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.

Out of the Closet and into the Phonebooth: DC gay-ifies a "major icon" in June

As reported all over the comics and mainstream media the last few days, DC Comics is planning in June to reveal one of their "major iconic" characters as gay.  You can read the ABC News report here.

It's nothing new for comics to feature gay characters, but DC wants everyone to believe this is something groundbreaking.  We are still within the first year of their linewide relaunch, known as the "New 52", which asserted as one of the reasons for relaunching an express intention to "diversify" their stable of characters.  However, other than shoehorning the African-American character, Cyborg, into the Justice League rather than the Teen Titans (where he had been introduced and was a longtime member), the major iconic characters have all stayed pretty much like they always have:  white and straight.  However, DC did make efforts to prop up some of the second and third tier characters and give them a different racial or sexual spin more reflective of the modern world.  The top tier are all still mired in their 1940s roots regardless of their updated costumes or attitudes.

Last summer, I pointed out on this blog that DC had quite an opportunity here of giving themselves a clean slate so that they could reintroduce a more diverse group of primary players.  My suggestion was to take the Billy Batson/Captain Marvel character and just make him black. I also thought Barry Allen/Flash was a great opportunity to reimagine with an ethnic bent of some sort.  We all kind of knew Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern were going to stay the way they were because of the various film and tv licenses wrapped up with them.  But as far as I'm concerned, everyone else was fair game for a major makeover.


In my opinion, DC wussed out.  But that's their call.  At least they seem to be more fully realizing the potential of a clean slate with the new EARTH 2 comic (which I love).

I am curious who they are going to "out" next month in their comics.  If not for those pesky new "Non Disclosure Agreements" that DC gets everyone to sign now, we would probably already have the news fully leaked out.  Instead, we all get to speculate.  So, what do we know?  Assuming veracity from those who've spoken on record, we know this much:

(1) It's a male.
(2) It's a "major iconic" character (which means no more second banana types like The Question, Voodoo, or Batwoman)
(3) It's either someone who has not had a lot of focus as a character yet or not been reintroduced yet for the New 52.

When I think "major iconic" DC male characters, that puts a specific image in my head that is limited to these guys:
SUPERMAN, BATMAN, GREEN LANTERN, FLASH, GREEN ARROW, HAWKMAN, ATOM, CAPTAIN MARVEL/SHAZAM, PLASTIC MAN, AQUAMAN, MARTIAN MANHUNTER

However, it is possible that DC might have a different definition of "major iconic".  I could see them also include these guys:

BOOSTER GOLD, BLUE BEETLE, MR. TERRIFIC, CAPT. ATOM, FIRESTORM, ANY OF THE VARIOUS ROBINS, ANY OF THE VARIOUS OTHER GREEN LANTERNS, ANY OF THE LEGION OF THE SUPER-HEROES OR TITANS.


We can rule out Superman, Batman, Flash, and Aquaman.  Each of them have a love, temptation, or wife that is female. Green Arrow has been shown in the New 52 in a major hetero sex scene with multiple women, so we can probably remove him from consideration. Shazam too.  I don't think they want to deal with underage teens turning into adult gay super-heroes. That might make the mainstream a bit uncomfortable, so we'll take him out of consideration. Hal Jordan has been shown to be pretty straight too, so Green Lantern is out of consideration.

This leaves us with Hawkman, Atom, Plastic Man or Martian Manhunter if we are talking actual "major icons".  Since Hawkman has already been headlining his own title in the New 52, I don't think he qualifies under the limited info we have been given.  Martian Manhunter has been featured in the STORMWATCH title, but that series features the gay Superman and Batman analogues, Apollo and Midnighter, already so I just don't see DC opening the door for a gay trifecta so J'onn gets a sexual reprieve I think (plus the fact that he's a shape-changing alien technically means he is probably asexual but we won't get into that right now).

This leaves us with a toss-up between Plastic Man and Atom.  Plastic Man is just too silly. I don't think DC wants to take this marketing opportunity to make their new gay character the quite insane and slapsticky Plas.

So...my money right now is on THE ATOM.  I don't even know who they have under the mask in the New 52, but regardless of who it is, it makes the most sense (and thus, the least likely to be overly controversial) to make the Atom gay.  He's a positive role model. He's smart, clever, and iconic with tons of potential for a TV series or film with modern f/x.  The worst the gay community and DC might have to deal with would be lame jokes about him only being "six inches."

COME JUNE, I PREDICT

THE "GAY" CHARACTER WILL BE THE ATOM.  

I'll be curious to see if I'm correct or if they surprise me.

Now, to hedge my bets and lower my opinion of DC's commitment to truly being bold, what if they wuss out once again and go to the secondary characters instead?  I don't think it will be Blue Beetle or Mr. Terrific.  Both of them are already representative of different ethnicities. Why would DC waste their diversification by doubling up again? They've already done it with The Question, Voodoo, and Batwoman. I don't think they will.  It could be Firestorm, but since the character combines 2 characters into one, I just don't think it counts and Firestorm is far from a major icon.  It could be one of the Robins.  However, I don't think they would do it simply because of the bad press over the years about Batman and Robin as a gay fantasy.  I think DC doesn't want to step in that pile of manure. So, none of them are likely.

What about John Stewart, Guy Gardner, or Kyle Rayner (3 other male Earth-based Green Lanterns)?  I've read some online speculation that Gardner is the one.  If DC does that, I think it will be insulting to the gay community rather than a positive move.  Gardner is an asshole.  That's his character.  While it is true that oftentimes a repressed homosexual is aggressively homophobic as a reaction to his desires.  However, that's really not been who Gardner was in the past (and I would expect him to be the same in the New 52) where he may act like a jerk, but when it comes to doing the right thing he would step up to the plate.  I could see DC do this, but I think it could backfire on them because I don't think the gay community would want Gardner on their team.

Honestly.

John Stewart? Highly unlikely and has a history of deep love for women. Kyle Rayner? A definite possibility as far as I'm concerned.  He's young and artistic. Prior to the New 52, he did have a love of his life, but in the New 52? I could see DC going this route to distinguish him even more from the other GLs.

If it's any of the Legion of Super-Heroes or Teen Titans, then it's a total fake-out on DC's part.  None of those characters rise to the level of "major iconic" status unless you are a completely disingenuous corporate mouthpiece.

Which leaves me with CAPT. ATOM as my number one pick

from the secondary characters that DC might try to convince me are "major icons."

Just a few days to weeks to find out.  But it is definitely another interesting bit of widespread Internet speculation.