Holy Men in Tights! Academic Superhero Conference 301
Malfourmed writes "The University of Melbourne's Cinema Studies Program, School of Art History, Cinema, Classics & Archaeology is hosting a four day conference (and fancy dress ball and movie programme) on superhoeroes and supervillains. The interdisciplinary conference will address the varying roles, identities, and social functions that these superheroes serve. Topics include censorship; industry and franchise differentiation (eg DC vs Marvel); mythology; the female superhero ("It has been a very much male-centred universe," co-convener Saige Walton said. "They need some more chicks."); ethnicity, class and race; diverse media formats (cinema, comics, computer games, television) ; the resurgence in the cult of superpowers in recent cinema; super-auteurs (eg Frank Miller, Alan Moore, Tezuka Osamu, Grant Morrison); fan culture; the science and physics of the superhero; ancient superheroes; and the 'hero' who isn't 'super'."
Where and when? (Score:2, Funny)
When? June 11th ~ 8pm
Where? The Bat Cave
"
Oh shucks. My bat cave attire is at the cleaners that day.
Re:Where and when? (Score:3, Funny)
Simple, Robin! We'll take the Bat-Kangaroo!
Why (Score:3, Insightful)
Making it a science takes all the fun away.
Re:Why (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why (Score:2)
Re:Why (Score:2)
A: It was bad for me, was it bad for you too?
Re:Why (Score:2)
--Richard Feynman [wikipedia.org]
For you maybe (Score:4, Insightful)
But for some of us, devouring puerile comic book entertainment and debating it as if they were something worthy of serious analysis appeals to the immature smart aleck eleven year old in us.
[disclaimer: the following was written by my inner child]
Now, for a demonstration of black belt level irony: those of you say we shouldn't talk about comic books actually hold the same opinions and have the same attitudes as those who say we shouldn't read them at all. Opinion: You both agree that the idea that comic books are anything based on them could have any literary value is absurd. You only differ in that you find comic books entertaining and they do not; they find pretentious intellectual blather entertaining and you do not. Some of us like both. Attitude: Both the literary stuffed shirts and the literary know-nothings share the attitude that people who don't like the same things as them need to be corrected. In short, you are both prigs. But I mean that in a nice way.
[/disclaimer]
Now, for you pleasure (or mortification (or both)), I will repost my K5 diary in which I analyze Spider-Man 2 on a level that would probably get me beaten up if I did it in my high school English class. By my teacher.
Re:For you maybe (Score:3, Funny)
Re:For you maybe (Score:2)
Re:For you maybe (Score:2)
Well, chastised would be more accurate, I'm afraid. However, I appreciation your magnanimity in the face of juvenile waggishness.
Re:For you maybe (Score:2)
Re:For you maybe (Score:3, Interesting)
Giggle? Oh, why not, you may as well join right in. So long as you don't mind being in line behind me.
While you're queueing, perhaps you might be interested in a small tract on a new religion I am promoting. It's tenets are as follows:
Re:For you maybe (Score:2)
That has to be the most profound set of statements I've ever read on slashdot. Kudos!
Understanding (Score:2)
Making it a science takes all the fun away.
Being involved in cultural studies, I've noticed that some people tend to consider any analysis to be overanalysis. To some extent, I can sympathize with this point of view (I've often said, "You can't dissect something without killing it").
However, ad hoc, I can't distill for you enough of what cultural analysis is about in order to convince you that comic books are not, and never will be, just about entertainment.
B
Re:Why (Score:2)
Also last I checked (over a year ago IIRC) he'd lost the adamantium some how (and had BONE claws, not that I see how on that one)
How would he be deaf though?
Mycroft
Re:Why (Score:2)
Or maybe it's more like when someone asks if you find a noise irritating, and you don't; you hadn't even noticed it u
Re:Why (Score:2)
I'm happy to say that years of therapy have finally gotten me to the point where I can look at a hershey bar and scream because of the chocolate inside, and not because of the godawful letterspacing on the label...
The question of whether a person who has studied a subject can enjoy that subject is a bit silly though. Like anyone you
Re:Why (Score:2)
It may just be possible, through some slim chance, that when the author wrote "It was a warm, sunny day" he/she was not referring to the political climate in his/her country with regards to the imminent summit on global warming which was held in the conference centre across the street. I know it may be a strange concept for you literature buffs to grasp, but sometimes a story is a story and nothing else.
Now that's over
you know it is late... (Score:3, Funny)
Academic men in tights? (Score:2, Funny)
Having been to numerous scientific conferences even the idea of men in tights in an academic conference made me shudder.
Re:you know it is late... (Score:2, Interesting)
Women in comic books (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, at no point are they ever in charge, in normal clothes, homely, or out of the control of some male superhero.
I've jacked off to Rogue in her undies many times, so I ought to know a thing or two about objectifying comic book women. That doesn't excuse the industry for its blatant subjection of women, though, it only reinforces the stereotype of geeks as misogynists.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:4, Informative)
Otaku. One otaku, two otaku, three otaku, four. It's a Japanese word, and so it doesn't change in the plural.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:5, Interesting)
You haven't read many comics lately, have you?
The women in X-Men and a number of other comics from Marvel and others are not exactly sex slaves (unless you've read the X-rated X-Men comic some knockoff did). Rogue might be a bit stereotyped, but Storm faced down Wolverine several times with authority - and Logan is about as macho a superhero as it gets.
Besides, this is anti-male feminist bullshit. Every woman (except maybe Andrea Dworkin, who's a total loss anyway) wants to be a sex goddess and every man wants to be a sex god. And the psychology behind this goes a lot deeper than the surface motivations attributed to either sex by the feminists (or by male misogynists). Without some comprehension of human and cultural evolution and primate neuroscience anything said about this is likely to be bullshit.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
A man is capable of having children with multiple women. For a woman to do the opposite is not as advantageous. Because of this, the strategies are different.
Women may want love, power, and attention and may enjoy sex. But compared to men there are a minority of women out there who really aspire to be 'sex gods.'
Re:children (Score:4, Informative)
It is if the woman can keep it a secret. In many species, including humans, females will mate with other males while their partner is otherwise engaged. That way they vary the genetic mix of their children, while still keeping a male partner to look after them.
Re:children (Score:3, Insightful)
The advantage of having 'genetically varied children' is not as valuable as having more children.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
I just have to say, this probably doesn't apply to you, but the men I know who subscribe most strongly to this hypothesis are those who have the least experience with women. Not that there isn't some truth in the hypothesis, it's just that it smacks of nineteenth century gentleman scholar science, the problem of which is this: theories that explain
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
> I just have to say, this probably doesn't apply to you, but the men I know who subscribe most strongly to this hypothesis are those who have the least experience with women.
I'd go further and say that the men who subscribe most strongly to this hypothesis are always those who have the least experience with women, understanding that "exp
Ah, a troll. Not even a good one. How cute (Score:2)
1. you call names any dissenting opinion ("anti-male feminist bullshit")
2. you call names everyone who dares have a different opionion ("total loss", "male mysoginist")
3. You briefly drop some pretentious sounding pseudo-science babble ("comprehension of human and cultural evolution", or "primate neuroscience"). Of course, without any further details as to _which_ recognized works
Re:Women in comic books (Score:3, Funny)
Romance Novels? (Score:2)
Re:Romance Novels? (Score:2)
No... (Score:2)
No I'm saying that blaming the male gender is absolutely rediculous because it is seen equally throughout the female gender. Any responsible person would point out that it is taking place in both genders, and not make men out to be some kind of monsters and say nothing about females.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
If you're trying to invoke the subject-object dichotomy, you'd have a hard time arguing that women in comic books are seen as property because they're sexualized. There may be some cases of this, but it's not the common theme.
If you think the sexualization of women is disempowering to women and the sexualization of men is empowering to them... well, you're welcome to your own opinion.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
they are depicted in a way that makes them objects of sexual interest, but are not depicted as beings with sexual behaviors.
To really make someone an object, their desires would need to be seen as entirely invalid or immaterial. They would only be relevant in terms of serving or being desired by others.
But using your standard I've seen comics where girls are interested in guys or in re
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
define:misogynist
"a misanthrope who dislikes women in particular"
I hardly think you could describe most geeks, comic book authors, and/or comic book readers as people who dislike women. Sure, some of us might not be very adept at talking to or relating to women, but I'm guessing that most of us would do just about anything for the women in our lives. That doesn't mean our comic book characters have to wear a body-concealing environment suit anytime they go out to fight
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
In a way, although of course the Valkyrie is super, you can argue she's not that super, compared to somebody like Thor. So may she's relatively speaking not empowered as a (super) person. That may be why I liked the book. The writers couldn't mighty-lunkhead their way out of a tight story
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
Oh, and please try to avoid generalizing fans of anime and manga. Not all of us are happy with the problem you cite. Of course, some of that problem stems from the fact that the Japanese have some really, really strange (or downright creepy) concepts.
One Counterpoint (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about it - the female lead in almost any comic book, despite being terrible underdressed and having boobs the size of torpedoes, is an independent, intelligent equal whom works with the super-heroes as a team, or works on her own. Female villains are almost always the most dangerous due to their abili
Re:Women in comic books (Score:3, Insightful)
When they project their impression of "strong female", we get diminutive height, waspy waist, large breasts, well-shaped vulva, and perfect skin. They have confused (or purposefully replaced) strong with sexy.
So only sexy female superheroes exist. Unsexy females can't possibly exist because it would shatter the geek audience's preconcei
Re:Women in comic books (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Women in comic books (Score:4, Informative)
hey have confused (or purposefully replaced) strong with sexy.
Actually 'sexy' means 'biologically strong'. A female is perceived as sexy because her body shape 'promises' healthy children, and thus survival of the genes. The same goes for men.
Specious Darwinian reasoning (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually 'sexy' means 'biologically strong'. A female is perceived as sexy because her body shape 'promises' healthy children, and thus survival of the genes. The same goes for men.
This line of Darwinian rationalism is so flawed that I'm surprised many intelligent people even proffer it. Humans do not select mates based on phenotypical signals of reproductive fitness. Period. What you argue about body shape "promising" healthy children is ludicrous. China and India both come to mind. Furthermore, even a cursory survey of sexual icons and fetishes over the last 500 years reveals enough of a range--fat, thin, black, white, tall, short, disabled, herculean--that any argument about sexiness being a biological predisposition to reproductive capability is just plain wrong.
Re:Specious Darwinian reasoning (Score:2)
No, that's another brainfucked pseudo-science (Score:2)
For starters, all species have a built in balance between available food and number of members. In most cases it involves some predator-prey relationships too.
E.g., if too many rabbits are born, more foxes have food, which naturally curbs the rabbits' expansion. If there are less rabbits, some foxes starve.
There is no way for a species to spiral out of control.
nope, you're wrong (Score:2)
We do select based on genetic traits.
Another example was the strong chin in males. Stronger chins have a correlation with weaker immune systems, so the lo
no no no (Score:3, Interesting)
If the mother survives and will reproduce again, that is certainly a factor of evolution. More offspring == better survival chances for the species.
So you expect healthy kids from a MUTANT? (Score:4, Informative)
There is a fundamental problem with the current brain-fucked ideal of beauty (as represented in comics too), namely anorexic with huge breasts. The problem is that it tends not to happen in normal, healthy humans. By the time the body has been forced to eat its fat reserves, or didn't have enough food to build them up in the first place, guess what? It doesn't have enough fat for big breasts either. Those reserves went too.
The current ideal of beauty is something that deviates far enough from the biological average, or from a normal human metaboloism, to count as a _mutant_.
So you're telling me... what? That you're expecting normal healthy kids from a _mutant_? Now I would understand a fascination with mutants in comics as a source of super-powers (after all, most super-heroes are mutants). But as a means of propagating normal human genes to healthy human offspring, it's outright idiotic.
And as was already mentioned, this ideal is very new. In some parts of the world, as new as late 20'th century. (See recent stories about Asian girls ending up with metabolism problem and other illnesses, by starving themselves or making themselves puke, to fit the beauty ideal Hollywood raped their coutries with. Countries where until recently the idea of beauty was a slightly fat woman.)
See, for most of human history, the beauty ideal was actually someone who by modern standards would be considered overweight. And you know the fertility figurines the cavemen made? Now those were seriously overweight.
_That_ was the kind of shape that guaranteed survival the next time there's a famine or you catch a disease. An anorexic wife would most likely have died long before passing those genes along. Someone with fat reserves would have survived.
And then there are other bleeps on the history radar, such as the Greeks and Romans. You may notice that those did have statues of thin women, for a change. They also had tiny breasts. In fact, the Romans are noted as having invented the bra... for the purpose of _hiding_ breasts. In effect, a strip of cloth tied over the breasts to make a woman look like she had none.
Oops, that ideal of beauty was different from ours too.
Or then, yes, were the Chinese, whose idea of beauty was more centred around crippled feet. A woman was apparently dead sexy for them if, before anything else, her feet were crippled to the point of barely being able to walk.
Oops, that differs from our beauty ideal too.
So give me a break. There is no correlation between our current _mutant_ ideal of beauty and survival in anything even vaguely resembling natural condition. And there is _no_ constant ideal through human history to suggest that somehow chasing that idea is built into the species.
Re:Women in comic books (Score:2)
Re:Women in comic books (Score:4, Informative)
People like to see attractive people in their entertainment, just look at Films or TV, or even many books. Comic book heroes are drawn to be attractive, both male and female. In comic books people are usually either attractive or disfigured. Unsexy characters of either sex are rare unless they are just supporting characters. Just like TV, books, films etc.
This isn't about women in comics, it is about people in popular entertainment.
Muscular men are usually considered attractive, muscular women are not. So the men get exaggerated pecs and abs, and the women exaggerated boobs and waist. Equal treatment really, emphasise what is considered attractive. I don't see sexy women in comics demeaning women any more than sexy men in comics demeans men. Cheese/Beef-cake all round.
They are projecting attractive/sexy, not "strong", it's just for men that often translates as "muscular". In the superhero genre though muscular doesn't mean much. Physical strength isn't about how muscular you are but superpowers (some super strong characters are muscular, but some aren't), and real character strength is about, well strength of character which is completely unrelated.
Both lots are put in revealing and/or skin tight costumes. Treatment here seems pretty equal, make them look good. The difference is society put more pressure on women to "look good", so guys reading comics don't feel bad about all these toned hunks.
Now it is true that historically female super heroes have been somewhat second string. The big companies Marvel and DC go back a way, and a lot of their heroes are from a time when attitudes between the sexes were different. When female heroes were introduced they were often knockoffs and often sidekicks of male characters (batwoman, batgirl, supergirl etc).
That hasn't been so true for a while though, check out stuff like Catwomen, or Birds of Prey for strong women in charge. Wasp has been chairperson of the Avengers, Storm field leader of the X-Men. Step outside the big two and you can find more independent and strong super heroines, although yes they will look sexy, becuase we expect that of both sexes in our entertainment.
Can I say that? (Score:4, Interesting)
Interestingly, a male would lose some edge saying that.
I salute you Saige, and your message. I just wish that wording the message the same, in my shoes, as a man, wouldn't get me an unsavory label.
so I says to the guy I says (Score:5, Funny)
Re:so I says to the guy I says (Score:2)
Shame The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs At Midnight only got one real episode.
Re:too obscure? (Score:2)
Come on - the Night of a Million Zillion Ninjas was better.
Re:too obscure? - I miss The Tick & TEMBWBAM ; (Score:2, Funny)
Re:too obscure? - I miss The Tick & TEMBWBAM ; (Score:2)
That's almost as much shame as the fact that you probably won't see the animated The Tick on DVD for decades down the road. Rights issues suck.
Ethnicity in comics? (Score:3, Funny)
"-- What's a Nubian?"
Re:Ethnicity in comics? - A rebutal involving SW (Score:2)
In voice only.
Lucas hired James Earl Jones to be the voice of Darth Vader. If you've seen Episodes III to VI in the STAR WARS movie series, it is easy to see why: Jones' peformance in the films gives the vocal embodiment of pure villiany for the most (in)famous bad guy in movies ever created to date. Race had nothing to do with Lucas' casting decision. Though David Prowse was deeply annoyed to find out he would be dubbed in Episode I
Re:Ethnicity in comics? - A rebutal involving SW (Score:2)
Look up Chasing Amy next time you're in the video store.....
Re:Ethnicity in comics? - A rebutal involving SW (Score:2)
Holy Men in Tights? (Score:4, Funny)
History tells us that many of the Celts went into battle naked. This was disconcerting to their foes. I wonder how popular That comic would be?
On another note, "Holy Men in Tights!" sounds like the next scandal.
The King
Rural Alaska nuclear power gets legislative backing [blogspot.com]
Re:Holy Men in Tights? (Score:3, Funny)
At least BEFORE you fight naked...
Afterwards you get to join the camp whores.
Holy men? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Holy men? (Score:2)
Yeah, I thought, "Boy, I don't know if the Boston Archdiocese coffers can handle another round of law suits."
I also thought "What, are they applying for a public relations opening with the San Francisco 49ers?"
Obligatory link (Score:5, Funny)
Superheroes being dicks.
And other stuff so amazing it... sucks.
Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:5, Interesting)
Wolverine wasn't irradiated, and except for the Adamantium in his bones, and his mutant healing power, and highly developed senses, he's probably one of the more "human" superheroes.
I can't count Daredevil since he was irradiated - although later it was revealed that actually had nothing to do with his supersenses.
There are probably hundreds of non-irradiated superheroes, and probably hundreds of strictly human ones as well.
But you're probably right that Batman was the FIRST (or nearly so) of the strictly human ones (if you don't count myths and legends, but only comics.)
But to pick a superhero because he is most human is to underestimate the importance of the genre. The genre is nothing more than a modern manifestation of the human desire for a Transhuman existence. Therefore it is necessary that even the most human of superheroes be so superior to the average human (even Captain America can press 800 lbs which very few real humans can do) that they stand as a symbol of divinity. Even your Batman is not strictly human, both because of his technology and because of his vast experience - and that apparent inhuman nature is something he specifically trades on to intimidate his enemies.
OTOH, Superman, although a godlike entity, is represented in the comics as almost absurdly human, even to the point of being absurdly AMERICAN. I haven't read the stories in recent years, so they may have changed him, but I doubt it. His superpowers still make him a divinity, but DC went to great lengths to make him acceptable to humans.
Marvel did the same thing with their "teenage-angst superheroes" like Spiderman - which is why I never was as attracted to Spiderman as I was many other Marvel characters. Fortunately, they also provided seriously powerful entities as well - the success of the character Thanos - who is truly a demi-god and has actually BEEN a genuine divinity at least twice - and has been converted from a pure villain to an ambiguous character - is an example.
Even many of the Marvel supervillains have been altered to make them almost superheroes - Doctor Doom (my main man!) and Magneto, as well as Thanos, are examples. These characters tend to exaggerate human failings to a degree that makes them almost divine - but still understandable to humans, just like the gods of human myth such as Zeus or Odin (not to forget that even those gods are part of the Marvel pantheon.)
Superheroes and supervillains are about being "super" - which means more than human. And that is the bottom line to the literary genre.
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
Norse mythology is something for itself. Odin did not create the world as such, but he killed Ymir and built Midgard aka Middle Earth from his remains. The Aesir were not the only gods, there were also norns and Vanir, another race of gods they were at war with. Overall, they were hardly supreme gods.
Nor were they all-knowi
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
You forgot his stacks of cash. Technology is largely useless without money, and being wealthy frees up lots of time through which a dire obsession can flower, if flower be the word. The life of an extremely rich man is so different from that of a homeless person that they might as well be different species; they may have the same basic biological necessities, but beyond that things get different
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
But you're probably right that Batman was the FIRST (or nearly so) of the strictly human ones (if you don't count myths and legends, but only comics.)
Batman starts off as a guy in a costume figthing crooks. He really is a continuation of masked mystery man types popular in the Pulps like the Shadow. Later on he gets integrated in a "super" world with supervillains and the like, although most of the rogues gallery remains strictly non-powered with a best a technological gimmick.
Masked crimefighters pre
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
Another favorite of mine has been 'iron man' while here the technology goes well into comic book physics (where people can shrink to atomic size and still breath along with other nonsense), it's still basical
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
(does he still have that? i haven't read Iron Man in years)
Radiation and the superhero (Score:5, Insightful)
This reflection of anxieties in popular art forms as a way of exploring or dealing with them is fairly well noted; for example, Bram Stoker's Dracula has an underlying theme of fear of supressed female sexuality, whereas Frankenstein is clearly all about fear of science. Its all the same thing really.
As an aside another reason Batman wins over his only DC rival, Superman, for readers internationally is that Superman is a little overly wrapped in the stars and stripes (of course "Red Son" had much fun playing with that aspect the strip) to the extent where his popularity waxes and wanes with regard to how people feel about the USA. He was big in the 1980s when American culture was at its zenith of being "cool" in Europe. Right now nobody wants to know really. He's always been and still is popular in countries that target the USA as a migration destination.
On closer examination though I think Superman is very symbolic but I think that Bruce Wayne/Batman is probably nearer the American dream ultimately. By day he's an enlightened capitalist in the modern American mould (rigorous businessman but very charitable etc) who still finds time to be a 'self made man' and act in a sort of "Wild West" state of mind by night.
Hang on, inherited wealth, wild west mentality, hangs out in a technologically advanced underground bunker...Batman=GWB? Holy known unknowns and unknown unknowns Batman! Makes you wonder if Wayne Industries had the contract for repairing the damage to Gotham done by the Batmobile and the Joker blowing stuff up. Meh, politics.
Re:Radiation and the superhero (Score:2)
I think he was mostly thinking of Slan.
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:4, Insightful)
Riddle on this a bit: Not to intentionally drag issues of class struggle into the whole thing, but it *is* a fact that Bruce Wayne's extreme maxi-mega-wealth is almost as unreachable, to the average Joe-crimefighter-wannabe, as actual super powers are. He didn't earn it; he was born into riches. Extremely deep pockets is about the closest thing to an actual super power, more than great martial arts ability, more than inventing skill, more than being a supertaster, that exists in this world.
Further: what's the difference between a young Bruce Wayne growing up to become: a crime fighter, the world's greatest detective, and an ultimately good guy, and a young Bruce Wayne growing up to become: yet another idle playboy with way too much money (with all the society-warping power that provides), maybe not explictly bad, but not over concerned with other people?
Often it takes something seriously bad to happen to a person to break him out of his limited perspective and into a large view of the world. Which isn't to say that it is right that those things happen, nor that it always works that way. But often it's unavoidable, and often it does.
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:3, Insightful)
Batman is a multi-billion genius scared by childhood trauma. I don't know about you, but much as I think the character is cool I can't relate to someone who is the world's best detective, maybe martial artist, speaks just about every language on the planet, is an expert in just about every field of science and fights crime dressed as an animal.
Over time the writers have made him effectively superheroic. His level of skill and knowledge is really beyong human, and it has become something of a joke that Bat
What made Batman "super" ... (Score:2)
As far as other "non-super" superheros...there's
Dick Tracy (don't look at me like that, he counts)
Iron Fist (I think...unless someone corrects me)
The Shadow (He achieved his power through training - I like his concept as well)
Dr. Strange (see "the shadow" above)
The Lone Ranger
The Punishe
Batman DOES have a special power! (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you want to drop of the face of the earth and learn with the best martial arts masters? No problem, the trust fund will keep up the house and pay the help as you vacation in Asia.
Do you want a nifty belt that has time warping effects so you can pull an elephant out of your pocket? No problem, you
Re:IRonman was only human as well (Score:2)
Re:Batman is the best superhero AND comic. (Score:2)
yes, his therapist is Leslie Thompkins
raise a family to honor my parents
why do you think he keeps taking in kids off the street? despite all the tired gay jokes, the Batman/Robin dynamic is really akin to Father/Son.
i wonder what the character will do when he's old.
see, "The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller, "Batman Beyond" by Bruce Timm, or "Kingdom Come" by Mark Waid and Alex Ross. its something that's been explored a bit
he's rich enoungh
Female Writers? (Score:2, Interesting)
Now that she mentions it, I can't think of any female comic writers. Please, could someone recomend a few?
Re:Female Writers? (Score:5, Interesting)
Rumiko Takahashi.
But in the US and Europe, there appear to be no good female comic writers.
I think this is because if a man wants to be a cartoonist, he learns to draw and design and lay out panels, while if a woman wants to be a cartoonist she networks with her art college freinds and produces a strip in which stick figures talk about Iraq and Men.
I must note that the above theory is based on a single visit to Forbidden Planet and there may be some cases it doesn't address
Re:Female Writers? (Score:2)
I also thought of Alison Bechdel and Claire Bretecher, although Bretecher is sort of more of a panel or single-page cartoonist rather than a comic-book author, and Bechdel's "Dykes to Watch Out For" is a strip, not a book. So maybe they don't count.
Re:Female Writers? (Score:2)
CLAMP is a team of all female manga artists, who seem to make stuff mostly for girls, like Cardcaptor Sakura, but also have some things like Chobits that are for an adult male audience (it's quite perverted stuff, but not pornographic)
I recommend all of those. The Rumiko Takahashi's creations I know are great if you just want to have fun. Chobits is nice if you're looking for something more oriented
Re:Female Writers? (Score:2)
Takahashi is a victim of her own success. Her comics are so popular that the editors won't let them end. A number of the villains in Inuyasha actually represent Shounen Jump editors.
Haha, good one! Got a source for that? Certainly makes sense though. I think part of the problem is the format though. Ranma had very little continuity, so it could go on forever, and Inuyasha doesn't have all that much either, since they can just keep on adding villains.
And I wouldn't say that Chobits was for an adult m
Re:Female Writers? (Score:2)
If you're looking for older writers, I'd recommend Louise Simonson. She had an awesome run on X-Factor in the 80s.
If you're willing to dig around for back issues of CrossGen comics (which is now sadly out of business, due to upper management not paying people whe
Re:Female Writers? (Score:2)
Phoebe Gloeckner, of course. Tough to read sometimes because of the difficult subject matter, but her art is fantastic.
Aline Kominsky-Crumb.
Julie Barr, although TBH I'm not a big fan of "Desert Peach."
That's what comes off the top of my head.
Another Church Scandle... (Score:3, Funny)
--
Toby
Re:Another Church Scandle... (Score:2)
Bulletproof Monk (Score:2)
What a day. (Score:2, Funny)
-phozz
Super Heroes (Score:2)
Re:Super Heroes (Score:2)
Humans seem to need to read/watch/hear/stories about, well, (demi)god-like super-humans doing stuff way above what normal humans could possibly do.
There's a reason why even in religion you have people like for example Samson in
Re:Super Heroes (Score:2)
Yes
It really depends what about superheroes you are conversing on.
Re:Super Heroes (Score:3, Informative)