Reading and rereading Frank Miller, 30 years after Dark Knight Returns
March 2, 2016 7:20 AM Subscribe
It's hard to imagine Frank Miller anticipating that his story, with that introduction, would ever fall into the hands of an 11-year-old, mixed-race girl. Susana Polo (Twitter) begins with reading Batman: Year One at 11, then follows Miller's output, and her career and life, from there.
(SLPolygon)
(SLPolygon)
I'm only peripherally a comic fan (I like the movies made from them, and I used to read a handful of title in my teenaged years), so I wonder two things:
One: Is Batman: Year One appropriate for an 11 year old? Or its this like taking said 11 year old to see Deadpool the movie?
Two: Is Miller marketed in such a way as to give surprise with the contents?
Not all things are for all people. Not even everything one artist or writer does is for all fans.
I read the article, and it's a bit unclear how she was taught to hate comics or what impact this hatred has. She still describes it as a "life-long passion," and as far as I can tell she's still employed writings about them. A bit far afield from hatred.
I get the sentiment. I idolize some very problematic and flawed artists. I tend to dismiss the parts of their work I dislike and embrace that which I do.
I stopped reading comics well before 9/11 and I am only conversant with the movies made from Miller's work. So I'm probably missing a lot of why one should hate on him.
posted by cjorgensen at 7:42 AM on March 2, 2016
One: Is Batman: Year One appropriate for an 11 year old? Or its this like taking said 11 year old to see Deadpool the movie?
Two: Is Miller marketed in such a way as to give surprise with the contents?
Not all things are for all people. Not even everything one artist or writer does is for all fans.
I read the article, and it's a bit unclear how she was taught to hate comics or what impact this hatred has. She still describes it as a "life-long passion," and as far as I can tell she's still employed writings about them. A bit far afield from hatred.
I get the sentiment. I idolize some very problematic and flawed artists. I tend to dismiss the parts of their work I dislike and embrace that which I do.
I stopped reading comics well before 9/11 and I am only conversant with the movies made from Miller's work. So I'm probably missing a lot of why one should hate on him.
posted by cjorgensen at 7:42 AM on March 2, 2016
Uh, I'm not a comics fan and it seemed pretty clear to me. The man who taught her to love comics despises people like her. That's the core of it. To love a thing that hates you back.
posted by Diablevert at 7:44 AM on March 2, 2016 [43 favorites]
posted by Diablevert at 7:44 AM on March 2, 2016 [43 favorites]
Year One is ostensibly appropriate for an eleven-year-old. Probably much of this article is not going to register for people who aren't comics dorks; you sort of need the background.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:45 AM on March 2, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:45 AM on March 2, 2016 [6 favorites]
frank miller was my introduction to superhero comics by way of the dark knight returns when i was 22 (long long after it was written) and i very much agree with this article. i'm glad comics have broadened and have a lot to offer that isn't straight down the middle, but works like those of frank miller did and do make me hate certain things about comics, even as i love them.
posted by nadawi at 7:46 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by nadawi at 7:46 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
I like how she wrote it like Dr. Manhattan's big origin flashback monologue on Mars.
posted by entropicamericana at 7:56 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by entropicamericana at 7:56 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
I've said this before, but the Martha Washington books owe a lot to two of the big near-future dystopia comics titles of the eighties: Howard Chaykin's American Flagg! and Tim Truman's Scout. (I think that quite a bit of TDKR also owes a heavy debt to AF! as well.) This is Chaykin's Medea Blitz, former party girl turned straight-arrow cop. Look familiar?
And, yeah, this was a great essay, with a lot that I could relate to, even though I was an adult by the time TDKR was published. The first issue of Daredevil that I bought was the first one that Miller drew, and although I've got nothing against the previous artist, Gene Colan--in fact, I'm a great admirer of his work--it was clear that Miller was bringing something to the book that was not only very different from Colan's style, but very different from just about any other artist at Marvel at the time. And I appreciated the shifts in style and tone, especially when Miller took over writing and it went from being a second-string version of Spider-Man to a martial arts/mob thriller book with the occasional quasi-mystical overtone. However, I also remember my dismay at Elektra's death, not only because I didn't think Bullseye should have been able to take her in hand-to-hand combat, but because of this panel; just the expression on Bullseye's face turned it into something else, and not only would Miller return to that well often, he practically camped out there.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:57 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
And, yeah, this was a great essay, with a lot that I could relate to, even though I was an adult by the time TDKR was published. The first issue of Daredevil that I bought was the first one that Miller drew, and although I've got nothing against the previous artist, Gene Colan--in fact, I'm a great admirer of his work--it was clear that Miller was bringing something to the book that was not only very different from Colan's style, but very different from just about any other artist at Marvel at the time. And I appreciated the shifts in style and tone, especially when Miller took over writing and it went from being a second-string version of Spider-Man to a martial arts/mob thriller book with the occasional quasi-mystical overtone. However, I also remember my dismay at Elektra's death, not only because I didn't think Bullseye should have been able to take her in hand-to-hand combat, but because of this panel; just the expression on Bullseye's face turned it into something else, and not only would Miller return to that well often, he practically camped out there.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:57 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
I think the emotional experience she's describing is a complicated ambivalence. Did you never come to love a person or a thing in a simple way when young and then, with wiser eyes, see they grey in them, the flaws? Wisdom does not extinguish the memory of innocence. That purity, that longing, can burn a flame long after, one whose rare flickers you live for, to taste that warmth again. That's what all those nuts lining up overnight for Star Wars movies are hoping for, to feel 8 again. But you can feel that and maintain that and have that brightness live alongside the cold grey iron certainty that the anger you now can see in this, the narrowness, the hate, is meant for people like you. That as far as the creator was concerned you snuck in under the flap, you were never meant to be welcome inside this tent.
I'm mixing my metaphors this morning, sigh.
posted by Diablevert at 7:58 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
I'm mixing my metaphors this morning, sigh.
posted by Diablevert at 7:58 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
Mod note: Couple comments removed, maybe let's skip the nitpicking the title and spend more time on the thinking about the actual content thing.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:02 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:02 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
I am roughly 15 years older than the woman who wrote this essay. It’s a good essay. She’s thoughtful and clear-spoken and right.
And nothing in her short commentary is novel, unknown, or previously unspoken--which I'm sure she knows and is not a suggestion that people stop saying it. Women who love comics, we know people like us exist in the universe “[of stories about a male character] in order to take the brunt of a terrible act of violence”.
So now I’m mid-life and have lived my whole life in this context and I don’t watch movies about men kicking ass because someone killed their girlfriend. I don’t read novels about the deep inner thoughts of men and the women who thwart their yearnings. Actually, I don’t watch movies about men doing anything for any reason; I don’t read books about men. I don’t buy comics anymore at all. I have no place in those stories and no interest in them so I've given up on the bulk of media available to the American public because it is not interested in people like me. I’m tired of learning over and over again that the lines are drawn here. Miller was a huge part of that lesson. The men I talked comics with back then practically used his books as a litmus whether you'd dig it or point out its misogyny.
I imagine people like this author go into the industry to improve the thing they love which hates them so that it stops hating them. I mean, that's part of why I do what I do for a living.
posted by crush-onastick at 8:03 AM on March 2, 2016 [14 favorites]
And nothing in her short commentary is novel, unknown, or previously unspoken--which I'm sure she knows and is not a suggestion that people stop saying it. Women who love comics, we know people like us exist in the universe “[of stories about a male character] in order to take the brunt of a terrible act of violence”.
So now I’m mid-life and have lived my whole life in this context and I don’t watch movies about men kicking ass because someone killed their girlfriend. I don’t read novels about the deep inner thoughts of men and the women who thwart their yearnings. Actually, I don’t watch movies about men doing anything for any reason; I don’t read books about men. I don’t buy comics anymore at all. I have no place in those stories and no interest in them so I've given up on the bulk of media available to the American public because it is not interested in people like me. I’m tired of learning over and over again that the lines are drawn here. Miller was a huge part of that lesson. The men I talked comics with back then practically used his books as a litmus whether you'd dig it or point out its misogyny.
I imagine people like this author go into the industry to improve the thing they love which hates them so that it stops hating them. I mean, that's part of why I do what I do for a living.
posted by crush-onastick at 8:03 AM on March 2, 2016 [14 favorites]
Frank Miller has, for a long time, been one of those people that you're just supposed to love and appreciate. His work was groundbreaking and mature and so complex. Ugh. It drove me nuts for years, because despite being a comic fan I pretty much hated Miller. And that's just not a thing you're allowed to say.
I started reading Daredevil just a few issues before his Born Again saga, so I had very little familiarity with the characters or their backstories (outside of what I picked up in general from other Marvel titles). I'll admit, I was taken in by that story arc. It was compelling and exciting, and hooked me as a reader. So for a brief time I could see the "genius" of Miller. (Looking back on the story today, given a bit more exposure to some of DD's history, I'm suspecting that I'd have a lot more difficulties with what Miller did to Karen, but I'm not going to indulge in that exercise.)
So when the Dark Knight Returns rolled around, I was excited, especially as a long-time Batman reader. There weren't any comic shops in my city, I didn't have a car to get to the closest city with a shop, and there was no way I could get a cheque or a money order in American dollars from my parents to subscribe (the joys of being a young Canadian comics reader in the 80s). I did eventually manage to get to that shop, and pick up some of the series--I got the second printing of the first issue and I think parts three and four (or maybe two and four), and I can't tell you how disappointed I was. It just seemed as if he hated the characters, hated the medium and hated the readers. I know there was certainly nothing in that work that gave me the same feelings as in Daredevil.
That didn't stop me from picking up Year One. I thought maybe going back into Batman's history would produce a better story than jumping forward into some alternative timeline. Nope. No such luck. Again, I felt the hatred for certain (especially female) characters, and I despised the changes Miller made to make people "edgier" and "more flawed" (see James Gordon). It just felt like he was trying too hard, and wasn't succeeding. Or at least he wasn't succeeding for me. I understand I was likely in the minority, given how influential those two properties became, but I still think it's a sad route that DC travelled down, following Miller's path.
As for me, the person who both made me love and hate (pretty much drove me away) from comics was Denny O'Neil, but that's another story.
posted by sardonyx at 8:04 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
I started reading Daredevil just a few issues before his Born Again saga, so I had very little familiarity with the characters or their backstories (outside of what I picked up in general from other Marvel titles). I'll admit, I was taken in by that story arc. It was compelling and exciting, and hooked me as a reader. So for a brief time I could see the "genius" of Miller. (Looking back on the story today, given a bit more exposure to some of DD's history, I'm suspecting that I'd have a lot more difficulties with what Miller did to Karen, but I'm not going to indulge in that exercise.)
So when the Dark Knight Returns rolled around, I was excited, especially as a long-time Batman reader. There weren't any comic shops in my city, I didn't have a car to get to the closest city with a shop, and there was no way I could get a cheque or a money order in American dollars from my parents to subscribe (the joys of being a young Canadian comics reader in the 80s). I did eventually manage to get to that shop, and pick up some of the series--I got the second printing of the first issue and I think parts three and four (or maybe two and four), and I can't tell you how disappointed I was. It just seemed as if he hated the characters, hated the medium and hated the readers. I know there was certainly nothing in that work that gave me the same feelings as in Daredevil.
That didn't stop me from picking up Year One. I thought maybe going back into Batman's history would produce a better story than jumping forward into some alternative timeline. Nope. No such luck. Again, I felt the hatred for certain (especially female) characters, and I despised the changes Miller made to make people "edgier" and "more flawed" (see James Gordon). It just felt like he was trying too hard, and wasn't succeeding. Or at least he wasn't succeeding for me. I understand I was likely in the minority, given how influential those two properties became, but I still think it's a sad route that DC travelled down, following Miller's path.
As for me, the person who both made me love and hate (pretty much drove me away) from comics was Denny O'Neil, but that's another story.
posted by sardonyx at 8:04 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
Two: Is Miller marketed in such a way as to give surprise with the contents?
Do comic books have little front cover stickers saying hey this one hates women heads up? Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up? Is there a warning on the all the comics that display misogynist violence and minimize or destroy female characters? Should women or girls even read comics anyway, or should they be back in a kitchen somewhere??!?
posted by the agents of KAOS at 8:06 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
Do comic books have little front cover stickers saying hey this one hates women heads up? Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up? Is there a warning on the all the comics that display misogynist violence and minimize or destroy female characters? Should women or girls even read comics anyway, or should they be back in a kitchen somewhere??!?
posted by the agents of KAOS at 8:06 AM on March 2, 2016 [11 favorites]
As for me, the person who both made me love and hate (pretty much drove me away) from comics was Denny O'Neil, but that's another story.
Whoa, would you mind sharing why? I don't think I've ever heard anyone having something really bad to say about O'Neil. Everyone seems to adore his Batman and Green Arrow/Green Lantern work.
posted by Sangermaine at 8:14 AM on March 2, 2016
Whoa, would you mind sharing why? I don't think I've ever heard anyone having something really bad to say about O'Neil. Everyone seems to adore his Batman and Green Arrow/Green Lantern work.
posted by Sangermaine at 8:14 AM on March 2, 2016
Yeah, it sucks to see works you loved fall apart as you learn more about the world and realize what those works really are. I revered Year One, Dark Knight Returns, and (Alan Moore's) Killing Joke as a kid.
Something that makes it less bitter for me is the fact that the magic comes from not just the work, but the reader and their perception and experiences hitting that work at a certain place and time.
I am no longer disappointed that the The Dark Knight Returns was not actually that great. It stirred my imagination when I first read it, and it's fine if reading it now doesn't do anything for them. Art has a life beyond the intentions of the artist, and experiences have a life beyond the art itself.
posted by ignignokt at 8:15 AM on March 2, 2016
Something that makes it less bitter for me is the fact that the magic comes from not just the work, but the reader and their perception and experiences hitting that work at a certain place and time.
I am no longer disappointed that the The Dark Knight Returns was not actually that great. It stirred my imagination when I first read it, and it's fine if reading it now doesn't do anything for them. Art has a life beyond the intentions of the artist, and experiences have a life beyond the art itself.
posted by ignignokt at 8:15 AM on March 2, 2016
Martha Washington, like everything Miller does that isn't outright awful, is a mixed bag. On the positive side you've got a poor black woman as the protagonist. Martha may well be the only female character Miller has ever been involved with who wasn't a prostitute or murdered to motivate a man.
On the negative side you've got all of Miller's sexual hangups on full display (the Ayran Thrust, a flamboyantly gay-Neo Nazi group wearing BDSM gear taking over part of America anyone?). And then the sequel is just Atlas Shrugged retold with Martha as a military Dagny Taggart.
On the third hand though, you've got the exploitation of Native Americans thanks to uranium and petroleum extraction on tribal lands, and an ecologically positive message.
Mixed bag indeed. I keep wondering if in Give Me Liberty the story wasn't influenced by Dave Gibbons, because so much there seems not-Frank Miller.
And finally, here we have Shortpacked on Miller's female characters.
posted by sotonohito at 8:16 AM on March 2, 2016 [5 favorites]
On the negative side you've got all of Miller's sexual hangups on full display (the Ayran Thrust, a flamboyantly gay-Neo Nazi group wearing BDSM gear taking over part of America anyone?). And then the sequel is just Atlas Shrugged retold with Martha as a military Dagny Taggart.
On the third hand though, you've got the exploitation of Native Americans thanks to uranium and petroleum extraction on tribal lands, and an ecologically positive message.
Mixed bag indeed. I keep wondering if in Give Me Liberty the story wasn't influenced by Dave Gibbons, because so much there seems not-Frank Miller.
And finally, here we have Shortpacked on Miller's female characters.
posted by sotonohito at 8:16 AM on March 2, 2016 [5 favorites]
in the last year i've gotten back into comics, and if you like kick ass women existing on their own and not as a plot device for men to react and lead right now is an amazing time to like comics.
posted by nadawi at 8:19 AM on March 2, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by nadawi at 8:19 AM on March 2, 2016 [7 favorites]
I am not a comic book fan, but oh man this essay. For me, it would be Robert A. Heinlein. He absolutely taught me to love sci-fi, and hate it at the same time.
posted by muddgirl at 8:20 AM on March 2, 2016 [12 favorites]
posted by muddgirl at 8:20 AM on March 2, 2016 [12 favorites]
the only female character Miller has ever been involved with who wasn't a prostitute or murdered to motivate a man.
Casey in Ronin?
posted by Slothrup at 8:21 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Casey in Ronin?
posted by Slothrup at 8:21 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also, I think a lot of Miller's thinking can be explained as mind-splitting culture shock he experienced when as a young man raised in small towns he moved to NYC at the beginning of its really dark, crime-filled period:
Miller had also been mugged—twice—since starting the series. “I never stopped loving the city,” he said. “But having a knife in your face can really change your day. The experience filled me with anger, and that translated right into my comics.”which you can see leading to the DKR:
Talking to The Comics Journal again in August 1985, while the book was still in the works, he said he was “having fun with” the fascist overtones of the Batman story. But elsewhere in that same interview, he seems determined to collapse any distance between Dark Knight’s politics and his own.It's similar to how Lovecraft's move from smaller New England towns to bustling New York City, and especially later to Red Hook in Brooklyn, sent his inherent nativism and racism into super overdrive:
“Now, presenting a vigilante as such a powerful, positive force is bound to draw some flak,” he said, “but it’s the force I’m concerned with, more as a symbol of the reaction that I hope is waiting in us, the will to overcome our moral impotence and fight, if only in our own emotions, the moral deterioration of our society. Not just some guy who puts on a cape and fights crime … I think Clint Eastwood is more in touch with what we should do with superheroes than virtually anybody in comics. Dirty Harry is clearly larger than life; his behavior would certainly land him in jail. But that’s irrelevant, what is relevant is that, through all his hostility, and despite his dirty language, Harry is a profoundly, consistently moral force, administering the ‘Wrath of God’ on murderers who society treats as victims … plainly bigger and greater than normal men, and perfectly willing to pass judgment and administer punishment and make things right.”
Added to the daunting reality of failure in a city with a large immigrant population, Lovecraft's single room apartment in the run down area of Red Hook was burgled, leaving him with only the clothes he was wearing. In August 1925 he wrote "The Horror at Red Hook" and "He", in the latter of which the narrator says "My coming to New York had been a mistake; for whereas I had looked for poignant wonder and inspiration ... I had found instead only a sense of horror and oppression which threatened to master, paralyze, and annihilate me". It was at around this time he wrote the outline for "The Call of Cthulhu" with its theme of the insignificance of all humanity.posted by Sangermaine at 8:23 AM on March 2, 2016 [13 favorites]
> Do comic books have little front cover stickers saying hey this one hates women heads up? Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up? Is there a warning on the all the comics that display misogynist violence and minimize or destroy female characters? Should women or girls even read comics anyway, or should they be back in a kitchen somewhere??!?
Yeah, cause that's what I said.
But unpack those:
Do comic books have little front cover stickers saying hey this one hates women heads up?
No, but if you pick up Faust for example I'm not going to feel too bad if you are surprised by the contents. Just like I don't have a lot of sympathy for the parents bringing their kids to Deadpool. I don't read shit I don't like. Life's too short.
Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up?
Perhaps ask the bookseller? Perhaps do a bit of research? Maybe don't buy and support crap you disagree with?
Is there a warning on the all the comics that display misogynist violence and minimize or destroy female characters?
So you're suggesting that sans warning the responsibility of the consumer should reside with the creator? I guess I don't think it's too much to ask for people to be aware of the products they are buying (or for them to be properly vetted by parents).
Perhaps you want these topics to be off limits to comics, but until they are I think knowing which books have the minefields isn't too difficult to find out. How often is one surprised by the contents of a comic?
Should women or girls even read comics anyway, or should they be back in a kitchen somewhere??!?
Book of Bad arguments.
Sometimes we're not the intended audience, but that doesn't mean there isn't an audience for this material or that it shouldn't exist. You can make that argument if you want, but sometimes we have to realize something that exists, and that others enjoy, might not be for you.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:28 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, cause that's what I said.
But unpack those:
Do comic books have little front cover stickers saying hey this one hates women heads up?
No, but if you pick up Faust for example I'm not going to feel too bad if you are surprised by the contents. Just like I don't have a lot of sympathy for the parents bringing their kids to Deadpool. I don't read shit I don't like. Life's too short.
Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up?
Perhaps ask the bookseller? Perhaps do a bit of research? Maybe don't buy and support crap you disagree with?
Is there a warning on the all the comics that display misogynist violence and minimize or destroy female characters?
So you're suggesting that sans warning the responsibility of the consumer should reside with the creator? I guess I don't think it's too much to ask for people to be aware of the products they are buying (or for them to be properly vetted by parents).
Perhaps you want these topics to be off limits to comics, but until they are I think knowing which books have the minefields isn't too difficult to find out. How often is one surprised by the contents of a comic?
Should women or girls even read comics anyway, or should they be back in a kitchen somewhere??!?
Book of Bad arguments.
Sometimes we're not the intended audience, but that doesn't mean there isn't an audience for this material or that it shouldn't exist. You can make that argument if you want, but sometimes we have to realize something that exists, and that others enjoy, might not be for you.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:28 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Sometimes we have to realize something that exists, and that others enjoy, might not be for you.
I think the equation changes when you're talking about work which is revered as seminal, revolutionary, groundbreaking. This isn't the equivalent of not letting your kid see a scary movie because it'll give them nightmares. When you say an artist which is so central to the medium is "not for people like you" then that's effectively declaring the medium is not for people like you. If Picasso and Wharhol are over your head, then modern art isn't your thing. If you can't get into a single Beatles or Stones song, then maybe rock music just ain't your bag. And again, the problem here is not that she couldn't get into it, it's getting into it, be affected by it, enraptured by it, and then realising part of the thing that gives it that power to move you is its hatred of people like you. Inextricable, linked.
posted by Diablevert at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [22 favorites]
I think the equation changes when you're talking about work which is revered as seminal, revolutionary, groundbreaking. This isn't the equivalent of not letting your kid see a scary movie because it'll give them nightmares. When you say an artist which is so central to the medium is "not for people like you" then that's effectively declaring the medium is not for people like you. If Picasso and Wharhol are over your head, then modern art isn't your thing. If you can't get into a single Beatles or Stones song, then maybe rock music just ain't your bag. And again, the problem here is not that she couldn't get into it, it's getting into it, be affected by it, enraptured by it, and then realising part of the thing that gives it that power to move you is its hatred of people like you. Inextricable, linked.
posted by Diablevert at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [22 favorites]
Mod note: We are far down a rabbit hole of late responses to deleted comments. Please stop and reload the page and make sure you aren't ghost-arguing.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Does everyone know Miller writes misogynist stuff so it's her fault for picking it up?
Perhaps ask the bookseller?
A woman in a comic shop will invariably receive useful and helpful advice from the staff, especially on whether a comic is misogynist.
posted by Etrigan at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [38 favorites]
Perhaps ask the bookseller?
A woman in a comic shop will invariably receive useful and helpful advice from the staff, especially on whether a comic is misogynist.
posted by Etrigan at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [38 favorites]
Perhaps ask the bookseller? Perhaps do a bit of research? Maybe don't buy and support crap you disagree with?
SHE WAS ELEVEN
can i ask what you're even getting out of this thread? i mean, you admit you don't know the works we're discussing and you don't seem to understand the essay...
posted by nadawi at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [30 favorites]
SHE WAS ELEVEN
can i ask what you're even getting out of this thread? i mean, you admit you don't know the works we're discussing and you don't seem to understand the essay...
posted by nadawi at 8:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [30 favorites]
cjorgensen: “Maybe don't buy and support crap you disagree with?”
Hm. So – that's exactly what I got out of the article: don't buy and support crap you disagree with. You said earlier that you like some "very problematic and flawed artists," but that you have learned over time to separate out the good bits from the bad. That's also what I got from the article.
As far as I can tell, you agree completely with the author – she's describing how, as a young person who was a fan, she didn't understand that at first, but came to understand it over time.
I guess my question would be – is there any way you actually disagree with her? It sounded like you did, but I gather now that I was just misreading your comment, for which I'm sorry.
I totally agree with you and her on these things – when you like problematic things, sometimes it may be difficult, but you have to separate out the bits you like from the bits you don't. You might dislike the whole of comics, for example, because of its tendencies toward sexism and toward the elevation of hate for hate's sake, as in the case of Frank Miller; but you can love parts of it, and want to work to make it better. You – and she – are totally right about that.
posted by koeselitz at 8:41 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Hm. So – that's exactly what I got out of the article: don't buy and support crap you disagree with. You said earlier that you like some "very problematic and flawed artists," but that you have learned over time to separate out the good bits from the bad. That's also what I got from the article.
As far as I can tell, you agree completely with the author – she's describing how, as a young person who was a fan, she didn't understand that at first, but came to understand it over time.
I guess my question would be – is there any way you actually disagree with her? It sounded like you did, but I gather now that I was just misreading your comment, for which I'm sorry.
I totally agree with you and her on these things – when you like problematic things, sometimes it may be difficult, but you have to separate out the bits you like from the bits you don't. You might dislike the whole of comics, for example, because of its tendencies toward sexism and toward the elevation of hate for hate's sake, as in the case of Frank Miller; but you can love parts of it, and want to work to make it better. You – and she – are totally right about that.
posted by koeselitz at 8:41 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
One: Is Batman: Year One appropriate for an 11 year old? Or its this like taking said 11 year old to see Deadpool the movie?
Two: Is Miller marketed in such a way as to give surprise with the contents?
Anecdata, I bought Year One when I was probably 12 or so at a Scholastic book fair held at the school. That, and Killing Joke. I was into comics at the time but I don't remember much marketing for them at all, other than having cool covers.
posted by Hoopo at 8:47 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Two: Is Miller marketed in such a way as to give surprise with the contents?
Anecdata, I bought Year One when I was probably 12 or so at a Scholastic book fair held at the school. That, and Killing Joke. I was into comics at the time but I don't remember much marketing for them at all, other than having cool covers.
posted by Hoopo at 8:47 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
As far as I can tell, you agree completely with the author – she's describing how, as a young person who was a fan, she didn't understand that at first, but came to understand it over time.
I do agree with her.
The mods, and others, saw my main point of contention as a derail and removed the comment (and that's fine).
mudgirl had the best response to what I was taking my issue with.
To me, there's not usually a binary response to these sorts of artists. Not usually anyway.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:50 AM on March 2, 2016
I do agree with her.
The mods, and others, saw my main point of contention as a derail and removed the comment (and that's fine).
mudgirl had the best response to what I was taking my issue with.
To me, there's not usually a binary response to these sorts of artists. Not usually anyway.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:50 AM on March 2, 2016
I think this whole FPP and commentary is re-covering some of the same ground as Rebecca Solnit's essay 80 Books No Woman Should Ever Read.
The problem is not with the text itself, which be enjoyed or avoided as the reader pleases; the problem is that misogynistic/violent/racist content is presented within the comic book world as the epitome of quality, as canon, without either alternative artists and viewpoints being equally venerated, and that for less experienced or younger readers, without a larger frame that states that the content is problematic.
posted by jfwlucy at 8:51 AM on March 2, 2016 [12 favorites]
The problem is not with the text itself, which be enjoyed or avoided as the reader pleases; the problem is that misogynistic/violent/racist content is presented within the comic book world as the epitome of quality, as canon, without either alternative artists and viewpoints being equally venerated, and that for less experienced or younger readers, without a larger frame that states that the content is problematic.
posted by jfwlucy at 8:51 AM on March 2, 2016 [12 favorites]
The mods, and others, saw my main point of contention as a derail and removed the comment (and that's fine).
And yet it's stumbled weirdly onward anyway. Please just leave it at having said your piece at this point and give the thread a pass from here on, and other folks maybe stop responding as well to any of that, and let's let the thread be about anything else.
posted by cortex at 8:55 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
And yet it's stumbled weirdly onward anyway. Please just leave it at having said your piece at this point and give the thread a pass from here on, and other folks maybe stop responding as well to any of that, and let's let the thread be about anything else.
posted by cortex at 8:55 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
The Batman Year One comic was originally published in the main Batman comic. Although they didn't have the comic code seal of wholesomeness on the cover, they were as mainstream as it gets. You might ask why an 11 year old is reading them, but that's around the age I first read them. The fact that such mainsteam, and seminal, work is full of "whores! whores! whores!" is problematic. Hell, a "mature" comic with the same themes - like Sin City - is problematic. But blaming the reader for not knowing what she was getting into is not what should be happening here. Maybe we should be looking at why the comics community has decided that this is an important piece of art, and what that says about them.
posted by thecjm at 8:55 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by thecjm at 8:55 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
There's a lot of stuff in The Dark Knight Returns I didn't find disturbing until I was older, but I stand by it as a a great graphic novel, flaws and all.
I even love The Dark Knight Strikes Again precisely for its weirdness and for extending Miller's—at the time original—take on Superman, even though the ethical implications made me queasy. After reading it I realized I appreciated classic Superman more, and the reasons why. Art works obliquely sometimes.
Frank's an asshole. But I still appreciate his contribution to comics, which, despite what some believe, is considerably more than ushering in the era of grimdark.
posted by echocollate at 8:57 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
I even love The Dark Knight Strikes Again precisely for its weirdness and for extending Miller's—at the time original—take on Superman, even though the ethical implications made me queasy. After reading it I realized I appreciated classic Superman more, and the reasons why. Art works obliquely sometimes.
Frank's an asshole. But I still appreciate his contribution to comics, which, despite what some believe, is considerably more than ushering in the era of grimdark.
posted by echocollate at 8:57 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Sometimes we're not the intended audience,
So this argument is terrible, but let me spend a moment with it anyhow. It almost works if we're talking about something like Sin City, which from its trade dress on down is fairly obviously what it is, yeah. I do not believe this means what it is is beyond discussion or criticism, but it does mean that a person who reads it and doesn't like it probably had an idea what they were getting into. It's still okay not to like it, and to explain why. If you don't want to read an article about a person's problems with the work of Frank Miller, do not read an article that is clearly about a person's problems with the work of Frank Miller. Easy-peasy, right? Yet here we are.
But here's the real problem: When you read Batman or Daredevil, there is a very real and understandable expectation that this work is for you. It may also be the idiosyncratic work of an auteur, buuuuuut...it's Batman. Batman is supposed to be for everybody. If you're not the intended audience for Batman, what the actual fuck? Who is Batman not for?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 9:03 AM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
So this argument is terrible, but let me spend a moment with it anyhow. It almost works if we're talking about something like Sin City, which from its trade dress on down is fairly obviously what it is, yeah. I do not believe this means what it is is beyond discussion or criticism, but it does mean that a person who reads it and doesn't like it probably had an idea what they were getting into. It's still okay not to like it, and to explain why. If you don't want to read an article about a person's problems with the work of Frank Miller, do not read an article that is clearly about a person's problems with the work of Frank Miller. Easy-peasy, right? Yet here we are.
But here's the real problem: When you read Batman or Daredevil, there is a very real and understandable expectation that this work is for you. It may also be the idiosyncratic work of an auteur, buuuuuut...it's Batman. Batman is supposed to be for everybody. If you're not the intended audience for Batman, what the actual fuck? Who is Batman not for?
posted by kittens for breakfast at 9:03 AM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
Saying you hate Miller in comics fandom is like saying you hate Heinlein in sf fandom.
I had been a comics fan for years before Miller's Dark Knight graphic novels came out - between The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, 1986 was a hell of a year for major shifts in the look and feel of comics. But even at the time, the consensus among comics nerds I knew was that while Moore was an anarchist, Miller came across as a liberal who'd been mugged a few times.
I'd read his Daredevil, too, and that was a time when ALL COMICS MUST INCLUDE NINJAS. The death of Elektra was annoying, but the Elektra limited series somewhat mollified me.
posted by rmd1023 at 9:12 AM on March 2, 2016
I had been a comics fan for years before Miller's Dark Knight graphic novels came out - between The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, 1986 was a hell of a year for major shifts in the look and feel of comics. But even at the time, the consensus among comics nerds I knew was that while Moore was an anarchist, Miller came across as a liberal who'd been mugged a few times.
I'd read his Daredevil, too, and that was a time when ALL COMICS MUST INCLUDE NINJAS. The death of Elektra was annoying, but the Elektra limited series somewhat mollified me.
posted by rmd1023 at 9:12 AM on March 2, 2016
Sangermaine,
It's not really a good story, but I'll share it anyway. I think I have before, but if not here it goes...
I bought this when it first came out. I was way, way too young to really understand or appreciate it at the time. I kind of got (but was a bit frightened by) the first story (Hang the Batman), was creeped out by the second one (I now pronounce you Batman and wife)--I think it was the art that bothered me--and was left totally dumbfounded by the third (Death Strikes at Midnight and Three). But there was something about that issue that kept drawing me back time after time (maybe it was just being too stubborn to give up on not understanding something). At some point, I finally grew up enough and gained enough maturity to be able to actually understand (vocabulary-wise) the third story.
When that light bulb finally went off, it was then I realized that comics could be so much more than entertainment for little kids. That story by Denny (as was the second one) has since been recognized on a number top Batman stories lists but I had never met another person who had ever read it or heard about it, unless I loaned them the issue. So even while I didn't have the outside validation that is so easy to get now in this online, connected world, I had something to hold onto: that promise that if you keep digging and get lucky you can find some amazing stories between those newsprint pages.
So I kept reading and found some good (including lots stuff by Denny such as The Question, which I loved) and some bad (sorry, but for me Killing Joke falls into this category). Eventually though I started to get bored and frustrated with what was being offered. Maybe it was another bout of maturity or maybe it was just a particularly bad period for comics (I think it was a bit of both) but my pull list got shorter and shorter until it was at the point where there wasn't much left except some Batman titles and a small handful of others.
The ongoing storyline at the time was Knightfall/KnightQuest/Knight-whatever-else-they tacked on, and Denny was the editor in charge of the Batman titles. (For those not versed in the comics, this was the arc that introduced Bane and broke Batman's back.) I really hated the way that whole mess from the character that replaced Bruce under the cowl (Azrael) to the way he was eventually healed (spoiler: it was MAGIC!). It was just the final straw. So I cancelled my pull list and didn't bother picking up another issue for years. I've since come around a bit. I keep my eye on what's going on and grab stuff that looks interesting.
Sorry for it not being an interesting story, but there it is.
I understand where the author in the original post is coming from when it comes to growing disillusioned with a favourite creator but unlike her, I'm glad my first comic experiences weren't tainted with stuff that I wouldn't have wanted to encounter as an 11-year-old girl (she mentions a scene with Selina's pimp). I don't know if never being exposed to comics and having Year One being my first purchase would have led me to being a comic reader. Somehow I doubt it. I'm just glad I started reading them when I was younger than that, and that there was material that was somewhat more appropriate for me to read, and more importantly, material I could grow into and grow up learning to love.
posted by sardonyx at 9:13 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
It's not really a good story, but I'll share it anyway. I think I have before, but if not here it goes...
I bought this when it first came out. I was way, way too young to really understand or appreciate it at the time. I kind of got (but was a bit frightened by) the first story (Hang the Batman), was creeped out by the second one (I now pronounce you Batman and wife)--I think it was the art that bothered me--and was left totally dumbfounded by the third (Death Strikes at Midnight and Three). But there was something about that issue that kept drawing me back time after time (maybe it was just being too stubborn to give up on not understanding something). At some point, I finally grew up enough and gained enough maturity to be able to actually understand (vocabulary-wise) the third story.
When that light bulb finally went off, it was then I realized that comics could be so much more than entertainment for little kids. That story by Denny (as was the second one) has since been recognized on a number top Batman stories lists but I had never met another person who had ever read it or heard about it, unless I loaned them the issue. So even while I didn't have the outside validation that is so easy to get now in this online, connected world, I had something to hold onto: that promise that if you keep digging and get lucky you can find some amazing stories between those newsprint pages.
So I kept reading and found some good (including lots stuff by Denny such as The Question, which I loved) and some bad (sorry, but for me Killing Joke falls into this category). Eventually though I started to get bored and frustrated with what was being offered. Maybe it was another bout of maturity or maybe it was just a particularly bad period for comics (I think it was a bit of both) but my pull list got shorter and shorter until it was at the point where there wasn't much left except some Batman titles and a small handful of others.
The ongoing storyline at the time was Knightfall/KnightQuest/Knight-whatever-else-they tacked on, and Denny was the editor in charge of the Batman titles. (For those not versed in the comics, this was the arc that introduced Bane and broke Batman's back.) I really hated the way that whole mess from the character that replaced Bruce under the cowl (Azrael) to the way he was eventually healed (spoiler: it was MAGIC!). It was just the final straw. So I cancelled my pull list and didn't bother picking up another issue for years. I've since come around a bit. I keep my eye on what's going on and grab stuff that looks interesting.
Sorry for it not being an interesting story, but there it is.
I understand where the author in the original post is coming from when it comes to growing disillusioned with a favourite creator but unlike her, I'm glad my first comic experiences weren't tainted with stuff that I wouldn't have wanted to encounter as an 11-year-old girl (she mentions a scene with Selina's pimp). I don't know if never being exposed to comics and having Year One being my first purchase would have led me to being a comic reader. Somehow I doubt it. I'm just glad I started reading them when I was younger than that, and that there was material that was somewhat more appropriate for me to read, and more importantly, material I could grow into and grow up learning to love.
posted by sardonyx at 9:13 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
sardonyx,
Thanks for that. Everything I've read about O'Neil, and in all his interviews, makes him seem like an exceedingly good person. I was worried there was some horrible fact about him I hadn't encountered. It seems like every seemingly decent public figure is being revealed as a monster these days.
I totally get where you're coming from, though.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:20 AM on March 2, 2016
Thanks for that. Everything I've read about O'Neil, and in all his interviews, makes him seem like an exceedingly good person. I was worried there was some horrible fact about him I hadn't encountered. It seems like every seemingly decent public figure is being revealed as a monster these days.
I totally get where you're coming from, though.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:20 AM on March 2, 2016
Man, I hated The Dark Knight Returns. Thoroughly nasty-minded, openly fascist, and not even drawn that well. It was certainly powerful, though.
I like Sin City, as a guilty pleasure. It's noir, of the Mickey Spillane type, dialed up to 11, and the art is formidable. And there are odd little pockets of redemption amid all the brutality.
I kinda wish he'd get to a shrink, though. Have you ever seen pictures of him? He's a shrimpy little guy. Yet he worships macho men (and an occasional macho woman) built like Mack trucks. It seems a little creepy.
The whole grimdark thing is played out to the point of self-parody. I think the best thing that's happened in superhero comics lately is the return of light-hearted titles— e.g. Ms Marvel, Batgirl, Harley Quinn.
posted by zompist at 9:30 AM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
I like Sin City, as a guilty pleasure. It's noir, of the Mickey Spillane type, dialed up to 11, and the art is formidable. And there are odd little pockets of redemption amid all the brutality.
I kinda wish he'd get to a shrink, though. Have you ever seen pictures of him? He's a shrimpy little guy. Yet he worships macho men (and an occasional macho woman) built like Mack trucks. It seems a little creepy.
The whole grimdark thing is played out to the point of self-parody. I think the best thing that's happened in superhero comics lately is the return of light-hearted titles— e.g. Ms Marvel, Batgirl, Harley Quinn.
posted by zompist at 9:30 AM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
Mixed bag indeed. I keep wondering if in Give Me Liberty the story wasn't influenced by Dave Gibbons, because so much there seems not-Frank Miller.
I always thought it was his take on Halo Jones.
posted by Artw at 9:50 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
I always thought it was his take on Halo Jones.
posted by Artw at 9:50 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'll go to bat (heh) for TKDR and Year One any day, but everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion.
Thoroughly nasty-minded, openly fascist, and not even drawn that well. It was certainly powerful, though.
How? Because a costume vigilante takes the law into his own hands and beats the holy hell out of criminals? Guess what, that's at least 90% of all comic books published.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:51 AM on March 2, 2016
Thoroughly nasty-minded, openly fascist, and not even drawn that well. It was certainly powerful, though.
How? Because a costume vigilante takes the law into his own hands and beats the holy hell out of criminals? Guess what, that's at least 90% of all comic books published.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:51 AM on March 2, 2016
Well, kinda. Socially the vigilante aspects of Supwrgeroes makes no fucking sense, no matter how you try to square the circle, and you're better off thinking of it as weird opera rather than a realist genre - something that the whole "comics grow up" ethos may be at odds with.
posted by Artw at 9:56 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 9:56 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
For me, it was Chris Claremont. His writing was great when I was younger, then as I got older it was like "Chris, STFU, this is a visual medium!"
Batman, the Dark Knight is great as a one off "What if" story. Taking it as a gospel truth of who Batman (and Superman) are was like eating nothing but Twinkies for a month. Fun, but not really fulfilling long term.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:08 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
Batman, the Dark Knight is great as a one off "What if" story. Taking it as a gospel truth of who Batman (and Superman) are was like eating nothing but Twinkies for a month. Fun, but not really fulfilling long term.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:08 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
It also contains "the gun is the weapon of the enemy" and Batman wasting a dude with an M60 (no rubber bullets or anything) so it can be a little self contradictory.
I still love it though, which is down to sheer badassery, the best Robin, a story that feels really big (in part because its allowed to have an ending) and a fetishistic approach to panel grids. All of these are things I dig, but there is certainly some less than great things about it too which are really hard to separate out from those.
posted by Artw at 10:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
I still love it though, which is down to sheer badassery, the best Robin, a story that feels really big (in part because its allowed to have an ending) and a fetishistic approach to panel grids. All of these are things I dig, but there is certainly some less than great things about it too which are really hard to separate out from those.
posted by Artw at 10:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
How?
Because of the pretty open worldview of "your liberal society is weak and unmanly, and coddles the big bad enemies, who can only be resisted by big violent men answerable only to themselves." Read Eco and see if you find no overlap.
Vigilantes are a common (though not universal) narrative trope. With most superhero comics, it seems pretty evident that it is only a narrative trope— the writers don't actually think costumed vigilantes are the way to fight crime. With Miller I'm not so sure. He seems to really really wish the violent freaks could be unleashed.
posted by zompist at 10:39 AM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
Because of the pretty open worldview of "your liberal society is weak and unmanly, and coddles the big bad enemies, who can only be resisted by big violent men answerable only to themselves." Read Eco and see if you find no overlap.
Vigilantes are a common (though not universal) narrative trope. With most superhero comics, it seems pretty evident that it is only a narrative trope— the writers don't actually think costumed vigilantes are the way to fight crime. With Miller I'm not so sure. He seems to really really wish the violent freaks could be unleashed.
posted by zompist at 10:39 AM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
you're better off thinking of it as weird opera rather than a realist genre -
Grant Morrison (hallowed be his name) made this same point in his Fatman on Batman interview a while back, that it took the character and turned him into this vast, towering Wagnerian figure fighting Ragnarök.
And I think it's important to remember that he was fighting Ragnarök: The Dark Knight Returns came out in the middle of Crisis on Infinite Earths which was clearing the stage for a new era of DC comics.
Chris Sims has an excellent article on TDKR where he makes the point that:
posted by Sangermaine at 10:48 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Grant Morrison (hallowed be his name) made this same point in his Fatman on Batman interview a while back, that it took the character and turned him into this vast, towering Wagnerian figure fighting Ragnarök.
And I think it's important to remember that he was fighting Ragnarök: The Dark Knight Returns came out in the middle of Crisis on Infinite Earths which was clearing the stage for a new era of DC comics.
Chris Sims has an excellent article on TDKR where he makes the point that:
Year One and The Dark Knight Returns are bookends, but not to each other. They’re in the other order: DKR is the ending of everything that came before it, and Year One is the start of something new, the version of Batman that we have today.TDKR was an apocalypse ending the old era of Batman, and specifically it's intended to be a contrast to the Silver Age/Batman TV show goofy friendly Batman.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:48 AM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Because of the pretty open worldview of "your liberal society is weak and unmanly, and coddles the big bad enemies, who can only be resisted by big violent men answerable only to themselves."
That's a gross oversimplifcation. The text is pretty blatant about Batman acting a symbol inspiring people to action, whether it is the questionable actions of the bat-faced ex-Mutant gangmembers, the murderous obsession of the Joker, the naive idealism of Carrie Kelley, or the collective non-violent action for the common good: the bucket brigade in Gotham.
Batman is not portrayed as unalloyed good: He does what he does due to a deep-seated childhood trauma, his return inspires the return of the Joker, and he even acknowledges his own broken and complex nature: "I see a reflection, Harvey. A reflection."
So I guess I just see a lot more nuance in the work.
posted by entropicamericana at 10:54 AM on March 2, 2016
That's a gross oversimplifcation. The text is pretty blatant about Batman acting a symbol inspiring people to action, whether it is the questionable actions of the bat-faced ex-Mutant gangmembers, the murderous obsession of the Joker, the naive idealism of Carrie Kelley, or the collective non-violent action for the common good: the bucket brigade in Gotham.
Batman is not portrayed as unalloyed good: He does what he does due to a deep-seated childhood trauma, his return inspires the return of the Joker, and he even acknowledges his own broken and complex nature: "I see a reflection, Harvey. A reflection."
So I guess I just see a lot more nuance in the work.
posted by entropicamericana at 10:54 AM on March 2, 2016
Also, TDKR did lead to the hilarious parodying of it in Cerebus with Dark Roach.
posted by rmd1023 at 10:54 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by rmd1023 at 10:54 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also, TDKR did lead to the hilarious parodying of it in Cerebus with Dark Roach.
Let's not get into the great-art-by-fucking-whackadoo aspects of Cerebus...
posted by Etrigan at 11:05 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
Let's not get into the great-art-by-fucking-whackadoo aspects of Cerebus...
posted by Etrigan at 11:05 AM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
If you're not the intended audience for Batman, what the actual fuck? Who is Batman not for?
Not every incarnation of Batman has the same intended audience though, does it? Batman '66 and Arkham Asylum are both Batman comics, but occupy opposite ends of the spectrum regarding how he can be portrayed. Their packaging makes this pretty clear.
posted by Paul Slade at 11:24 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Not every incarnation of Batman has the same intended audience though, does it? Batman '66 and Arkham Asylum are both Batman comics, but occupy opposite ends of the spectrum regarding how he can be portrayed. Their packaging makes this pretty clear.
posted by Paul Slade at 11:24 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
An, yes. Cerebus. That comic is so fucking influential on my rhythms of storytelling; someday I hope to do lettering half as gorgeous as Sim. I am also a woman. It really helped a lot that I happened to have a pretty sporadic acquisition pattern to that comic, and "Reads" coincided with a period when I wasn't in comic shops at all...
posted by egypturnash at 11:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by egypturnash at 11:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
Stray Bullets was far better than Sin City will ever be.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 11:43 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 11:43 AM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
So Heinlein has been mentioned twice in this thread and I just wanted to say that was literally my experience with his work - I adored his juveniles, and then I read his adult stuff, and in my late teens I wrote the most anguished letter in the world to Spider Robinson about about Heinlein's views of women (and bless him, Mr. Robinson sent me a thoughtful, encouraging letter that defended RAH but acknowledged my points and most of all reassured me that is okay to have mixed feelings about an author, or even to reject something you once loved.)
It's much more complex than whether a work is written "for me" as a woman or not (and it's a false premise to say that being a child came into it for the original essay or in my case - she loved Miller's books when she was a child, and only saw the problems when she was older.) When you come to a genre by way of someone with such influence in it, and you gradually realize that he doesn't think women are, in the general case, human people (in Miller's case, that he hates and fears them), it becomes a problem with the whole genre, because of that influence.
posted by gingerest at 12:04 PM on March 2, 2016 [15 favorites]
It's much more complex than whether a work is written "for me" as a woman or not (and it's a false premise to say that being a child came into it for the original essay or in my case - she loved Miller's books when she was a child, and only saw the problems when she was older.) When you come to a genre by way of someone with such influence in it, and you gradually realize that he doesn't think women are, in the general case, human people (in Miller's case, that he hates and fears them), it becomes a problem with the whole genre, because of that influence.
posted by gingerest at 12:04 PM on March 2, 2016 [15 favorites]
Not every incarnation of Batman has the same intended audience though, does it? Batman '66 and Arkham Asylum are both Batman comics, but occupy opposite ends of the spectrum regarding how he can be portrayed. Their packaging makes this pretty clear.
At the time of its publication, Batman: Year One was intended as the canonical early career of the mainstream version of the character.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 12:19 PM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
At the time of its publication, Batman: Year One was intended as the canonical early career of the mainstream version of the character.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 12:19 PM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
On further thought, I should make it clear that my experience of course doesn't include the racial element of Polo's - Heinlein definitely tried to be anti-racist, but was pretty bound by the limits of his time, place, and personal experience, and I am not a person of color. Miller's work is racist.
posted by gingerest at 12:22 PM on March 2, 2016
posted by gingerest at 12:22 PM on March 2, 2016
all of this 'maybe she's not the audience' stuff isn't sitting well with me - is she not the audience because teen girls shouldn't read the exact same comics that are recommended for boys in that age group or a little above? because she went to school for comic writing? because she works for a nerdy news site? like, what about her makes her not the target - besides feeling unsettled by the reoccuring misogynistic, homophobic, at times racist underpinnings of the work? and when that work is a huge central piece if the entertainment medium she enjoys, what are we saying when we say she's not the audience?
posted by nadawi at 12:28 PM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by nadawi at 12:28 PM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
I think the best thing that's happened in superhero comics lately is the return of light-hearted titles— e.g. Ms Marvel, Batgirl, Harley Quinn.
Squirrel Girl! Lumberjanes! Also the Princess Leia comics are pretty badass, exactly the thing that would have enthralled 11-year-old me. But I would recommend them to everyone regardless of age or gender.
Saga and the Wicked + Divine are adult titles with plenty of darkness, in contrast, but the women in them are fully realized human beings.
posted by emjaybee at 12:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
Squirrel Girl! Lumberjanes! Also the Princess Leia comics are pretty badass, exactly the thing that would have enthralled 11-year-old me. But I would recommend them to everyone regardless of age or gender.
Saga and the Wicked + Divine are adult titles with plenty of darkness, in contrast, but the women in them are fully realized human beings.
posted by emjaybee at 12:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [8 favorites]
How? Because a costume vigilante takes the law into his own hands and beats the holy hell out of criminals? Guess what, that's at least 90% of all comic books published.
Guess what indeed. (Miller kinda just comes out and says what is elsewhere often implied).
posted by atoxyl at 12:53 PM on March 2, 2016
Guess what indeed. (Miller kinda just comes out and says what is elsewhere often implied).
posted by atoxyl at 12:53 PM on March 2, 2016
all of this 'maybe she's not the audience' stuff isn't sitting well with me - is she not the audience because teen girls shouldn't read the exact same comics that are recommended for boys in that age group or a little above? because she went to school for comic writing? because she works for a nerdy news site? like, what about her makes her not the target - besides feeling unsettled by the reoccuring misogynistic, homophobic, at times racist underpinnings of the work? and when that work is a huge central piece if the entertainment medium she enjoys, what are we saying when we say she's not the audience?
Well nowadays I would expect a comic writer to know what Frank Miller represents and whether they want to read him but obviously she does - she's writing about encountering an acclaimed comic as a kid for chrissake and then coming back to it knowing what people know about Frank Miller now and in light of the rest of his career.
posted by atoxyl at 12:58 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Well nowadays I would expect a comic writer to know what Frank Miller represents and whether they want to read him but obviously she does - she's writing about encountering an acclaimed comic as a kid for chrissake and then coming back to it knowing what people know about Frank Miller now and in light of the rest of his career.
posted by atoxyl at 12:58 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Just out of curiosity, is everybody here who is defending Miller/Dark Knight Returns/Year One male? I can't be completely sure just going by user names.
I'm not saying my objections and negative feelings came about because I wasn't one of the guys--I had never considered that my being a girl had any affect on the comics I read--but I really think that a lot of what bothered me about his writing came down to the way women were presented.
As for those trying to make the "audience argument" with regards to the writer in the link, let me just offer my personal perspective: at the time when these were first published I was definitely "the right audience" (with the exception of that pesky gender thing). I was a dedicated comic reader and buyer, somebody who was reading the "mature" titles and content. I was very familiar with the medium, including the historical backstories and continuity of the characters (especially those in the Bat family).
These days it's so much easier to be critical of the readers not doing their jobs well enough or buying the wrong book (that's not all ages, or that one is filled with an overabundance of sexual and violent situations) but that wasn't the case back in the dark ages that gave birth to these books. It was much, much harder to find commentary or analysis about the stories. You just had to get your hands on the issues as the were released, and pretty much the only way you heard about the new titles that were coming out were in the publishers' house ads and letter columns.
I haven't gone back and looked at Miller's Batman in years (more like decades) so I can't offer up cutting criticism of everything that offended the young girl that I was when I first read those titles. And I can't really remember that many details about them to be honest. But that in itself says a lot to me. There are other series and titles that I referred back to constantly, even in my non comic buying days. There are other issues and bits of dialogue and scenes that, to this day, are still seared into my memory. Those were the books that spoke to me as a young (and if I need to say it, female) reader. Instead of alienating me like Miller did, they captivated me and made me a fan. Like I said above, if my first encounter with comics had been with Miller at age 11, I doubt I'd have kept reading. And I would have missed a lot.
posted by sardonyx at 1:02 PM on March 2, 2016 [5 favorites]
I'm not saying my objections and negative feelings came about because I wasn't one of the guys--I had never considered that my being a girl had any affect on the comics I read--but I really think that a lot of what bothered me about his writing came down to the way women were presented.
As for those trying to make the "audience argument" with regards to the writer in the link, let me just offer my personal perspective: at the time when these were first published I was definitely "the right audience" (with the exception of that pesky gender thing). I was a dedicated comic reader and buyer, somebody who was reading the "mature" titles and content. I was very familiar with the medium, including the historical backstories and continuity of the characters (especially those in the Bat family).
These days it's so much easier to be critical of the readers not doing their jobs well enough or buying the wrong book (that's not all ages, or that one is filled with an overabundance of sexual and violent situations) but that wasn't the case back in the dark ages that gave birth to these books. It was much, much harder to find commentary or analysis about the stories. You just had to get your hands on the issues as the were released, and pretty much the only way you heard about the new titles that were coming out were in the publishers' house ads and letter columns.
I haven't gone back and looked at Miller's Batman in years (more like decades) so I can't offer up cutting criticism of everything that offended the young girl that I was when I first read those titles. And I can't really remember that many details about them to be honest. But that in itself says a lot to me. There are other series and titles that I referred back to constantly, even in my non comic buying days. There are other issues and bits of dialogue and scenes that, to this day, are still seared into my memory. Those were the books that spoke to me as a young (and if I need to say it, female) reader. Instead of alienating me like Miller did, they captivated me and made me a fan. Like I said above, if my first encounter with comics had been with Miller at age 11, I doubt I'd have kept reading. And I would have missed a lot.
posted by sardonyx at 1:02 PM on March 2, 2016 [5 favorites]
I think those foundational Miller books (and The Killing Joke) are bad books with some very good stylistic elements, and that they've ultimately done much more harm to comic books as a medium than they were ever worth as art or entertainment. I think it would be better had they never been written.
posted by howfar at 2:31 PM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by howfar at 2:31 PM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
There's lots to admire in them, and I can appreciate why people disagree with me, even vehemently. But, for me, almost all of the stuff in comics that gets me down seems to be touched, in some ways, by those key works by Miller and Moore.
posted by howfar at 2:50 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by howfar at 2:50 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeahhhhh, I'd be hesitant to throw DKR or Year One away; The Killing Joke has a really cool story structure that has a lot to teach creators, and some beautiful art, but it's probably the weakest thing Moore ever wrote for DC and I don't think I'd miss it overall. Anyway, the problem isn't that these comics are bad. It's that these are cultural artifacts from thirty years ago, and the conversation around them does not reflect that. Like, I'm not going excuse Miller's "every woman is a nun or a hooker" sexual politics, but have you seen any crime movies from the '80s? This is just the kind of fucked up thinking that was prevalent in action genres at the time. I'm not saying it's cool! I'm just saying it's everywhere in 1986. And no one ever contextualizes these books. You don't have a Ben Mankiewicz of comics step out and explain about what the hell was happening in the '80s when you open Year One the first time. The idea is that here is a book that means exactly the same thing in 2016 as it did on first publication, and it's just not true.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 3:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 3:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
Who would dare travel in time and kill baby Frank Miller? What would be the result? Probably no Burton Batman. Heath Ledger might still be alive. No Sin City, and therefore No Country For Old Men would have a different cast. No Clooney Batman? Zack whatshisname would never have made Sucker Punch. That british guy from 300 woulda never gotten so buff that one time. Crossfit wouldn't be a thing. The mind boggles.
posted by valkane at 3:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by valkane at 3:36 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
No Miller reading Manga and incorporating Manga techniques into his work to have Moore and others copy him would have a pretty wide reaching effects - he's pretty much the reason modern western comics don't read like silver age comics.
posted by Artw at 4:54 PM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 4:54 PM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
Both Frank Miller and Orson Scott Card turned out to be assholes, crypto-fascists, or misogynistic.
But their works are still great critiques on blind patriotism and the dangers inherent in that. Yeah, Miller replaced the corrupt lap-dog with an unhinged billionaire vigilante.
There's undoubtedly a spectrum between relying on justice from the state and putting power into citizen's hands. I hope, given all the issues with police violence lately, we could acknowledge blindly believing all protective roles in service of the government are good may not be the best philosophy. Earlier comics looked at the dangers of excessive reach by government, whether it was mutant registration or whatever. But most of them had that role reserved for the villain.
But yeah, something happens to US artists, intellectuals and others who embrace these anti-state ideas. They eventually fall into crazytown. It almost seems inevitable. It's ironic that Miller kind of fell into his own story.
posted by formless at 4:59 PM on March 2, 2016
But their works are still great critiques on blind patriotism and the dangers inherent in that. Yeah, Miller replaced the corrupt lap-dog with an unhinged billionaire vigilante.
There's undoubtedly a spectrum between relying on justice from the state and putting power into citizen's hands. I hope, given all the issues with police violence lately, we could acknowledge blindly believing all protective roles in service of the government are good may not be the best philosophy. Earlier comics looked at the dangers of excessive reach by government, whether it was mutant registration or whatever. But most of them had that role reserved for the villain.
But yeah, something happens to US artists, intellectuals and others who embrace these anti-state ideas. They eventually fall into crazytown. It almost seems inevitable. It's ironic that Miller kind of fell into his own story.
posted by formless at 4:59 PM on March 2, 2016
Anyway, the problem isn't that these comics are bad. It's that these are cultural artifacts from thirty years ago, and the conversation around them does not reflect that. Like, I'm not going excuse Miller's "every woman is a nun or a hooker" sexual politics, but have you seen any crime movies from the '80s? This is just the kind of fucked up thinking that was prevalent in action genres at the time.
I read things like this and I think, "Why? Why do I bother getting out of bed? I am culturally irrelevant and too old to live."
Let me tell you, my children, about the 1980s. I saw them firsthand, though my eyes are now clouded with cataract. We had Misogyny Miller, yes, and all those shitty movies with Sylvester Stallone wearing sweatbands, not to mention goddamn Cherry 2000, but we also had Margot Kidder in the Superman movies and Tina Turner in Thunderdome, and we had a movie series about Aliens, and a lady named Linda Hamilton in the Terminator movies, and we had everyone's favorite action hero trading barbs with Cybill Shepherd in Moonlighting. It was not, in fact, all darkness and oil-slicked puddles and Blade Runner, at least, not outside New York City.
posted by gingerest at 4:59 PM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
I read things like this and I think, "Why? Why do I bother getting out of bed? I am culturally irrelevant and too old to live."
Let me tell you, my children, about the 1980s. I saw them firsthand, though my eyes are now clouded with cataract. We had Misogyny Miller, yes, and all those shitty movies with Sylvester Stallone wearing sweatbands, not to mention goddamn Cherry 2000, but we also had Margot Kidder in the Superman movies and Tina Turner in Thunderdome, and we had a movie series about Aliens, and a lady named Linda Hamilton in the Terminator movies, and we had everyone's favorite action hero trading barbs with Cybill Shepherd in Moonlighting. It was not, in fact, all darkness and oil-slicked puddles and Blade Runner, at least, not outside New York City.
posted by gingerest at 4:59 PM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]
Sometimes we're not the intended audience, but that doesn't mean there isn't an audience for this material or that it shouldn't exist.
So, hey.
I don't like it when work is sexist. I guess that means I'm not the audience for sexist works.
But this argument--that if I think something is sexist, I should just shut up and not buy it--is super weaksauce, because I don't want men and boys to read sexist works either. I can avoid sexist work that upsets me, but when men and boys are steeped in cultural products that reinforce sexism, that still harms me.
Our society would be a hell of a lot better if it were the type where a boy, when picking up a story for which he is the audience found it full of relatable female characters with a variety of roles just like the male characters, instead of just sex symbols, quest objects, impediments, or tragic motivations.
I want boys to be taught that the female half of the world are human beings just like they are. I don't want comics to be excused from treating my gender fairly because--what, it's natural that male audiences want comics where people like me are treated like a special class of not-people? No, we teach them that crap, and we can fix it by challenging the idea that anything with a relatable female character is for girls, by challenging the idea that sexism is okay as long as it's for boys.
So, sorry about the long comment, but "it's not for you" is a super infuriating argument for me when it comes to issues of fair representation.
Justice for women is not a women's issue, it's not "my" issue, it's everyone's issue--including the boys who are reading these comics even if they don't know it. It's your issue. You can't just build a wall around it and say "this isn't for you" and expect me not to peek in and criticise and ask for change.
And that is entirely separate from the issue of it being sexist that girls and women are so often not assumed to be part of the audience anyway.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 5:42 PM on March 2, 2016 [15 favorites]
So, hey.
I don't like it when work is sexist. I guess that means I'm not the audience for sexist works.
But this argument--that if I think something is sexist, I should just shut up and not buy it--is super weaksauce, because I don't want men and boys to read sexist works either. I can avoid sexist work that upsets me, but when men and boys are steeped in cultural products that reinforce sexism, that still harms me.
Our society would be a hell of a lot better if it were the type where a boy, when picking up a story for which he is the audience found it full of relatable female characters with a variety of roles just like the male characters, instead of just sex symbols, quest objects, impediments, or tragic motivations.
I want boys to be taught that the female half of the world are human beings just like they are. I don't want comics to be excused from treating my gender fairly because--what, it's natural that male audiences want comics where people like me are treated like a special class of not-people? No, we teach them that crap, and we can fix it by challenging the idea that anything with a relatable female character is for girls, by challenging the idea that sexism is okay as long as it's for boys.
So, sorry about the long comment, but "it's not for you" is a super infuriating argument for me when it comes to issues of fair representation.
Justice for women is not a women's issue, it's not "my" issue, it's everyone's issue--including the boys who are reading these comics even if they don't know it. It's your issue. You can't just build a wall around it and say "this isn't for you" and expect me not to peek in and criticise and ask for change.
And that is entirely separate from the issue of it being sexist that girls and women are so often not assumed to be part of the audience anyway.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 5:42 PM on March 2, 2016 [15 favorites]
I'd resist easy narratives/explanations that relied too heavily on either "It's Moore and Miller's fault" or "It was the eighties". Mostly, it was comics, which was then as now dominated mostly by male executives and editors (even with Jenette Kahn at DC), and who took almost exactly the wrong lessons from the successes of TDKR and Watchmen, not to mention the other comics companies that were springing up to take advantage of the direct market (many of which no longer exist).
posted by Halloween Jack at 5:58 PM on March 2, 2016
posted by Halloween Jack at 5:58 PM on March 2, 2016
Who would dare travel in time and kill baby Frank Miller?
Of course not. I would, however, travel back and tell my 17 year old self that with DKR and Year One under our belt, we could safely be done reading comics by Frank Miller. That Sin City would be better to skip altogether, that I could get to work much earlier on adding Grant Morrisson to my superhero diet.
It would be tempting to tell my younger self there would be a babillion dollar Rocket Raccoon movie one day that most everyone would love, but I wouldn't want to undermine my warning by letting him think I came back in time just to mess with me.
posted by EatTheWeek at 6:00 PM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
Of course not. I would, however, travel back and tell my 17 year old self that with DKR and Year One under our belt, we could safely be done reading comics by Frank Miller. That Sin City would be better to skip altogether, that I could get to work much earlier on adding Grant Morrisson to my superhero diet.
It would be tempting to tell my younger self there would be a babillion dollar Rocket Raccoon movie one day that most everyone would love, but I wouldn't want to undermine my warning by letting him think I came back in time just to mess with me.
posted by EatTheWeek at 6:00 PM on March 2, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm not suggesting anything, but say a safe had dropped on him out of the sky around 1995 or so, I think we'd have a much kinder view of him and be given to more charitable readings of his earlier stuff.
posted by Artw at 6:18 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 6:18 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Our society would be a hell of a lot better if it were the type where a boy, when picking up a story for which he is the audience found it full of relatable female characters with a variety of roles just like the male characters, instead of just sex symbols, quest objects, impediments, or tragic motivations.
I want boys to be taught that the female half of the world are human beings just like they are. I don't want comics to be excused from treating my gender fairly because--what, it's natural that male audiences want comics where people like me are treated like a special class of not-people? No, we teach them that crap, and we can fix it by challenging the idea that anything with a relatable female character is for girls, by challenging the idea that sexism is okay as long as it's for boys.
But this posits that the purpose of art is didactic, no? Every comic book a lesson plan, Pilgrim's Progress hidden behind every pow and biff.
I'm fine with the idea that people should write comic or any other work with fully rounded, relateable female characters because that's what they want to write. I'm fine with the idea of anyone as a reader saying, "I'd like to read works like this and not works like that because I think works like that say bad things about the world." I'm not fine with the idea that one should say "that is a work that says bad things and therefore it shouldn't exist." That we should identify and shield people from Degenerate Art. It's not the artist's job to be nice, or moral. Only to tell the story they want to tell as well as they can. How we react to it is on us.
posted by Diablevert at 8:39 PM on March 2, 2016
I want boys to be taught that the female half of the world are human beings just like they are. I don't want comics to be excused from treating my gender fairly because--what, it's natural that male audiences want comics where people like me are treated like a special class of not-people? No, we teach them that crap, and we can fix it by challenging the idea that anything with a relatable female character is for girls, by challenging the idea that sexism is okay as long as it's for boys.
But this posits that the purpose of art is didactic, no? Every comic book a lesson plan, Pilgrim's Progress hidden behind every pow and biff.
I'm fine with the idea that people should write comic or any other work with fully rounded, relateable female characters because that's what they want to write. I'm fine with the idea of anyone as a reader saying, "I'd like to read works like this and not works like that because I think works like that say bad things about the world." I'm not fine with the idea that one should say "that is a work that says bad things and therefore it shouldn't exist." That we should identify and shield people from Degenerate Art. It's not the artist's job to be nice, or moral. Only to tell the story they want to tell as well as they can. How we react to it is on us.
posted by Diablevert at 8:39 PM on March 2, 2016
But this posits that the purpose of art is didactic, no? Every comic book a lesson plan, Pilgrim's Progress hidden behind every pow and biff.
Not at all. You can influence the culture in which you live by the art that you produce. We just had a huge long thread about racism in metal a couple weeks back, in which it was roundly criticized and rebuked. I think you'd have a hard time finding anyone to state that no, no, it's fine for Phil Anselmo to give the Nazi salute from the stage and scream "White Power!", you probably just weren't the audience for his art.
Why should misogyny be any different? If Frank Miller, instead of producing art that reduced all women to strippers and whores, instead made his heroes lily white and all villains dark-skinned, would that be acceptable? Certainly not. And I think that the misogyny inherent to his work is as harmful to the boys that read it and the women in their lives as the girls who read it and find it damaging to their view of themselves. I could never stomach Sin City, despite the groundbreaking art. And it should color our view of his work. He may have been an interesting new voice in comics, but his misogyny has rightly tarnished his legacy.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:03 PM on March 2, 2016 [6 favorites]
Not at all. You can influence the culture in which you live by the art that you produce. We just had a huge long thread about racism in metal a couple weeks back, in which it was roundly criticized and rebuked. I think you'd have a hard time finding anyone to state that no, no, it's fine for Phil Anselmo to give the Nazi salute from the stage and scream "White Power!", you probably just weren't the audience for his art.
Why should misogyny be any different? If Frank Miller, instead of producing art that reduced all women to strippers and whores, instead made his heroes lily white and all villains dark-skinned, would that be acceptable? Certainly not. And I think that the misogyny inherent to his work is as harmful to the boys that read it and the women in their lives as the girls who read it and find it damaging to their view of themselves. I could never stomach Sin City, despite the groundbreaking art. And it should color our view of his work. He may have been an interesting new voice in comics, but his misogyny has rightly tarnished his legacy.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:03 PM on March 2, 2016 [6 favorites]
Existential Dread: "We just had a huge long thread about racism in metal a couple weeks back, in which it was roundly criticized and rebuked. I think you'd have a hard time finding anyone to state that no, no, it's fine for Phil Anselmo to give the Nazi salute from the stage and scream "White Power!", you probably just weren't the audience for his art."
Whenever there are discussions of old film, old books, etc., it's often stated that you can like old stuff while at the same time finding it problematic. On the other hand, if someone puts out something racist, misogynistic, etc. today, a different standard is used. There's no bright line between "It's okay to enjoy this Shakespearean play despite the sexism" and "It's okay to enjoy this modern film despite the sexism". The fact that there isn't a bright line doesn't mean that the two are actually the same. There's no bright line between "cold water" and "hot water", but you don't get second degree burns from a mountain stream and you don't get hypothermia in a hot spring. So I think pretty much everyone agrees Shakespeare falls in the "okay to enjoy while also finding problematic" and Anselmo falls in the "What the fuck!?" camp, despite there being no specific delineating point.
The question comes down to where to draw the line on Miller, and I don't think there really is a "correct" answer, it's more a matter of where society, as a whole, decides to draw the line. It's pretty clear that society, as a whole, has said that Miller's post 9/11 stuff is right out. It starts to get fuzzier the further back you go.
Personally, I'd draw the line after DKR, but before Sin City, but if I'm honest with myself I suspect that's merely because I never liked Sin City, and not because of critical differences in society between 1986 and 1991.
posted by Bugbread at 9:21 PM on March 2, 2016
Whenever there are discussions of old film, old books, etc., it's often stated that you can like old stuff while at the same time finding it problematic. On the other hand, if someone puts out something racist, misogynistic, etc. today, a different standard is used. There's no bright line between "It's okay to enjoy this Shakespearean play despite the sexism" and "It's okay to enjoy this modern film despite the sexism". The fact that there isn't a bright line doesn't mean that the two are actually the same. There's no bright line between "cold water" and "hot water", but you don't get second degree burns from a mountain stream and you don't get hypothermia in a hot spring. So I think pretty much everyone agrees Shakespeare falls in the "okay to enjoy while also finding problematic" and Anselmo falls in the "What the fuck!?" camp, despite there being no specific delineating point.
The question comes down to where to draw the line on Miller, and I don't think there really is a "correct" answer, it's more a matter of where society, as a whole, decides to draw the line. It's pretty clear that society, as a whole, has said that Miller's post 9/11 stuff is right out. It starts to get fuzzier the further back you go.
Personally, I'd draw the line after DKR, but before Sin City, but if I'm honest with myself I suspect that's merely because I never liked Sin City, and not because of critical differences in society between 1986 and 1991.
posted by Bugbread at 9:21 PM on March 2, 2016
And, to be clear, I'm strictly talking about the issue of whether it is okay to like something problematic or not, not the whole "you aren't the intended audience" thing.
posted by Bugbread at 9:28 PM on March 2, 2016
posted by Bugbread at 9:28 PM on March 2, 2016
It's not the artist's job to be nice, or moral.
It is absolutely the artist's job to be nice and moral when he or she is creating a story about a character identified as a hero that takes place in a comic book intended to be appropriate for children. Again, this isn't "Must We Burn Sade?" it's "Should kids be able to read a Batman story explicitly intended as appropriate for children without encountering a lot of weird sexist bullshit, and let's not even get into race."
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:29 PM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
It is absolutely the artist's job to be nice and moral when he or she is creating a story about a character identified as a hero that takes place in a comic book intended to be appropriate for children. Again, this isn't "Must We Burn Sade?" it's "Should kids be able to read a Batman story explicitly intended as appropriate for children without encountering a lot of weird sexist bullshit, and let's not even get into race."
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:29 PM on March 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
kittens for breakfast: "that takes place in a comic book intended to be appropriate for children"
There are a ton of problems with Miller, but, at least with The Dark Knight Returns, this isn't one of them. That comic is in absolutely no way intended to be appropriate for children. Kids still bought it, of course, just like kids went to see Deadpool, but that doesn't mean it was intended for them. It's not even one of those wink-nod T&A-and-violence comics where it's clearly meant to appeal to kids but puts on an adults-only fig leaf; instead its bleak and satirizes news programs and Ronald Reagan and lots of other stuff that adults would grok and kids couldn't care less about.
If you're referring to Batman Year One, etc., then I've got no idea, as I haven't read those.
posted by Bugbread at 11:03 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
There are a ton of problems with Miller, but, at least with The Dark Knight Returns, this isn't one of them. That comic is in absolutely no way intended to be appropriate for children. Kids still bought it, of course, just like kids went to see Deadpool, but that doesn't mean it was intended for them. It's not even one of those wink-nod T&A-and-violence comics where it's clearly meant to appeal to kids but puts on an adults-only fig leaf; instead its bleak and satirizes news programs and Ronald Reagan and lots of other stuff that adults would grok and kids couldn't care less about.
If you're referring to Batman Year One, etc., then I've got no idea, as I haven't read those.
posted by Bugbread at 11:03 PM on March 2, 2016 [2 favorites]
Whenever there are discussions of old film, old books, etc., it's often stated that you can like old stuff while at the same time finding it problematic. On the other hand, if someone puts out something racist, misogynistic, etc. today, a different standard is used. ... Personally, I'd draw the line after DKR, but before Sin City, but if I'm honest with myself I suspect that's merely because I never liked Sin City, and not because of critical differences in society between 1986 and 1991.
I promise to drop this after this, but I really want to underscore the point that, yes, it was 30 years ago, but we had, like, telephones and electricity and Geraldine Ferraro and Sally Ride. Frank Miller was problematic THEN. Women read comics even then. We just didn't have a lot of documented female voices in comics criticism.
posted by gingerest at 11:08 PM on March 2, 2016 [9 favorites]
I promise to drop this after this, but I really want to underscore the point that, yes, it was 30 years ago, but we had, like, telephones and electricity and Geraldine Ferraro and Sally Ride. Frank Miller was problematic THEN. Women read comics even then. We just didn't have a lot of documented female voices in comics criticism.
posted by gingerest at 11:08 PM on March 2, 2016 [9 favorites]
Yeah, I didn't mean to give the impression that "This is ancient history, just like Shakespeare!" I read Dark Knight Returns in real time. I just meant that it's not in the unambiguous now or the unambiguous historical.
(One of the authors that gets discussed a lot in the "you can like a work but find it problematic" discussions is Heinlein, whose peak was in the 1960s, when second wave feminism was already going strong, so "it was problematic then" doesn't seem to affect the "you can like a work but find it problematic" position)
posted by Bugbread at 12:00 AM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
(One of the authors that gets discussed a lot in the "you can like a work but find it problematic" discussions is Heinlein, whose peak was in the 1960s, when second wave feminism was already going strong, so "it was problematic then" doesn't seem to affect the "you can like a work but find it problematic" position)
posted by Bugbread at 12:00 AM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
Looking back at the '80s, I'm really glad I was reading mostly Uncanny X-Men and New Mutants at the time, as a teenager. Those comics weren't perfect, but one thing they did really well was present multiple strong female characters.
I'm not sure how much that influenced me, but I definitely think having multiple and different female characters is completely natural at this point and roll my eyes at anyone saying different. Hell, I enjoyed the Avengers movie immensely, but I did keep thinking "Why is there only one female character on the team, that's just weird."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:29 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure how much that influenced me, but I definitely think having multiple and different female characters is completely natural at this point and roll my eyes at anyone saying different. Hell, I enjoyed the Avengers movie immensely, but I did keep thinking "Why is there only one female character on the team, that's just weird."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:29 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
the problem with "well it's of its time" - even if that were true - is that today his work is still being used as a gatekeeper to get past. if it had just faded into history and some of us vintage nerds just had fond (or not so fond) memories of it, that'd be one thing - but this piece got written because they got a big pr push about tdkr anniversary, there is always a new copy in my local video game/comic store (and not always the same new one, it seems to pretty reliably get bought), it's (appropriately, i think) still getting taught in college courses about comics - this isn't old news, this is current scripture and as such, people who have felt at one point or another (or constantly) like comics don't want their participation are going to wrestle with works like those of frank miller. as long as he's still being held up as one of the greatest of all time, he will be met with criticism.
posted by nadawi at 6:42 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by nadawi at 6:42 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]
There's nothing wrong with Frank Miller that I can't fix with my hands.
posted by phearlez at 1:05 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by phearlez at 1:05 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
the problem with "well it's of its time" - even if that were true - is that today his work is still being used as a gatekeeper to get past.
Which is another problem with the it's not for you argument. If I refuse to support artists or titles that I think are sexist--I miss out on a lot of works that are considered culturally important. I won't understand the conversations about them because I won't have the proper context. I'll miss out on seeing their influences on other artists. Importantly, I'll miss out on what's good about them.
This is true outside of comics fandom, as well. Literature, music--asking me to exclude myself from vast swathes of our culture because it's not a problem that so many important cultural works treat women like shit, that it's only my problem for reading them --
Just, ugh.
I'm not fine with the idea that one should say "that is a work that says bad things and therefore it shouldn't exist.
I've never understood the idea that art cannot be criticised for its prejudices because of this pseudo-mystical belief in the sanctity of an artist's vision. I'm an amateur writer, and voracious devourer of stories, and I know that one of the most powerful things about a story is how it makes us look at the world differently--no art is created in a vacuum. It influences and is influenced by our culture. The idea that you can just put aside the troubling aspects of art because it is somehow separate from all of that both baffles and slightly offends me, because it devalues art.
Artists are just people, not oracles. Their vision can and should be criticised.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 2:01 PM on March 3, 2016
Which is another problem with the it's not for you argument. If I refuse to support artists or titles that I think are sexist--I miss out on a lot of works that are considered culturally important. I won't understand the conversations about them because I won't have the proper context. I'll miss out on seeing their influences on other artists. Importantly, I'll miss out on what's good about them.
This is true outside of comics fandom, as well. Literature, music--asking me to exclude myself from vast swathes of our culture because it's not a problem that so many important cultural works treat women like shit, that it's only my problem for reading them --
Just, ugh.
I'm not fine with the idea that one should say "that is a work that says bad things and therefore it shouldn't exist.
I've never understood the idea that art cannot be criticised for its prejudices because of this pseudo-mystical belief in the sanctity of an artist's vision. I'm an amateur writer, and voracious devourer of stories, and I know that one of the most powerful things about a story is how it makes us look at the world differently--no art is created in a vacuum. It influences and is influenced by our culture. The idea that you can just put aside the troubling aspects of art because it is somehow separate from all of that both baffles and slightly offends me, because it devalues art.
Artists are just people, not oracles. Their vision can and should be criticised.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 2:01 PM on March 3, 2016
My impression of the Miller zeitgeist is that he's not really considered a great so much as a fucked up guy who produced some great work decades ago. He's like Chris Sims or Heinlein in that way: people recognize that he was influential and skilled, but that you could see the problems peeking through the cracks in his early work, until some point when the damn broke and he went full-on crazy. People may bat an eye when you criticize DKR, but nobody bats an eye when you criticize his later work, or the person himself.
posted by Bugbread at 2:09 PM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Bugbread at 2:09 PM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
I, uh, think you mean Dave Sim.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 2:15 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 2:15 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]
kittens for breakfast: "I, uh, think you mean Dave Sim."
I do indeed, and who the heck am I getting him mixed up with? Looking at Wikipedia, I don't recognize any of those Chris Sims (or Chris Simms). Maybe someone I went to elementary school with, whose name is unobtrusively taking up some dusty corner of my brain?
posted by Bugbread at 3:04 PM on March 3, 2016
I do indeed, and who the heck am I getting him mixed up with? Looking at Wikipedia, I don't recognize any of those Chris Sims (or Chris Simms). Maybe someone I went to elementary school with, whose name is unobtrusively taking up some dusty corner of my brain?
posted by Bugbread at 3:04 PM on March 3, 2016
Chris Sims is a long-time comics blogger who has probably been mentioned on the front page of MeFi in comics contexts multiple times over the years, and a lot more so inside threads about same. So could be just background seepage getting you.
posted by cortex at 3:23 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by cortex at 3:23 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]
80s ... and we had a movie series about Aliens, and a lady named Linda Hamilton in the Terminator movies,
*ahem* Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) Bad-ass Sarah Connor was the 90s. The 80s were the shitstorm she was transformed by.
posted by phearlez at 7:47 AM on March 4, 2016
*ahem* Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) Bad-ass Sarah Connor was the 90s. The 80s were the shitstorm she was transformed by.
posted by phearlez at 7:47 AM on March 4, 2016
I, uh, think you mean Dave Sim.
Remarkably, there are some who think he's not misogynistic at all. I have to assume they are not familiar with his later work.
posted by Ashwagandha at 9:26 AM on March 4, 2016
Remarkably, there are some who think he's not misogynistic at all. I have to assume they are not familiar with his later work.
posted by Ashwagandha at 9:26 AM on March 4, 2016
I'm rusty on Sim but from my recall of his work and writing I might be able to believe that he's just a misanthrope who is unwilling to accept the idea that women's situation in life deserves some consideration and that hard-line equal treatment actually means regressive treatment. Whether you want to call that not misogyny... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
posted by phearlez at 11:20 AM on March 4, 2016
posted by phearlez at 11:20 AM on March 4, 2016
...you should refresh your recall. also some googling around shows that someone who works for him advertises his work on r/redpill.
posted by nadawi at 11:26 AM on March 4, 2016
posted by nadawi at 11:26 AM on March 4, 2016
phearlez: “I'm rusty on Sim but from my recall of his work and writing I might be able to believe that he's just a misanthrope who is unwilling to accept the idea that women's situation in life deserves some consideration and that hard-line equal treatment actually means regressive treatment. Whether you want to call that not misogyny... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯”
Well – I'm with nadawi here, but to be more specific: you are very much misremembering. I can understanding wanting to, as I appreciate the great moments of Cerebus as much as anybody.
But Dave Sim was absolutely not really not making vague statements about the situation of women, or the treatment of women, or anything contextual like that. His philosophy, espoused in those obnoxious long sermony things inserted in the later volumes of Cerebus, is that women are simply inherently different from men: that women are by nature weaker, more emotion, and less rational. At the core he was elucidating this belief about the fundamental difference between the sexes, and that by nature women are born less capable of leadership and more prone to hysteria and confusion because of their lesser intellects. Everything else flowed from that. When women demanded something like equal pay, or equal treatment, they were being silly and emotional; any rational human being would see that women naturally ought to get less pay and be treated as subservient, because they were born to be subservient. That's what women are; it's what they're for.
So – well, unfortunately this kind of thing really can't be brushed off. It's misogyny in the most fundamental sense. It's not just a dismissal of the concerns of women in general; it's a dismissal of women as intellectual and rational creatures worthy of equal status in society with men.
posted by koeselitz at 11:41 AM on March 4, 2016 [4 favorites]
Well – I'm with nadawi here, but to be more specific: you are very much misremembering. I can understanding wanting to, as I appreciate the great moments of Cerebus as much as anybody.
But Dave Sim was absolutely not really not making vague statements about the situation of women, or the treatment of women, or anything contextual like that. His philosophy, espoused in those obnoxious long sermony things inserted in the later volumes of Cerebus, is that women are simply inherently different from men: that women are by nature weaker, more emotion, and less rational. At the core he was elucidating this belief about the fundamental difference between the sexes, and that by nature women are born less capable of leadership and more prone to hysteria and confusion because of their lesser intellects. Everything else flowed from that. When women demanded something like equal pay, or equal treatment, they were being silly and emotional; any rational human being would see that women naturally ought to get less pay and be treated as subservient, because they were born to be subservient. That's what women are; it's what they're for.
So – well, unfortunately this kind of thing really can't be brushed off. It's misogyny in the most fundamental sense. It's not just a dismissal of the concerns of women in general; it's a dismissal of women as intellectual and rational creatures worthy of equal status in society with men.
posted by koeselitz at 11:41 AM on March 4, 2016 [4 favorites]
Yeah, I'm willing to accept being rusty on the specifics, but not classifying Dave Sim's fauxlosophical musings as "misogyny" is functionally indistinguishable from denying there is such a thing as "misogyny" at all.
posted by Etrigan at 11:47 AM on March 4, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 11:47 AM on March 4, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, no, you have missed some very important aspects of Dave Sim.
posted by gingerest at 1:31 PM on March 4, 2016
posted by gingerest at 1:31 PM on March 4, 2016
Poor Cerebus. It was such a good series 'til Sim went straight off the rails, round about Reads. Best Groucho Marx in comics, for instance.
posted by rifflesby at 1:40 PM on March 4, 2016
posted by rifflesby at 1:40 PM on March 4, 2016
Well, the part (shortly after Sim's divorce and during High Society, I think?) where pope Cerebus marries, rapes, and divorces the female lead over a short period of time might've been an early hint...
posted by rmd1023 at 4:27 PM on March 4, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by rmd1023 at 4:27 PM on March 4, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yes, true. True.
Also, now looking at a list, I find that I misremember -- Jaka's Story is where I always stopped reading, four volumes before Reads. Much earlier than I thought.
Someone should compile and release a trade paperback "Cerebus: The Fun Bits". It'd be a really great inch and a half.
posted by rifflesby at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2016
Also, now looking at a list, I find that I misremember -- Jaka's Story is where I always stopped reading, four volumes before Reads. Much earlier than I thought.
Someone should compile and release a trade paperback "Cerebus: The Fun Bits". It'd be a really great inch and a half.
posted by rifflesby at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2016
Frank Miller Says His Batman Was ‘Too Nice’ for Darren Aronofsky’s Unmade Adaptation
posted by Artw at 12:55 PM on March 6, 2016
posted by Artw at 12:55 PM on March 6, 2016
« Older League 1 America: The Soccer Revolution That Never... | What a bum rap for a nice, sensitive guy like me Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I'm tempted to raise Martha Washington as a counterpoint to some of this article, but I suspect if I reread it is find plenty that's objectionable in there too.
posted by Artw at 7:36 AM on March 2, 2016 [10 favorites]