Noir as the greatest confuser. Dick Grayson is all of these things, but he has one advantage that your average comic book female doesn’t, and that’s that he’s Dick Grayson.

Originally brought in to the comic in 1940 as Bruce Wayne’s ward after his parents’ death left him an orphan, Dick Grayson is a complex character with over seventy years of backstory that runs the gamut from Superman fanboy to reluctant leader. At no point in time has Dick Grayson’s overtly displayed sexuality been used as a defining part of his character. Which isn’t to say that he doesn’t flaunt it or use it to his advantage–I’m looking at you, Brothers In Blood–it’s just not the thing that drives his story lines and character development. If he was to be wrapped at the feet of a woman he would still be himself. Female comic book characters are often stripped of their costumes or distinguishing characteristics when posed this way, but male characters are left alone in most instances. This way they can be seen as contextually adding strength to the woman who has enthralled them. (And in some cases, nefariously captured them, because why would a man decide on his own to support a woman?)

As your average male superhero, Dick doesn’t look the way he does because that’s what will sell comics or because a male writer or artist personally fetishized trapeze artists. He looks the way he does because he needs those muscles to perform acrobatic feats and because the idealized male body is seen as inherently heroic. It commands power. Unlike the ‘idealized’ female body which is designed to attract heroic men and make them feel strong. The ‘idealized’ female body through a man’s perspective is sexualized, because that is a woman’s worth to a man, ultimately, when boiled down through the lens of our media. Dick Grayson is not Dick Grayson because he’s sexy. Dick Grayson is sexy because he’s Dick Grayson. The difference there is not as subtle as the English language would have you believe. I’m not arguing that male comic book characters are never fetishized, I’m arguing that that’s not their default purpose and hasn’t been historically.

Things have gotten better, though. Natasha Romanoff is a woman who knows she can use her looks to her advantage, and she does, but lately her storylines have been driven by other parts of her character with that as an incidental tool in her belt. She is actually empowered (in some books, I’m not currently reading all of the titles she’s in) to be the best version of her character, physically, intellectually, and emotionally. It’s a really great thing to see. (Even if I am still bitter over the end of Black Widow Hunt.) If a woman’s wardrobe is so important, why can’t we at least create more female characters like this who understand the world around them and are smart about it? Or we could even retrofit older characters to be like this. It’s certainly not uncommon for characters to go through an editorial evolution. DC rebooted their entire universe full stop two years ago. And if I ‘m speaking of DC, the Kate Kane that I know and love is a reintroduction of an entirely different character from DC’s past. She’s just been heavily updated to reflect the time. I’m not really that picky. Dress her up however you like, but make her a whole person whose wants and desires are not defined by the men around her.

So no, random panel goer, it’s not the same thing. It’s not the same thing at all, and it’s incredibly disheartening to me when the gatekeepers and creative forces in a massive industry can’t tell the difference either. The fact that we have to have these discussions is the reason why I needed a panel about how women can rule. It’s really too bad no one was prepared to give me one. I’d like to leave this as official feedback for the panel, but I don’t think it will fit into the box on the app. It would be nice if, next year, there was another panel about women in comics that managed to carry the academic tone of the Comics and Pop Art conference as a whole, and it would be wonderful if the panelists respected their audience.

Addendum 1: The saving grace of the whole ordeal was panelist Chandra Free, who is a talented and intelligent woman. She tried many times to bring the conversation back around to context, but was more or less ignored by the other panelists. She’s just the sort of person I would love to see on the new and improved version of this panel for next year. She does great work that you should absorb and read. So, go do that. I’ll be here when you get back, ready to actually discuss women in comics. I’ll have a gold star for each of you.

Addendum 2: The abstract for the great talk I saw earlier in the weekend on feminine poses in comics in the context of Art History can be found here.

Addendum 3: In light of recent Batwoman news, I’d just like to remind the universe that I still have a lot of feelings about that character and that Plunge magazine let me write an article on it.

.022 – He’s here. The Bat…man.

With two short hours until the official east coast release of The Dark Knight Rises, my entire twitter feed is bursting with excitement.  But this isn’t a fresh flurry of twitterpated fans, this has been ramping up for months now as marketing people and DC employees have worked tirelessly to not let us forget that the most important Bat-event of our lives is about to rain down on us like glass from an art museum ceiling.  Everything everywhere has been all Batman all the time.

I’d be remiss in pretending like I haven’t been a part of that deluge.  The Wrong Opinions About Movies podcast crew worked with a whole host of guests over the last two months on a project we’ve affectionately dubbed Batcon.  We watched almost every Batman movie and then unpacked each one in a mini-episode along with some stellar friends.  My personal favorite of the bunch is the Batman Forever episode, which we recorded with comedian Andrew Sanford.  Nothing says the universe loves me quite like Val Kilmer in the cowl.

Since we started this immersion course in a universe I already have a lot of love for, I’ve been doing some thinking about Batman and the movies they make about him.  Watching anything back to back to back will throw the things that you dislike into sharp relief with the things you do, and I’ve been turning over in my head a list of things I’d like to never see in a Batman movie again.  (The Waynes dying in an alley, Barbara as Not A Gordon, ice puns, etc.)  But along with that I’ve also been thinking about the things that I’m pining for.  The comics universe that has been built around Bruce Wayne and his made family is massive.  Why do we make the same movies over and over again?  It seems that no matter who writes the movies we get Bruce’s manpain, several villains picked out of a hat, and an added dash of origin.  According to the Wiki article there are 16 current members of the more or less immediate Bat-family.  (I would argue whether some of them are appropriate, but that’s a whole other post entirely.)

So, with this information, what other movies could we write that would engage the lay-audiences while not boring those of us who spend way too much time thinking about Gotham anyway?  I’ve come up with five I’d like to see.

1. Under the Red Hood
This is an easy starting place, because Warner Brothers already released a nicely done animated version of the story line straight to home video in 2010.  The average film going audience isn’t going to be familiar with Jason Todd (or any Robin that isn’t Dick Grayson), but it wouldn’t be hard to compress his meeting with Bruce–trying to steal the rims from the Batmobile–and his capture and subsequent ‘murder’ at the hands of the Joker.  The fact that Jason comes back to Gotham as a hard hitting, life taking, smarm monster does more to dent Bruce’s self-worth than Poison Ivy, Bane, and Mr. Freeze can together.  And Jason’s lack of redemption in Bruce’s eyes would be an excellent driving force for a sequel.

2. Batman Beyond
Even the curlicue of storytelling that comic books call continuity has to admit that Bruce Wayne can’t be Batman forever.  Eventually he’ll grow old and resign himself to a desk.  Enter Terry McGinnis, the Batman of the future.  I’ll leave you to search for the main plot points in the wikipedia article if you’re curious, but Batman Beyond could have all of the elements that we as a society fear the most these days: corporate conglomerates, chemical weapons, a whole gang devoted to the memory of The Joker.  Batman Beyond as a movie would be the most radical change you could make at this point, since it would leave us with very few remembered characters.  It would be a drastic pull away from the Batman movies we’ve grown comfortable with.

3. Nightwing
Eventually, Dick Grayson grew up, and much more gracefully than Chris O’Donnell ever let on.  At the age of eighteen he was dismissed from his Robin duties and took on the mantle of Nightwing (along with some truly tragic costumes).  This is a movie that could happen in Gotham, but it could also introduce his part time home of Bludhaven, where Dick went to get away from Gotham and be out from under Batman’s teflon wing.  He worked on the police force during the day, so the investment in keeping his alter ego and his true ego separate would have even more at stake than Bruce, whose eccentricities can often be played off as just what money does.  The great thing about a Nightwing movie would be the shift in tone.  Dick is very much not Bruce Wayne, even when they’re together.  Given room to breathe his character is inspiring and responsible while also being a bit silly and game for a laugh.  Even for the short time that Dick wore the Batman mantle himself he let hope and his heart rule out over his head.

4. Oracle
Ladies!  There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether or not a female superhero can carry a film franchise.  I like to think that one could, given the right writer.  (If the universe could arrange for Joss Whedon to write the Black Widow movie, I’d be eternally in its debt.)  And even without the ‘right’ writer, Barbara Gordon is so much more than a cape or a character confined to a wheelchair.  As Oracle Babs is a fighter, a librarian, and the world’s greatest communications/research gal a detective, Suicide Squad, or group of female vigilantes could have.  Our daily lives are increasingly falling prey to the technology we let in, and Barbara’s ability to manipulate that, as well as her physical prowess, could make for a compelling and modern story.  The studio could even include the events of The Killing Joke if it had to, but I’d rather her story be more about strength and intellect and less about depression and fear.

5.  Batwoman  
Ladies on ladies!  This addition is even more personally indulgent than the one about Nightwing.  Kate Kane is my current favorite member of the Bat-family.  She’s relatively new, having been introduced as the current incarnation of Batwoman in 2006, but her story is timely.  She was a student at the United States Military Academy when she was outed as having a relationship with a woman.  When confronted by the higher ups and asked to just deny the claims so she could stay, she leaves her class ring on his desk and quits.  This happens several months before Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was repealed for us in the real world.  From there she goes on to fight the ills of the world the best way she knows how.  Batwoman’s stories tend to have a more supernatural element than a lot of the other tales told about the Bat-family, so they would probably appease the paranormal romance crowd.  She’s contrary while holding strong convictions and she refuses to cowtow to Batman, even though she’s working within his city.  She’s honestly, and I have been holding off on saying this for a little over a thousand words now, the hero we need and deserve.  In my eyes, anyway.

Above all, I think the key to introducing new Bat-family characters to the movie going audiences is to not doubt the movie going audiences.  For the most part, we’re not stupid.  We are introduced to new characters and new stories every year and have no problems taking in their hopes and fears and journeys of discovery.  Why should it be any different with properties that might be familiar?  What do you think?  Do you disagree vehemently with the stories I’d like to see?  Would you hate or love these movies?  Which stories would you like to see them tell about Batman and his caped cohorts?  I can, as you might have noticed, talk about Batman until the Bat-cows come home.  So sound off!  But if you post spoilers for the movie, please give us a heads up so we can all avoid them until we’ve seen it.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑