posted
Lardy, Identity Crisis set the standard for 'lets kick off our new kewl era by gruesomely killing a beloved character'. For shits and giggles they inserted a rape into her backstory too, and the rapist has never gotten his comeuppance.
Not only dozens, but probably hundreds of examples exist before this, but this is the most striking one in recent years.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, I remembered Sue's rape, or near-rape (?), since I did read Identity Crisis. But the implication in your post was that someone had been raped and then subsequently burned to death by the rapist. Obviously, Doctor Light was a suspect in her murder, but as you know, the culprit turned out to be Jean Loring, Ray Palmer's ex-wife.
I do hate that they killed off Sue Dibny, but I can see that it was done to polarize the readers and make them become invloved in the story (much as Marvel's Civil War was constructed by forcing the readers to choose sides with beloved characters). I mean, Sue and Ralph were arguably DC's most beloved couple, so if you were going to go for the jugular, that was the way to go.
So what if it had been Ralph who'd been sexually assaulted and murdered? I'm not advocating what was done to Sue at all, understand, but would this have made it better? You could argue that DC shouldn't ever have done Identity Crisis at all, but if you were going to tell the same story with that alteration, would it have been more acceptable?
I'll go on the record to say that I support the idea of Identity Crisis, if not the actual execution. Why? 1) Everything has it's seedy underbelly in real life, so why shouldn't the Silver Age? 2) It's folly to think that the secret's of super heroes would always be kept 100% safe with the kind of villains they faced and even greater folly to think there wouldn't be horrible consequences if those secrets were exposed. 3) What would our heroes do to protect their loved ones? I think the option shown here was logical, if not desirable. In real life the "heroes" probably would have killed them to protect their loved ones.
But you could argue there was double-misogyny committed here when it was revealed that Jean Loring was behind it all and did it for the love of a man! Good grief! That gives me an uncomfortable Susan Smith-type vibe--one that doesn't seem to fit a character who, as I recall, was the one who wanted the marriage to Ray to end in the first place and was shown acting all cold-hearted when they interacted post-breakup. WTF?
Yeah, there were some misogynistic tones to that story, but I'm more inclined to use Jean as more of an example of it than Sue. At least Sue's character wasn't assassinated, along with her life.
And yes, Doctor Light is long overdue for payback.
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess what Cobalt Kid was saying that first, Sue was raped (and she was, not "near-raped" but raped, it's clearly to be read that the heroes arrived too late), and later on, she was set on fire by Jean Loring (whom I did not know before and was even more astonished that she could shrink as well - was that ever established before???).
Apart from the lame ending, it was a rather great story. Still, it was not full-heartedly done, as Alan Moore was saying: If DC would have been interested in doing a really epochal story, they would not have taken second-rate characters like Sue and Robins father to die... but for example Louis Lane.
The violence must not be part of modern stories, but in the case of Identity Crisis, I thought it was a good read. At least far better than the third case of "Universes die, whiteout, everything explodes and never will be the same again" as Infinite Crisis was... and there was lots of graphic violence as well...
From: Bamberg, Germany | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, it's been a long time since I read Identity Crisis. I recall reading the incident as an attempted rape, but in any case it was a brutal thing to be done to a well-loved character.
But Sue being set on fire was post-mortem. She had actually been killed by a brain aneurism that Jean caused by shrinking into Sue's brain. As I recall, Jean's intent had been to injure, not to kill, in order to further her goal of winning Ray back. The burning was done to cover up the actual cause of death, and, perhaps, to implicate someone else, like Light or Heat Wave.
As for Jean shrinking, I believe she used some of the material (white dwarf?) her husband used to do that.
Certainly, Ron Marz opened the door for this kind of thng with the unnecessarily brutal muder of Kyle Rayner's girlfriend, Alex (dismembered and stuffed in the refrigerater).
Probably the main precedent to that in terms of graphic murders of female characters was Elektra's murder by Bullseye in Frank Miller's classic Daredevil story. I don't know if many people point to that as a significant trend-setter (preceding Barbara Gordon's paralysis) or if a lot of people find (or found) it offensive, but it was quite a brutal death. Sure, she got better later, but the effect remains.
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
All of that sounds just horrible to me! I do not want to read about any of that happening to Legion characters. I'm sure that sounds naive or idealistic.
quote:Originally posted by Sketch Lad: All of that sounds just horrible to me! I do not want to read about any of that happening to Legion characters. I'm sure that sounds naive or idealistic.
I'm with you Dean!
But let's talk for a minute about terrible things happening to heroes or supporting characters.
You see, in Spider-Man, throughout his career, there has been a long standing series of moments where this happens. Indeed, its a part of the series (and almost all comic book series, but I'll focus here). In the last 1960s, an extremely important supporting character, Captain Stacey, is killed during a battle with Dr. Octopus. Nearly five four years later, Gwen Stacey, Spider-Man's love interest for many years at this point (and daughter of the previous mentioned supporting character) is killed, in probably what is the most famous 'girlfriend of hero dies in the story' issue ever.
Is there a difference in the deaths? Not really, in regard to male vs. female deaths in comics.
But let's fast forward to the late 1980's. Black Canary brutalized. Barbara Gordon, brutalized. Scores of other exmaples. Now the early 1990's, when Kyle Rayner's girlfriend is stuffed into a refrigerator. Months later, Guy Gardner's mother is stuffed into a refrigerator. Weeks later, Damage's girlfriend is killed. Again, scores of other examples.
Are there examples of males being brutalized? Yes.
Where then, is the difference between now and the Silver Age?
And that brings me to the topic of the sexualization of violence against females in various forms of entertainment. Because in the 1980's & 1990's, and still to this day, that notion is still extremely relevant. Are there instances that prove otherwise? Always. But the larger, more general sense is there.
Was it so in the earlier comic book ages. Yes--but to a much lesser degree. Lois tied up, hanging from a building is quite different than Kyle Raynor's girlfriend, brutally stuffed into a refrigerator by Major Force, where the villain then explains to Kyle that yes, it was slow, and yes, she screamed, and yes--well, you get the point.
Lardy in particular has asked about if violence against males would then be sexualized, would that make it more balanced? But I don't want violence against any comic book super-heroes to be sexual, or designed to sexually titilate.
Can it be powerful in literature? Of course. For instance, in films, the implied sexual predator in the original Cape Fear is gruesomely done by Robert Mitchum, but does indeed lend to the atmosphere of the film. On the other hand, the devastating implications of what happened to Peter O'Toole at the end of Lawrence of Arabia further give a sense to the viewer of his suffering.
What I'm trying to get at it is that in many instances, comic books in the last 20 years have not only depicted violence against women (and men) like in earlier eras, but have taken it a bit farther--by almost celebrating the sexualization of violence against women, and often times only for a cheap thrill to the story. The same is seen in film and other forms of entertainment.
To bring this completely back to the Legion, I do think, however, that the Legion is different in this regard. Violence has been equally given out (for the most part), largely non-sexual and all things Legion have always been more fair across gender-lines, at least moreso than anything that can be validly compared to it.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I believe it's necessary to kill characters and supporting characters (male and female) to show consequences, provide drama and change the status quo, I'm not into depicting it graphically in any "mainstream" comic. Alex Dewitt could've simply been murdered by Major Force and left at that, without the refrigerator, etc.
Anything more graphic should be left for "mature readers" comics. And I feel any graphic depiction of rape should be avoided even there.
Rape is a very heinous crime, obviously, and if it is explored in a comic at all (and I believe it should, to an extent), all titillation should be left out. The focus should be on the effects on the victim, so anyone who reads it, will understand the wrongness of it.
In my mind the Sue Dibny rape scene was not gratuitous or graphic, as the main effect left on me was the horror of it. And, of course, the fact it was such a beloved character and a ret-con made it even worse.
Of course, one of the bigger issues is that this kind of thing seems to be happening more and more to women in comics. It seems we're having fewer female characters who haven't been raped or brutalized at this point, and that is definitely sending the wrong message! it screams: "Women are victims!" And that's detestable.
And, no, I didn't mean to imply that doing this to males would "balance things out"--I was just wondering what the fan reaction would've been. When I wrote a scene where Lard Lad was raped, I felt I used restraint and avoided titillation and emphasized the horror of it. It was a very difficult scene to write and one I wasn't sure I should. Lardy's actions today are informed, to some degree, by what happened to him that day, so I feel it wasn't a gratuitous thing on my part.
But there is a decided lack of males being victimized in comics, especially when compared to the victimization of women. That's pandering, folks, and it ain't right!
I hope the Legion remains relatively "clean" in these terms, as it has historically. However, you have to admit Monstress's death was pretty brutal and graphic compared to all the other Legion deaths...
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Set
There's not a word yet, for old friends who've just met.
posted
The big deal for me is that 90% of what is being peddled to me as 'dark' or 'gritty' or 'mature' is actual puerile fantasy stuff meant to titillate the absolute lowest common denominator.
Comics tend to muddy the waters as well, often times portraying a telepathic violation (such as what Jean did to Emma) or some sort of physical infestation (such as the Brood implantation) as 'rape,' which, IMO, diminishes the act, and outrage it should invoke. Some things a person *shouldn't* become desensitized towards. Some things should *always* be outrageous, and every cheap shock-tactic hack of a writer who thinks he's being all edgy by showing us a character being raped is, IMO, missing the point.
Alan Moore's run on Swamp Thing, portrayed Abby as someone who had been a sex offender in her past, without actually getting all sensationalistic about depicting it. The consequences are what mattered, not the event itself. It's the only time I put the comic down and said, 'whoa,' because the idea that Abby could have done something like that made me seriously question whether or not I could like that character. It was an interesting place for me to be in, personally, and I was prompted to think about stuff I hadn't thought of since I was a child, and whether or not there ever could be forgiveness for such a thing, whether or not a person could learn and grow beyond some terrible act they committed many years ago. It's a no-brainer to explore whether or not a victim can 'get past' something, but it was a comic book that first made me realize that the perpetrator also had something to 'get past.' Very much a 'sympathy for the devil' moment, and a point where my thinking on the matter got a little less black and white, as it hit home that not everyone who gets hurt is a saint, and not everyone who hurts someone is a devil. If life goes on, then there is a chance for change.
To me, that was 'mature' writing.
Too many fictional portrayals of this sort of material fail to go past the 'I Spit on Your Grave' level of sensationalizing sexual violence to women (or, in the case of shows like Oz, men) to titillate the audience. It's the 'mature' version of a gory movie splashing blood on the screen, or having a cat jump out of the closet to make you jump, but rape shouldn't be reduced to a cheap shock tactic like this.
Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lard Lad: And, no, I didn't mean to imply that doing this to males would "balance things out"--I was just wondering what the fan reaction would've been. When I wrote a scene where Lard Lad was raped, I felt I used restraint and avoided titillation and emphasized the horror of it. It was a very difficult scene to write and one I wasn't sure I should. Lardy's actions today are informed, to some degree, by what happened to him that day, so I feel it wasn't a gratuitous thing on my part
Lardy, just to clarify, I know you better than some others, so I'm speaking generally more towards the issue than any one poster (rather than make assumptions on any one posters sentiment).
Its a complicated issue that should definately be discussed. I just happen to argue all my points like they were 100% correct
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Hyperpath: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
