Gail Simone's Blog, page 1085

APE IN A CAPE: Someone Asked...

APE IN A CAPE: Someone Asked...:

tedcroland:

While I wouldn't call myself a "fan" of this scene, the objections that Simone (who is someone I have a high amount of respect for) are a bit unfair and don't take into account the nuanced characterizations that Moore was trying to establish.

gailsimone:

…so here we go.

One of my big problems with Watchmen is how stupidly the near-rape is handled. And it's EPIC stupid.

It's full of every dumbass cliche there is, and unfortunately, this was common in work of the time.

We have:

Slut Shaming, check.

Which would have been the case in the 1940's when the rape took place.

Woman falls in love with her rapist, check.

It's not as though Sally didn't have a relationship with The Comedian before and after the attempted rape. It's also well established that she's emotionally fucked up (like every other character in the book).

Man who object to rape is only doing so because he's gay, check.

Just because the Comedian says he's only objecting because he's gay doesn't make it true. Hooded Justice is established to have the closest thing to conventional morality than any other character.

Woman at least partly to blame for assault because of her clothes, check.

Also something that would have been the conception in the 1940's.

Man who rapes has oh-so tender spot for victim's daughter (see? He's not so bad, he's just misunderstood!), check.

Because rapists aren't all the devil, they are just fucked up people who have other emotions than wanton desire for rape.

There are other issues, but if those scenes were in any other book, they would have gotten the loud raspberries they deserve. It's just a bunch of gunk rape cliches, one after another.

Other books, for the most part, will not have been as amazing as Watchmen is.

I do like the book. But it's not completely unproblematic.

I hate rape as much as anyone else, and I find it repugnant in most uses of fiction, especially since this odd, endemic use of rape to establish the evilness of a character. I don't think Watchmen uses rape in the same appalling way that a lot of other fiction does. The action fits the morality of the character, as do the reactions of the other characters.

****************************

Wow.  What a bunch of…responses.

Well, first, let's start with using the 1940's as an excuse. It's crap, and here's why. THE CHARACTERS THEMSELVES are the voices for the problems in this sequence, including the victim AND her grown daughter, whose scenes take place in the present day.

Not all rapists are purely monsters? What? It is a purely male bag of cliches from minute one, here. Sally falls in love with her rapist, that alone is just sheer horseshit, based on the character in the rest of the book.  I can't explain how obnoxious it is to see the best writer comics has ever had using this trite and stupid cliche so unreservedly.

The other problem is, nearly all of Alan's mature comics of the time feature similar problematic rape nonsense. Miracleman has a young girl repeatedly raped while in a stasis field, and she essentially says it's a fair trade because she got superpowers.

There's a ton of that stuff.

AND, I'm not basing Hooded Justice being gay on Comedian's accusations (although it's a problematic cliche in itself), but on other material and Alan's own notes on the subject, where it was implied.

"The Action fits the morality of the characters?" really?  SSII's reaction, as a modern woman, first having a crush on and then later forgiving her mother's attempted rapist makes sense to you, based on the character in the rest of the book?

It's a male vision story in every sense, in those sequences.

Also, sorry to be brusque, I'm on my way out the door and wanted to respond but am in haste.

And TBH I Know People Are Doing The Whole "Tough, He Doesn't Get To Decide What Happens With The Characters," Thing

fyeahlilbitoeverything:

Which I agree with. When you work for Marvel and DC, that's the implied knowledge.

But at the same time I don't think everything NEEDS a prequel/sequel/sidequel/spin-off to begin with.

You know he had one planned himself, right? Not saying the point's invalid, but he did have a MINUTEMAN prequel planned.

I think it's the idea that nothing can be 'stand-alone' any more/There always has to be a prequel/sequel if it's successful/& watchmen has become an iconic singular piece of work so widely appreciated that it's hard to imagine strands of it working out of

**********

You can make a case that Watchmen is complete and doesn't need sequels or prequels.

I think that's the only real defense here, is that they might not be needed.

If the agreement allows them, if top creators are used, if Alan himself planned a prequel at some point, I think a lot of the other objections seem kind of moot.

I think it's the idea that nothing can be 'stand-alone' any more/There always has to be a prequel/sequel if it's successful/& watchmen has become an iconic singular piece of work so widely appreciated that it's hard to imagine strands of it working out of

**********

You can make a case that Watchmen is complete and doesn't need sequels or prequels.

I think that's the only real defense here, is that they might not be needed.

If the agreement allows them, if top creators are used, if Alan himself planned a prequel at some point, I think a lot of the other objections seem kind of moot.

I think it's the idea that nothing can be 'stand-alone' any more/There always has to be a prequel/sequel if it's successful/& watchmen has become an iconic singular piece of work so widely appreciated that it's hard to imagine strands of it working out of

**********

You can make a case that Watchmen is complete and doesn't need sequels or prequels.

I think that's the only real defense here, is that they might not be needed.

If the agreement allows them, if top creators are used, if Alan himself planned a prequel at some point, I think a lot of the other objections seem kind of moot.

Ach, I meant to add another question in that last one as well...if you were given the opportunity to explain the "boob window" (if you haven't. Boy, I've missed out on alot of your books...) how would YOU have handled it?

*****

I have answered this a few times, and I'll be honest, I think the more complicated the writers get, the less it fits Power Girl's character. To me, it's Karen. She dresses the way she wants to and fuck anyone who tells her she shouldn't.  :)

"I'm Power Girl, and I LIKE this costume. You think I give a &^%$ what you think about it?"

That's Karen, to me.

Covert Wallace: Someone Asked...

Covert Wallace: Someone Asked...:

covertwallace:

[Trigger warning: discussion of rape, rape culture, rape-related tropes found in Watchmen.]

gailsimone:

…so here we go.

One of my big problems with Watchmen is how stupidly the near-rape is handled. And it's EPIC stupid.

It's full of every dumbass cliche there is, and unfortunately,…

**********************

Answering Deimos' comment here because of the goofy Tumblr formatting. He or she said: 

" I didn't think the slut shaming & victim blaming were supposed to be… approved by the narrative. (I never thought Hooded Justice stopped it because he was gay either). Not that the rest isn't problematic."

Ah, there is almost nowhere in the book that supports an opposing narrative. Moore's work of the time is full of oddball rape cliche, as well as some other stuff I hesitate to bring up, but that others have, that I am less knowledgeable about.

If you read the book, Silk Spectre II offers a weak defense of her mother's rape to the Comedian, who is (sickningly), heartbroken, in a scene that is supposed to humanize Eddie, but instead makes me think Alan had never at that point in his life spoken to a genuine victim of rape. It's nauseating.

Later, even Silk Spectre I poo-poos the idea that what Eddie did was so very bad.  Again, I have to think what Alan knew about rape could be put in a very small thimble.

I like the book. But it's got problems.

thehappysorceress:So, my custom Lady Blackhawk figure is...

thehappysorceress:

So, my custom Lady Blackhawk figure is finished!

Made by Adam Crohn of AC Custom Figures,  it was the first female figure he'd made & I think he did a pretty darn good job of it.

You can see more pictures of her here. And when she arrives, you know I'll be using her in Action Figure Theater!

Oh, man, that's adorable.

I have a custom made Zinda a terrific custom figure guy made for me. It's BEAUTIFUL.

Someone Asked...

…so here we go.

One of my big problems with Watchmen is how stupidly the near-rape is handled. And it's EPIC stupid.

It's full of every dumbass cliche there is, and unfortunately, this was common in work of the time.

We have:

Slut Shaming, check.

Woman falls in love with her rapist, check.

Man who object to rape is only doing so because he's gay, check.

Woman at least partly to blame for assault because of her clothes, check.

Man who rapes has oh-so tender spot for victim's daughter (see? He's not so bad, he's just misunderstood!), check.

There are other issues, but if those scenes were in any other book, they would have gotten the loud raspberries they deserve. It's just a bunch of gunk rape cliches, one after another.

I do like the book. But it's not completely unproblematic.

About Before Watchmen

I'll start off by saying, I don't have remarkably strong feelings either way. I'm excited to see some of those creative teams, simply because I'm a huge fan of Brian, Amanda, and Darwyn, among others. So, new work for them is always a thrill.

But I must admit, I've not nearly romanticized Watchmen to the degree that others have. There's nasty crap in there that is kind of inexplicable, that appears in a lot of Moore work of that period. And it really was a book, like Dark Knight, that unfortunately caused a lot of crappy imitators.

The art's magnificent, the craft is remarkable, but I can name ten Moore works I like better without hesitation.

I have mixed feelings about Alan's response about the books. On the one hand, it would be lovely if every creator who did a work like this got to decide how the property was handled in the future. But they don't, and I'm not sure exactly what makes this book an exception, if that was never part of the agreement in the first place. Because of its artistic merit? Because of Alan's well-known unhappiness with DC?  Cases could be made in both situations, but that's not quite the complaint Alan seemed to have in his response.

He said, there were no sequels to Moby Dick, which is just bizarre and ironic, considering Alan himself uses characters from Moby Dick, and dozens of other sources, without permission or credit, in his Extraordinary Gentlemen books. Is the idea that Watchmen is SO wonderful that no other creators can work on it, despite the fact that the characters themselves are pastiches of Charleton characters owned wholly by DC?

I may be looking at this wrong. I don't know that these books need to happen at all. But Watchmen is immensely popular, these creators are extremely talented. I suspect the books will actually be quite good. Again, I'm not so wild about the characters that I am dying to see them again.

Alan has taken a principled, if sometimes confusing, stance against almost all his former publishers and many of his co-creators. I don't doubt his sincerity for a moment. His work is a series of milestones in the industry.  I have no doubt that many, most, or all of his complaints are valid.

But I'm not sure that the publisher is in the moral wrong, here. Alan himself had a Watchmen prequel planned at one point, so it's weird that he says, "Moby Dick didn't have a prequel," when he himself planned one.

Don't know the answers. The covers look nice, the creative teams are top-notch. I don't know the particulars of the Watchmen contract, so I won't speak about that.

What are your thoughts? What am I missing, here?