So What's All THIS About Green Lantern Being Gay? Not That There's Anything Wrong With That...

Well, this whole thing was a big hullabaloo about nuthin'.  I made a prediction in my last blog entry, based on the words coming from the DC Comics publicity machine that a "male" character who is a "major icon" was going to be reinvented as "gay" for the New 52-verse wherein DC rebooted their entire comics universe of comic books in September 2011.  Where my guess was "The Atom" as the closest thing to a "male" who's a "major icon" who had not been already established in the New 52-verse as straight.  Even then I felt I was stretching the "major" aspect of those clues with the Atom, but he has been a member of the Justice League since issue #14 of the series way back to the '60s.  He also appeared in the SUPER FRIENDS  a few times in the 70s and on the more recent JUSTICE LEAGUE cartoon series.  As the premiere size-changing super-hero of the Justice League, he's pretty iconic.  Major?  Well....I was giving DC grace on that.  As a secondary guess, if DC had a different concept of "major icon" than I, then I found myself gravitating towards Capt. Atom -- although, a much bigger stretch, I kind of thought DC might see the archetypal inspiration for WATCHMEN'S Dr. Manhattan as "iconic."

I was wrong on all counts.  DC comics editorial and publicity machine have an entirely different concept of what constitutes a "major icon."  I'm tempted to just laugh because it's really kind of ridiculous.  Get ready....in case you haven't seen the network news coverage from CNN (owned by the same company that owns DC Comics, natch) -- it is......GREEN LANTERN!

Oh my god! Green Lantern? Really?

No.


Not really.


Well....not who you think they mean.

What only serious comic books geeks already knew (until last summer probably), the Green Lantern isn't just one character, he is a bunch of characters.  The recent Green Lantern movie starring Ryan Reynolds introduced to the masses the concept of the Green Lantern Corps, plus a couple of fully-animated DVD features, and currently airing cartoon series.  These all feature the character of test pilot, Hal Jordan, as the iconic Green Lantern and the various other Green Lanterns as supporting characters.

Within the comics world, since 1958 when the Hal Jordan version of Green Lantern appeared, there have been quite a few human beings who have joined the Green Lantern Corps.  There is John Stewart, Guy Gardner, and Kyle Rayner.  For racial diversity, the African-American John Stewart version of Green Lantern was the only version featured in the JUSTICE LEAGUE/UNLIMITED cartoon series, and the Kyle Rayner version appeared as the only Green Lantern in a single episode of SUPERMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES.  Other than that, Hal Jordan has been the only version of the character really marketed to the masses and is easily the face that most people associate with the Green Lantern persona.

Lesser known in this history of the character is the character of Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern, as created by cartoonist Mart Nodell, was the wielder of a magic green ring and who first appeared on newsstands in ALL-AMERICAN COMICS #16 (1940).  His last "golden age" appearance was in ALL-STAR COMICS #52 (1951).  This character disappeared out of the collective consciousness of the public and 7 years later, the Hal Jordan version of Green Lantern (reimagined completely) appeared with his science-fiction based ring and has been the iconic version of the Green Lantern ever since.  Alan Scott reappeared in comics again in the 60s and off-and-on throughout the last 4 decades, but always as either the Green Lantern of a parallel Earth (called Earth 2) or later, after a major continuity jumble, as a redundant and past-retirement-age elderly Green Lantern who has no direct ties to the Green Lantern Corps.

So, does this mean that DC Comics was progressive enough to have a "gay" super-hero all the way back to 1940.  No, it does not.

As most readers of this blog will know, DC Comics did another massive continuity jumble back in September 2011 resulting in a rebooted universe of characters they now market as "The New 52."  And within the New 52, there is a new ongoing comic book called EARTH 2 in which writer James Robinson has reimagined the entire concept of the Earth 2 parallel world for the New 52.  In the New 52, the world called Earth 2 is not a world in which the comics of the 1940s actually happened, it is a modern parallel to our own Earth but where a battle 5 years ago ended with the deaths of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.  That power vacuum leads to the rise of a whole new and different generation of young heroes and this new 20-something Alan Scott, who will become the Green Lantern of Earth 2 this month, is gay.   I really never even considered any characters on "Earth 2" (DC's alternate universe of same-named heroes) to be iconic.  They are redundancies.  You can tell good stories about them, but they really only exist as redundancies.

Most importantly, this is not the Alan Scott who first appeared in 1940.

I am not quite sure by what leaps of logic the DC editorial and publicity machine can, with a straight face, identify a brand-new version of a character with absolutely none of the previous version's history beyond a name and a hair color as a "major icon."  At best, the original character from the '40s is the inspiration for the iconic version of the character (Hal Jordan), but even in the '40s he was in the realm of the lesser-knowns.  In the '40s, Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman,  and Capt. Marvel would be the major icons.

So, the new Alan Scott, Green Lantern turns out to be gay in the reimagined Earth 2 of the New 52.  That's fine.  They want to diversify the line.  That's fine.  Don't bullshit me with the major icon thing and don't try to drum up media coverage under the misleading header of "Green Lantern is Gay" and that sort of thing.  It's all just silly and DC never surprises me by actions like this that have no real impact.  Making a major character gay would be somewhat dramatic.  Making an alternate version of a character in a parallel world gay is essentially meaningless.



Writer, James Robinson, gave some insight on his thinking process in a recent interview where he pointed out that in the old continuity, the elderly (and straight) Alan Scott had previously fathered a daughter (Jade) and a son (Obsidian).  In that old continuity, Obsidian was gay.  Since Robinson was going to make these new versions of the characters much younger and at the start of their super-hero careers; there was no place for Jade and Obsidian, so he decided to let Scott himself fill that role.  Robinson has a pattern in his comic book writing of nearly always including an "out" gay character, so it makes sense that he would look for who might fit that bill in this new EARTH 2 series.  And, in truth, since he of any of the writers at DC seems to understand the latitude available when reimagining a world from the ground up, he is probably the best suited for handling this type of characterization with respect and without exploitation.  However, he is doing it under the guiding hand of the editorial direction of Dan Didio who approaches the world of comic book marketing like a carnival barker, so it is no real surprise that Robinson's characterization choice became a media circus.

All that being said (and this is what will likely piss off friends and enemies both)....I have a conceptual problem purely from an intellectual standpoint.  From my own research and reading and observation of the human condition, I take the position that human sexuality is a continuum and not a bright line.  I don't believe anyone is actually born straight or gay outright....although I admit there is likely a genetic propensity that makes it more likely one or the other.  Sexuality is a convoluted mix of genetics, environment, and sexual imprinting.  And even more than that, sexuality involves choice and not just attraction.  We aren't just animals with a determinative direction that we can't control.  It's why there is such a thing as situational homosexuality -- most notably within prisons by otherwise heterosexual men and women who become exlusively homosexual until out of prison and then revert back.  There are experimenters who toy with one side or the other, but eventually settle exclusively on  one.  There are people who simply don't have a sex life of any kind and choose to dive into the gay experience because they want the intimacy of sex and that lifestyle is more open to accept them.  There are people who find themselves with no real interest in sex at all -- hetero or homo.  There are some who are simply addicted to sex and don't care who or what gender so long as they are gratified.  It's not always easy to mark the dividing line.  The whole debate over what is "normal" and "abnormal" is obfuscatory.  No form of sexuality is objectively "normal", however heterosexuality is objectively  "normative".  They are different words and connote different things.  "Normal" carries with it a judgment based on one's moral values.  "Normative" is just an objective recognition of the way the vast majority function. If homosexuality had been "normative" then the human race would have died out millennia ago.  Homosexuality, by necessity, will always be nonnormative.  But that itself is not a moral declaration and shouldn't be taken as one.


Sexuality is complicated and it's a lot more than just simply "I was born this way", regardless of the efforts by various political and activist groups who vociferously demand validation for their nonnormative lifestyle choices (which is nobody else's business so why demand it?).  My point of view is very simply that I am not going to impose my own morality on anyone else when it comes to something as personal and intimate as their sexuality.  That is between themselves, their own consciences, and their philosophical/religious values.

Now that I've said that, my only problem with the choice to make the new version of Alan Scott into a homosexual is simply that I think it smacks of tokenism at this point -- "Let's see....who can I make gay????" -- that sort of thing.  By using the name "Alan Scott" there is an intention to evoke some sense of history to the character that ties him back to the version from the previous continuity.  For some reason, that to me, almost belittles his sexuality choice a bit to think it can be changed so matter-of-factly.  I guess that more than anything bothers me from an intellectual standpoint.  I can separate the 2 characters well enough in my own mind to have no problem at all enjoying EARTH 2 and Robinson's excellent storytelling abilities.  But I also know that this whole thing is going to get muddled and confused in the public's mind and give off a wrong-headed message that something as intensely personal as our own sexual identity can be switched around as easily as a couple of keystrokes.

Worst of all, whenever James Robinson leaves the EARTH 2 series and stops writing the character, I have absolutely zero confidence in whoever succeeds him that they won't turn the new Alan Scott character into an embarrassing gay caricature.  The best we comic readers can do is hope Robinson stays in the writing seat for a good long time.

Reblogged: Rush to Judgment

Great column by Zaki Hasan.

I was an early adopter of Rush myself. I started listening to his show in 1988 and listened practically daily for over 10 years.


That was during the time when, if you really listened daily, you knew he didn't take his own schtick seriously. I don't doubt his conservative belief system, but the blustery puffed-up ass he portrayed on the radio was a persona he turned on when the microphone was hot and turned off when the microphone was off.

When Rush started to lose me was when he started the slow process of believing his own schtick and I was evolving into a near absolute individualist (which runs contrary to both the American "Conservative" movement AND the "Liberal" movements).

This pattern of believing their own hype happens too often with populist personalites like this. They go from being brilliant performers (and/or commentators) and slip into full demagoguery before they even realize it. Rush is digging his own grave...and Glenn Beck is surely privately drawing up proposals to offer his show to the stations currently carrying the Limbaugh radio show.



ZAKI'S CORNER with Zaki Hasan | News | Reviews | Pop Culture | Politics: Rush to Judgment: There was a time when I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh. All the time. And not ironically, either. As a junior high student in the thick...

IGN Sticks Politically-Correct Foot in Mouth

I must laugh!

IGN originally reported today:

Along with the other Batman announcements made today, DC revealed plans for a more diverse line of Batman comics. Alongside Batwoman, Batgirl, Catwoman, and Birds of Prey will be Batwing #1, starring the first ever African-American character to don the mantle as the Batman of Africa. Written by Judd Winick with art from Ben Oliver, Batwing #1 should answer the question about whether or not Batman Incorporated is still relevant. [emphasis mine]

In a quick-witted and funny move, Rich Johnston at Bleeding Cool almost instantaneously published a post that corrected IGN that this character is not at all "African-American" but actually....as the "Batman of Africa" he is....quite frankly...."African-African". 

IGN promptly moved to correct the story like this:

Along with the other Batman announcements made today, DC revealed plans for a more diverse line of Batman comics. Alongside Batwoman, Batgirl, Catwoman, and Birds of Prey will be Batwing #1, starring the first ever black character to don the mantle as the Batman of Africa [Editor's note: mistakenly originally reported as African-American, Batwing is African]. [emphasis mine again]


However, may I point out that they are wrong about THAT as well?!

Ten years ago, in 2001, DC ran a 12-issue mini-series called "JUST IMAGINE...." and the hook of that year-long series was that it was a universe of their most famous super-heroes but "re-imagined" by Stan Lee, the man who made Marvel Comics....well....Marvel and the elder statesman of comic book artists, Joe Kubert himself. 

And guess what "race" Stan and Joe chose to make their version of Batman? 

Why yes, you are correct. He was an "African-American." 

 hee-hee. 

Shoddy reporting AND political correctness BOTH.  I'm sure IGN is loving all this "positive" attention.

The TRUE reason for the DC Comics' Reboot in September...

Superman co-creator's family given rights - Entertainment News, Film News, Media - Variety

Siegels now control character's Krypton origins
By Marc Graser

Warner Bros. and DC Comics have lost a little more control over the Man of Steel.
In an ongoing Federal court battle over Superman, Judge Stephen Larson ruled Wednesday that the family of the superhero's co-creator, Jerry Siegel, has "successfully recaptured" rights to additional works, including the first two weeks of the daily Superman newspaper comic-strips, as well as portions of early Action Comics and Superman comic-books.


The ruling is based on the court's finding that these were not "works-made-for-hire" under the Copyright Act.


This means the Siegels -- repped by Marc Toberoff of Toberoff & Associates -- now control depictions of Superman's origins from the planet Krypton, his parents Jor-El and Lora, Superman as the infant Kal-El, the launching of the infant Superman into space by his parents as Krypton explodes and his landing on Earth in a fiery crash.


The first Superman story was published in 1938 in Action Comics No. 1. For $130, Jerry Siegel and co-creator Joel Shuster signed a release in favor of DC's predecessor, Detective Comics, and a 1974 court decision ruled they signed away their copyrights forever.


In 2008, the same court order ruled on summary judgment that the Siegels had successfully recaptured (as of 1999) Siegel's copyright in Action Comics No. 1, giving them rights to the Superman character, including his costume, his alter-ego as reporter Clark Kent, the feisty reporter Lois Lane, their jobs at the Daily Planet newspaper working for a gruff editor, and the love triangle among Clark/Superman and Lois.

You can read the entire article (rather than just this pertinent snippet) at the jump in the headline.

I wrote a legal analysis piece back in 1999 about this case and will try and dig it out and format for the blog this weekend along with some commentary on how this case (and the Simon vs. Marvel case mentioned in my piece) developed and what it has wrought.

For now, this is a big week of news for WB/DC.

OTHER FICTIONAL CHARACTERS FOLLOW SUPERMAN'S EXAMPLE

This week, ACTION COMICS #900 revealed Superman's intention to renounce his American citizenship to become a "Citizen of the World."  Needless to say, this was a bit controversial.  However, the attention it has generated for DC Comics and their Superman character has been extraordinary and, as is the usual pattern in such things, apparently inspired other publishers to follow suit with similar storylines.  I found these 5 reports on the newswires this morning.

James Bond renounces British citizenship

British super-spy, James Bond renounces his citizenship in an upcoming new novel. The publisher announced today that they are cancelling all orders on the previously scheduled novel, CARTE BLANCHE, by Jeffrey Deaver and announcing a street date for an entirely different novel.

HER MAJESTY IS NOT ENOUGH, the new James Bond novel by acclaimed Hollywood screenwriter and director, Roland Emmerich will reportedly center around a controversial development in the life of the quintessentially British hero. After decades of successful missions in which the former Royal Navy Commander faced down global threats, including terrorist organizations such as S.M.E.R.S.H. and S.P.E.C.T.R.E., he comes to realize that he is tired of being perceived as a tool of the British government.

In a dramatic encounter with the British Prime Minister, Bond announces his intention to resign his commission, renounce his citizenship, and become an at-large agent of the United Nations.

God Save the Secretary-General!

Capt. Planet renounces Gaia

It has been over 15 years since the last new CAPTAIN PLANET & THE PLANETEERS cartoon aired. In that time, climate change has caused ever escalating disasters wrought upon the earth and the rise in global temperatures melts the ice crystals that entrapped Gaia, the earth goddess. She calls forth, once again, the great mullet of environmentalism called Capt. Planet. But his reaction to the modern world is one of disillusionment and despair.

This is the bold direction of the new CAPT. PLANET: WHEN A MULLET CRIES animated film recently rushed into production by Hanna Barbera and produced by Ted Turner and Michael Bay.

When Capt. Planet calls the Planeteers into action and none of them show up, he sets off to search for them. His worldview is shattered when he discovers that Kwame was set on fire when he returned to his African tribe and revealed that he wielded a magical ring that controlled plant life. Wheeler was delivering mail in the World Trade Center when terrorists flew planes into the towers on September 11, 2001. He did not survive the attack. Linka died in a Siberian gulag as an enemy of the state because she publicly expressed her disagreement with Putin's policies. Gi was consumed by a Great White Shark while scuba-diving off the coast of Australia. The most heart-breaking for Capt. Planet, was learning that Ma-Ti was killed in her sleep by her own pet monkey, Suchi, who it turned out was a sleeper agent for the Eco-Villains.

Sliding desperately into extreme and emasculated depression, Capt. Planet publicly renounces his allegiance to Gaia and leaves Earth to choose a planet without ecological diversity or humanity to protect.

Next stop...Mars.


Tarzan abdicates Lordship of the Apes

Tarzan, who ascended to the leadership of the Mangani tribe of great apes nearly 100 years ago has announced his intention to abdicate the position.

In the first officially sanctioned novel since THE DARK HEART OF TIME by Philip Jose Farmer in 1999, Tarzan returns in TARZAN, MAN OF THE PEOPLE by acclaimed Hollywood screenwriter and director Joe Ezterhaus.

The story involves Tarzan officially abdicating his position as Lord of the Apes and putting his Kenyan plantation estate up for sale to effect his return to assume his position as Viscount of the Greystoke estate in England. With Jane by his side, Tarzan mounts a campaign for position of Prime Minister under the Naturalist Party committed to principles of globalism and environmental awareness.

The Burroughs estate explains in a press release that this is the natural progression of the character and recommends people read the story before criticizing. They assert that Tarzan's creator, Edgar Rice Burroughs, always intended Tarzan to abdicate his Ape-ship and become a global political powerhouse.

All I can say is...."Un-GA-wa!!"


Blondie divorces Dagwood

An icon of the institution of American marriage is coming to an end this year. Blondie and Dagwod Bumstead will dissolve their marriage of 78 years with a dramatic change. Blondie, tired of decades of sub-middle-class life with the bumbling and selfish Dagwood dumps him and returns home to her upper-crust parents' mansion.

Retaking her maiden name, Blondie Boopadoop parlays her family name and her experience as a middle-class wife and mother into a global reality TV-series. Dagwood will be written out of the strip after his marriage is shattered, his children turn on him, and even his dog Daisy rejects him in a controversial panel where she intentionally pees on his leg.

When asked about this change, longtime BLONDIE writer, Dean Young, explained that it happened because a Hollywood screenwriter approached him with a proposal for a new film franchise possibility. The approach in the film is one that recognizes Blondie's global appeal as a woman of beauty, wealth, and intelligence who steps out from under the oppressive thumb of her shiftless American husband to become an avatar for women's rights everywhere.

"How could I turn down such an important and monumental opportunity?", Young declared.