Making a really big deal over a comic cover that won't even see print

[yojoebro82]

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/19/8252361/batgirl-dc-canceled-cover

 

So the Batgirl variant cover with the Joker has been canceled. It was decided that the homage to the 30 year old Killing Joke story didn't fit the tone of the current book and it was pulled by the creator's request.

 

Fine. I actually have been reading the current Batgirl run and it's true. They're going with a much different take on Batgirl these days and thanks to that and New 52 rebooting, that Alan Moore story (though still a classic) seems like a distant memory. I understand, creatively, why they didn't run with it. I also understand why it touched a nerve. Short answer: bondage artwork featuring a helpless female and a male aggressor doesn't go over too well this day in age. Fine, I get that too.

 

What I find interesting is that the cover was pulled. DC isn't going to print it. But some people still seem upset that the cover was even created to begin with. Like it's not enough that DC decided it would be best not to publish it. The idea that someone would produce this artwork is seemingly offensive to some people.

 

IMO, at this point, this thing is the equivalent of fan art. Never going to see print, only viewable online. A company decided it would be a mistake to run with it, no one profited off of it. So what's the hubub, bub?

 

This quote from the above article, I believe, sums up all the problems:

 

"It's just the latest flare-up to reflect the incongruous, factional nature of the comic book community and the forces that threaten to rip it apart."

 

Translation: Fanboys are a whinny bunch.

[mako]

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/19/8252361/batgirl-dc-canceled-cover

 

So the Batgirl variant cover with the Joker has been canceled. It was decided that the homage to the 30 year old Killing Joke story didn't fit the tone of the current book and it was pulled by the creator's request.

 

Fine. I actually have been reading the current Batgirl run and it's true. They're going with a much different take on Batgirl these days and thanks to that and New 52 rebooting, that Alan Moore story (though still a classic) seems like a distant memory. I understand, creatively, why they didn't run with it. I also understand why it touched a nerve. Short answer: bondage artwork featuring a helpless female and a male aggressor doesn't go over too well this day in age. Fine, I get that too.

 

What I find interesting is that the cover was pulled. DC isn't going to print it. But some people still seem upset that the cover was even created to begin with. Like it's not enough that DC decided it would be best not to publish it. The idea that someone would produce this artwork is seemingly offensive to some people.

 

IMO, at this point, this thing is the equivalent of fan art. Never going to see print, only viewable online. A company decided it would be a mistake to run with it, no one profited off of it. So what's the hubub, bub?

 

This quote from the above article, I believe, sums up all the problems:

 

"It's just the latest flare-up to reflect the incongruous, factional nature of the comic book community and the forces that threaten to rip it apart."

 

Translation: Fanboys are a whinny bunch.

More to the point, Fanboys are an easily manipulated bunch.

 

This is just another textbook case of a comic company cooking up a minor controversy to score some attention for a book that frankly, probably needs it. This just like back in the early days of Mike Grell's post Longbow Hunters Green Arrow monthly when they POed a women's action group by featuring a drawing of a dead prostitute's body on a cover.

 

They may say its tearing DC apart, but in reality, they love the attention.

[featofstrength]

Translation: Fanboys are a whinny bunch.

 

Not really sure where you're getting that and that alone from this case.

 

Somebody (the media, DC, artists, fanboys, feminists, etc) is sensationalizing and some people ((the media, DC, artists, fanboys, feminists, etc) are getting caught up in it on many sides.

 

*EDIT* -

 

Here's a good one:http://popcultureuncovered.com/2015/03/19/no-laughing-matter-a-comic-fangirls-concern-about-the-joker-variant-cover-cancellation/

 

But for every one good, there are a hundred bad:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/20/between-the-panels-the-real-problem-with-dcs-batgirljoker-cover

"unwanted sexual subtext" - "He's caressing her lips." - "The position of Joker's pistol between her breasts can even be construed as phallic imagery"

 

Ugh...reading a bit much into it? Gimme a break.

[mako]

The Ad Man's Mantra:

 

"THEY CAN LOVE IT, THEY CAN HATE IT . . . AS LONG AS THEY REMEMBER IT."

[supreme-d]

I find nothing wrong with the Batgirl cover, or even the Spider-woman cover. Comic books are art intended to get a (storytelling) point across. How an artist does that is their own decision. If I don't like it, I don't have to buy it. Sometimes people are completely justified in their opinion to be offended by certain things that comic books do, but this certainly is not one of those times.

 

These days, the input of comic fans more often that not seems to neuter creativity and direction taken in stories. I liked the internet a whole lot more before twitter.