For what it's worth, in the interview with the two of them up on CBR right now, Meredith Finch's primary career is acting as David's manager and agent. That seems to be her day-to-day business.
But I'll probably transition my $3 a month over to one of those new Batbooks, so I've got that going at least.
0
Options
UnbrokenEvaHIGH ON THE WIREBUT I WON'T TRIP ITRegistered Userregular
I keep posting the misogyny angle because regardless of your intent, that is the effect such accusations have. The industry and comic fandom is often incredibly hostile to women and women creators, which is why I believe it is important to not toss around stuff like "she got the job because she's his wife" lightly. That you might be right is beside the point, because right or wrong you're propagating a very real problem.
I'm not accusing you personally if being a misogynist in this case, I believe you when you say you'd make the same accusation if it was David Finch's brother instead of his wife, but regardless of your intent your actions are supporting a shitty status quo where every woman breaking into the in the industry faces accusations like this.
And I never said I thought they had a great pitch, I said I thought they had a pitch that DC editorial liked. If anything, that's cause for concern.
@Fearghaill, you can't have it both ways. Either men and women should be treated the same and called on it when something smells bad, or women should be treated differently and we should hold our breath when something stinks instead of pointing it out. And the fact is, this particular hiring smells bad, just like it would if Finch's brother was hired to write the book instead of his wife.
AspectVoid on
PSN|AspectVoid
0
Options
UnbrokenEvaHIGH ON THE WIREBUT I WON'T TRIP ITRegistered Userregular
@AspectVoid that is actually entirely wrong, for the same reason that "I'm an equal-opportunity offender" is a shitty excuse for comedians to use when making fun of minorities. Treating everyone equally is only fair when the rest of the playing field is level.
Currently the industry is very much slanted against female creators, so yes we absolutely should be more careful about making damaging accusations about them and their careers. That is because the effect of such an accusation is much greater than the same accusation made against a man would be, as it is added onto the pile of bullshit women already need to deal with when breaking into comics. "She just got the job because of who she slept with/is married to" is a real problem that women need to deal with to a far, far greater extent than men, and even if you feel that you are totally justified in making that accusation in this case, you are still contributing to the larger problem.
Even beyond that, you are still undermining and questioning a person's competence and ability to do their job with nothing resembling actual evidence to support it. It would be a shitty conclusion to jump to with a male creator given the myriad of other possible explanations that we simply aren't privy to, and it's an even shittier conclusion to jump to with a female creator because of all the reasons I keep harping on, both the amount of roadblocks individual women have to deal with getting into the industry, and the larger trend amongst the industry, creator and fans alike to be extra critical of female creators in general.
I think she's a beautiful, strong character. Really, from where I come from, and we've talked about this a lot, we want to make sure it's a book that treats her as a human being first and foremost, but is also respectful of the fact that she represents something more. We want her to be a strong—I don't want to say feminist, but a strong character. Beautiful, but strong.
Hey guys, according to Bleeding Cool, Jeff Lemire's DC exclusive is up. Which is probably a more important piece of info than him leaving Green Arrow with #34, with a writer from Arrow taking over and planning to make Ollie liberal again and revive some pre-New 52 bits of his world.
I'm pretty sure I know what they're going for and meant there.
In modern terms "Feminist" has been colloquially tainted and transformed from its original meaning into "Women who hate all men as scum of the earth and desire to place Females above males in all situations." in the minds of a lot of people, including many self-labeled "Feminists". Which is very different from the wholly positive and inclusive messages of "Equal Rights Supporter" and/or "Female Rights Supporter"
They're saying they don't want Wonder Woman to be a sexist bastard. Which is good.
Not that she wasn't the exact opposite of sexist in Azzarello's run, smashing gender barriers and bringing positive and growing social change to the Amazon island.
Hey guys, according to Bleeding Cool, Jeff Lemire's DC exclusive is up. Which is probably a more important piece of info than him leaving Green Arrow with #34, with a writer from Arrow taking over and planning to make Ollie liberal again and revive some pre-New 52 bits of his world.
The second part of that is way more exciting to me. Now if they can just fix his costume.
I think Lemire will stick it out until the transition event at least, but I wonder if he'll keep doing any work for DC afterward. He could easily go to Marvel, and we probably all expect him to start doing work for Image soon.
And I do miss liberal Ollie, but I'll definitely be waiting and seeing. I haven't been completely satisfied with any of the GA incarnations so far, including Lemire's.
Also, I hate to be the dude that keeps posting BC links, but they also have some stuff on the new royalty system in action which is important to look at, because basically no one will be getting any royalties from monthly issues anymore, and trades and OGNs may take months or years to see royalties when they would've generated them immediately in the past.
The new system requires 60,000 issue sales in print and digital before any returns. Last we heard, digital was about 15%-20% of an issue's sales, so if we look at the icv2 estimates, we could maybe drop that down to roughly 50,000. In May, which is a bit of a high month due to all the events and recent launches, still only 18 DC titles crossed that mark, and 8 of them were the weeklies, one was the finale of Forever Evil, and three were perennial marquee titles: Batman, Justice League, and Detective Comics.
Also, I hate to be the dude that keeps posting BC links, but they also have some stuff on the new royalty system in action which is important to look at, because basically no one will be getting any royalties from monthly issues anymore, and trades and OGNs may take months or years to see royalties when they would've generated them immediately in the past.
The new system requires 60,000 issue sales in print and digital before any returns. Last we heard, digital was about 15%-20% of an issue's sales, so if we look at the icv2 estimates, we could maybe drop that down to roughly 50,000. In May, which is a bit of a high month due to all the events and recent launches, still only 18 DC titles crossed that mark, and 8 of them were the weeklies, one was the finale of Forever Evil, and three were perennial marquee titles: Batman, Justice League, and Detective Comics.
Does DC not like attracting talent? Pretty soon they'll have no choice but to accept naive fanficcers and bad amateur artists from Deviant Art for creative teams.
0
Options
UnbrokenEvaHIGH ON THE WIREBUT I WON'T TRIP ITRegistered Userregular
Also, I hate to be the dude that keeps posting BC links, but they also have some stuff on the new royalty system in action which is important to look at, because basically no one will be getting any royalties from monthly issues anymore, and trades and OGNs may take months or years to see royalties when they would've generated them immediately in the past.
The new system requires 60,000 issue sales in print and digital before any returns. Last we heard, digital was about 15%-20% of an issue's sales, so if we look at the icv2 estimates, we could maybe drop that down to roughly 50,000. In May, which is a bit of a high month due to all the events and recent launches, still only 18 DC titles crossed that mark, and 8 of them were the weeklies, one was the finale of Forever Evil, and three were perennial marquee titles: Batman, Justice League, and Detective Comics.
Does DC not like attracting talent? Pretty soon they'll have no choice but to accept naive fanficcers and bad amateur artists from Deviant Art for creative teams.
I think you just figured out how the Wonder Woman team was chosen
I'm pretty sure I know what they're going for and meant there.
In modern terms "Feminist" has been colloquially tainted and transformed from its original meaning into "Women who hate all men as scum of the earth and desire to place Females above males in all situations." in the minds of a lot of people, including many self-labeled "Feminists". Which is very different from the wholly positive and inclusive messages of "Equal Rights Supporter" and/or "Female Rights Supporter"
They're saying they don't want Wonder Woman to be a sexist bastard. Which is good.
Not that she wasn't the exact opposite of sexist in Azzarello's run, smashing gender barriers and bringing positive and growing social change to the Amazon island.
Expressly checking your language in order to avoid calling a person a feminist isn't actually good, though. It's bad.
It's bad even if there's a roundabout way you can construct a possible PR advantage to doing so.
Gay no longer means happy.
Awful no longer means inspiring awe/full of awe.
Cute no longer means clever and shrewd, at least by its most common definition.
Feminist no longer means woman's rights activist.
Gay no longer means happy.
Awful no longer means inspiring awe/full of awe.
Cute no longer means clever and shrewd, at least by its most common definition.
Feminist no longer means woman's rights activist.
Although feminist no longer means that because of an active attempt to demonise the word
which makes it somewhat different from those other words
You'll note that a lot of words which represent ideologies that challenge the capitalist, patriarchal, classist, heteronormative and so on are demonised in this way
practically nobody knows what Anarchist actually means any more for this exact reason
practically nobody knows what Anarchist actually means any more for this exact reason
Someone who believes government and laws are undesirable and unnecessary, as without them they believe a society based upon mutual cooperation will form?
practically nobody knows what Anarchist actually means any more for this exact reason
Someone who believes government and laws are undesirable and unnecessary, as without them they believe a society based upon mutual cooperation will form?
Classical anarchists don't believe there should be a social hierarchy or class structure, not that there should be no governments, in essence they believe everyone is part of the government (they tend to debate quite a bit on laws, some think that laws require law enforcers and that creates a hierarchy, others that a system of law can be communally enforced and that if you all write a list of rights that everyone has by default that is essentially a law system. So it depends on what you consider laws, and how communally those laws are enforced)
Really anarchism is somewhat broad, but if you say to someone anarchist they think "everyone can do whatever they want with no consequences" and that's a result of deliberate demonising of the term.
practically nobody knows what Anarchist actually means any more for this exact reason
Someone who believes government and laws are undesirable and unnecessary, as without them they believe a society based upon mutual cooperation will form?
Classical anarchists don't believe there should be a social hierarchy or class structure, not realy that there should be no governments, in essence they believe everyone is part of the government (they tend to debate quite a bit on laws, some think that laws require law enforcers and that creates a hierarchy, others that a system of law can be communally enforced and that if you all write a list of rights that everyone has by default that is essentially a law system. So it depends on what you consider laws, and how communally those laws are enforced)
Really anarchism is somewhat broad, but if you say to someone anarchist they think "everyone can do whatever they want with no consequences" and that's a result of deliberate demonising of the term.
Huh. I was slightly off. I guess you really do learn something every day!
When Anarky was introduced back in the 90s, he actually gave a lecture (to his dog, I think?) explaining the fundamentals of anarchism and such.
This was when talking to his dog was more of a quirky character trait, before they ramped up Anarky's IQ so high that he was building boom tubes and making a device that let his dog talk back.
Prior to Anarky's little lecture, I think all I'd ever heard about anarchism back then was basically "they want to blow everything up."
Many contemporary feminists do a more than adequate job of demonizing the term without any outside help.
I always hear about these contemporary feminists from people who hate the word feminist anyway. I just pat their head and tell them Andrea Dworkin died in 2005. Shhh, it's all better now.
Many contemporary feminists do a more than adequate job of demonizing the term without any outside help.
I always hear about these contemporary feminists from people who hate the word feminist anyway. I just pat their head and tell them Andrea Dworkin died in 2005. Shhh, it's all better now.
I'm trying to be charitable and not tar all the historical feminists leaders who did valuable things with the same brush.
But if we're being honest some prominent feminists of past eras did/said some pretty embarrassing stuff too. Shulamith Firestone comes to mind, and Margaret Sanger if we're going really old-school.
io9 has the scoop onKlarion by Ann Nocenti and Trevor McCarthy, which has a neat concept of Klarion coming of age as a sorcerer, being pulled between pagan and tech magic. Meanwhile, author and io9 blogger Geneieve Valentine takes over Catwoman with artist Garry Brown. Their run will focus on Selina's (urgh) hidden legacy of being heir to a criminal empire, which sounds pretty dumb.
In Addition, JM DeMatteis will be doing a combined Trinity of Sin book with artist Yvel Guichet. Oddly, DeMatteis says in that interview that the book won't really be exploring any more of the characters' pasts, and that it will stand alone without any ramifications for the DCU, so it sounds like DC Editorial has essentially abandoned these characters as being major players in the overall DCU.
And lastly for now, Cullen Bunn and Reilly Brown will be doing a book based around the new, handsome, humorless Lobo. Bunn originally pitched a buddy cop comedy book featuring both Lobos, influenced by Simon and Simon, but DC shot him down because they have no understanding of the market or what readers want.
Soooo, I'm going to be honest here and say that three out of four of these sound pretty bad, and that Nocenti's work has been hit or miss so Klarion could easily be crappy too. DeMatteis's Phantom Stranger run was actually solid, but his Justice League Dark was not so great and I stopped reading it pretty early on. I expect a team Trinity of Sin book to be about the same as his JLD, especially if he's not allowed to explore the characters' histories or tie them to the greater DCU in a meaningful way.
Does every fucking character have to be heir to some ridiculously powerful organization, even if we have to contrive new secret backstories to make it happen? Can't anybody ever just have been nobody? Can't anybody just have an unremarkable lower or middle-class background? Started from the bottom now we're here? I'm not saying we need to settle on Selena being a former prostitute like Frank Miller made her in Year One because Frank Miller loves him some whores, but not everyone can be or should be Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. Or Talia Al Ghul. TALIA AL GHUL. I mean, as far as the niche "Ambiguously villainous possible love interest of Batman who stands to inherit leadership of a formidable criminal cabal" goes, Talia is still RIGHT FUCKING THERE if that's the direction you wanna go.
And also, Vic Sage appears to be leading the relaunched Suicide Squad. He may or may not be the Question.
They keep trying to backtrack on early New 52 ideas and end up making everything even more convoluted. In the New 52, almost every character is as bad as post-crisis Hawkman.
Does every fucking character have to be heir to some ridiculously powerful organization, even if we have to contrive new secret backstories to make it happen? Can't anybody ever just have been nobody? Can't anybody just have an unremarkable lower or middle-class background? Started from the bottom now we're here? I'm not saying we need to settle on Selena being a former prostitute like Frank Miller made her in Year One because Frank Miller loves him some whores, but not everyone can be or should be Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. Or Talia Al Ghul. TALIA AL GHUL. I mean, as far as the niche "Ambiguously villainous possible love interest of Batman who stands to inherit leadership of a formidable criminal cabal" goes, Talia is still RIGHT FUCKING THERE if that's the direction you wanna go.
Well, it's been a thing for quite some time now, that Selena might be Carmine Falcone's illegitimate daughter. So, there's some precedent. I'm not totally against the idea of Catwoman being descended from old-money mafia, the same way Batman's descended from old-money do-gooders. But, I think you're right, in that Talia al Ghul already fills that role. Honestly, I thought Catwoman had been canned, some time ago.
Anyhow, the new DC books sound pretty not great.
Why would you get an artist/writer team known for their work on Deadpool, and not let them do a funny Lobo book?
Why does DC think anyone cares about their dumbass Trinity of Sin? Just let the concept die.
Why is Ann Nocenti still being given books, after her disastrous Green Arrow run? Was Katana any better?
So, its taken me a fair bit of time to write this post. Mostly because I am hopelessly optimistic in most things and somewhat stubborn. I kept my small flame alight for Catwoman for many months through sheer optimism choosing to be in denial about just how bad Ann Nocenti's series is. But I can't take it anymore. I feel like I am being taken for a ride by DC and Ann Nocenti. They are preying on people's love for Selina Kyle and turning out a book that is beyond sub par, greedily taking the fans $2.99 each month with little regard for quality.
I refuse to believe that Ann Nocenti sits back after finishing a script and thinks to herself "Yep, thats a good story". What galls me the most is not the horrendous scripts that contradict themselves over and over again sometimes on the same page. But more so the complete disregard for Selina's character or motivations. You could swap out Catwoman for any other character and they would fit in just the same. This is not a Catwoman book it is a generic anti hero book. Ann Nocenti has taken the decent work done by Judd Winnick and completely dismantled it.
I wonder if DC higher up's look at Catwoman pulling 20,000 sales a month and are happy with that. Seeing in the same list that the critically acclaimed Harley Quinn is pulling close to 65,000 a month. These books shouldn't be that far apart. If a Catwoman book was treated like Harley Quinn then those sales could be much closer. Catwoman fans want a book they can enjoy and share with others. As it is right now I am ashamed to be a Catwoman reader.
But I wont take it anymore. I wont give them any more money until they fix what is wrong creatively. I bought the floppies, I bought the trades, I supported the character and they have treated me with such disregard. My money will no longer support Ann Nocenti. Hell, I am angry enough that I let it get to this stage. That month after month I shit up with this thread ironically calling her Queen Nocenti and actually trying to review the book. To give constructive critique. I am sorry to anyone who has been bothered by me talking about Ann Nocenti. From this point on I am going to refuse to talk about her until she has left Catwoman and moved onto something else less close to my heart.
And lastly for now, Cullen Bunn and Reilly Brown will be doing a book based around the new, handsome, humorless Lobo. Bunn originally pitched a buddy cop comedy book featuring both Lobos, influenced by Simon and Simon, but DC shot him down because they have no understanding of the market or what readers want.
I would've bought the shit out of the Lobo/Lobo buddy book. Hey Marvel, now's your chance to publish a Wolverine/Cyclops book to fill the gap.
He actually had a really good series from 2002-2006 with Geoff Johns, Rags Morales, Palmiotti & Gray. Johns' use of violence and more darker stuff worked for a character built around being space cop with a mace.
And then Chaykin came in, made it about Hawkgirl with One Year Later, and it turned to crap.
Many contemporary feminists do a more than adequate job of demonizing the term without any outside help.
I always hear about these contemporary feminists from people who hate the word feminist anyway. I just pat their head and tell them Andrea Dworkin died in 2005. Shhh, it's all better now.
I'm trying to be charitable and not tar all the historical feminists leaders who did valuable things with the same brush.
But if we're being honest some prominent feminists of past eras did/said some pretty embarrassing stuff too. Shulamith Firestone comes to mind, and Margaret Sanger if we're going really old-school.
But hey, comics!
Unfortunately the detractors don't give a shit about feminism's history, they judge all modern feminists by the tumblr crowd. They literally cannot tell the difference between Gail Simone and Andrea Dworkin. All they see is a word they hate and go into defon 1.
Does every fucking character have to be heir to some ridiculously powerful organization, even if we have to contrive new secret backstories to make it happen? Can't anybody ever just have been nobody? Can't anybody just have an unremarkable lower or middle-class background? Started from the bottom now we're here? I'm not saying we need to settle on Selena being a former prostitute like Frank Miller made her in Year One because Frank Miller loves him some whores, but not everyone can be or should be Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. Or Talia Al Ghul. TALIA AL GHUL. I mean, as far as the niche "Ambiguously villainous possible love interest of Batman who stands to inherit leadership of a formidable criminal cabal" goes, Talia is still RIGHT FUCKING THERE if that's the direction you wanna go.
I'm intrigued by Catwoman being a mob boss. On the other hand it's DC - they'll fuck it up somehow.
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
I think DC badly needs to evolve into something a bit more high concept. Right now, there is no reason to care about something like the potential for Catwoman to become the heir of a criminal empire. Because there really isn't any potential to fortify that idea with. DC comics is not unlike North Korea in terms of being a progressive-you can laud the country for its ecological footprint, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily care about the environment.
More painfully, I don't expect reform or lasting change in DC for the same reason I don't expect North Korea to give up being a dictatorship-the money's too good for the people at the top, and it's too rewarding being China's(Warner Brothers) shoulder monkey.
But what I would bring to the table is the idea that DC should consider, new 52 and all, the benefits of copying Marvel in terms of having an Ultimate line. That may have been DC's true intentions for making a New 52, but they bumbled it miserably by deciding to entirely replace their whole damn lineup, rather than making a separate arm that can start with a few big names and gradually amp up with additional books. Prolong the anticipation and the magic. If there was a way that DC could provide incentives and give creators a sense of personal investment in a longer-term sense, that would also be good. I think the chances of that would be greater if there was an arrangement allowing the people that actually make the books left to some of their own devices.
It's a nice idea, at least. DC has made a lot of mistakes, but one cannot advance without making mistakes. This has great significance.
Given their sales lately, they'll have to either do something drastic again or totally change the way they publish in print. And out of their set of new books for October (6 new ongoings, and the Earth 2 Weekly so far), I can only see Arkham Manor and possibly the Deathstroke title selling consistently above 30K. I can't imagine how an entertainment company can continue to misunderstand the concept of "fun" so badly month after month. Seriously, I don't think anyone wants to read about that new Lobo, and the books he's been in so far should've proven that, and yet they're going to launch another 20K title that will be canceled after 8 months.
DC could end up being a company that publishes big corporate titles with licensed characters in Image numbers if they don't fix their shit soon. I could easily see them falling into third place in another year or two.
I do have do say. Anyone remember how the Injustice comic, outside of the shitty start, actually ended up pretty damn good? Well, Injustice: Year 2 has been even better.
And thankfully, the comic isn't following the game's storyline. It's doing its own, better one.
Eh, I don't have a problem with Selina Kyle being Falcone's illegitimate daughter. I just don't see how that translates into Catwoman becoming the Mafia Queen. She's hit them just as hard as she's hit everyone else; why would they then agree to let her be the leader? I mean, unless she's going to walk around with a sawed-off for problem solving, Selina should remain a free agent.
Posts
But I'll probably transition my $3 a month over to one of those new Batbooks, so I've got that going at least.
I'm not accusing you personally if being a misogynist in this case, I believe you when you say you'd make the same accusation if it was David Finch's brother instead of his wife, but regardless of your intent your actions are supporting a shitty status quo where every woman breaking into the in the industry faces accusations like this.
And I never said I thought they had a great pitch, I said I thought they had a pitch that DC editorial liked. If anything, that's cause for concern.
Currently the industry is very much slanted against female creators, so yes we absolutely should be more careful about making damaging accusations about them and their careers. That is because the effect of such an accusation is much greater than the same accusation made against a man would be, as it is added onto the pile of bullshit women already need to deal with when breaking into comics. "She just got the job because of who she slept with/is married to" is a real problem that women need to deal with to a far, far greater extent than men, and even if you feel that you are totally justified in making that accusation in this case, you are still contributing to the larger problem.
Even beyond that, you are still undermining and questioning a person's competence and ability to do their job with nothing resembling actual evidence to support it. It would be a shitty conclusion to jump to with a male creator given the myriad of other possible explanations that we simply aren't privy to, and it's an even shittier conclusion to jump to with a female creator because of all the reasons I keep harping on, both the amount of roadblocks individual women have to deal with getting into the industry, and the larger trend amongst the industry, creator and fans alike to be extra critical of female creators in general.
http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2014/07/new-wonder-woman-artist-doesnt-want-wonder-woman-be-feminist
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=53802
In modern terms "Feminist" has been colloquially tainted and transformed from its original meaning into "Women who hate all men as scum of the earth and desire to place Females above males in all situations." in the minds of a lot of people, including many self-labeled "Feminists". Which is very different from the wholly positive and inclusive messages of "Equal Rights Supporter" and/or "Female Rights Supporter"
They're saying they don't want Wonder Woman to be a sexist bastard. Which is good.
Not that she wasn't the exact opposite of sexist in Azzarello's run, smashing gender barriers and bringing positive and growing social change to the Amazon island.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
The second part of that is way more exciting to me. Now if they can just fix his costume.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
And I do miss liberal Ollie, but I'll definitely be waiting and seeing. I haven't been completely satisfied with any of the GA incarnations so far, including Lemire's.
The new system requires 60,000 issue sales in print and digital before any returns. Last we heard, digital was about 15%-20% of an issue's sales, so if we look at the icv2 estimates, we could maybe drop that down to roughly 50,000. In May, which is a bit of a high month due to all the events and recent launches, still only 18 DC titles crossed that mark, and 8 of them were the weeklies, one was the finale of Forever Evil, and three were perennial marquee titles: Batman, Justice League, and Detective Comics.
Does DC not like attracting talent? Pretty soon they'll have no choice but to accept naive fanficcers and bad amateur artists from Deviant Art for creative teams.
I think you just figured out how the Wonder Woman team was chosen
Expressly checking your language in order to avoid calling a person a feminist isn't actually good, though. It's bad.
It's bad even if there's a roundabout way you can construct a possible PR advantage to doing so.
Gay no longer means happy.
Awful no longer means inspiring awe/full of awe.
Cute no longer means clever and shrewd, at least by its most common definition.
Feminist no longer means woman's rights activist.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
Although feminist no longer means that because of an active attempt to demonise the word
which makes it somewhat different from those other words
You'll note that a lot of words which represent ideologies that challenge the capitalist, patriarchal, classist, heteronormative and so on are demonised in this way
practically nobody knows what Anarchist actually means any more for this exact reason
Someone who believes government and laws are undesirable and unnecessary, as without them they believe a society based upon mutual cooperation will form?
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
Classical anarchists don't believe there should be a social hierarchy or class structure, not that there should be no governments, in essence they believe everyone is part of the government (they tend to debate quite a bit on laws, some think that laws require law enforcers and that creates a hierarchy, others that a system of law can be communally enforced and that if you all write a list of rights that everyone has by default that is essentially a law system. So it depends on what you consider laws, and how communally those laws are enforced)
Really anarchism is somewhat broad, but if you say to someone anarchist they think "everyone can do whatever they want with no consequences" and that's a result of deliberate demonising of the term.
Huh. I was slightly off. I guess you really do learn something every day!
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
This was when talking to his dog was more of a quirky character trait, before they ramped up Anarky's IQ so high that he was building boom tubes and making a device that let his dog talk back.
Prior to Anarky's little lecture, I think all I'd ever heard about anarchism back then was basically "they want to blow everything up."
But the politics were too convenient.
I always hear about these contemporary feminists from people who hate the word feminist anyway. I just pat their head and tell them Andrea Dworkin died in 2005. Shhh, it's all better now.
I'm trying to be charitable and not tar all the historical feminists leaders who did valuable things with the same brush.
But if we're being honest some prominent feminists of past eras did/said some pretty embarrassing stuff too. Shulamith Firestone comes to mind, and Margaret Sanger if we're going really old-school.
But hey, comics!
io9 has the scoop on Klarion by Ann Nocenti and Trevor McCarthy, which has a neat concept of Klarion coming of age as a sorcerer, being pulled between pagan and tech magic. Meanwhile, author and io9 blogger Geneieve Valentine takes over Catwoman with artist Garry Brown. Their run will focus on Selina's (urgh) hidden legacy of being heir to a criminal empire, which sounds pretty dumb.
In Addition, JM DeMatteis will be doing a combined Trinity of Sin book with artist Yvel Guichet. Oddly, DeMatteis says in that interview that the book won't really be exploring any more of the characters' pasts, and that it will stand alone without any ramifications for the DCU, so it sounds like DC Editorial has essentially abandoned these characters as being major players in the overall DCU.
And lastly for now, Cullen Bunn and Reilly Brown will be doing a book based around the new, handsome, humorless Lobo. Bunn originally pitched a buddy cop comedy book featuring both Lobos, influenced by Simon and Simon, but DC shot him down because they have no understanding of the market or what readers want.
Soooo, I'm going to be honest here and say that three out of four of these sound pretty bad, and that Nocenti's work has been hit or miss so Klarion could easily be crappy too. DeMatteis's Phantom Stranger run was actually solid, but his Justice League Dark was not so great and I stopped reading it pretty early on. I expect a team Trinity of Sin book to be about the same as his JLD, especially if he's not allowed to explore the characters' histories or tie them to the greater DCU in a meaningful way.
Does every fucking character have to be heir to some ridiculously powerful organization, even if we have to contrive new secret backstories to make it happen? Can't anybody ever just have been nobody? Can't anybody just have an unremarkable lower or middle-class background? Started from the bottom now we're here? I'm not saying we need to settle on Selena being a former prostitute like Frank Miller made her in Year One because Frank Miller loves him some whores, but not everyone can be or should be Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark. Or Talia Al Ghul. TALIA AL GHUL. I mean, as far as the niche "Ambiguously villainous possible love interest of Batman who stands to inherit leadership of a formidable criminal cabal" goes, Talia is still RIGHT FUCKING THERE if that's the direction you wanna go.
They keep trying to backtrack on early New 52 ideas and end up making everything even more convoluted. In the New 52, almost every character is as bad as post-crisis Hawkman.
That may or may not be because that was her origin in Batman: The Animated Series.
Well, it's been a thing for quite some time now, that Selena might be Carmine Falcone's illegitimate daughter. So, there's some precedent. I'm not totally against the idea of Catwoman being descended from old-money mafia, the same way Batman's descended from old-money do-gooders. But, I think you're right, in that Talia al Ghul already fills that role. Honestly, I thought Catwoman had been canned, some time ago.
Anyhow, the new DC books sound pretty not great.
Why would you get an artist/writer team known for their work on Deadpool, and not let them do a funny Lobo book?
Why does DC think anyone cares about their dumbass Trinity of Sin? Just let the concept die.
Why is Ann Nocenti still being given books, after her disastrous Green Arrow run? Was Katana any better?
Tumblr Twitter
Over at NeoGAF the reigning Catwoman fan finally gave up.
Next day, new Catwoman writer.
I would've bought the shit out of the Lobo/Lobo buddy book. Hey Marvel, now's your chance to publish a Wolverine/Cyclops book to fill the gap.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
He actually had a really good series from 2002-2006 with Geoff Johns, Rags Morales, Palmiotti & Gray. Johns' use of violence and more darker stuff worked for a character built around being space cop with a mace.
And then Chaykin came in, made it about Hawkgirl with One Year Later, and it turned to crap.
Unfortunately the detractors don't give a shit about feminism's history, they judge all modern feminists by the tumblr crowd. They literally cannot tell the difference between Gail Simone and Andrea Dworkin. All they see is a word they hate and go into defon 1.
I'm intrigued by Catwoman being a mob boss. On the other hand it's DC - they'll fuck it up somehow.
Johns' and Goyer's JSA.
however I also like Selina with short dark hair way more than Selina with long blonde hair
who knows why that is coughdarwyncookecough
More painfully, I don't expect reform or lasting change in DC for the same reason I don't expect North Korea to give up being a dictatorship-the money's too good for the people at the top, and it's too rewarding being China's(Warner Brothers) shoulder monkey.
But what I would bring to the table is the idea that DC should consider, new 52 and all, the benefits of copying Marvel in terms of having an Ultimate line. That may have been DC's true intentions for making a New 52, but they bumbled it miserably by deciding to entirely replace their whole damn lineup, rather than making a separate arm that can start with a few big names and gradually amp up with additional books. Prolong the anticipation and the magic. If there was a way that DC could provide incentives and give creators a sense of personal investment in a longer-term sense, that would also be good. I think the chances of that would be greater if there was an arrangement allowing the people that actually make the books left to some of their own devices.
It's a nice idea, at least. DC has made a lot of mistakes, but one cannot advance without making mistakes. This has great significance.
DC could end up being a company that publishes big corporate titles with licensed characters in Image numbers if they don't fix their shit soon. I could easily see them falling into third place in another year or two.
And thankfully, the comic isn't following the game's storyline. It's doing its own, better one.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
How is Ann Nocenti still in comics after her abysmal follow-up to Grant Morrison's excellent Kid Eternity mini-series?
Hawkworld by Tim Truman.