tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post115759405419321742..comments2024-01-02T09:18:23.893-05:00Comments on Written World: Help Me Out Here.Ragnellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157921072519149532006-09-10T16:44:00.000-04:002006-09-10T16:44:00.000-04:00Calvin-- True, in and of itself, it's not a proble...Calvin-- True, in and of itself, it's not a problemetic comment. I think on reflection its the referencing back to his response to my original argument about Storm and Black Panther, which was about the move from potential lead to supporting cast that got my goat. The oversimplification thing.Ragnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157906046189671612006-09-10T12:34:00.000-04:002006-09-10T12:34:00.000-04:00Alright, I'm going to chip in. I'm not sure it's a...Alright, I'm going to chip in. I'm not sure it's a good idea, but oh well.<BR/><BR/>Just looking at West's comment, by itself, and not considering the argument it was made in (which is what you wanted us to do, I think), I don't see anything wrong with it.<BR/><BR/>Maybe it's the way I'm reading it, but to me, West is expressing the opinion that it's wrong to immediately catgeorize a woman finding male companionship as a method through which the female character will be marginalized.<BR/><BR/>That sounds right to me. It may be that, in the case of T'Challa and Storm, Hudlin will devalue Storm to make Panther look better. Heck it may have already happened in that "Black Panther and Storm visit Latveria" issue, though I thought that made Panther look overly macho and just stupid more than anything.<BR/><BR/>But it seems to me, we need to wait and see. if the characters can be written as equals, then I don't see a problem with it.<BR/><BR/>And now, I'm going to run away very fast.CalvinPitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11815632086057048846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157834928830570782006-09-09T16:48:00.000-04:002006-09-09T16:48:00.000-04:00Christopher -- It's possible my sample's skewed, a...Christopher -- It's possible my sample's skewed, and being interfered with by the real-life pressure on women to marry, the pressure that says you can win a Nobel Prize but still won't be happy until you get married and have babies.<BR/><BR/>Still, I get the overall general impression that Sandicomm does. I suppose a double-sided list would be in order to serttle thigns (that was one of our reasons for starting the Damned List), but my last project is draining enough as it is, I'm not about to embark on another one.Ragnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157807364377536282006-09-09T09:09:00.000-04:002006-09-09T09:09:00.000-04:00Oh, and r.nav:Chris Sims feels feels the same abo...Oh, and r.nav:<BR/><BR/>Chris Sims feels <A HREF="http://the-isb.blogspot.com/2006/02/terry-long-update-still-incredibly.html" REL="nofollow">feels</A> <A HREF="http://the-isb.blogspot.com/2006/02/romance-special-wonder-girls-creepy.html" REL="nofollow">the same</A> about Terry Long as you do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157806465162423542006-09-09T08:54:00.000-04:002006-09-09T08:54:00.000-04:00I guess my immediate reaction is that there has to...I guess my immediate reaction is that there has to be a better way to disagree then going, "sigh, there you go again".<BR/><BR/>Condescension is a tool of polemics, not discussion; and while it certainly has it's place, I don't really like it when it's used on somebody you <I>know</I> is going to attempt to reply.<BR/><BR/>anyway, part of my problem is that I don't really read modern superhero books; my window into the universe of superheros comes from my dad's collection of comics, which is almost entirely made of marvel books and spans roughly 1967 through 1970.<BR/><BR/>What';s interesting to me is how many <I>male</I> characters of the time defined/were defined as succesful when they got a mate;<BR/><BR/>Spider-Man, Namor, Reed Richards, Ben Grimm, Johnny Storm, Namor and Thor all defined long-term success in terms of entering heterosexual relationships, (Perhaps because they were so succesful in all other fields? After all, Thor can pretty much pummel anybody on the planet, but whether he'll actually get together with a mortal girl, that's another story.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, the Avengers, Iron Man and Nick Fury generally weren't too interested in romantic relationships. Even Wanda was pretty much Celibate.<BR/><BR/>While the first part seems pretty much indisputable, I'm not sure that female characters show much more pressure to get married then male ones.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, as I mentioned, my sample is highly skewed.<BR/><BR/>One thing that would be interesting to look at is minor characters who couldn' hold onto their own series. When a character retires from the superhero biz, are they more likely to get married if they're female?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157770951596802292006-09-08T23:02:00.000-04:002006-09-08T23:02:00.000-04:00First, apologies for littering Ragnell's comment s...First, apologies for littering Ragnell's comment section with so many of my own comments. But you offered such an intriguing space to discuss such an intriguing topic, Ma'am, and I thank you for it.<BR/><BR/>Now, Rob, I agree with so much that you have so eloquently said, and I appreciate your thoughtful response to my babblings (I've just--just!--quit smoking in the last week, so I feel that I don't come across very coherent At All, so wrapped up in nicotine craving I am!). But to comment on something specifically,<BR/>you said, <I>It’s in Wonder Woman’s best interest to keep getting published, whether she’s single, married, has super powers, or just uses kung-fu in a kickin’ jumpsuit.</I><BR/><BR/>And I say, Amen. Yes, please. I've heard some scuttlebutt In The World regarding WW's waning popularity, and it breaks my very heart. I think conversations like this and the many others I've spotted in the blogosphere over the past few weeks have renewed my faith that WW, and other such titles, will remain In The World.<BR/>Gratitude, Rob, Ragnell, and others.<BR/>Ciao,<BR/>AmyAmy Readshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02571924705714110971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157753164247218322006-09-08T18:06:00.000-04:002006-09-08T18:06:00.000-04:00Rob -- Ooo, thanks for the info. :)Rob -- Ooo, thanks for the info. :)Ragnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157724218631800972006-09-08T10:03:00.000-04:002006-09-08T10:03:00.000-04:00Glad to hear I'm not a pariah. But if you need it,...Glad to hear I'm not a pariah. But if you need it, the "golden ratio" for effigies is 70% straw, 30% oily rags.Rob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07331286524477806963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157682304271389902006-09-07T22:25:00.000-04:002006-09-07T22:25:00.000-04:00"Arj, if you want to burn me in effigy, go right a..."<I>Arj, if you want to burn me in effigy, go right ahead. And Ragnell, if I’m not welcome here, just say the word and I’ll go. But I’m thinking that this is more a case of getting off on the wrong foot than a deeper disagreement.</I>"<BR/><BR/>No, I think you had an interesting point about Peter Parker, though I don't know Spider-Man well enough to decide for myself if I agree w/ you or not. But I don't understand how you bringing up Spider-Man was missing the point. Consider yourself, at least in my book, flaming effigy free. :)<BR/><BR/>I was more annoyed with the people who oversimplified the argument about the fact that women are often solely defined by their relationships to others (either girlfriend, wife, sister, daughter, but especially as mate or romantic attachment). It's not about simply finding male companionship. It's the subtle messages inherent throughout our culture (including comics, but also everywhere) that havin' a man is the best thing that could possibly happen to us wimmin, and that chance at perfection gets ruined when we get sexually violated.Andrea Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06469866936790559318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157676297262814252006-09-07T20:44:00.000-04:002006-09-07T20:44:00.000-04:00re: "I offered up Sandicomm's comment as food for ...re: <B>"I offered up Sandicomm's comment as food for further thought and discussion from an earlier unformed post, and rather than look into it or discuss it,"</B><BR/><BR/>I can stop right there.<BR/><BR/>You are so blind. I read every damned word every damned time I comment on something. You love to tell someone they're not "look[ing] into something," despite how much detail they've put into their comments and opinions. You do yourself and others a disservice.<BR/><BR/>So screw it. You don't hear me and I'm tired of typing up posts just to have you claim I'm ignoring your points... which I usually address in detail. I made a short comment, instead and you said just what you always say.<BR/><BR/>More power to you, Ragnell. Peace.Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06305755944694741335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157675690272312162006-09-07T20:34:00.001-04:002006-09-07T20:34:00.001-04:00West -- (I hardly consider my use of sarcasm unnec...West -- (I hardly consider my use of sarcasm unnecessary) Were it simply condescension, I wouldn't have been so annoyed. Some of my favorite blogs are run by <A HREF="http://kalinara.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">condescending</A> <A HREF="http://www.girl-wonder.org/girlsreadcomics/" REL="nofollow">elitists</A>.<BR/><BR/>No, what got me on your comment was the complete reduction of my own concerns to an extremist position, which I will <B>not</B> stand for. I stated my points about Storm twice, and both times depended heavily on factors aside from man + woman, even though her treatment as a female character was a large part of the concern.<BR/><BR/>I offered up Sandicomm's comment as food for further thought and discussion from an earlier unformed post, and rather than look into it or discuss it, you used the same dismissive tone you used in the Storm argument, going back to the similar wording ("<A HREF="http://ragnell.blogspot.com/2006/08/looks-like-this-does-need-to-be-said.html#c115685935733644091" REL="nofollow">For you, being a part of a couple = marginalization</A>") of an erroneous assumption. You even stated, "once again." It was so obvious that you were referring back to our earlier disagreement that even Lois Lane wouldn't miss it.<BR/><BR/>As for ignoring, it seems pretty obvious as I am a <I>known</I> shipper of several male-female pairs that you have <B>completely</B> ignored many of my earlier posts.<BR/><BR/>I deal in complex thoughts and viewpoints on this blog. I have since the start. I'll offer a half-formed or vague statement up for discussion, but I'll be damned if I'm going to let simplifying an already complex argument go by without calling you on it.Ragnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157675679221085872006-09-07T20:34:00.000-04:002006-09-07T20:34:00.000-04:00Rob S -- Wasn't referring to you, don't sweat it.Rob S -- Wasn't referring to you, don't sweat it.Ragnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373059673228550524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157668161887365202006-09-07T18:29:00.000-04:002006-09-07T18:29:00.000-04:00Amy wrote: And again, I'm speaking off the top of ...Amy wrote:<BR/><BR/><I> And again, I'm speaking off the top of my hat here, as I'm interpreting what someone else has said, but I believe the original question was *why* is that "the best thing that can happen to a female character"?</I><BR/><BR/>Well, Sandicomm’s original question was actually a statement: that getting a mate <I>is</I> the best thing to happen to a female character. Some people chose to ask the question “<I>Why</I> is it the best thing for female characters?” and others chose to ask the question “is that <I>really</I> the best thing for female characters, and if so, does that make them different from male characters?” Both groups are responding to the statement with a question, but they’re different questions. <BR/><BR/>I think it’s interesting that we’re looking at these things as endpoints for the characters, when in reality, the best thing to happen is that the character’s stories don’t end at all, whether in death, marriage, reincarnation, or the hula-hoop marathon to end all hula-hoop marathons. It’s in Wonder Woman’s best interest to keep getting published, whether she’s single, married, has super powers, or just uses kung-fu in a kickin’ jumpsuit.<BR/><BR/>(I’d prefer her unattached too, by the way.)<BR/><BR/>I think there’s another question that we should be asking, in fact. Romance doesn’t have to marginalize female characters. I’m no WW scholar, but I don’t think Steve Trevor ever pushed Diana out of her stories or hobbled her character (I could be very wrong on this, and god knows what grief she was given in the Kanigher years). I’ve always thought Saturn Girl in the Legion was the stronger and more assertive half of her marriage to Lightning Lad, and, as I said before, I expect Snow White will continue to be the well-drawn character she’s always been in <I>Fables.</I> So my question is this: If other paired-off female characters aren’t being written this way, why not?<BR/><BR/>My guess is that it’s Steve Trevor syndrome. A lot of writers shy away from using Trevor in the fear that, if they show Wonder Woman saving his bacon too often, he’ll seem weak and unworthy of her. But in the situations they’d get into together, there’s really no way he can pull his own weight. What to do?<BR/><BR/>It’s a tightrope, and some writers are more successful at walking it than others. But I’d say that has more to do with their skill (and their awareness of the problem Trevor and his counterparts pose) than any systemic problem in comics.<BR/><BR/>And ultimately, that’s where this all leads me. If I’ve got a problem with the way Ororo is portrayed, I have to lay it at the feet of the writer, not comics in general. If Zeb Wells writes a lazy, stereotypical story, that’s his fault, not Greg Rucka’s. And vice versa. There’s no sense in laying the sins of Frank Miller at the feet of Kurt Busiek.Rob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07331286524477806963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157661425495532022006-09-07T16:37:00.000-04:002006-09-07T16:37:00.000-04:00furikku's first point may be true.Missing the poin...furikku's first point may be true.<BR/><BR/>Missing the point, while unfortunate, isn't, in and of itself, offensive.<BR/><BR/>The second point that is remiscent of the first in that it misses the point of my statement. It's not an attack, passive or otherwise.<BR/><BR/>I think there's something sad about intepreting the coupling of fictional characters as the sexual marginalization of ONE of them. Now, whether that's what was going on or not, it's a point of some substance, as others came to the same conclusion.<BR/><BR/>If that's enough to leave anyone here incensed, again, I suggest that these same people leave their own more venomous and sarcastic comments to themselves in any future conversations... with <I>anyone</I>.Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06305755944694741335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157661138428534692006-09-07T16:32:00.000-04:002006-09-07T16:32:00.000-04:00Apropos of nothing, Amy pretty much nailed the bul...Apropos of nothing, Amy pretty much nailed the bullseye on why <I>Fables</I> makes me uncomfortable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157659958619955702006-09-07T16:12:00.000-04:002006-09-07T16:12:00.000-04:00Skimming over most of the discussion here...My own...Skimming over most of the discussion here...<BR/><BR/>My own take is that 1) it's completely missing the point being made- that it's bad that female characters tend to be "retired" once they hook up; and 2) it's sort of a veiled, passive-aggressive attack. It translates to, "SIGH... look at you unreasonable people, fighting against love." It creates a straw man unrelated to the ACTUAL point.<BR/><BR/>--furikku from LJAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157657267803957852006-09-07T15:27:00.000-04:002006-09-07T15:27:00.000-04:00Donna Troy (ugh, I can't keep up with all of the v...<I>Donna Troy (ugh, I can't keep up with all of the versions of Donna, but she's been married at least once)</I><BR/><BR/>His name was Terry Long, and he was the creepiest character in the ENTIRE DC UNIVERSE. At least, he struck me as creepy. He was written somewhere between a Mary Sue & a cry for help.R.Navhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11039953551726189448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157656555048101132006-09-07T15:15:00.000-04:002006-09-07T15:15:00.000-04:00Hi Ty,You asked, In short, how many A/B list femal...Hi Ty,<BR/>You asked, <I>In short, how many A/B list female characters have a love interest vs A/B list male characters?</I><BR/><BR/>I guess the question is, how do you define A/B list female characters? I personally will go with characters that are popular enough to hold their own books/be major characters on a team.<BR/><BR/>In DC:<BR/>Wonder Woman (Golden Age: Steve Trevor; recent runs, no one--which I absolutely adore--although JLA #0 shows future Diana about to get married)<BR/>Raven (Beast Boy, yes?)<BR/>Donna Troy (ugh, I can't keep up with all of the versions of Donna, but she's been married at least once)<BR/>Oracle (paired with Nightwing; gets engaged at the end of his book, then no longer engaged in OYL jump?)<BR/>Black Canary (almost always paired with Green Arrow)<BR/>Huntress (paired with Nightwing in a one-night stand that came back to haunt her; also goes out with random guy in BoP as "payment" for his help; also Arsenal and The Question)<BR/>Catwoman (Bruce Wayne/Batman, Slam Bradley, possibly Sam Bradley, and who the heck is the father of her baby, anyhow??)<BR/>Supergirl (I'm going to talk about Linda in my own blog, but Kara hasn't really been paired, so yay!)<BR/>Wonder Girl (Conner/Superboy)<BR/>Renee Montoya (lesbian, so counters the heterosexual imperative, but her relationship with Kathy is complicating 52)<BR/>Hawkgirl (Hawkman)<BR/>Stargirl (Captain Marvel, and there's the whole weird "age" issue)<BR/>Starfire (Nightwing again; he just gets around!)<BR/>Sasha Bordeaux/Black Queen (Bruce Wayne and Mr. Terrific)<BR/><BR/>Help me think of some others!<BR/>Ciao,<BR/>AmyAmy Readshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02571924705714110971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157652125514342062006-09-07T14:02:00.000-04:002006-09-07T14:02:00.000-04:00re: "Well, I didn't mean my argument to come off a...re: <B>"Well, I didn't mean my argument to come off as a mutually exclusive thing."</B><BR/><BR/>r.nav, no doubt. But I concede that there are a lot of binary-thinking individuals who WILL see it (and write it) that way.<BR/><BR/>So, I feel you.Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06305755944694741335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157646829924048422006-09-07T12:33:00.000-04:002006-09-07T12:33:00.000-04:00To West:Well, I didn't mean my argument to come of...To West:<BR/><BR/>Well, I didn't mean my argument to come off as a mutually exclusive thing. it goes back to my needing for writers to understand and show what the characters -do- rather than just assigning what they -are- and leaving it at that.<BR/><BR/>It's like if Lois Lane was from here on out just referred to as Superman's wife. Hah! She's way more than that. I think that's probably why they want to get rid of Mary Jane over at the Marvel neck of the woods. Writers either can't, won't, or are afraid to assigning her an active trait outside of filling in the "Wife" role.R.Navhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11039953551726189448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157644483894640602006-09-07T11:54:00.000-04:002006-09-07T11:54:00.000-04:00re: "It's why I like Steve Trevor. Because the wri...re: <B>"It's why I like Steve Trevor. Because the writers who "Got" him could easily answer that question with something along the lines of "A dashing sort of chap who goes on adventures with Wonder Woman." instead of "He's Wonder Woman's love interest". The first answer tells me what he -does- rather than who he -is-. He's not defined by Wonder Woman, and Wonder Woman should not be defined by him."</B><BR/><BR/>I don't think it should be an either/or kinda thing.<BR/><BR/>"Trevor: A dashing adventurer and Wonder Woman's current love-interest."<BR/><BR/>But if it <B>is</B> a question of one or the other, I guess I agree with you.Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06305755944694741335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157639825167867942006-09-07T10:37:00.000-04:002006-09-07T10:37:00.000-04:00It's always been my opinion that characters in sup...It's always been my opinion that characters in super-hero books need to be defined by their actions and not by who they are/aren't with.<BR/><BR/>It's why I like Steve Trevor. Because the writers who "Got" him could easily answer that question with something along the lines of "A dashing sort of chap who goes on adventures with Wonder Woman." instead of "He's Wonder Woman's love interest". The first answer tells me what he -does- rather than who he -is-. He's not defined by Wonder Woman, and Wonder Woman should not be defined by him. I hate it when romantic interests are just used as props. Example: don't TELL me why Peter Parker loves Mary Jane. SHOW ME!<BR/><BR/>Should a star (Male or Female) be paired up with a supporting cast member? Well.. if they're actually characters and not props, the question is far more an exciting one.R.Navhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11039953551726189448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157639095536009212006-09-07T10:24:00.000-04:002006-09-07T10:24:00.000-04:00I guess I can see that romantic relationship/marri...I guess I can see that romantic relationship/marriage motivation much more clearly in the older comics cited (like the Lois Lane series of the Silver Age), but not so much in the modern books.<BR/><BR/>Granted, the issue hasn't really been on my radar, but since it's been raised on this blog and others, it's given me the chance to assess where things are at. When I try to take in all of the characters and titles being published, no female character really pops into my head who's motivation is to find a guy and/or get married.<BR/><BR/>Granted, it's a powerfully ingrained drive to find a "love connection", so that's bound to become at least <I>part</I> of any character's story (male or female), so when the characters do find love and companionship, I don't necessarily see that development as a marginalization or ending of the character's story.<BR/><BR/>I apologize if none of that make sense, or if I've missed the point. I can definitely see good points on both sides of the discussion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157638608288731232006-09-07T10:16:00.000-04:002006-09-07T10:16:00.000-04:00really? I only remembered Steve Trevor when he was...really? I only remembered Steve Trevor when he was reinroduced in the Justice League carton. Besides, the Lynda Carter series ended over twenty years ago :) there's a whole generation of people out there that haven't seen the show.<BR/><BR/>I think it's fair to say that Steve isn't equal in prominence to Clark/Lois, Reed/Sue, Peter/MJ.<BR/><BR/>In any case, can anyone make tat list?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538843.post-1157637790430417042006-09-07T10:03:00.000-04:002006-09-07T10:03:00.000-04:00I'll post more later, but yes, Amy, I meant that I...I'll post more later, but yes, Amy, I meant that I don't expect Snow to be marginalized by her marriage. Sorry I wasn't clear.Rob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07331286524477806963noreply@blogger.com