Pretty, Fizzy Paradise

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

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

A couple of cover reactions.

You know, I'm usually totally oblivious to art, and to be honest, half the time I barely remember to look at the covers of the comics when I'm reading the solicits. But I totally have to second SallyP: The August GLC cover looks amazing.

I wonder how long it'll take for some folk to complain that they don't appear to be eunuched. :-) Crotch-fussing amuses me.

Now if only the other covers could be so nice. Like JLA. Which is another cover I didn't really notice until Willow posted. I'm embarrassed about that. I ought to be more observant, because this is a serious WTF.

Seriously, what is this, like the third cover in a row that forgets that Vixen is actually black? Would it kill someone to draw Vixen with her actual skin color? Why even put her ON the cover if the artist doesn't feel like drawing her right? A red tint doesn't hide/excuse the fact that the last few covers have all seemed to make a deliberate effort to excise any visual indicator of Vixen's race. They've long lost the benefit of the doubt here.

It's gone way past ridiculous now. Even if we assume that the artist(s) is/are totally oblivious, shouldn't the editors be catching this? Whoever's got the power to veto these covers ought to step in. If they can shrink Power Girl's breasts when Michael Turner gets carried away, they ought to damn well be able to make sure a minority character is not suddenly a white woman. Please, whoever's supposed to be vetoing this sort of thing, do your fucking job.

10 Comments:

  • At May 21, 2008 8:23 AM, Blogger notintheface said…

    On the plus side, at least there was no ass shot. This is Benes we're talking about here, after all.

    I'll have a post on this later.

     
  • At May 21, 2008 8:37 AM, Blogger Sea_of_Green said…

    Not to mention on that same JLA cover, Hal Jordan, on his back, is staring straight up at Animal Man's crotch. ;-)

     
  • At May 21, 2008 10:07 AM, Blogger Patrick C said…

    When that "Women of DC" piece by Adam Hughes came out a few weeks ago, I was actually wondering who the black woman was. I momentarily forgot Vixen was black! I agree, they really need to fix that.

     
  • At May 21, 2008 10:28 AM, Blogger SallyP said…

    Can somebody please sit down with the colorist and gently tell him (I assume it is a him) that yes, indeed, Vixen is NOT white?

    But yes, Sea, I did note Hal's position, and giggled wildly.

    But the boys on the GLC cover are just so gorgeous, and yes, they even have boy parts! Woohoo!

     
  • At May 21, 2008 8:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Regardless of the colorist (since the artist doesn't "draw" her skintone), how are these covers getting by editorial? Editors have to look at and approve covers, they don't go to the printer sight unseen. They pass through quite a few hands as they get approved, lettered, alighned for print and then printed.

     
  • At May 21, 2008 8:47 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    *shrug* I count colorist under the umbrella of "artist" most times if I don't know for certain that the penciller and colorist are seperate in every case. But correction appreciated. :-)

     
  • At June 02, 2008 10:04 PM, Blogger John Foley said…

    Hello. I'm a little late to this controversy, but I was on vacation. Anyway, I opened the image in Photoshop and removed the excess redness. Vixen is colored much darker than everyone else on this cover. I'm afraid that this is a case of everyone seeing what they wanted to see, and what they wanted to see was another whitewashing of Vixen. Didn't happen this time. Just because it's happened before doesn't mean it's happened this time.

     
  • At June 02, 2008 10:42 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Interesting that she's much darker without the red tint, considering that WITH the red tint, she's as pale as everyone else.

    Sorry, it'd be one thing if the other covers hadn't fucked up and painted a white Vixen. But since they did, painting a red one who isn't visibly darker than the white men around her who MIGHT be darker without the red tint...

    No, sorry. No benefit of the doubt this time. Besides, if you have to alter it in photoshop to see a black character have darker skin than a white character, it doesn't actually counter the white-washing accusation.

     
  • At June 02, 2008 11:03 PM, Blogger John Foley said…

    kalinara-
    I understand your skepticism, but the only alteration I made was to remove the red tint. I took the red out of the entire image, not just Vixen. Are you saying that after applying a red filter to the entire image the colorist should have gone and purposely darkened just Vixen? That would have been overkill.
    I just don't think that this particular image is an example of whitewashing. That's all I'm saying.

     
  • At June 02, 2008 11:44 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    I probably reacted a bit too virulently. The truth is, I'd imagine you're right. The downside is that with the red filter, it's not visible.

    Which would be fine, really, if not for all the whitewashing earlier. When it's been white-wash, white-wash, white-wash, then red-tint-obscuring-what-might-or-might-not-be-actual-dark-skin doesn't really alleviate the problem.

    Hopefully next issue, they'll get a clue and we'll get a non-obscuring-tint actually-black Vixen. Then I'll be able to look at covers like this with benefit of the doubt. :-)

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home