The comic book industry is fucked. Everybody knows it. The only people who buy comics these days are blokes over forty, who are nostalgic for the stuff they used to read in that golden period from the 60s to the early 90s.
"But Alex", I hear you say, "Marvel and DC super-hero shit is everywhere these days". Yeah, it is. People are going to the movies, and watching the TV shows, and buying the merchandise, and showing up to the conventions dressed as their favourite characters—but still—nobody's buying the comics.
There's no real mystery to it. Why would anyone want to pay five quid for a thirty page picture book, when an all-you-can-eat Netflix buffet will only set you back ten bucks a month. Factor in the rise of video games, and it's easy to see why the only people buying the books are rusted-on old farts.
This puts comic book publishers in a bit of a predicament. While desperately trying anything and everything that they think might pull in a younger—or at the very least, more diverse— crowd, they're continuously running the risk of alienating the small and dwindling fan-base they already have.
I've talked before about 2000AD. A British sci-fi anthology comic that's been running for forty years. Recently they released a special edition with an all-female creative team. Well, sort of. It turned out that one of the female artist used a male assistant, whose name was scandalously left out of the main credits, presumably because his inclusion would have put a dampener on the all-girl gimmick. Also, sadly, it turned out that most of the work that appeared in the special was pretty crap. A disappointing result, that was further soured by the fact that the level of quality was well below what many of these women had demonstrated in the past. What this suggests, is that most of them signed up to be part of something they knew would be marketed as a special showcase of female talent, and then put absolutely no effort into their submissions. Leaving anyone who bought the thing, with the impression that female talent within the industry is virtually non-existent.
What interested me were the reactions.
Some people blamed the female contributors for their lazy art and writing. Some people blamed the editors for publishing such lazy work. Some people argued that having a special edition was a bad idea in the first place, and female talent should have just been brought in through the normal process, without making a big song and dance about it. And of course, some people claimed that all the negative feedback was evidence of a deeply rooted culture of sexism and misogyny within the fandom.
*sigh*
I know none of you have any interest in sci-fi comics, but tell me, do you reckon these kinds of gimmicks are a net positive, or do they generally just do more harm than good?
17 comments :
I don't know that I'd call it a gimmick. I think it's fine to address historical imbalances in this way. Why not. Men have been hogging everything for so long - they need to move over a bit and manspread a little less
Hmmm, that view makes sense if you see the world as being split into two teams, with us all working together against the blokes, who are all working together against us … but if you see the world as a free-for-all where it's every man/woman for themselves, I dunno how well it holds up.
I suppose it depends on how much you think things are controlled by in-group/out-group preferences.
Let me put it this way: When I think about writing and drawing, there are people whose work I like and people whose work I don't, and I don't put a lot of thought into whether they're women or men, or how that factors into the equation. However, when it comes to something like sport, it's completely natural to think of the world as being divided into men's sport and women's sport, with male athletes being on a completely different level to the women. When you do things like an all-women special of a comic book, does it not encourage people to view the creative sphere in the same way they view the sporting sphere? And if the product is really fuckin' terrible (like this on was), does that not then encourage people to see women as inferior to men? Would it not just be better to quietly add more women to your roster of regular talent, and let the results speak for themselves?
that view makes sense if you see the world as being split into two teams, with us all working together against the blokes, who are all working together against us … but if you see the world as a free-for-all where it's every man/woman for themselves, I dunno how well it holds up.
Men pretty much rule the world and the board rooms and they get paid more. I wouldn't call that a fair free-for-all
Would it not just be better to quietly add more women to your roster of regular talent, and let the results speak for themselves?
Yeah, obvs. But maybe an all-women special just helps spread the idea that women exist in this traditionally male dominated field. The fact that it was crap is unfortunate. I don't go along with your sport analogy. Let me use poetry as an example. There is a well-known poetry journal which consistently showcases way more poems by (white) men. But there is also a poetry comp just for women (or people who identify as) so that competition helps redress the imbalance. It's not ideal but it's something. When all things more or less balance out, there won't be any need for the women poetry comp or the women-only comic special
Men pretty much rule the world and the board rooms and they get paid more. I wouldn't call that a fair free-for-all
From the stats I've seen, in most developed countries, men also make up around 80% of the homeless. And I don't think many of the men at the top give a shit about those men at the bottom. I'd wager most of them don't put a lot of thought into being on "team man" and instead mostly just think about "me, me, me, me, me".
There is a well-known poetry journal which consistently showcases way more poems by (white) men
Why do you reckon that is? Fewer female submissions? Female submissions are of lower quality? Bias against female submissions? I know you can't read the minds of the people running the journal, but do you have any sense of it?
so that competition helps redress the imbalance
Does it do anything else? And is that imbalance actually that important? I'm all for removing discriminatory barriers, so that women who want to pursue something can go as far as their abilities will allow them; however, I don't feel any great need to reshape the world so that every aspect of society has a near-perfect gender balance. I don't need women to be 50% of the board room any more than I need them to be 50% of the homeless, or 50% of the prison population. Just so long as they're not actively being kept out.
…
Either way, assuming that your poetry journal is keeping women out because of a biased selection process, so there is a legitimate hurdle here that needs to be overcome …
Does having a women's category not encourage people to think of women's poetry as being in a different class? And then, if they're thinking about these two different classes, won't they naturally then draw comparisons—not between individual poets, but between the classes as a whole?
What I'm saying is, even if there's a legitimate problem here, isn't this kind of a crummy way of fixing things? And also one that potentially causes as many problems as it creates?
… causes as many problems as it solves.
What I'm saying is, even if there's a legitimate problem here, isn't this kind of a crummy way of fixing things? And also one that potentially causes as many problems as it creates? I don't think it's crumby and I don't think it causes any problems!
Actually in regards to the corporate and govt imbalances, companies like Sweden that does have quotas for women do prove it works. Most women do not put themselves forward in the same way that men do, but we still have things to say and a unique perspective to contribute. It's no coincidence that in my field, most of the junior-level staff are female, but most of the managers are male. And it's not because the men are better at the job.
It's like politics. The Liberal Party are refusing to apply quotas or even attempt to redress the imbalance of MPs they have. They are idiots. They can't even see the picture they present - almost all middle-aged white men in their Parliamentary party and women being bullied out of the job. And the most competent one of all (Julie Bishop) having been allowed to make her decision to leave too. I read that the only reason she didn't resign in disgust when Mal was rolled was because she wants to make sure she's not replaced in Curtin by another white man.
I made the mistake recently of confessing to someone that I wouldn't be overjoyed to be listed in a women's-only writing prize because it's just for women and so isn't the whole field, and doesn't have the prestige of the other big Australian one. Maybe it's because it's a young prize, and of course if I was listed I would be happy because it's prominent but it would be tinged with some other feeling of annoyance.
Then the person told me they were closely associated with the board (maybe even on the board. I can't remember, I was so shocked and felt he'd trapped me into saying something negative about the thing).
I wish he had told me that before he fucking got me to disclose. This was late at a dinner party, abundant wine, loose lips. And he is a fucking school reverend/pastor/minister. Nasty move I thought. Sneaky. Those men of god.
I keep thinking about it.
But stats show that in the lit world, women are less reviewed in the press. Apparently women buy 80% of books. Women seem to dominate publishing, lit agencies, editorial work (other than the top ones - see institutional gender inequality when it comes to power).
I don't know. I'm pretty disengaged right now from all that. Am tired after hustling hard for ten years. Irritated by all the clit and dick stroking on twitter LOL. Taking a breather and focusing on the business (or the 'hobby'). Am writing a series of parent guides for the business. And thinking about next moves, will get back to the writing work over summer. It's been nice to take a break.
Putting aside the fact that I've never been a huge fan of quotas, I dunno if it's even a good comparison. At least with quotas, you're integrating more women into the party/board/whatever. What I'm talking about is having a female only thing that exists off to the side of the main thing. Would that be like having a female only political party? Or more like having a female only parliament, that was secondary to the main parliament? I think Melba hit it on the head when she said that winning in a women's comp isn't going to feel like as big a deal as winning in a general comp.
Like I said, I get why you have to have women's divisions in sport, where the difference in ability isn't even in question; but do you want/need them in literature/academia/elsewhere?
I've just entered a women's poetry comp and a women's pamphlet comp. In the unlikely event that I win a prize or get shortlisted, I'll just be all like 'darn, I wish I won the Old Boy's Club comp because that's waaaay more prestigious'
PS. Good to see you, Melbs!
Regardless of how thrilled you might be to win the women's comp, are you saying you wouldn't be MORE thrilled to win the open comp?
More importantly - there are pamphlet competitions!? Is that what I think it is, or does pamphlet have a second meaning that I don't know about?
Also, good luck.
Regardless of how thrilled you might be to win the women's comp, are you saying you wouldn't be MORE thrilled to win the open comp?
I'm not sure why it matters. That's like saying would you be MORE thrilled to win 5K or 2K?
More importantly - there are pamphlet competitions!? Is that what I think it is, or does pamphlet have a second meaning that I don't know about?
It means a short poetry collection. You can't really have a full book collection published unless you have a pamphlet published first. I'm not a fan of pamphlets but they seem to be the norm
Thanks!
Is it public voting? We could vote for you. :)
It's not by vote but thanks :)
Post a Comment