I am so close to done with all this bullshit.

[kingrockwell]

No icon ragey enough. This one feels cold and bitter, which is appropriate enough.

A little under two pages from Birds of Prey #2.





With all the fail going 'round at DC lately, the last thing I needed this week was Gail Simone killing gays (even if he pulled the trigger himself). I don't even know anymore.

This shit better be a fake-out because I'm out of patience for Brightest Day and DC in general. I'm gonna go drown my sorrows in Pet Avengers. :(

Comments

[cygna_hime]

I mean, yes, I get that, but there are so few female/nonstraight/nonwhite characters that each one killed represents a significant reduction in the population -- how many gay men does DC have right now? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, no matter how sensitively or with regard to the character's humanity you make it, killing one means that thereafter it's significantly harder to find any gay male characters to tell nondeath stories about. Whether the death story is a good one or not, it takes away the possibility of future stories.

[nezchan]

Hmm, that brings up something interesting. How many gay/lesbian heroes (or even villains) are really depicted as being connected to any larger queer community? Most of the time it seems like they pop up more or less in isolation, sometimes with a partner but that's about it, like some sort of random mutants (not that sort!).

Like when gay characters die, it's a reduction in population, but is there a community that feels that loss?

[katzedecimal]

Complete agreement. It's one of the major pitfalls to DC's promised "dead is dead" mandate: They'd better get their writers to quit killing people off, or they won't have a DCU left to write about :-\

[big_daddy_d]

Amen. As many have seen me state here before, the "No Resurrection" Policy is bullshit. In fact a lot of new policies is bullshit solely because with the dead is dead thing as an example, DC is going on a slaughterfest. Gail, I'm gonna trust and see how next issue is pulled off, but others..yea they seem to have no real reason as to why this person or that person died. When confronted we get the usual "We wanted you to feel something" or "Good because it still got your attention right?" When we can get a different and reasonable answer, I'll tolerate it more, otherwise, DC needs to rethink these bullshit policies.

[gailsimone]

"When confronted we get the usual "We wanted you to feel something" or "Good because it still got your attention right?" "

I think, if that's the response they give you, you're right to be annoyed. I hate that, it's condescending. I could chop off the Tiny Titans' heads with a chainsaw and get a reaction.
It takes no art to evoke repulsion and anger, just a willingness to do something
repulsive and provoking.

I created Savant and Creote. They mean something to me. And I get that people cared about them.

Here's a fact I've mentioned a couple times. Savant was meant to die at the end
of his first arc, and Creote wasn't even considered a significant character. But the
people at DC liked Savant and asked me not to kill him.

Then the response came in from the first couple issues and both those characters
started getting fanmail. For one issue, we got more mail for them than we did for
Babs or Dinah. And in particular, people glommed onto Creote in a surprising
and delightful way.

I hate most of these character deaths because I think they are stupid and ill-conceived
and thoughtless (but not all, I've choked up at a few, like Ted Kord's death, and I cried
my eyes out when Supergirl died in the original Crisis). But I also have mixed feelings because
for purposes of even the most fundamental dramatic tension, the POSSIBILITY of
lasting damage to a character, or even death, has to be present. And I strongly feel
that just because a character is gay or Asian or female, they should ever be considered
out-of-play, because unfortunately, that IS a real drama deflationary condition.

It's just that so many of these choices feel like a marketing consensus decision rather
that a creative one. As a reader, I resent it, and I certainly get the anger about it. I've had
more than a little bit of that many times even in the last couple years.

But I think this story is going to say some interesting things and that IS the ultimate
use for any character, in my opinion. If anyone reads the first arc, four issues, and feels
this same anger about this issue, I will totally understand them dropping the book.
But I hope they stick around that long. Trees are being planted.

[big_daddy_d]

Which is why I stated that I trust you and will wait until the next book as well as the final issue of this arc just to see how it all plays out. If trees are being planted, I'd like to see how they mature.

On another note: If DC is going to remain stubborn and stick to the No Resurrection thing, then at least, I think, they should make a loophole for anyone who played no part in Blackest Night as clearly this particular one came about due to Blackest Night and Brightest Day. That way characters like Ryan Choi, and Lian can come back (yes.. I will beat that dead horse long after it has turned to dust). So at the very least, we should be allowed that. Otherwise, I stick to my stance that they need to throw out the policy and go back to the drawing board when it comes to story telling.

One more thing.. I remember someone mentioning that characters whose parents are evil are destined to become evil themselves.. I hope to god that's not an actual mandate by DC and that someone was just making an injoke in response to the behavior of said characters. Because seriously..know what..don't get me started on that.

[mynondw]

I hope it's okay if I chime in as an uninvested outsider; I'm embarrassed to tell you I don't read a lot of mainstream comics and am not too familiar with the characters or plot. My daughter is queer, however, so I feel this is an issue close to me personally.

The way I see it is this: gays are going through a period that has some similarities to what African-Americans went through at the start of mass media. Things aren't quite as bad as they were even ten years ago (and at least crap like Will & Grace is off the air) but for the most part, gay/queer/trans is still played for laughs or for writing on specific issues. It's not completely norm'd yet. There's not a whole lot of just regular gay characters.

There's some great insight here on the history of a show I'd never heard of before this article - The Beulah Show - and the personal difficulties the actresses faced for perpetuating a stereotype. It didn't matter if one actress wanted to make the character more "real", the NAACP still (rightfully) called out the show for being harmful. Critics of the NAACP could say, "But there really are black maids. And can't all people, black or white, be funny and silly?" Yeah, the statement is factual, but that doesn't make it right.

So when people complain about yet another story with a dead gay person (and death in relation to an unrequited heterosexual love interest would be particularly painful), it's still something to treat with sensitivity. For some people, it's still a daily struggle for acceptance. I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is or how this should be handled. You're correct in saying that no character should be immune to having bad things happen, but all writers should be aware of when they're treading near cliches and stereotypes.

It sounds like you've thought through this story, though, and my interest is piqued for the outcome. I hope it's well received. :)

[alienist]

...I hope this isn't too personal, but - as a queer girl, can I say you are an awesome parent, for being so aware and critical and understanding?

[gailsimone]

Amen, that's the kind of mom we all need!

[tavella]

Well, they'll have plenty of straight white guys left to write about. Which is I suspect all that most of the current DC writers care about.

[katzedecimal]

*nod* Which will lead to another kind of population problem ^_~

[gailsimone]

" mean, yes, I get that, but there are so few female/nonstraight/nonwhite characters that each one killed represents a significant reduction in the population -- how many gay men does DC have right now? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, no matter how sensitively or with regard to the character's humanity you make it, killing one means that thereafter it's significantly harder to find any gay male characters to tell nondeath stories about. Whether the death story is a good one or not, it takes away the possibility of future stories."

Well, again, it might, or it might not.

But I do believe you don't chop a tree in a shared forest unless you're planting a better one.