![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icon_uk posting in ![[community profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_dailywww.sciencefiction,com has an interview with Nicola Scott, late of the Secret Six, Teen Titans and others, wherein she describes how dhe got involved in the New 52 (and I do wonder what title she might have been offered, a couple of notions spring to mind, but I'd be interested in hearing other opinions)
A few quotes to whet your appetite
DC has come under some scrutiny recently for the number of women (or lack thereof) working in a creative capacity for them. You were working pretty consistently for them for a number of years, so I was surprised (and disappointed) that you weren’t one of the regular artists on any of their ‘New 52′ books. Were you offered a regular assignment or were you simply busy with other work?
I consider them to be equals in many ways but they are very different people. Despite being alien, there’s a very relaxed human quality to Clark. He’s grown up being different but still fully integrated into the American culture, lifestyle and values. Diana, on the other hand, grew up amongst her own people, royal, special and celebrated.
Clark has come to understand that his power gives him a responsibility to mankind, Diana was made aware of her responsibility to her people from birth, before her powers were evident. This is all my theory anyway. It informs how I approach their body language and draw them in general.
There has also been a lot of debate over the sexualization of female characters like Catwoman and Starfire. What are your thoughts on the depictions of female characters in comics in general?
As a woman I can say undoubtedly that sexuality is a power in our utility belt. However, it doesn’t mean all women use it and even then, not all the time.
Catwoman, sure, her sexual presence is one of her primary weapons. That, and she can beat the sh*t out of you. But I’m also pretty comfortable with plenty of other female characters being sexy, sexually aware and/or sexually aggressive. But not all of them and certainly not at every turn. It’s very one dimensional. If a character is going to be proactively sexual in their nature there needs to be a motivation for it, a reason behind it. Really, I think a lot of the responsibility comes down to the artist. Incidentally sexy is something else altogether but it shouldn’t involve a broke-back pose or an arse-floss costume.
And her opinion on some of Diana's costumes;
I LOVE the classic costume in all it’s variations. It’s exciting, bold and glamorous, three things I don’t think Diana is trying to be but she is nonetheless. The Star Sapphire costume was ridiculous but standard for a Star Sapphire costume. I tried to make her wear it with some dignity.
There were a number of things I really liked about the “pants and jacket” look but none of them were the pants or the jacket.
People often argue that male super heroes are also human perfection, but I would argue that they might be muscular and such, but they aren’t “sexy” because they aren’t presented that way… unless you draw them! Is that a conscious choice on your part? And if so, is it an example of “turning the tables” so to speak?
Men can be very sexy but I don’t often think it’s something in their control, like it can be for women. A man that’s too selfconsciously sexy tends to be a bit gross (to me anyway). A guy might know he’s sexy but as soon as he starts to “work it”, YUCK!
There are guys that have a natural sexual energy and some of those men are in the DCU. Dick Grayson, Roy Harper, Hal Jordan (?), Thomas Blake, etc. When I have the opportunity to draw any of these men I’m very aware of what I’m doing and it’s absolutely a chance to throw some equal opportunity ogling out. That said, if I were drawing Catwoman I wouldn’t be holding back on her either.
But desire is a very personal thing. Gail used to get more fan mail for our version of Bane than she did for Catman. Sexy doesn’t have to be obvious.
It's an interesting read to be sure.
And for legality, Nicola's pencils and Doug Hazelwood inks on a nice page from her Teen Titans run featuring Solstice, in a form I hope we get to see her back in.
A few quotes to whet your appetite
DC has come under some scrutiny recently for the number of women (or lack thereof) working in a creative capacity for them. You were working pretty consistently for them for a number of years, so I was surprised (and disappointed) that you weren’t one of the regular artists on any of their ‘New 52′ books. Were you offered a regular assignment or were you simply busy with other work?
Both actually. I was offered one book that seemed an odd choice for me. Really interesting but I didn’t think I was the right artist for it (turned out to be one of my favourites from the new line up and the totally appropriate art has had quite a bit to do with that). There was another book that was briefly in the mix too but again not quite what I was looking for. If I was going to leave my (then) current title I wanted it to be for the right book.
I consider them to be equals in many ways but they are very different people. Despite being alien, there’s a very relaxed human quality to Clark. He’s grown up being different but still fully integrated into the American culture, lifestyle and values. Diana, on the other hand, grew up amongst her own people, royal, special and celebrated.
Clark has come to understand that his power gives him a responsibility to mankind, Diana was made aware of her responsibility to her people from birth, before her powers were evident. This is all my theory anyway. It informs how I approach their body language and draw them in general.
There has also been a lot of debate over the sexualization of female characters like Catwoman and Starfire. What are your thoughts on the depictions of female characters in comics in general?
As a woman I can say undoubtedly that sexuality is a power in our utility belt. However, it doesn’t mean all women use it and even then, not all the time.
Catwoman, sure, her sexual presence is one of her primary weapons. That, and she can beat the sh*t out of you. But I’m also pretty comfortable with plenty of other female characters being sexy, sexually aware and/or sexually aggressive. But not all of them and certainly not at every turn. It’s very one dimensional. If a character is going to be proactively sexual in their nature there needs to be a motivation for it, a reason behind it. Really, I think a lot of the responsibility comes down to the artist. Incidentally sexy is something else altogether but it shouldn’t involve a broke-back pose or an arse-floss costume.
And her opinion on some of Diana's costumes;
I LOVE the classic costume in all it’s variations. It’s exciting, bold and glamorous, three things I don’t think Diana is trying to be but she is nonetheless. The Star Sapphire costume was ridiculous but standard for a Star Sapphire costume. I tried to make her wear it with some dignity.
There were a number of things I really liked about the “pants and jacket” look but none of them were the pants or the jacket.
The New 52 costume is pretty close to classic. I don’t mind it at all. I would prefer a red boot.
People often argue that male super heroes are also human perfection, but I would argue that they might be muscular and such, but they aren’t “sexy” because they aren’t presented that way… unless you draw them! Is that a conscious choice on your part? And if so, is it an example of “turning the tables” so to speak?
Men can be very sexy but I don’t often think it’s something in their control, like it can be for women. A man that’s too selfconsciously sexy tends to be a bit gross (to me anyway). A guy might know he’s sexy but as soon as he starts to “work it”, YUCK!
There are guys that have a natural sexual energy and some of those men are in the DCU. Dick Grayson, Roy Harper, Hal Jordan (?), Thomas Blake, etc. When I have the opportunity to draw any of these men I’m very aware of what I’m doing and it’s absolutely a chance to throw some equal opportunity ogling out. That said, if I were drawing Catwoman I wouldn’t be holding back on her either.
But desire is a very personal thing. Gail used to get more fan mail for our version of Bane than she did for Catman. Sexy doesn’t have to be obvious.
It's an interesting read to be sure.
And for legality, Nicola's pencils and Doug Hazelwood inks on a nice page from her Teen Titans run featuring Solstice, in a form I hope we get to see her back in.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-12 10:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-12 11:03 pm (UTC)Nicola Scott, I could bloody kiss you and have all your babies right about now.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:13 am (UTC)i think she explained it the most eloquently. There is nothing wrong with sexy, or sexual (and both are different as she points out) its just not all there should be to a character. its a part of them, and its as she said weapon in the utility belt, but its not the only weapon.
Starfire dressed up as a space captain in issue #10 THAT is sexy, and her look exudes power! (i love how roy is in the background all scared, and Jason is all, oooh this is gonna be fun! :)
no subject
Date: 2012-03-12 11:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 12:16 am (UTC)... i didn;t see mention of a nother title.... did i skip it?
Nicola draws one SEXY superman :D
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:31 pm (UTC)Ok, anybody else find a lot of what she said incredibly heteronormative and pretty stupid?
As a woman I can say undoubtedly that sexuality is a power in our utility belt. However, it doesn’t mean all women use it and even then, not all the time.
Ehh.... Well, at least she added the caveat that not all women use their sexuality as a 'power,' and those that do not all the time.
Men can be very sexy but I don’t often think it’s something in their control, like it can be for women. A man that’s too selfconsciously sexy tends to be a bit gross (to me anyway). A guy might know he’s sexy but as soon as he starts to “work it”, YUCK!
>_<
I for one absolutely LOVE it when a man is self consciously sexy, because a). it is transgressive (which is probably the real reason why it makes Scott and so many other people say "yuck," b). because sadly, too many men lack confidence in their sexiness, and c). because men just ARE damn sexy, and if we're going to be egalitarian about it we should admit that their sexuality is a 'power in their utility belt' just like it is for women.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:38 pm (UTC)Maybe I'm not the best judge since I don't really find women sexy in any circumstances, but I'm pretty grossed out by the message that performative sexuality is titillating and empowering for women, yet gross for men.
Men can only be sexy by accident, and they definitely can't be aware of it or use it to gain power? Bullshit - some of the best femme fatales are men. :P
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:34 pm (UTC)Ok, anybody else find a lot of what she said incredibly heteronormative and pretty stupid?
Nope (well, not me at any rate). Certainly not "stupid) and I don't think I can take someone to task for expressing their own fairly innocuous opinions, even if I don't agree with them. She's not aiming to speak for the greater population or all women, just herself. Plus, heteronormative IS, for wont of a better term, the norm so I can't blame her for having those opinons either. She's certainly not demonising the non-heteronormative, which I WOULD have an issue with.
Ehh.... Well, at least she added the caveat that not all women use their sexuality as a 'power,' and those that do not all the time.
So, in effect, she didn't say anything you didn't agree with there then, right? :)
I for one absolutely LOVE it when a man is self consciously sexy, because a). it is transgressive (which is probably the real reason why it makes Scott and so many other people say "yuck,"
I'm not sure I'd say it was necessarily down to being transgressive, just not appealling to a lot of people. That doesn't make someone wrong for finding that to be true.
Personally I'm not a fan of overtly trying to be sexy in either gender because it usually seems to lack spontaneity and in many cases I can think of comes across as phony and "trying too hard", confidence can shift into apparent arrogance all too quickly. Some people can make it work, and kudos to them, but not that many IMHO (and I stress the M there).
b). because sadly, too many men lack confidence in their sexiness,
Really? I view it as being men are often less self aware of what constitutes "sexy" in the first place, and since that is such a subjective thing, it's easier to do nothing.
and c). because men just ARE damn sexy, and if we're going to be egalitarian about it we should admit that their sexuality is a 'power in their utility belt' just like it is for women.
I think Ms Scott might well agree with that, but having a power and using a power are two different things! :)
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:59 pm (UTC)I think Ms Scott might well agree with that, but having a power and using a power are two different things!
It really sounds like she doesn't, since she just expressed the exact opposite sentiment.
Plus, heteronormative IS, for wont of a better term, the norm so I can't blame her for having those opinons either. She's certainly not demonising the non-heteronormative, which I WOULD have an issue with.
Oh, give me a break.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:50 pm (UTC)"So, in effect, she didn't say anything you didn't agree with there then, right? :)"
In this particular sentence she technically doesn't say anything I disagree with: As a woman I can say undoubtedly that sexuality is a power in our utility belt. However, it doesn’t mean all women use it and even then, not all the time; except for the fact that "women have the power to be sexy! But not all of them do, and those that do don't do it all the time" is a pretty empty statement, and doesn't really mean anything unless she's trying to imply that this type of 'power' is unique to women, and not something men can exert as well.
And then it turned out that she *was* in fact implying that, as she goes on to state it more explicitly later in the interview.
If you want the tl:dr; it's that I expected Scott to be much cooler than that, and I'm really disappointed that she's not.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 01:37 am (UTC)Ah, right, gotcha. The old "Idol has feet of clay" moment.
Again, my status as "Resident old fart" has long since inured me to that particular bit of life disappointment.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 04:36 am (UTC)