Magnus: Robot Fighter #3

[arbre_rieur]

"A robot is a representation of the human, and this book is about representation and appropriation. When it’s not about karate chopping robots until they explode, of course." -- Fred Van Lente



















Magnus escapes with the help of the older robot lady he saved earlier.

Comments

[michaelhealy]

Do you have a link to the source of that quote? I'd like to see if there is any comment on the blatant irony of making a story about a white guy who with the help of a robot appropriated Asian martial arts about how appropriation is bad.

[northstarfan]

Given what I've read of Fred "Spider-Rape" Van Lente's work, I wouldn't bank on it.

[drtechnobabel]

Wait, what? How'd he earn THAT nickname?

[superboyprime]

www.examiner.com/article/van-lente-on-chameleon-rape

[tugrul]

I'm not good at explaining things in a well rounded way so I'll just point you at this article:

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/09/15/is-there-too-much-rape-in-superhero-comics

EDIT: I didn't refresh the page to see whether someone commented before I did, but since some of you might get alerted on comments, I'll just leave this here.

[drtechnobabel]

My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn't quite the same thing. - Fred Van Lente

Wow, that... that is really skeevy. I see now why he has that nickname.

[superboyprime]

Here: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05/21/magnus-vs-solar-well-at-least-barbiere-vs-van-lente/.

He doesn't mention the martial arts, but he does talk about Magnus being inspired by the writings of Frederick Douglass as a form of appropriation, so we know the character isn't intended to be completely innocent of such a charge.

[nyadnar17]

I wonder how long the UCF is going to have to exist before "White Male Martial Artist" stops being seen an an appropriation.

[michaelhealy]

Since MMA is literally taking several styles of martial arts (not all Asian granted) and stripping them of their cultural and spiritual context so that all that remains is the physical combat aspects, it is pretty much the text book definition of appropriation.

[raspberryrain]

Or, you know, science.

[arilou_skiff]

Any martial art practiced today is stripped of it's cultural context. (kind of at the point when it became a "martial art" rather than just a way for people to beat each other)

[shadowpsykie]

hm given no other context on the writer or his work, (and ignorning the very snarky tone of those panels) this pretty much shows what issues i have with the Bechdel Test in general.

Not saying the the Bechdel test is bad. it's a good starting point, but it shouldn't be the standard because movies that do pass it could be HORRIBLE movies. and movies that don't pass it could be great and have great female characters.

I think i like the idea of the Maki Mori Test better, which allows for character development and growth. http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/mako-mori-test-bechdel-pacific-rim/

i think my issue is that the Bechdel test is hailed as the be all, end all or THE definitive way to make a female friendly movie... when, right now i can think of several ways in which i could make a movie that passes the test, but it would be a horrible movie.

It is one tool to examine a movie, but it shouldn't, in my opinion, be the only standard of measurment for the movie.

[bizarrohulk]

If you view the Bechdel Test purely as an exercise in box-ticking (which seems to be the approach that these panels are making fun of) then technically almost every lesbian porn film ever made would pass.

[himalayan_pink]

As you said, the Bechdel Test is just a start (and one that was intended as snark in the first place).

It would be great if more media passed BOTH the Bechdel Test (quantity of women characters) and the Maki Mori Test (quality of women characters). One's not necessarily better then the other. They are just different ways of looking at the same problem: the general lack of multiple well-written female characters.

[shadowpsykie]

oh i agree, and that's what i was trying to say. a lot of people forget it was meant to be snark in the first place (though you know it had a point)

Both tests are incomplete, and a lot of peopel DO use it as a "check off list" (both people trying to cater to, and people deriding movies that other wise have very well written female characters and stories because "Oh it doesn't pass the Bechdel Test"). Neither are better than the other, and neither should be the "standard" they are both ways of examining and pointing out the same problems.

[himalayan_pink]

Also: Fred Van Lente can snark about it, but by following the Bechdel Test (even in jest) he has shown why it can be a good thing to follow.

Panel One:
It gives Leeja some additional characteristics (she's more than a badass human hunter), she's someone who takes time to get to know her co-workers. It elevates her from "Strong Female Character" (a loaded term in its own right) to "Well-Rounded Female Character."

It gives the company they work for more depth. By being forced to look at Nica as an individual rather than a default (some random guy) it shows that this place is made up of "real" people with lives outside of whatever plot-of-the-month is happening this issue. This, in turn, makes the world he's creating seem more legitimate.

Panel Two:
Despite the dialogue outwardly being about a man, Nica is also providing vital plot information exclusive of Magnus as a dude. Information that moves the plot along is equally valid coming out of a woman's mouth.

Panel Three:
Cats! Everyone likes cats, right?

(p.s. shadowpsykie, we are in agreement!)

[shadowpsykie]

heh yeah.

i would also argue though that even though the panels *indicated more information* they were still bland and, okay that cat scene was cute. but none of that really added anything to her character.... NOW if things were EXPANDED from there... if each of those panels happened in multiple panels through out the book then YES, i would say it passed "The intended Purpose" of the test. which is to give us a more developed female character.


(forgive me if this came off as unintentionally brusque or knitpicky. i was having a fight... err a heated debate, with a guy over at The Mary Sue and i am sorta punchy...)

[himalayan_pink]

Hee. It's all good.

I'm just A.) overly optimistic and B.) examples of even this are so frustratingly rare that I'll take what I can get.

[avantre]

Panel 3 also showed that she has flaws (allergies) and therefore is not a perfect character.

[drexer]

The Bechdel test is a statistical method for analysis, it hardly works when applied to just one story. When applied to all movies within an year or a genre it works well, same with series with a nice runtime. And for instance on the lifetime of a comic or book which can be considered 'long enough'.

That's what always annoys me when one applies the test literally, and I could respect this comic if it seemed to be making a comment on that, but I don't have that much confidence in it.

[shadowpsykie]

ah , i have never thought of the test being used for statistical analysis, and that makes much more sense than using it on an individual movie ect. most people (when they discuss the test) use it as a movie by movie event. the way it was used a while ago (compiling statistical analysis for the pre and post moffat doctor who) makes sense.


i would agree that MAYBE that is what this comic is trying to do... BUT as you said, that's giving it too much credit because for me is see this as nose wiggling...(is that the right term?:/ saying "see THIS is what people think the test should do" or something.

if this comic was used to carry this thought further, it would seem like a well thought critique on the "check listers" but it doesn't seem like that (though to be fair i am not familiar with this series in the slightest... it might all be a huge critique as far as i know...)

[arbre_rieur]

"if this comic was used to carry this thought further, it would seem like a well thought critique on the "check listers" but it doesn't seem like that (though to be fair i am not familiar with this series in the slightest... it might all be a huge critique as far as i know...)"

Did you read the quote before the cut?

[shadowpsykie]

Yeah.... but I've noticed that some times those quotes in the context of the scans don't always make sense.... I mean the quote talks about appropriation, but how is this showing appropriation? Maybe I am just being dense. .... or distracted by the funeral I have to go to today. ...

And upon re reading this quote, I still don't see how one character in a few pages makes this comic apt representation when it seems more like it's saying "people who ask for mere representation don't know what they are really asking for. And again, it's just one comic. One conic vang really do the idea of representation and appropriation in depth.

[northstarfan]

Honestly, if this was Simone, Rucka, BKV or any other half-dozen writers who I had some faith would handle thorny issues with any skill (or would at least give it a good faith try), my take on this would be that the writer was indeed presenting the argument that filling out ticky boxes does not a powerful [insert marginalized group(s) here] character make, and then would expect them to advance the argument by creating such a character through subversion of overplayed, calcified tropes like the Strong Female Character.

But this is Van Lente and I don't have that level of trust in a writer who 1) penned the Spider-Rape debacle mentioned above, 2) was in part responsible for playing 616 Herc's (canonically unconfirmed) bisexuality as literally nothing more than a punchline, 3) wrote the ableist, sexist, misogynist load that was the 2011 Alpha Flight series (and then proceeded to pass the blame for his writing choices to both his editor and someone who hadn't written the characters in 30 years), and 4) claimed to be holding a fair and balanced forum on the issue of comics piracy when his comics were depicting torrenters as literally sucking the life out of creators, leaving them as skeletal husks.

Given the guy's history of general cluelessness, I'm more inclined to view this as straight-up mockery or, at best, making the statement about checking off boxes without having much understanding of why they exist in the first place.

[espanolbot]

Yeah, people just assuming that a work is good, bad, sexist or non-sexist depending on whether it passes or not is kind of silly.

I mean, the movie Showgirls passes it several times over, but you could hardly be pressed to call it either good nor feminist.

[avantre]

I always thought that the test was meant to be a start, not the end goal - as in, if you're not even passing the test then you're not even in the race to getting it.

[lieut_kettch]

I mean, the movie Showgirls passes it several times over, but you could hardly be pressed to call it either good nor feminist.

Ohmygod. It's true. You just blew my mind with that statement.

[shadowpsykie]

But, Showgirls is about a young over achieving college student Jessie Katzapolis leaving leaving behind her repressed former life after appearing in an 80s music video and getting addicted to caffeine pills. So forges her own life following hey passions of performing live on stage! How is that not feminist?


What? I mean I've never seen it, but Jessie was always one of my favorite Bayside kids (next to Slater, because, come on, look at him, you best belive I am waiting for that Showboys sequel:) how bad could it be?

[jkcarrier]

I think the point of the Bechdel Test is not that passing it makes something automatically good. It's just that it's so incredibly easy to pass (as the Leeja sequence snarkily points out), and yet so many movies/books/comics/etc. still don't. That's the point: In any sane universe, the Bechdel Test would be the equivalent of saying "I only read stories that have verbs in them". And yet here we are.

[big_daddy_d]

Rather enjoyed this and had a good chuckle.

[starwolf_oakley]

The Bechdel Test has confused me from when I first heard about it. "So, two named female characters can be talking about their husbands, fathers, sons, etc. and that's sexist?"

[donnblake]

Not at all short version- they can talk about men, they just can't only ever talk about men.

Slightly longer version- two named female characters talking about their sons, husbands, fathers, or any other man doesn't negate the Bechdel test. However, to pass, they have to interact in some way that doesn't center on a male character, at least once.

[rainspirit]

People talking about the Bechdel test need to keep in mind that it emerged from a one-off gag strip from 1985.

Even the author is vaguely dismissive of its importance - if also honoured that others have given it such attention. The lesson being: Don't have issues with the Bechdel test. Have issues with those who trump up its significance.

Side note: I'm a big fan of Alison Bechdel, and if anyone is interested I could post scans of Fun Home, her "family tragicomic" autobio concerning her father's suicide (and the things leading up to it.) It's a very good read.

[halloweenjack]

How to Hang a Lampshade [TVTropes]:

1. Put down the sledgehammer, please.