RazzaTazz's forum posts

#1 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: I am someone that is trying to become a writer, and as such, I am prone towards anyone that has any creative concept, however strange or unorthodox that it might be. As an example I am sure that when Tolkien told his friends that he was going to write a book about trolls and dragons and a magical ring that they probably tried to persuade him to stick with something more common, but he ended up creating a genre of fiction. Because of that I tend to err on the side of creativity rather than resting on old ideas. Sif, Valkyrie or Angela? Sure, that would be fine too, but it is not the writer's concept, and so I give him benefit of the doubt for the story that he wants to tell.

Moderator
#2 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@frozen said:

@razzatazz said:

@frozen: Clearly you are quite opinionated when it comes to the concepts of equality. You are misappropriating feminism in this instance as it has nothing to do with it.

It's clearly related to Feminism. It's like saying making Wally West black has nothing to do with race, it DOES, just as replacing Thor with a female, IS related to Feminism, which falls under ''diversity''

I think anyone that equates feminism on equal theoretical footing as Marxism is probably somewhat biased when it comes to their understanding of either. I think you are not differentiating between abstract concepts and concrete concepts.

That Wally West is black does have something to do with race in the sense that he is now black and that as a black person he has a higher level of melanin in his skin tone. It is equally the same with the new Thor, as she is definitely a female, as that is her biological definition. Where you are going wrong is reading the abstract concepts into these developments. Wally being black is not affirmative action it is just about a new direction for the character. Thor being a woman is not about her being a feminist, rather just feminine. There is a difference.

Moderator
#3 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@frozen said:

@sc said:

@frozen said:

Again, finding ‘new readers’ in this given context is pandering to Feminism, that a male character, a popular one too (because of the MCU) should now be made into a female to show how ‘strong’ female characters can be.

Money wise this idea is attrocius, considering the new found popularity Thor has had with the MCU, and to ‘’find new fans’’ while throwing away the foundation of a good character is not the way to go.

You do know the Superman/Wonder Woman book is NOT prospering well in sales?

Its pandering to controversy/curiosity not feminism. Jason Aaron writing a new Thor ongoing with a beard and without his hammer isn't going to be picked up by IGN, The Guardian, Variety, New York Daily News, The Young Turks, Time magazine, several newspapers and news sites. Thor the comic character from Marvel who has some familiarity with casual audiences because of the MCU, having the comics version be represented by a woman, will get attention from those websites the same way a Muslim teenage girl superhero also got attention and discussion.

MCU awareness/sales don't translate to comic sales, and I agree its risky in the sense that MCU Thor gained a lot of fans that could find the comic version more accessible now, and specifically as the character generally is, so gender switching the character… oh wait, character isn't being gender switched, okay so the Thor character dying… oh wait the character isn't dying. Those that like the MCU version of Thor will still find that Thor around but there will just be a female version running around as well. Eh the first Thor movie actually had Thor without his hammer for most of it so in that sense its actually not that different from a hammerless Thor in comics running around. So the foundation of Thor isn't going away, its being built on by the idea the character can actually support such a character. That its "throwing away" anything is really just a knee-jerk reaction to this news and thats okay too, at this stage a lot of whats said whether pro or anti this creative decision is just speculation. Its about individuals personal attitudes to concepts and actual quality of products.

But that's NOT the way to go - anything can be made 'curious' - if Superman was made gay, would that pander to 'curiosity'? Or if Batman was made black? Creating controversy will only last so long, it'll create an initial ''buzz'' or attract attention but eventually that buzz Marvel are aiming for will fade. That does not give Marvel the right to throw away a great run, and a great character and replace it with an unnecessary change. The operative word here: unnecessary. Marvel instead could focus on other female characters, or attempt to make them more known, but instead they've opted for a cheap cop out - fans don't deserve to have that happen to them. Marvel are simply trying to be diverse for the sake of being diverse.

A Muslim teenage girl superhero can only be handled so carefully - if that is to truly appeal to Muslim teenagers, then they should capture the culture/society they live in, of a post-9/11 world, there are other Muslim superheroes in DC who have nothing notable about them and no attempt at capturing the culture whatsoever.

It does, in a way - since the MCU's popularity, more posters here have been predominantly Marvel fans, the MCU brought more awareness to the character, and Marvel, up until this fiasco, were doing a good job at maintaining good stories, and making him more accessible with Marvel NOW!

But if we take too much of an OPTIMISTIC view, then we simply become suckers to both DC and Marvel.

I think what you are missing as well is the potential for comics to act as a medium of pure creativity. With the creativity of a writer and artist nearly anything is possible, from the early years of adventure comics which mirrored reality to wild and impossible stories of science fiction and fantasy. It would seem though that you are saying that creators should not be allowed to create whatever they want. I believe it is the exact opposite. In the end market forces will prevail and dictate what will be successful, but because something has never happened before doesn't mean that it will never happen, otherwise no innovation in human history would have ever happened. As with any other comic development, if you don't like it then simply don't read it.

Moderator
#4 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@frozen: Clearly you are quite opinionated when it comes to the concepts of equality. You are misappropriating feminism in this instance as it has nothing to do with it.

Moderator
#5 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@frozen said:

@razzatazz: Again, finding ‘new readers’ in this given context is pandering to Feminism, that a male character, a popular one too (because of the MCU) should now be made into a female to show how ‘strong’ female characters can be.

Money wise this idea is attrocius, considering the new found popularity Thor has had with the MCU, and to ‘’find new fans’’ while throwing away the foundation of a good character is not the way to go.

You do know the Superman/Wonder Woman book is NOT prospering well in sales?

Perhaps you should better acquaint yourself with feminism before you start calling creative changes in comic books as being driven by feminist thought processes. The biggest misunderstanding of feminism is that it wants to take things away from men, which is not the case. Feminism is much more geared towards equality, not the subjugation of masculinity. So to say that this is a feminist decision is ridiculous, especially when one considers the near lack of female creators between Marvel and DC, combined with the bizarre comments that many of the male creators have made towards femininity, female characters and feminism.

Also Superman-Wonder Woman may not be doing well, but it has made it farther into its run than a lot of other new 52 books.

Moderator
#6 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

I was kind of hoping for Sharon Carter, but I guess not.

Moderator
#7 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

@frozen: There hasn't been any talk of feminism in relation to this character. To drag gender issues into this muddies what is happening, and it is purely about money and finding a wider base. In terms of decisions based on money versus loyalty to characters, the comics industry and specifically the big two have always done it. Any time there is something like "Wonder Woman and Superman are dating" it signifies a break from the past. I am still a Wonder Woman fan though and still read her comics despite my dislike of that aspect of the character.

Comic readers only really tend to care about major changes like this when it is a character that they like. There are not many of those opposed to for instance the aforementioned Wonder Woman-Superman thing that will join in arms on this one, unless they are also Thor fans.

Moderator
#8 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

I thunk the people reacting with outrage have some validity to their reactions, but that there is something bigger here. Obviously the people commenting on Thor have a greater tendency to actually read the character's stories, but what Marvel is going after here are new fans. Just like the changes of the new 52, this is an attempt to gain new readers.

Moderator
#9 Posted by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

I guess that time will prove the answer, but such changes are maybe necessary for a medium that continues to lose interest.

Moderator
#10 Edited by RazzaTazz (9478 posts) - - Show Bio

In my experience the female members on this site are both the most dedicated but also the most disenchanted with the community as a whole. I think that they find this site as a good way to meet like minded comic fans (whether male or female) but once those friendships are made, that they retract to the shadows, to only post once in a blue moon and to stick mostly to PM. So there are probably more here than it would seem, only they are not as visible.

Moderator