Author: Michael

How interesting to discover this morning, that DC co-publishers, Dan DiDio and Jim Lee released this blog post yesterday on the DC Universe blog, The Source. It’s a response to the community’s uproar and criticism of the lack of female comics creators and characters.

They write:

Over the past week we’ve heard from fans about a need for more women writers, artists and characters. We want you to know, first and foremost, that we hear you and take your concerns very seriously.

Is this damage control? Oh sure. But it’s also a response that shows they’re at least acknowledging the criticism and saying they are doing something about it:

We’ll have exciting news about new projects with women creators in the coming months and will be making those announcements closer to publication. Many of the above creators will be working on new projects, as we continue to tell the ongoing adventures of our characters. We know there are dozens of other women creators and we welcome the opportunity to work with them.

Maybe next time they’re called out, they’ll just answer the question instead of mocking the person asking. Oh wait, they probably need to go back and write a response that won’t piss everyone off further. They seem to be a lot better scripted than off-the-cuff.

Still, it’s nice to see this, and let’s hope something comes of it.

Anyone who pays any attention to comics on the Internet has probably noticed a bit of a kerfluffle going on after some comments made by DC Co-Publisher Dan DiDio at the San Diego Comic Convention (SDCC). A question was asked about the lack of female comics creators at DC, and DiDio by all accounts, avoided the question and treated it with some derision. I wasn’t there, and I haven’t listened to the audio; only read the reports, but I’m not really surprised. Comics is a man’s world, and it’s pretty surprising to me that I’ve been a comics reader for over 40 years. Especially, as I realized a few years ago, I’m not actually a fan of superheroes, I am a fan of women with super powers. Woe is me. That doesn’t give me a whole lot to get excited about in the world of comics, and I tend to get really excited by some of the slightest scraps of attention paid to female characters.

But let me get to the point of this article, and the realization that I have finally admitted to myself about the comics industry. For some background, here are some good articles about the situation that we suddenly find ourselves in. I first learned about the SDCC here: http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/7985599811/panels. Then the intelligent and highly enteraining DC Women Kicking Ass Tumblr Blog followed up with http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/8130151171/bgsdccinterview. Tonight I read a couple more articles, that led to more background. Graeme Macmillan wrote for Newsarama this article, http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/07/29/the-dcu-relaunch-tough-on-female-creators-tough-on-female-characters/, which referred to Laura Hudson’s article here, http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/07/28/dc-dan-didio-female-creators/, and Tim Hanley’s article here: http://thanley.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/there-are-actually-less-female-characters-in-the-dc-relaunch-than-there-are-now/.

What really started to bother me was not the allegations that DC doesn’t hire enough female creators, or DC doesn’t feature enough female characters, both of which are statements I agree with, but some of the inferences I gleaned from Laura Hudson’s article. She talks about the danger of a writer not being able to capture the experiences of a character who is not like them. She states, “And if you’re a creator and you’re trying to write and draw characters that are different from you, it can mean that you end up sounding inauthentic, tone-deaf, or worse, actively feeding into stereotypes.” While this is certainly true and has happened frequently… okay, endlessly in comics (Laura includes an example in her article) it worries me that she makes this point in an article about the difficulty DC claims it has finding good, female comics creators.

The problem, to me, of putting these two idea together is that one affects the other. If a writer is good (and there is a wide range of talent currently writing in comics) their gender, race, sexuality, etc. should matter one whit. They should have an abundance of creativity, empathy, observational powers, and insight to be able to write, convincingly, a character of a different gender, race, sexuality, etc. Does this mean we should be satisfied if DC has all male writers even though they write terrific stories about complex women? Well, no. But even if that were the case, at least we’d have some good stories about complex women.

What really bothers me, and what I finally verbalized to myself is what I think is the root of the problem. This issue has emerged with the upcoming relaunching of the DC Universe: 52 new #1’s that people are complaining are reducing the number of female-led titles. Let’s look at the likely reasons DC is doing this relaunch. They are the #2 comic publisher in an industry that is floundering. The #1 company (Marvel) is gaining ground by focusing on fewer and fewer different titles, and for the most part, ignoring women. The market is glutted with Avengers, Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, and X-Men titles and very little else. So you’re #2, and you’re looking around to do something bold and potentially ground-breaking in order to gain some market share, and maybe even revitalize the market a little. So you’re certainly going to look at your competition that is consistently outselling you, and see what they’re doing right. Well, they’re certainly not branching out to feature more titles with women, more titles by women, more titles featuring diverse nationalities or sexualities. They consistently sell comics by playing it pretty safe. Why do they do this? Because that’s what sells.

Can we just accept this bottom line, people? Marvel and DC, in the end, are all about making money. They’re not going to spend too much money, or risk too much, by publishing a title that doesn’t make money. Sure, they’ll try for a little while, hoping it might catch on, or even because they’re trying to feature a Latino, or gay, or female character, but in the end, if people aren’t buying it in big numbers, it’s going to be history.

We’re in a Catch-22 situation. If DC or Marvel does try to diversify a little, it usually takes too long for the word to get out for them to turn around and be profitable. Now, maybe this relaunch of DC’s will do exactly that, and titles like Batwoman, Wonder Woman, Batgirl, Birds of Prey and Voodoo will benefit from this attention and promotional hype, and attract a new audience that actually supports the books and gets some people who would like to read superhero comics beyond the male-centric stuff that we’re force fed, which will in turn, embolden DC to try more comics like Huntress, Black Orchid, Dr. Light, Vixen and Stargirl. And so on.

It’s not easy loving comics that feature women with super powers. Especially when you also demand well-written, well-drawn comics. But every now and then, individual writers and artists will deliver, often surreptitiously, behind the disguise of a mainstream, superhero comic. (One of my favorite examples is how Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning took the testosterone heavy Marvel cosmic event, Annihilation, which featured one or two women in supporting roles, and slowly and quietly kept adding more fascinating females, and gave them more and more amazingly complex storylines, until we were reveling in the likes of Phylla-Vell, Moondragon, Gamora, Mantis, Medusa, Crystal and many, many more). See? It can be done?

Please keep in mind, that I do understand that there are exceptions. Marvel tried some nifty things with their Year of the Woman. DC has actually done pretty well of late with regard to women and other diverse characters. I can only hope that despite the apparent dip in female characters/creators in the DCnU, we will see a resurgence. But then both companies go and do the stupid, insensitive things like having Wonder Women holding Mera’s severed head on the cover of a Flashpoint comic, or changing Harley Quinn’s costume to something so ridiculous as to be beyond laughable, or Marvel continually forgetting about all the fascinating female characters they have in their rich history and continuing to focus on the same characters over and over again.

That’s it, that’s my rant. I didn’t really intend to do this, or for it to be so long, but since I don’t have many close friends who read comics, I needed an outlet somewhere. If you made it this far, thanks for reading. Feel free to contradict, agree, or enlighten in the coomments.

This next category of new relaunches from the DCnU are titles that I’m pretty doubtful about. I plan to flip through them at the comic book store and if something catches my eye, I will pick up the first issue. But I would be surprised if any of them make it onto my regular pull list.

• Batman (Snyder; Capullo) – Not a huge fan of Batman’s solo exploits. Strangely enough, i enjoy Batman in team scenarios, but his solo stories don’t do much for me. Just not interested.
• Catwoman (Winick; March) – Between the uber-cheesecake cover, and my ambivalence toward Judd Winick as a writer, this is one title featuring a superheroine that I think I’ll be passing on. However, I may be surprised.
• Detective Comics (Daniel) – See Batman above.
• Frankenstein: Agent of S.H.A.D.E. (Lemire; Ponticelli) – Of this list, this one has the best chance of piquing my interest. I have no interest in Frankenstein as a character, however, the set up sounds somewhat intriguing, and I do enjoy Lemire’s writing. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if I find myself picking up the first story arc of this title. In fact, if I read more about it, Frankenstein: Agent of S.H.A.D.E. might graduate to the “Maybe” list.
• Hawk and Dove (Gates; Liefeld) – Surely this must rank as my biggest disappointment of the announcements. I like Dove a lot. She’s an intriguing character that has a lot of room for development. Her relationship with Boston Brand ended tragically at the end of Brightest Day. I’m very sorry we don’t get to see what Gail Simone had in mind for them as part of Birds of Prey long term. That said, Rob Liefeld is quite possibly the most horrendous artist ever published, and I would have a great deal of difficulty supporting anything that features his art. Here’s hoping they switch artists immediately, then I will try this title out.
• O.M.A.C. – (Didio; Giffen) – No interest whatsoever, but as a new title, I will flip through it and see if it can catch my attention.
• Red Hood and the Outlaws (Lobdell; Rocafort) – I’m a little surprised that this one ended up on my “Maybe” list as opposed to my “Absolutely not” list. I do have a slight fondness for Arsenal, but Starfire bores me to tears, and Red Hood should have been left out completely. No Stephanie Brown, Power Girl, JSA, Secret Six, but a revamped Red Hood? It;s criminal.
• Suicide Squad (Glass; Rudy) – Normally, this would be a much more likely candidate for purchase, but man, oh, man, that cover is atrocious! The original Suicide Squad was brilliant. Brilliant concept, superb execution. This just looks like trash. Would love for this to surprise me though.
• Teen Titans (Lobdell; Booth) – I was hoping a revamped Teen Titans might interest me in the title again… especially with the inclusion of so many superheroines, but again, this cover, and the costume redesigns just look abysmal. I would love a good Teen Titans book though, so I will flip through this and hope for the best. However, I remain… doubtful.

Tomorrow will be my final list of :”Absolutely Nots.” Titles I just have no interest in whatsoever and would have to work really hard for me to even flip through them.

So this next batch of new titles from the DCnU relaunch are titles that I might be picking up. I will add them to my picklist, and will at least give the first issue a try, but I am making no commitments to continuing on with them.

• Action Comics (Morrison; Morales) – I don’t currently read any of the Superman titles, but I’d like to give this one a chance, particularly because it’s Grant Morrison writing it. It will have to really grab me though for me to keep reading.
• Batwing (Winick; Oliver) – This one is a bit intriguing, and as I said in an earlier post, I’m all for supporting more diversity in comics. I’ll check this out and see what I think.
• Mister Terrific (Wallace; Robinson) – Mister Terrific is a character that I’ve always thought had some potential, but I’ve only read his JSA exploits, so I can’t quite imagine him as a solo character. Still, see above re: diversity, so I’ll give this a shot.
• Nightwing (Higgins; Barrows) – I’ve always liked Nightwing as a character, even though I didn’t follow his earlier solo series. Since this relaunch gives me an opportunity to try new titles, I will give it a try. I do like the costume redesign.
• Red Lanterns (Milligan; Benes) – I can’t quite figure this title out, but it’s got Peter Milligan writing, and it’s got Lanterns fueled by rage, so it could be pretty darn cool. I’ll check it out.
• The Savage Hawkman (Daniels; Tan) – Ummm… not too sure about this one. I enjoy Hawkman as a character, but largely because of having Hawkgirl/woman to balance him out. The savage part doesn’t really impress me, but because Hawkman intrigues me a bit, I’ll give this a try.
• Stormwatch (Cornell; Sepulveda) – Adding the Martian Manhunter to this title is really interesting. For that reason alone I’ll give it a try.
• Supergirl (Green; Johnson; Asrar) – This so looks and sounds bad. I would love to love a Supergirl title, but no one has made her interesting to me since Peter David. I don’t expect this to last more than one issues on my picklist, but I’ll try to keep an open mind.
• Superman (Perez; Marino) – See above for Action Comics but substitute George Perez for Grant Morrison.
• Voodoo (Marz; Basri) – The only reason I’m giving this a try is because it’s a comic book with a superheroine as the lead. Worth a shot. If it’s any good, I’ll keep going. Not a fan of the Wildstorm comics, but anything is possible.

Two more categories left. Tomorrow I’ll list the titles I’m doubtful about.