Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Some of the Backlog

Happy Birthday, Louise Simonson

Community, Fandom and maybe a smattering of Feminism

...and the second word is, "off"

Breaking news!

Lauren K Hamelton and women don't read comics

the cover of Anita Blake #1

Well, Denial was fun…

The pain and the horror! The horror!

In which I am shallow about Robin thighs

Men Stereotyping Men

Men Stereotyping Women

Sexist Language

Who would be interested in this type of column?

Their Greatest Adventure

Canary in a timeline

A Brief Moment of Unintentional Hilarity:

(No subject) (Green Lantern reviews)

"A Different Kind of Circus"

My eyes, they burn!

Susan Richards would NEVER leave her Children

The Guy I Don’t Like

God, I hate how women get offended so easily when they have every right to be. Damn bitches.

This-ism, that-ism, -ism -ism -ism


Seth T. Hahne said...

One question regarding, most immediately, some of the sentiments reflecting on the recent Wizard-How-to-Draw bit. Someone says: "I just — what a slap in the FACE. The way to draw women is to make them hot. The way to draw men is to make them strong." I've seen this idea represented with some degree of commonness, but I'm wondering...

Isn't the value choice kinda arbitrary there? The commented is obviously upset (and probably for good reason) that the way to draw women is to draw them as "hot." But then she compares this as being unfair because the men get to be drawn as "strong."

So by what random sort of selection is "strong" contrived to be a better single attribute than "hot"? Both seem entirely inadequate as ways to represent people, but the commenter clearly thinks that "strong" is more acceptable than "hot." Where does this sentiment come from (as this does nto seem an isolated case)?

Obviously, the lessons are rather silly in that if you want to draw characters believably, you draw them as people - not as visual cyphers of ideology. We only resort to drawing physiognomically when we are not concerned with complex characterization and are more working with allegory.

arielladrake said...

the dane, it's a practicality issue, I think. When you're talking about superheroes and fighting crime, strength is a practical asset in that vocation (or at least is generally presented as such in the universe). I think you're right in saying that ultimately we want characters drawn as people, but there is a difference between having the core focus of visual representation as a practical asset in what one *does* and having the focus as a practical asset in what one has done *to* them.

Anonymous said...

I just wanted to say thank you for including my post about Sue Richards on your site. I started keeping track of hits and stuff earlier in the month and WOW, your inclusion really upped the visits. What has been nice is the actual comments that were left and being able to visit other fan blogs as well. Thank you and keep up the good job of providing these links. They are thought provoking and informative.

Seth T. Hahne said...

Thanks A. That makes sense somewhat. I think strength is definitely an asset for some characters (i.e., the strength-based ones), but seems less important to say, Green Lantern or the Flash - yet those guys are pretty ripped too. I like what you say, but I'm still vacillating. I'm know that one of my ex-girlfriends would happily say that physical beauty (a.k.a. hotness) would fall in the category of practical assets that allow her *to do* things rather than have them *done to* her. But then I realize this isn't the case for eveybody. Hm, bears more thought...

arielladrake said...

Ah, but using 'hotness' in that way is a two-part process. It's offering oneself up to the 'male' gaze so that one's acceptability to that gaze allows one to do things. I could be wrong, but I can't actually think of how one uses 'hotness' without it being such.

Mickle said...


It's a matter of whether the artist is going so far as to reduce characters to how their body can be used by others or if they are simply using physical attributes to communicate information about a character's place in society. That is the difference between objectification and simply being judged based on physical appearance.

Both can be bad, and in varying degrees - but they are different kinds of bad, and it's really hard for the former to not be bad, if that's all or most of what is being communicated.