On Negativity:

This is by far one of my least coherent posts (this month anyway). You are warned. :-)

My mind is in a strange place today. I was reminded again of a comment from my post on Cassandra Cain:

"You have an awful lot to say about a character you aren't interested in. It's okay to just not like a comic, you know. You could just say "it wasn't to my taste" and move on to Green Lantern butts or something, so I'm wondering why you feel the need to rant at length on the subject.

It's a fair comment of course, but it's one that gave me pause nonetheless. Not to mention, more than a little bemusement. After all, if I limited myself to only talking about things that I enjoy or agree with, well, I definitely wouldn't make my "one post a day" resolution.

Besides, it's my blog. And if I want to spend an entry ranting about things that I don't particularly like, that's my prerogative. :-)

I do think people react oddly to negativity sometimes. I mean, sure, no one wants to be around someone who's only complaining about the bad things all the time. But there's nothing wrong with the occasional piece of criticism. Or even "I don't like this because of..." sorts of posts. They can make for good discussion. (See my Cassandra Cain post, if I say so myself. There are a lot of great comments from people who are fans of the character, and while I may not agree with them, they've definitely got some great things to say.)

And then there are people who can make criticism funny. I've never really mastered the knack for that.

I am reminded of an email I'd gotten once, from someone who compared me "favorably" as a feminist to another feminist comics blogger, who he'd felt had become too much of a "hardliner" on the issues and had lost her sense of humor. Now I put "favorably" in quotes, because the truth is, the blogger in question actually posts a great many humorous/light-hearted posts. As many or more than I do. The big difference though is that she also has a knack for critical essays and tends to post them more often than I do.

(The fact that she had called this person out in one of the essays may have had something to do with that assessment as well.)

I simply couldn't and still can't understand this mindset. Either someone is enjoyable to read or they're not. It shouldn't matter whether they're raving about something good or ranting about something bad (and no one says everyone else has to AGREE anyway).

And sometimes criticism and rants are important. Sure, I can dismiss my own opinion with "Well, it wasn't to my taste." But why should I? Ranting helps me organize my thoughts. When I can pinpoint what exactly it is that I don't like about a particular subject, I can narrow down what exactly I do like, which is very useful to me. I've already mentioned the discussion potential.

It can be really important when it comes to issues regarding racism, sexism or homophobia. Because, well, honestly human beings tend to have a very narrow perspective. It can be hard to think outside our boxes. I'm a white American with all of my privilege intact. And that means sometimes I miss things that are racist or offensive to other people, because it doesn't affect me. A good example of this is with Eli in Young Avengers. It took a rant from The 4th Letter for me to pick up on the unfortunate overtones regarding the character's actions. It never occurred to me that Eli's actions could be read like that. I still like the comic, and Eli's still my favorite Young Avenger, but David's post really made me sit down and think.

Just saying "It wasn't to my taste" does absolutely nothing for anyone. It doesn't offer any insight. It doesn't invite any discussion. It's pointless and meaningless. We might as well not say anything at all

And finally for the record, though I am a very big Green Lantern fan, butts are not to my taste. I leave that to other notables.

I on the other hand write Mogo slash fiction and essays on how Guy Gardner is a woman.

It's an easy mistake to make. :-)