|
Post by pacino on Mar 16, 2015 20:57:51 GMT -5
Not that, you said they were like this over the Trans issue. Were they though?
|
|
|
Post by Huw on Mar 16, 2015 21:06:28 GMT -5
To be clear, I'm upset at the cover artist being hung out to dry, literally over his cover. I completely respect people not liking it. But threatening the man over it? C'mon guys. He has tweeted that he wasn't threatened
|
|
|
Post by jonathansoko on Mar 16, 2015 21:07:29 GMT -5
Ok that makes me feel a hundred times better. I was talking captain superiors post literally
|
|
|
Post by Huw on Mar 16, 2015 21:08:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jonathansoko on Mar 16, 2015 21:10:52 GMT -5
Good to hear. That would have been so disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by henrythemorerecent on Mar 16, 2015 21:23:55 GMT -5
Holy hell. Its a variant.
I just read one reaction against the cover that said "Thankyou for respecting the new demographic"...
So now we're going to disregard books like Killing Joke just because the new demographic doesn't like it? I repeat, its a variant. Regular buyers didn't have to suffer with having to buy this copy. They could buy the regular one. So this would have been both an homage and a treat for fans of the Killing Joke anbd Rafaels art which is incredible, and also a way for the new demographic to not have to buy this cover.
It was a defining character moment and literally nobody can change that, it is the reason the book has been in every single Top whatever list since it came out. I understand its disturbing for some, but those people also need to respect the people out there who don't have an issue with it. Nobody is right or wrong in this situation if they just thought about it before reacting with such outrage.
|
|
|
Post by CaptainSuperior on Mar 16, 2015 21:25:40 GMT -5
To be clear, I'm upset at the cover artist being hung out to dry, literally over his cover. I completely respect people not liking it. But threatening the man over it? C'mon guys. He has tweeted that he wasn't threatened With the news being extremely recent things are getting thrown around details wise. I'll correct my previous statement, I just recently was able to checkout his twitter.
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Mar 16, 2015 21:36:59 GMT -5
Holy hell. Its a variant. I just read one reaction against the cover that said "Thankyou for respecting the new demographic"... So now we're going to disregard books like Killing Joke just because the new demographic doesn't like it? I repeat, its a variant. Regular buyers didn't have to suffer with having to buy this copy. They could buy the regular one. So this would have been both an homage and a treat for fans of the Killing Joke anbd Rafaels art which is incredible, and also a way for the new demographic to not have to buy this cover. It was a defining character moment and literally nobody can change that, it is the reason the book has been in every single Top whatever list since it came out. I understand its disturbing for some, but those people also need to respect the people out there who don't have an issue with it. Nobody is right or wrong in this situation if they just thought about it before reacting with such outrage. Why not have James Gordon being tied upas a variant on one of these titles? If this is so integral to her character, isn't that to his? Only one of those is ever brought up, however.
|
|
matt
Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Posts: 75
|
Post by matt on Mar 16, 2015 21:38:42 GMT -5
To be honest I would of bought the cover. The Killing Joke was essential in the early days of me reading comics, though i do understand why many are so upset. I was bummed to hear it was being pulled but after I learned that it was Abuquerque depiction I respect the choice a lot
|
|
|
Post by henrythemorerecent on Mar 16, 2015 21:54:15 GMT -5
Holy hell. Its a variant. I just read one reaction against the cover that said "Thankyou for respecting the new demographic"... So now we're going to disregard books like Killing Joke just because the new demographic doesn't like it? I repeat, its a variant. Regular buyers didn't have to suffer with having to buy this copy. They could buy the regular one. So this would have been both an homage and a treat for fans of the Killing Joke anbd Rafaels art which is incredible, and also a way for the new demographic to not have to buy this cover. It was a defining character moment and literally nobody can change that, it is the reason the book has been in every single Top whatever list since it came out. I understand its disturbing for some, but those people also need to respect the people out there who don't have an issue with it. Nobody is right or wrong in this situation if they just thought about it before reacting with such outrage. Why not have James Gordon being tied upas a variant on one of these titles? If this is so integral to her character, isn't that to his? Only one of those is ever brought up, however. If there was a James Gordon book, I'm sure they would. I understand your reasoning, I'm not saying its integral to her character now, she has clearly grown as a character and is far from that. Which is why this cover is an homage. Its also why I stressed the fact its a variant. If this was the standard cover of, say, the Batgirl Endgame tie in, granted my personal opinion would still stand on the quality and context of the cover, but also completely understand the fact that it does not fit in tone with the current series. The fact its the Joker's 75th anniversary and the defining moment between Joker and Batgirl, while unfortunate, is her being shot by him, makes perfect sense to have a variant homaging that moment. No doubt if there was a Gotham Central or Jim Gordon book, that would be the cover. And it would make sense. And I would buy that cover. Because he is one of my favourite characters of all time. But thats my personal view again. All I'm saying is this is the history of the character now. Yes she has grown. But you can't deny history. I know what I'm about to say may seem silly in comparison to the heavy themes of this cover, but in response to some other comments I saw regarding this being an innapropriate fit (once again forgetting its a variant and not the standard cover) and that tonally it doesn't fit with the series... We get Lego and Robot Chicken and Movie posters that have in no way thematical ties to the books they're in. But nobody has a problem because they are variants. Again I stress, I know thematically they couldn't be more different from this Batgirl cover. But if the argument is that it doesn't fit the book, the same argument can be made that there is the option to not have to buy it. Readers wouldn't have been missing out. Its just the same age old argument of parents complaining about whats on TV; Just change the channel?
|
|
|
Post by harmonica on Mar 17, 2015 2:17:10 GMT -5
i hate this piece as a cover. as a panel or splash page in the right storyline this would be awesome though because it evokes so many feelings and i feel dirty just looking at it. anyone remember the bathtub scene in "Dexter"? this reminds me of that and that scene haunts me to this day.
the arguments i really have an issue with thou are that this piece is misogynistic or that you shouldnt show superheroes in a hopeless crisis.
superheroes can only be superheroes if you break them apart and show that even after such events they recover and beat whatever held them down. if your heroes are always on top it gets dull and boring. but as i said you need the right story for that and as a cover its completely disconnected from any circumstance or payoff, even though its a hommage to TKJ.
as for the misogyny, yes this cover is degrading and exploitative but to the character, not all women like some want to argue. imo female characters are a bit too sacred right now, in that everytime you show them in a not so heroic way it gets huge outcry, and i get why it is that way but i think we are overcompensating a bit sometimes and not every attack to a female character is an attack to all women. btw i think compensating the years of "damsel in distress" should be done by more "dude in distess" not "nobody in distress" because if noone needs to be saved we wouldnt need superheroes at all, and "city in distress" just doesnt stike as much as a specific character we know.
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Mar 17, 2015 5:56:14 GMT -5
Why not have James Gordon being tied upas a variant on one of these titles? If this is so integral to her character, isn't that to his? Only one of those is ever brought up, however. If there was a James Gordon book, I'm sure they would. I understand your reasoning, I'm not saying its integral to her character now, she has clearly grown as a character and is far from that. Which is why this cover is an homage. Its also why I stressed the fact its a variant. If this was the standard cover of, say, the Batgirl Endgame tie in, granted my personal opinion would still stand on the quality and context of the cover, but also completely understand the fact that it does not fit in tone with the current series. The fact its the Joker's 75th anniversary and the defining moment between Joker and Batgirl, while unfortunate, is her being shot by him, makes perfect sense to have a variant homaging that moment. No doubt if there was a Gotham Central or Jim Gordon book, that would be the cover. And it would make sense. And I would buy that cover. Because he is one of my favourite characters of all time. But thats my personal view again. All I'm saying is this is the history of the character now. Yes she has grown. But you can't deny history. I know what I'm about to say may seem silly in comparison to the heavy themes of this cover, but in response to some other comments I saw regarding this being an innapropriate fit (once again forgetting its a variant and not the standard cover) and that tonally it doesn't fit with the series... We get Lego and Robot Chicken and Movie posters that have in no way thematical ties to the books they're in. But nobody has a problem because they are variants. Again I stress, I know thematically they couldn't be more different from this Batgirl cover. But if the argument is that it doesn't fit the book, the same argument can be made that there is the option to not have to buy it. Readers wouldn't have been missing out. Its just the same age old argument of parents complaining about whats on TV; Just change the channel? Plenty of people have spoken up about how many variants or covers appear to have no thematic sense with the book inside.
|
|
|
Post by angelus104 on Mar 17, 2015 7:44:35 GMT -5
I've been thinking a lot about this and will of course talk about it on tonight's show. But I have some specific ideas about some of the points brought up here. (On top of that thank you for keeping the discussion respectful and interesting. It's been awesome to see)
The piece itself is pretty stunning. It's a wonderful piece of horror art and also perfectly evocative of The Killing Joke. The problem lies, not in the image being mysoginistic or malicious, but in being unaware or ignoring the very real critiques that have surfaced about that story.
It's an homage, but one that memorializes the character being used as an object and a plot device. With what the current Batgirl run is going for that message is completely at odds.
Yes it is variant cover, but as Cameron, Babs, Brendan and others have said they want everything to reflect the story and core of the book they are writing.
Of course those robot chicken and Lego covers are not keeping in tone, but there is a lot more leeway when you are being super silly than when you are evoking something so serious.
I also want to talk about the "damsel and dudes in distress" point one poster brought up.
I completely agree that no character is sacred in service of a great story. But I think the qualm with image is that it's not part of a story, or arc for Batgirl it was a sensational image made to sell books. This trauma is part of her history, and I think it's been used to great effect by creators inside of stories. But putting it on a cover, even a variant, seems to be courting an audience, not of Batgirl, but of Alan Moore and The Killing Joke.
Again. This is my opinion and I appreciate you all having such a good debate about everything here! Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by rgsc on Mar 17, 2015 8:05:01 GMT -5
[dammit! I just finished writing a post when my computer restarted and I lost it all. Here it goes again] I am very pleased Rafael Albuquerque asked DC to not use the cover. As a previous commenter said it is all about context and, in this situation, there are several contexts that need to be considered. One is the context of the current run. The creative team has actively created an atmosphere which is the polar opposite of this cover. They have stated they want to move away from TKJ, even while respectfully acknowledging the history. A week or more BEFORE the cover was announced Brendan Fletcher addressed The Joker & TKJ in their run in an interview. See ca. 1:10:00 to 1:17:00 of the most recent episode of 3 Chicks Review Comics threechicks.podbean.com/e/3-chicks-review-comics-episode-077-the-brenden-fletcher-interview/Other variants (Lego, Darwyn Cooke etc) may also not be thematically linked to the story between the covers, but they are not tonally at odds with them either. The dramatic difference between cover and content is key. To have such a dramatic image on the cover it ought to be dealt with in the story. As a previous commenter (Harmomica) stated, if this were a splash page, or something, it would be different – there would be the opportunity for Batgirl to assert her power and overcome her moment of terror. Here, the trauma inflicted in TKJ is reinscribed and there is no opportunity to show the character address it, let alone overcome it. The context of the audience cannot be ignored here, either. It is not “pandering”. It is a wilful decision by the creators – heartily approved by DC/WB – to court a different audience than has traditionally been served in comics. The success in this area that the current team has seen has been celebrated by their corporate overlords as something to be emulated, even as it has been hatefully derided by some sectors of comics fandom. We’ve talked about this issue on this very board and, for some this is not the Batgirl they want to read. For others, it is exactly what they want. What does it say to the new audience they have reached –and they want to gain more of –for the RA cover to be on the issue? The chorus of “it is just a variant, what’s the big deal?” does not take into consideration that it is a variant but it is not a limited one (ie not even a 1:25 or whatever it was for the Manara Spider-Woman variant which would be less likely to be seen) so that, at least in the US & Canada, there is a very good chance that this will be the one that is seen in stores. And it is certainly the one that will be associated with the issue online. Comics companies use the variants as part of their marketing push –sometimes it works in their favour and other times it can cause controversy which may or may not help sales which, we must never forget, is the marketing dept’s main concern. Like with Spider-Woman, the choice of the variant cover does impact how people will approach the series. While they may get some more sales of this issue to fans of TKJ they are more likely to alienate a potential audience who may have bought this issues and all the others that follow. The larger context, of course, is the history of the characters and how this image references it. At least a couple commenters above, Henrythemostrecent in particular, have stated that the shooting is a pivotal moment between Batgirl and the Joker but I think it is important to remember that Batgirl had retired prior to the events of TKJ. It was Barbara Gordon who was made to suffer to serve a narrative that wasn’t her own. She was out of the cowl in both the old continuity and in the new (the new52 continuity suggests she was only Batgirl for a year before she hung up the cowl, THEN was shot and then took up the mantle after her long rehabilitation; for the old continuity she retired in Batgirl Special #1) and I think this is a very important distinction. TKJ is not a Batgirl story but has become the defining story for her. She was only later rehabilitated after a lot of work by some talented creators and this was not part of the initial decision to have her shot. It was never intended to be a part of a longer BG arc where she triumphantly returns a la Knightfall; it was one of a series of horrors perpetrated by the Joker in an attempt to unhinge Jim Gordon. This history can be acknowledged without celebrating the horror inflicted on her. It HAS been referenced skillfully by the creators of the current and previous run, as well as in ancillary books that Batgirl has appeared. RA stated that his cover was an homage to a book he loved. Note that it is the BOOK, not the character of Batgirl/Barbra Gordon that it is an homage to, and this is at the heart of why the cover is so dramatically inappropriate to be associated with this run of Batgirl. I cannot fathom how anyone who is a fan of Batgirl could get behind a celebration of the treatment of the character in TKJ. The cover revisits the character’s lowest point, showing her completely fearful and powerless. It is antithetical to the title. Albuquerque listened to the criticism the piece received and, whether you agree with the people who took issue with the cover or not, as he wrote opinions should not be discredited. The decision to pull the cover, even in the face of the outcry, is not censorship. It was a creative and marketing decision, the same calculus that went into the decision to its creation in the first place. Personally, I am very happy that this was the decision that was made.
|
|
|
Post by lennyreid on Mar 17, 2015 8:18:03 GMT -5
Well said, Bobby.
Furthermore, I'd just like to highlight that though there is a lot of reaction nowadays when something hits a nerve, this kind of reaction is at least progressive in its intent.
There is some talk coming down the pipeline about political correctness and censorship in the wake of the cover being pulled, but the fact that these controversies are being discussed - intelligently or not - is a good thing. It was DC that decided to publish the cover, it was DC who decided to pull the cover, which they have a right to do, or not to do, on both counts. It sets a precedent that can only inform them going forward, from listening to their audience - also a good thing. It means that there are changes happening in comics, which is really exciting as a fan.
Missteps along the way are bound to happen and they will again. Looking forward to reading and participating in more well-reasoned debates as a result.
|
|