Folks have been asking how DC is planning to market "The Fallen Angel." There's some concern that it will receive little-to-no attention, and just be tossed out there so it can safely sail under retailer radar and quickly vanish.
Thus far that doesn't seem to be the plan. According to what I've been told, "The Fallen Angel" is being promoted as the anchor book of three new titles featuring female leads that will--ideally--appeal both to male readers, and also attract that great untapped resource, women. There will be a major marketing push for these three books, of which "The Fallen Angel" will be the first, with the other two following shortly thereafter in subsequent months. I've suggested the collective marketing hook of referring to the new titles as "Dangerous Curves." We'll see if they go with that.
I believe "Fallen Angel" should be in the next Previews. Here's hoping the book gets good positioning.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at April 2, 2003 06:47 AM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingHa.. It looks like the 1st comment.
Anyway... Nice and Catchy (spl?)name.
I haven`t been following the "Fallen Angel" posts that closely, so when will DC release it?
Johny
Did you know that your post time (at 6:47am) was the exact same time as the post time yesterday morning? Not sure why I noticed that...
Looking fwd to reading Fallen Angel...here's hoping the best for the series.
Around when can we expect the new NEW FRONTIER book to arrive at the bookstores? Thanks for all you do...
Xyon
Looking forward to Knight Life 2, Sir Aproros 3, the next New Frotier book, the next Spyboy mini, the next issue of Captain Marvel and Fallen Angel...
All this and a new baby...when do you find time to sleep?
Wouldn't a pun like "Dangerous Curves" serve to reinforce the idea in many potential female readers' minds that comics still view women (at least female characters) as a collection of body parts rather than interesting and complex actors in their own stories? (And doesn't it have the ring of "badgirl femme fatale" to it?)
"Weo weo weo." This is the political correct police force. Come out with comic above your heads. Elayne, it's entertainment. Comic book entertainment. Give it a rest.
"it's entertainment"? That hardly answers the concerns Ms. Riggs brought up. What, because it's just "comic book entertainment," sexism is suddenly not an issue?
I dunno, KC, I think Elayne's got a point. I mean, if the point is to try to attract a female readership, you should make sure the ad campaign doesn't offend them. And I had the exact same thought she did, that "Dangerous Curves" might be seen as highlighting the wrong aspect. But then, what do I know?
Anyone know what the other two titles will be?
I find it irksome when people choose to ignore valid points by belittling them as PC. Here again is the point; if a comic company is trying to pull in a somewhat resistant part of the audience, does it make sense to allude to containing attitudes that keep that particular audience from sampling the books?
I like Peter's writing and respect his attitudes in general, but I don't think that the issue is irrelevent from a PR point of view. I want EVERY Peter David book to succeed, and I want these books to succeed within the very parameters that Peter has described (pulling in a neglected audience).
Wouldn't a pun like "Dangerous Curves" serve to reinforce the idea in many potential female readers' minds that comics still view women (at least female characters) as a collection of body parts rather than interesting and complex actors in their own stories? (And doesn't it have the ring of "badgirl femme fatale" to it?)
Elayne...everyone is offended by something. In writing my column for thirteen years, I've seen people take offense over the most innocuous of comments. I've given up worrying about it, because it's impossible *to* worry about it. Especially when it's something that perfectly sums up what I'm trying to convey. "Badgirl femme fatale" is pretty much right: "Fallen Angel" is definitely noirish. If that's what "Dangerous Curves" conveys, I have zero problem with that.
PAD
Bleh. My complaints will be labeled "a" and "2".
a) Calling it "Dangerous Curves" will make me think it's the latest Lady Death vs. Vampirella crossover drawn by Jim Balent. Which is probably not what DC wants here.
2) Puns are the lowest form of humor.
Looking at this from purely a marketing standpoint...
Having female leads does not seem to correlate to female readerships. By far the most popular comic series with female readers would be Sandman. Isn't the sensibility more important than the gender of the leads? For years, Cerebus was the book that girlfriends of comic fans read, and I strongly believe that was because of the presentation and subject matter.
Simply expecting to attract female readers with female leads is a bit simplistic and probably doomed to failure.
Peter, why do you feel female readers would be interested in noirish? Alias (comic, not tv) seems to be working in this vein, and I don't see a large female readership for it. Please correct me if I am wrong about that point.
A book that truly attracted female readers would be a great boon to the community of comics, but I don't feel that this is the right avenue to exploit their potential support.
Then again, I was trying to get a larger female readership with Rust, and that pretty much failed.
Steve Miller
Peter, why do you feel female readers would be interested in noirish?
Steve, I'm sorry, but I don't comprehend this question.
It's impossible to say what "female readers" would be interested in because female readers don't think with one mind any more than male readers do. It's ridiculous to think they do.
Personally, I'm not out to court a gender. I'm out to tell good stories with interesting characters. I'm hoping it attracts enough readers of ANY gender to succeed. Period.
PAD
Herein lies the comic book industry's greatest conundrum; how do you write comics for men that also appeals to women? Almost everything that attracts men, comic books' core customer base, seems to repulse women, and vice versa.
WARNING: COMMENTER ABOUT TO INSERT FOOT IN MOUTH:
Frankly, I'm not sure I WANT to read a comic book that appeals heavily to women. I've always considered Harlequin Romance novels to be the "comic book" for women, and I have zero desire to ever read one.
I was merely commenting on the fact that noir seems to attract a predominantly male audience (in books and movies).
I think this discussion also points out one of the major mistakes when mixing artistic expression with marketing: It is impossible to know who will respond to any artistic creation. To me, the attempt to market comics to women is an exercise in futility. Simply getting female readers to be aware of the books would be a nightmarish task. If DC is going to do anything other than the usual in house ads, posters, and Previews ads, I would be amazed. How many women are going to see any of those ads? If DC was truly interested in gaining a wider female audience, they would advertise in places that women would see such as women's magazines and television shows with large female viewership.
Personally, I would love to see Peter on Oxygen Network pushing these books. Anything that grows the readership would be good for all of us with more choices, a healthier industry, and another forum for creators of all stripes to explore.
In the end, all any writer can do is to put down his view of the world and hope that anyone connects to it.
Steve Miller
Speaking as a female reader, I am likely to seek out a story with a believable, interesting storyline and a character that I relate to, regardless of whether it's in a genre that I usually read.
When we talk about "attracting female readers," we automatically believe it must be more "sensitive," relationship-oriented, with a downgrade on action, horror, etc. That's a reason I heard in the press for why "Gangs of New York" didn't do as well as expected at the box office - they said, "Well, it's violent, and we couldn't get the women in." Nothing could be further from the truth. The reason women comprise a minority of readership/viewership in certain traditionally male genres is because the female characters in those stories are unrealistic and frankly irritating. Example: the second Indiana Jones movie. Am I the only one who wanted Indy to leave the screaming blonde in the damn jungle?
Attracting female readers is easy: write something they can relate to. If I open a comic book and see a woman cowering in terror while the big strong man fights the bad guy, it goes back on the shelf. If I see a woman kicking ass in a g-string and high heels, it goes back on the shelf. The reason? Neither of those ring the bell of reality for me. Give me a strong female character who takes proactive steps in an interesting storyline and does so without being drawn like a 15-year-old boy's fantasy pinup, and I'm hooked.
That said, when I hear "Dangerous Curves," I immediately think of the Barbie doll in a g-string and high heels. I know better, because I know it's PAD. But other women may not.
Just my $0.02.
That said, when I hear "Dangerous Curves," I immediately think of the Barbie doll in a g-string and high heels. I know better, because I know it's PAD. But other women may not.
Fair enough, but I would think the marketing wouldn't exist in a vacuum. Any promo would be accompanied by artwork, and although I can't attest to the other titles, g-string and high heels doesn't describe "Fallen Angel."
PAD
"Dangerous Curves" sorta emphasizes the sexuality, doncha think? And that's not what FALLEN ANGEL is all about, from what I gather...
Elizabeth,
By your logic, Wonder Woman would be DC's best-selling title with regards to women. She's a strong character (the 2nd strongest in the DCU, by some people's opinion) and she certainly has been presented as having very real emotions (George Perez and Phil Jimenez were particularly good at this).
And, of course, there was Supergirl. Well-written, realistic, and now in limbo.
Comics present women in terms of realism a lot better than movies (but not as well as TV). But still, the comic book is viewed as a male-oriented genre. TV is more gender-neutral (until it's broken down by programming).
Just my $.02.
I realize everyone's an editor (better than everyone being a critic) but I'd modify PAD's "DC" suggestion thusly for the print ads:
"Real Women Have DANGEROUS Curves."
The allusion to the play/movie "Real Women Have Curves" ought to dilute the implied sexism of "Dangerous Curves" in isolation.
By your logic, Wonder Woman would be DC's best-selling title with regards to women. She's a strong character (the 2nd strongest in the DCU, by some people's opinion) and she certainly has been presented as having very real emotions (George Perez and Phil Jimenez were particularly good at this).
I agree. However, here lies the main problem, as I see it. How many women who don't already read comics are going to happen upon a copy of an issue of Wonder Woman?
We need to get comics back into stores - both bookstores and grocery stores - preferably in a magazine format that can be shelved with regular magazines and get young women interested in this stuff.
It's sad when Wizrd, a magazine about comics sells more than the comics it covers.
-Joe
Quoth Joe: "It's sad when Wizrd, a magazine about comics sells more than the comics it covers."
Could be, it's like the line from The Lost Boys: "If you read the TV Guide, you don't need a TV."
Or not.
Random thought: James' link to the 1988 "Dangerous Curves" included a part by someone named Armin Shimerman. Anybody sense a subtle "Star Trek" connection?
Anyway, my $0.02: Most of PAD's works appeal to a wide audience. I have several female friends who read his books and really enjoy his writing style. So I'm not so sure that for his novels the female fanbase is untapped. However, this probably *is* true for comics. And with a sexy woman on the cover, a title like "Dangerous Curves" that reinforces this image might not be the best thing to do in this case. And I liked Mitch's idea, as it doesn't just have "tough woman main charcter" written all over it, it gives her character rather than being a character whose raison d'etre is to be female to attract a female audience. Now I know that's not how its going to be because this is PAD, but if he's trying to appeal to a wider audience who doesn't know his writing, they might brush it off. But if PAD feels strongly for the title as is, then let's just see what happens. There's been too much arguing on this blog lately. Besides, whatever he writes, we all want to read it anyway, no matter who the target audience is.
On the subject of PAD's 2003 projects: I just got sent the Summer 2003 Penguin USA trade catalogues by a colleague in the publishing world, and One Night Only (the Knight Life sequel) is listed as on sale July 1. Sounds great, especially since I've just read the remastered Knight Life.
It may be just me, but it seems that even in the face of the cancellations of "Supergirl" and "Young Justice," PAD has some of his most exciting work coming out in 2003. (Give us Turtles and Calhoun, Peter--not in the same story--and I'll be mindlessly happy!)
Brava, Elizabeth!
I wholeheartedly agree with you. While I trust PAD implicitly not to turn "Fallen Angel" and the "Dangerous Curves" angle into something sordid or demeaning, I share your concern about how other women might misconstrue them.
And as Steve Miller pointed out, the biggest task will be even making women aware of the books, let alone getting them to overlook their distrust of the marketing angle. Having to brave the "regulars" at the comic shop, and then stroll past racks of Vampi, Lady Death and who-knows-what from Japan to reach the books they are looking for probably intimidates most women. So even though strong positive female role models do exist in comics (where was YJ when I was 15?), getting the message out there is really the difficult part.
Louise
"Who-knows-what from Japan?" American comics publishers should only learn from manga publishers, and the publishers who're distributing them in graphic novel form in the US. Manga are read by both genders in Japan in much more equal numbers than they are here, because there's material to appeal to a much greater range of tastes and interests. And recently 6 of the top 10 graphic novel sales in the US (to bookstores; i.e., where the general public shops) were inexpensively-priced manga collections. Including titles like "Marmalade Boy" (a nearly decade-old romance title with no media tie-in).
Translated manga are serving markets and interest groups that aren't being served by the major publishers, and delivering it in a format that people will pay for. The major publishers could learn a lot here; but Marvel is only interested in dressing up their old super-hero stuff in manga drag. The only publisher who seems to have a clue in this regard is Crossgen.
As some people here (predominately female like me) have already said, they are not very happy about using the catch phrase "Dangerous Curves" to promote this new line of comic books featuring female main characters.
If this would be used to describe "Fallen Angel" without me knowing that it is written by Peter David and being familiar with a lot of his books, it would definitely not attract me, the contrary. Nowadays most people who produce stories with female characters have learned that scream-a-lots and the pretty but bland and subservient female are not attractive nowadays, also not to male readers. "Dangerous Curves" makes me think of the other extreme we see only too often nowadays, women in Seven of Nine or even worse outfits, superslim females who are nevertheless able to kick and punch even men in cupboard format - and win! Often these men are shown as being stupid and brutal. They are shown as inferior beings so that it even looks like it is "ok" that the woman can treat him like a punching ball and get away with it. (Of course, if a man would do the same to a woman, it would be much less acceptable). Sexy kick-ass women who are just warrior types are not attractive to me. (And, Doug, I find the treatment of women in the Mangas I have seen disgusting and object strongly to it to see women degraded to be giggly schoolgirls with huge eyes).
But, yes, Crossgen definitely knows how to attract the attention of female readers, at least me. People, male and female, look natural on covers. The emphasis is on storytelling and good characterizations. By now I dropped nearly all Marvels but recently added two more Crossgen titles to my subscription list after I quickly became a big fan of Sojourn. Now I also have Ruse completely and although I have mixed feelings about the first issue of the new Lady Death, I see potential here as well.
I noticed that New Frontier has a very strong female fan base. It is my favourite book series. Why? Because these people are natural, strong characters with strengths but also weaknesses. Men and women are treated as equally important. Action and also sex are part of a sophisticated story with an emphasis on character development and relationships.
Also NF covers don`t show women in skimpy outfits kicking ass. I think other publishers of comics can learn a lot from Crossgen.
I love Marmalade Boy, but I can't figure out why. I normally don't like "soap opera" material.
As for women and comic books, it has taken almost three years of going to a comic book store nearly every week for me to begin to feel comfortable in the store. I've overheard degrading comments about women when in comic book stores and way too many of the characters look like they just walked out of the Playboy mansion. (Including Wonder Woman and Barbara Gordon on occasion.) Comic companies need to figure out a way to distribute their books where women feel comfortable buying them. I think women like stories told in comic book form as much as men, but few ever read any.
One more thing, PAD, I loved YJ. You had great female characterization. I'll check out Fallen Angel, but Dangerous Curves does tend to rub me the wrong way. Cest la vie.
Baerbel Haddrell wrote:
" 'Dangerous Curves' makes me think of the other extreme we see only too often nowadays, women in Seven of Nine or even worse outfits, superslim females who are nevertheless able to kick and punch even men in cupboard format - and win! Often these men are shown as being stupid and brutal. They are shown as inferior beings so that it even looks like it is 'ok' that the woman can treat him like a punching ball and get away with it. (Of course, if a man would do the same to a woman, it would be much less acceptable). Sexy kick-ass women who are just warrior types are not attractive to me."
I concur 100% with what you wrote above. Not only is it completely unrealistic, but sends a disgusting, terrible message to young men and women about gender relationships (abuse in one direction is not only acceptable, even appropriate). That's what took me years to get into "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," (luckily it has excellent, humorous writing on its side) and why I won't or wouldn't watch "Alias," "Birds of Prey," "She-Spies," "Charmed," "Dark Angel," and all shows like it, where an "empowered women" is defined by how many men she can beat or kill simply for being male.
Which brings me to...
Baerbel Haddrell wrote:
"I noticed that New Frontier has a very strong female fan base. It is my favourite book series. Why? Because these people are natural, strong characters with strengths but also weaknesses. Men and women are treated as equally important. Action and also sex are part of a sophisticated story with an emphasis on character development and relationships."
I thought so until this Gleau/M'ress mess. It's weird, but Peter David is my favorite comic book and media tie-in writer, but with the Sir Apropos series and the above stiuation (Really, the entirity of "ST:NF--Cold Wars" had the same problem), it seems like PAD's anti-male sentiment has crept into his writing more and more. It's always been there, and I turned a blind eye to it because, hey, I can deal with poor parts of a good novel or a poor comic issue once a year. Lately, though, it seems that once I get past the humor, the misandry is in quite a bit. And his internet discussions (CBG, AOL board) support the notion that this is an example of the author using fiction to get across his worldview rather than the author using fiction to tell a good story with interesting characters.
To be honest, I'm sorta iffy on how "Dangerous Curves" would be perceived by folk not familiary with Peter as well.
But, given that, if DC does use "DC", they could potentially do the whole campaign as a series of road signs; "Dangerous Curves"
with the curves doing a not too exaggerated women's silouette, "Look Out For Falling Angels" with a riff on the "Look Out For Falling Rock" sign, etc. Would depend on whether the other two books fit the theme though.
"Dangerous Curves"? Works fine by me. Heck, that catchphrase is a hell of a LOT better than "Girl Frenzy" (DC's last attempt at lumping female-driven titles together thematically). :)
Erhan Kartal writes: "And his internet discussions (CBG, AOL board) support the notion that this is an example of the author using fiction to get across his worldview rather than the author using fiction to tell a good story with interesting characters."
And once again, someone makes the naive assumption that fiction is merely "a good story with interesting characters".
The fact is just about ANY good fiction available espouses SOME kind of worldview. Otherwise, the characters involved just wouldn't be "interesting", or even have anything remotely "interesting" to do.
KET
Peter David wrote:
"I'm out to tell good stories with interesting characters."
Erhan Kartal wrote:
"And his internet discussions (CBG, AOL board) support the notion that this is an example of the author using fiction to get across his worldview rather than the author using fiction to tell a good story with interesting characters."
KET wrote:
"And once again, someone makes the naive assumption that fiction is merely 'a good story with interesting characters'."
Actually, no. Neither Peter David nor I said "merely." In fact, I said "example," which cleanly precludes the use of the word or idea of "merely," so I don't know how you read that into my message. Nevertheless, I'd not call Peter David "naive," or even his statement such (and I used his phrasing intentionally, which is why I quote him, even though you quoted me directly). And as an aside, I didn't assume, since one can't assume his own view on fiction.
Which brings us to...
KET wrote:
"The fact is just about ANY good fiction available espouses SOME kind of worldview. Otherwise, the characters involved just wouldn't be 'interesting', or even have anything remotely 'interesting' to do."
Hey, you're preaching to the choir. Your mistake is that you assume that because I said one author uses fiction to vocalize his worldview, that a) all do, b) I think that's a bad thing. Both are object lessons in why one must never assume anything.
My favorite novel of all time is "A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" by James Joyce. James Joyce had many things to say about his the world as he experienced it, and his novel is a great piece of art. Joyce never said he was out to tell a good story with interesting characters, however; that wasn't what he was about. Many times in many forums Peter David has said that he doesn't really use fiction to show his version of the world, that he never uses characters as his voicebox, that he only tries to tell good stories with interesting characters.
All I'm saying his misandry shows in his writing. That he believes he is being impartial means it's unconscious, or that in his view, it's a "common sense" or "rational" way of looking at the world.
To throw in my two cents:
My feeling is, the question of whether the title is appropriate depends on whether emphasis is being deliberately placed not only on the characters' personality and distinctive identity, but also on her sexuality. That is, is the book intended to be "sexy," as in a film noir type of story, or perhaps a Bond-girl type of way? If so, then the title is hardly shocking. I would expect such a title for a Danger Girl or She-Hulk story, because those character's sexuality has always been a tongue-in-cheek aspect of their portrayal.
On the other hand, if sexiness has nothing to do with either the character or the story, then using it would seem a bit gratuitious, especially if, say, it was intended as a dark, gritty story, or the character intended to be a very serious, dignified one, like Clarice Starling or Catherine Willows from CSI.
This is not to say that sexuality cannot be explored within a character that is otherwise a dignified one. There's nothing wrong, for example, with writing a story in which Deanna Troi or Beverly Crusher have a romantic interest, but when those stories are written well, the female characters are not objectified in the process, and the story is used to explore some theme, idea or aspect of the human condition, as when The Host(TNG) explored the nature of love, and its limits.
If sexuality is not an aspect of the character or story in Fallen Angel, particularly in the first issues that will be advertised with this title, then it would seem that undue attention is being drawn to the fact that the character is female, for no other reason than its own sake, making the title less than pertinent to the book.
OK,I'm gonna be the pig and say it. I love g-string heroines.There is absolutely nothing wrong with looking at a pretty girl kick ass.
I say this, yet Oracle is my favorite character and one could hardly say she is more about sex appeal than brains.
Col
Three female lead based titles?
"Fallen Angel" is the first. I'm guessing Paul Dini's version of Zatanna will be the next. Anybody want to make a prediction on the third?
Meanwhile, I seem to be a minority of one right now because I thought Peter was joking when he suggested 'Dangerous Curves'.
I personally hope that it's Power Girl that's the third comic to be released the end!
Which brings me to a question I have for Mr Peter David at the same time too.
Mr Peter David sir,
If the current rumours going around DC's messageboards are indeed true, in that Power Girl might possibly be getting her own comic and that if say DC asked you if you would like to be the writer for it?
Would it be a project that you would be interested in doing as well as handling your other projects at the same time?
AA
Erhan wrote: "I thought so until this Gleau/M'ress mess."
I'd forgotten about that...it's so long between NF books that I think a recap is in order with every new release.
That exchange left me cool as well. It just came off as Shelby and M'Ress being totally ignorant of Gleau's culture and abilities. The guy may be a jerk, and he certainly has what humans would call "extraordinary" abilities, but he's just a juiced-up Casanova in many respects. Shelby was remiss in not understanding her senior staff, IMHO.
I thought so until this Gleau/M'ress mess. It's weird, but Peter David is my favorite comic book and media tie-in writer, but with the Sir Apropos series and the above stiuation (Really, the entirity of "ST:NF--Cold Wars" had the same problem), it seems like PAD's anti-male sentiment has crept into his writing more and more.
For those of you not keeping track at home, over the years I've variously been described--by those who analyze my writing and believe it all reflects my opinions--as being anti-male, anti-female, anti-Catholic, anti-religion, and anti-Semitic. This despite the fact that I'm a man who dotes on his four daughters, married a Catholic, and attends synagogue. Oh, and I also hate deaf people and Japanese people.
The above is a testament as to the dangers of judging the writer instead of what's written.
PAD
Whatever anyone's opinions on the hows and if of women portrayals in comics, let me point out that I for one don't dig political correctness, which was described in Orwell's 1984 as Newspeak, and the sad part is that at least from what I can see, Marvel for one has needlessly succumbed by far to much of the problem of PC lunacy in how they deal with X-Men, Spider-Man, or even the awful Truth miniseries, alienating fans and ruining the books artistically. And if you ask me, it would be better not to worry about hows and ifs of womens portrayals in comics. Besides, if they're strong, in brains and/or brawn, then hey, there's something to celebrate! :-D
BTW, if anyone's interested, Nightwing's book I've heard has a very impressive female following, no doubt because he's one of the most gentlemanly characters in the DCU! How about that. :-)
Peter David wrote:
"The above is a testament as to the dangers of judging the writer instead of what's written."
Except that a) I'm not judging you, merely pointing out behavior that exists, and b) I'm not basing my assertions on your fiction alone (though I think that using your extensive writing career has weight in this discussion, and any media analyst would agree). The rest of the paragraph you quoted included mentionings of your CBG column and internet boards, where you speak as "Peter David," not as a fictional character.
Anyway, I'd rather be wrong in this instance than be right. I'd love it if Gleau is treated as he should be, as an alien with inherent abilities, instead of an X-man who has to keep his powers reined in lest he woo all the chicks. I'd be ecstatic if Fallen Angel's origins don't involve a rape, a cheating boyfriend, or an ass of a father, or she doesn't kick the ass of every man she sees in the first set of issues. I'd go nuts if I read on your discussion board something pro-male (and not just to prove a point).
But if I don't, I'll still read your books, as long as you continue to tell good stories with interesting characters.
ENOUGH TALK!!!!
I say we condemn this series without having read a word of it as well as the ad campaign which may not even happen! How dare Peter David fly in the face of all popular media and write a series with a sexy female lead (I mean, I guess. Knowing nothing about it I feel confident in judging...) I'm sure this will be another failure like "Die Another Day", "Daredevil", "Alias", "Buffy" and "Chicago."
I'd go nuts if I read on your discussion board something pro-male (and not just to prove a point).
Okay...that rates a big "Huh?" in my book. Really. I have no idea what constitutes "pro-male." If I criticize George W. Bush, is that anti-male? If I praise Joss Whedon, is that pro-male?
You've lost me. I mean, your post is like political correctness gone berserk. You'd like it if the origins of Fallen Angel don't involve a rape, an abusive father, or a jerk of a boyfriend? So Roy Thomas is anti-male (the rape of Red Sonja). Bill Mantlo and Barry Windsor-Smith are anti-male (introducing Brian Banner, Bruce's abusive father). Every writer who ever portrayed a boyfriend as a jerk is anti-male? Oh, and you don't want the Fallen Angel beating up every man she encounters. I guess Joss Whedon, creator of the ass-kicking Buffy, is anti-male after all.
If conclusions about writers themselves are to be drawn from what they write, dude, seriously...you've got some issues you need to work out.
PAD
Well, whether or not you agree with Erhan (and I'm 50/50), he does make an interesting and valid point about Gleau and his "chick-wooing." =D
Matt
For those of you not keeping track at home, over the years I've variously been described--by those who analyze my writing and believe it all reflects my opinions--as being anti-male, anti-female, anti-Catholic, anti-religion, and anti-Semitic. This despite the fact that I'm a man who dotes on his four daughters, married a Catholic, and attends synagogue. Oh, and I also hate deaf people and Japanese people.
Hey, don't forget anti-gay. (remember Daisy Dyke?)
Well, whether or not you agree with Erhan (and I'm 50/50), he does make an interesting and valid point about Gleau and his "chick-wooing." =D
Not really.
I mean, I thought it was fairly obvious: I wanted to do a story about sexual harassment at a time when sexual harassment was so much a thing of the past that the humans have to make a genuine effort to come to grips with it. The notion that a female Starfleet officer was being taken advantage of by a senior Starfleet officer? Literally unthinkable.
Now if someone wants to dilute the complexity of the storyline to "Gleau's a big ho," I can't do anything about it, but it sure does a disservice to what I was writing.
PAD
Peter Daivd wrote:
"I have no idea what constitutes 'pro-male.' If I criticize George W. Bush, is that anti-male? If I praise Joss Whedon, is that pro-male?"
It seemed pretty self-explanatory, but it's the society that we live in that chauvinism is readily understood, but anti-male garners puzzled looks. If you say, "Man, it figures that George Bush would invade Iraq; it's a typical male thing to do--not thinking rationally," that's anti-male, or misandric. If you say, "You know, I'm glad Joss wrote an episode where domestic abuse against men is given a bit of light," that's pro-male. Just like if you'd say, "A woman gets paid less on the dollar because she does less than a man per hour," no one would have any problem seeing misogyny in that.
Peter David wrote:
"So Roy Thomas is anti-male (the rape of Red Sonja). Bill Mantlo and Barry Windsor-Smith are anti-male (introducing Brian Banner, Bruce's abusive father). Every writer who ever portrayed a boyfriend as a jerk is anti-male?"
If that's all they write, or write to such an extent that people say, "Hey, wait a minute, I noticed that misandry, too," then the question becomes, why is that particular theme so prevalent in that writer's work? Also, there are shades of misandry, like there are shades of misogyny, or racism, or anything. It's not an on/off switch.
Peter David wrote:
"Oh, and you don't want the Fallen Angel beating up every man she encounters. I guess Joss Whedon, creator of the ass-kicking Buffy, is anti-male after all."
Keeping in mind that you sound as though I should want Fallen Angel to beat up every man she encounters, from interviews, I get the impression that Joss Whedon, (creator of Buffy, Angel, and Firefly) has defined gender roles (men do this, women do this). That's not to say that there a couple of misandric episodes of "Buffy" out there, but that's due to the particular writers of those episodes.
Peter David wrote:
"The notion that a female Starfleet officer was being taken advantage of by a senior Starfleet officer? Literally unthinkable."
But that's sort of the whole point. Keeping in mind that the whole point of Star Trek is that society has evolved beyond makes a sexual harassment story anachronistic (what next, welfare mothers? home robberies? white/black race war?), it's not unthinkable because we as a society are accustomed to thinking of men as the aggressor in a relationship. This is just one more story like it. Now, if Gleau were female, and she did the exact same thing to say, Arex, that'd be different. A female Gleau sexaully harassing M'ress? That'd be different. But Gleau, using what equates to charm on his world is forced into an oath of chastity by his captain? That's just ridiculous, and more, as the reader, we're supposed to think that's acceptable, because Shelby doesn't really question her actions because she's the hero in the book.
"'Dangerous Curves' sorta emphasizes the sexuality, doncha think?"
Yes, my point exactly. Reducing women to sexuality alone (which won't exactly appeal to the female gaze) all for the sake of a pun is, IN MY OPINION, not the way to go here. It's not a matter of offending, it's a matter of savvy marketing. I merely suggested that one may not wish to market something using a pun that's going to immediately indicate disinterest to a large portion of your potential readers.
"The above is a testament as to the dangers of judging the writer instead of what's written."
This thread isn't about judging the writers, it's about judging your suggestion of what's to be written in the marketing campaign, specifically the slogan. Many of us have judged it a less than good idea, have explained our reasons for this judgement, and would prefer to not be knee-jerk dismissed or belittled by others due to our opinions. PC my sweet patootie, marketing campaigns are (or should be) all about enticing people to buy something, not turning them off.
Elayne, did you read the quote that the above was attached to? A chunk of this thread has been exactly about judging PAD by his writing. Which was what he was responding to, not your comments.
Yes, yes, this is all very interesting, but I've just read Supergirl #80 at last and, if the protagonist of "The Fallen Angel" doesn't turn out to be Linda Danvers, all the clever marketing strategies in the world won't stop me wanting to staple my head to the floor.
"and why I won't or wouldn't watch "Alias," "Birds of Prey," "She-Spies," "Charmed," "Dark Angel," and all shows like it, where an "empowered women" is defined by how many men she can beat or kill simply for being male."
course if you watched charmed you would know the wicthes kill evil demons not men for being men
Erhan Kartal: it seems like PAD's anti-male sentiment has crept into his writing more and more.
Luigi Novi: You have not established that Peter has one.
Erhan Kartal: All I'm saying his misandry shows in his writing. That he believes he is being impartial means it's unconscious, or that in his view, it's a "common sense" or "rational" way of looking at the world.
Luigi Novi: Again, in order for this argument to work, you have to first establish that he is anti-male. You have not. You are confusing your perception of what you think Peter’s mindset is when reading his work with his actual mindset. Why do you automatically assume that you can glean his sociopolitical gender views simply by reading his books?
“That he believes he is being impartial means it’s unconscious”??? What’re you, his shrink? His psychic? Trying to gauge his “sentiment” from the Star Trek stories he writes will yield about as accurate a result as reading tea leave or star charts, and is more demonstrative of a flimsy intellect and delusion on your part than any anti-male sentiment on his.
Erhan Kartal: Except that a) I'm not judging you, merely pointing out behavior that exists…
Luigi Novi: Bullshit. You’re pretending to know what Peter’s views or feelings on gender are, and the inner workings of his unconscious mind, without really knowing him, simply by reading fictional stories by him. You’re not “pointing out behavior,” you’re merely giving an interpretation of his writing, and pretending you can gauge his state of mind from it.
Erhan Kartal: b) I'm not basing my assertions on your fiction alone. The rest of the paragraph you quoted included mentionings of your CBG column and internet boards, where you speak as "Peter David," not as a fictional character.
Luigi Novi: That does not mean that any misandry on his part has been established as fact, certainly not to the point where you can make unfounded assumptions about his “unconscious.” Facts must established, not invented from jumped-to conclusions and interpretations of fiction. I’ve read Peter’s columns for years. Could you please tell us where he’s displayed misandry?
Erhan Kartal: Anyway, I'd rather be wrong in this instance than be right. I'd love it if Gleau is treated as he should be, as an alien with inherent abilities
Luigi Novi: He is.
Erhan Kartal: instead of an X-man who has to keep his powers reined in lest he woo all the chicks.
Luigi Novi: Putting aside the extraneious “X-man” reference (since it is neither pertinent nor makes sense), this is again your interpretation. Gleau isn’t being treated as someone who has to keep his powers reined by Peter, he’s being treated that way by Shelby. The flaw in your reasoning is the childish assumption that Shelby’s mindset mirrors Peter’s. Because writers write what they know and sometimes speak through characters, PCers seem to think that they can decided which character is the supposed “author voicebox,” and to what degree. Just because Shelby placed unfair restrictions on Gleau does not necessarily mean that Peter would agree with such an action. As a writer, he has to not only write things that conform to what he thinks is right, but also things that do not, even when it comes from a “good guy” like Shelby. Otherwise, it would be impossible to write engaging conflict, drama or tragedy.
Erhan Kartal: I'd be ecstatic if Fallen Angel's origins don't involve a rape, a cheating boyfriend, or an ass of a father, or she doesn't kick the ass of every man she sees in the first set of issues.
Luigi Novi: Most criminals, thugs, cutthroats and assassins are male. Thus, when a male hero goes up against such thugs, he invariably ends up going up against hordes of men. Why should that be any different if the main character is female? Aren’t most of the opponents the Hulk went up against during Peter’s run on that title male? Why would doing so be anti-male merely if the main character was female?
Matt Adams: Well, whether or not you agree with Erhan (and I'm 50/50), he does make an interesting and valid point about Gleau and his "chick-wooing."
Luigi Novi: No, he merely gave his perception of Peter vis a vis his stories, and I do not agree with it as “valid.” Nowhere in the story did I ever see Peter’s depiction of Gleau as being anti-male. This is just me, but I perceived it as Peter depicting an ugly situation where he didn’t necessarily portray either Gleau or M’Ress as being right or wrong, but as two people who perceived what happened entirely differently. Not once did I get the sense that Peter himself sided with M’Ress and Shelby (though it’s possible I’m just obtuse and saw it differently than other people), even if Gleau was treated harshly. I simply thought Peter detached himself from the story enough to make either side look lopsided, even if Gleau was severely punished. Personally, I think Shelby was entirely out of line for what she did to Gleau, and I hope he gets justice for the persecution he’s suffering.
Erhan Kartal: That's just ridiculous, and more, as the reader, we're supposed to think that's acceptable, because Shelby doesn't really question her actions because she's the hero in the book.
Luigi Novi: Wrong. Main characters and “heroes” can be depicted as being flawed and wrong too. This is where your reasoning falls apart. The idiotic idea that everything a main character does is necessarily “good” or “right.” It isn’t.
Just for the Record.
I am the one who came up with "Dangerous Curves" when Peter and I were dicussing the DC line over lunch. Yes, that's right. It was a Woman who came up with that one.
Kathleen
**'Dangerous Curves' sorta emphasizes the sexuality, doncha think?"
Yes, my point exactly. Reducing women to sexuality alone (which won't exactly appeal to the female gaze) all for the sake of a pun is, IN MY OPINION, not the way to go here. It's not a matter of offending, it's a matter of savvy marketing. I merely suggested that one may not wish to market something using a pun that's going to immediately indicate disinterest to a large portion of your potential readers.**
"The female gaze."
You know...I find that statement horrifyingly patronizing. It would never occur to me to make the flat statement of how all females perceive anything.
PAD
A lot has been written since I wrote my earlier comment. So far I haven`t read the later columns which seem to be related to this one. Before I do that, I want to comment some of it what I have read here:
I find it interesting that Kathleen came up with "Dangerous Curves". I still think this is not a good choice but I am not a marketing professional. All I can say is that *I* don`t find it appealing and that this catch phrase is not working for me.
About the M`Ress/Gleau chapter in NF: I find it very interesting. It certainly causes controversial discussions, it makes people think and I discovered that people can draw very different conclusions from the story. To me, that is what Star Trek should be about.
I certainly wouldn`t call it a "mess". What I find so interesting is that I can actually understand both positions here, the one of M`Ress and Gleau. But I can also see that BOTH of them are also wrong. I also think Shelby didn`t handle the situation well at all, but as it is the case with M`Ress and Gleau, I can see why and understand her. This makes this story so tragic and I wonder how this will end. I haven`t got a good feeling about it and predict a tragic outcome.
About the discussion concerning personal views of authors in books: I have no problem with it. The contrary, I think people who have personal experiences are best qualified to also write about them. After I learned a bit about PAD`s personal background I can see why the Israel/Palestine conflict as well as related aspects have been appearing more or less disguised in NF and Apropos and if I remember correctly, also Captain Marvel. "Cold Wars" is one of my favourite NF stories mainly because it deals with that topic so well. I just don`t like the feeling I get that there is a message "religion is bad". My opinion is, of course religion can be misused as an instrument of power and an excuse for violence but I also know that it enriches other people`s lives and can do a lot of good. I prefer the more balanced view of religion in DS9 Relaunch. Maybe "Gods Above" will show a different view. Maybe, but I am not hopeful.
As soon as you are allowed to do so, PAD: I would welcome some little and maybe even not so little NF teasers :-).
My opinion is, of course religion can be misused as an instrument of power and an excuse for violence but I also know that it enriches other people`s lives and can do a lot of good. I prefer the more balanced view of religion in DS9 Relaunch. Maybe "Gods Above" will show a different view. Maybe, but I am not hopeful.
What fascinated me was when people read "Supergirl" and claimed it was anti-religion...while totally ignoring the fact that Supergirl's mom was very religious, an active participant in the local church, derived great serenity from her faith, and the only permanent religious figure in the book was a priest who was a decent and upstanding citizen who was working with Supergirl's mom on her religious studies.
PAD
Mr Peter David sir,
I was hoping that you may have seen my enquiry that I had posted earlier on up this thread that I had addressed to you.
As to, what your thoughts were, on if you were asked by DC that if you would maybe consider writing a Power Girl comic for them, that they had currently in the works?
and I was hoping that you may have been able to let this Karen fan of ol'e (ever scince first picking up my very first comic of the Pre-Crisis Kara of the Earth 2 era, that introduced me to the unique comic Superheroine in the first case) know, as to what the chances are, to having my favourite writer maybe writing a Power Girl comic in the end?
I hope that I may hear your thoughts as to this soon. For I'm extremely curious to know as to, if it would be something that you would like to take on, even while handling your other projects in the meantime too?
Thanks in advance for you being kind enough and taking some time out from your busy schedule to read this enquiry of this Power Girl fan up here. :)
AA
I'm offline a day or so thanks to an ice storm, and look what happens. =)
To PAD and Luigi...I chose the words "interesting and valid point" very carefully. I think Erhan has stimulated discussion, and that he seems to have as much right to his opinion as anyone else who posts here. Are you two taking issue with the "interest" or the level of validity? =)
Gleau's story works as a case against sexual harassment, but it's just as viable as a case for looking at the issue VERY carefully. I think it could also work in a story about cross-cultural taboo and racism.
Whether or not the issue at hand was "fairly obvious," I can't say. I know MY reaction, and that's all I can speak on. Whether or not my idea is valid or interesting, I leave to the experts. =)
I understand the difference between the two, Matt, and I stand by my comments. But thank you for your viewpoint. :-)
I didn't mean to imply that you didn't! I just wanted to make certain that I wasn't misconstrued as another random loudmouth spouting off for lack of something better to do. =D
**I was hoping that you may have seen my enquiry that I had posted earlier on up this thread that I had addressed to you.
As to, what your thoughts were, on if you were asked by DC that if you would maybe consider writing a Power Girl comic for them, that they had currently in the works?**
A Power Girl series. Hmmm. Perhaps I could cut off one of her arms and replace it with a harpoon that has angelic powers...
Just kidding. At this point, if DC is planning a Power Girl series, I dont know anything about it. Would I write it if it happened? That depends on a variety of factors.
PAD
Yes, Matt, and I myself was not implying that were doing so. Simply clarifying my position, and I included a smiley at the end of my post to indicate my demeanor when doing so. :-)
"Dangerous Curves" does bring to mind a quote from John Waters' "Cry Baby"...
"Our bosoms *are* our weapons!"
... in addition to scores of females who were supposed to be "strong" women (Hell, I'll settle for characters that happen to be female human beings, they don't even gotta be strong) who always seemed to find their biggest strengths in their support garments for those massive boobs, or possibly in their mega-strength ankles capable of both supporting the exaggerated figure above and the butt-kickin' foot below while perched in ice-pick heels...
Now that's some gravity defying strength, right there.
Anywho.
That's one take on the "Dangerous Curves" idea from a female human person who would like to enjoy comics more than she has. If I didn't know anything about Mr. David or his work, I too would toss it back as just another teenage-male-with-a Zena-or-Emma Peel-fixation bit and move on, regardless of what cover image was used.
Knowing that it's a Really Bad Pun lightens it a bit, but maybe saving the Really Bad Pun for some future drag queen hero/ine would be a better idea. If you're gonna offend, offend BIG.
;)