Pretty, Fizzy Paradise

I'm back! And reading! And maybe even blogging! No promises!

Monday, November 19, 2007

Quick Bits

Huh, so up at the scans_daily post they've got excerpts from Dixon defending himself on CBR. The CBR link doesn't seem to work, sadly, so I can't really see the context.

Personally, I think his defenses are weak and they don't really counter very many of the points I found offensive.

But well, you guys can judge for yourself by following the link.

All I know is ultimately defense or no defense, I found it offensive. And I have absolutely no intention of buying issue #2.

On a more positive note: Wasn't Wonder Woman fantastic? I was a bit skeptical of the fit of writer to character, though I do like a lot of Gail Simone's work. I just wasn't sure I thought she was the best writer for the job. I'm glad to admit, my doubts were unwarranted. I really really enjoyed the comic for the first time in ages.

I'm really really looking forward to the next one!

15 Comments:

  • At November 19, 2007 5:15 AM, Blogger Flidget said…

    I so very much dislike the "well, if I hadn't mentioned 'contentious-issue-goes-here' people would have been screaming about that so it's damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don't" strawman. Just because you feel the need to cover said issue doesn't mean you have to be an asshole about it when you do.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 5:18 AM, Blogger LurkerWithout said…

    The new WW was damn nice. Simone rarely clicks with me, though her Villain's United was the only IC related book I bothered with. Though even there I had a few small issues that meant I didn't go for the follow up book. But this book has talking gorillas and Nemesis (who I like from his Suicide Squad days) and Nazis. Everyone likes seeing a Nazi get beat down...

    But its Wonder Woman. Which means that it will get dragged along into EVERY damn mini-event and crossover and stupid, damned thing until Final Crisis and beyond. Which is NOT a selling point for me. Pity, it looks nice. I'll probably add it to my Big List of trades to try and get...

    Then again it could win me over despite that, the way Blue Beetle did or Manhunter or even Dan Slott's Avengers: The Initiative over at Marvel. We'll have to see...

     
  • At November 19, 2007 7:08 AM, Blogger Mike Haseloff said…

    While I agree with the fundamentals of what he's saying, I think it's interesting to submit an issue of character, putting agenda aside.

    An intimiate relationship not matter to Batman? The guy who devised personal attacks for every member of the Justice League?

    He can't help but judge, and if he's assessing body language he's bound to spot a sexual relationship there, and bound to think poorly of that.

    Everyone knows Batman hates sex!

     
  • At November 19, 2007 8:09 AM, Anonymous Mark Engblom said…

    Slam dunk to Chuck Dixon.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 11:26 AM, Blogger Willow said…

    Uhmm, I know I'm out if the loop atm, dealing with various RL situations.

    But uhm, what?

    Am I supposed to be seeing homophobia or something in the scans daily links?

    Granted I read the second scan first and yet it all still read to me as Batman being, well Batman - ie, not giving a damn about anything other than someone being ill-prepared for the war/mission. Someone who then busts out with "You pervert" and him ultimately going. "Uhm, dude, people have best friends, best friendships can cloud judgement. I know, I play tactician for the Justice League. But you're only confirming my decision by giving out personal information in the middle of a mission."

    Then again, it's Batman. The only one that hasn't rung true for me so far is THE GODDAMN, and the devil took his soul, damn Frank Miller.

    Seriously though, is there more that I'm just missing about the issue?

     
  • At November 19, 2007 1:25 PM, Anonymous Mark Engblom said…

    Willow-

    I think the fact that Chuck Dixon is writing it that's gotten so many people to set their Offense-O-Meters to "high". Other writers may have gotten a pass, but when it comes to Dixon, people get a little jumpy.

    'Cuz, you know, the guy has the nerve to disagree with the political group-think of the comics world.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 1:30 PM, Blogger Evan Waters said…

    I think Dixon dodges the other issue raised by the scene, which is A) it makes Batman look like a dick (something DC's been trying to avoid) and B)it makes Anissa look weak. Like she's not worthy. It's just unpleasant on a character level.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 1:53 PM, Blogger Willow said…

    Mark:

    I've heard things, I believe it was Dixon, about him in regards to Apollo and Midnighter and when he did something limited with Midnighter and someone else (I forget whom)

    But...

    Evan:

    Batman in training mode is almost always a dick. He's the sports coach that makes you train on a sprained ankle and do extra push ups if you whine. He's the mentor who fucks with your head to get you into the right state of mind to say "Eff you" to anyone and do what you have to do.

    I guess it says something about Nightwing as a character and the lack of thinking about communication between characters - as a fault of DC - that there's not the response of:

    "Dick said you were a dick, and damn it, he wasn't kidding."

     
  • At November 19, 2007 2:29 PM, Blogger tavella said…

    Slam dunk to Chuck Dixon.

    Yeah, right. More like he proved the point -- he *is* incredibly homophobic. The mere *existence* of a normal gay relationship in a comic is the equivalent of showing dogs fucking on the sidewalk.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 3:47 PM, Blogger LurkerWithout said…

    And even ignoring whether the Batdickery is currently in character, his claiming NOT to know about their relationship is bullshit. Given that Grace basically yells "You fired my girlfriend?" at him in the one-shots where he's picking and choosing who will be on the team...

     
  • At November 19, 2007 5:33 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Willow: You're not supposed to see anything.

    I personally see the scene as at least somewhat homophobic for reasons I've detailed here and here.

    You are free to agree or disagree as you will.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 10:09 PM, Blogger zhinxy said…

    mike haseloff.
    Everyone knows Batman hates sex!

    I think I love you.

    Willow - I'm actually FINE with him playing up his assholish tendencies when he's trying to pull a team of yung-un's together for THE BIGGEST MOST AMAZING MOST IMPORTANT MISSION EVAH. I went through boot camp. I understand what he's doing. ;)

    But the lack of gaydar, and Thunder's offended reaction just seemed so gratuitous to me. It was out of character for the worlds greatest detective, and it seemed like Thunder was simply being set up to be shown up as "oversensitive."

    It just didn't work very well, IMO.

     
  • At November 19, 2007 10:57 PM, Blogger Willow said…

    zhinxy:

    I also didn't think she was being oversensitive. I thought she had every right to be upset cause B's a known dick.

    I just honestly thought from the scans only - cause I haven't read it all in the least - that he was calling both Alissa and Grace childish with the 'special friends' as in 'you two are the best friend goof off buddies on the team', because again, I know nothing of outsiders.

    AND I thought that he wasn't denying he knew, just that he'd observed things and then she just gave up the information tadah.

    I think as much as I loathe Batman being a total jackass, I'm now so used to that portrayal that all I ever see is 'a total jackass' and I go 'Eh, it's Batman being Batman as a dick'.

    Via comments and more posts by Kalinara I'm now beginning to think the whole thing was a hamfisted "If you go around being so obviously gay for one another, someone's going to use the information you're neon flashing them" and that she was being picked out as the most PDA giving culprit.

    Anyway I've come to think of Batman as DC's Wolverine. I love Bats. But they put him in every and anything and then various writers decide to play up their fav aspects of said character and then you get disjointed dickery.

    Which all goes to say, I'm sad it sucks. But I picked the wrong year to come back to comics (2006) and it's been nothing but OMGWTF.

     
  • At November 20, 2007 2:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    As much as I loathe to admit it, there were people who were prejudging Dixon based on past statements. I gave him the benefit of the doubt because I thought his views were based more on ignorance than actual homophobia. I've always felt like you can have a dialog with an ignorant person who is willing to listen and will at least have some other views other than his or her own. Each one of us have been ignorant about certain issues, but there's always room for learning. However, Dixon's statement has been that of a total asshole. That's too bad. I have always liked his work. He was the one that put The Birds of Prey together. I'll give him props for that and his other stuff. But now...
    What slam dunk?
    WM

     
  • At November 20, 2007 11:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I found the words "special relationship" to be offensive because they are code words. Code words that the extreme righties use so they don't have to say homosexual or lesbian in public. If Bats had just said "good friendship" or "strong friendship", it would have been more in character for the new Batman, and also would NOT have shown that Batman let a detail slip past him. Batman doesn't do that.

    Alan Coil
    .

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home