FRESH START: Are you excited? What are your thoughts?

[Lady Warp Spasm]

Right now, nothing is saying buy or even try me. Perhaps they will eventually come up with a book that I want to read.

[Colossus1980]

What's the incentive for an unknown but eager comic book writer to be on a book if the talented and been around the block Ed Brubaker is not getting paid properly? That's going to be a big discrepancy in wages for a rookie vs a popular veteran.

Also it's probably the same 5 guy writers because that's how they end up making a decent wage if Marvel is not paying them properly. They have to take on sheer volume to make it worth their while.

[classicgmer]

Right now there's things I'm interested in but not necessarily super excited for (Dr. Stange by Waid, Quicksilver and Ghost Rider min & Jason Aaron Avengers) but it's still early & with names like Hickman & Priest being connected to Marvel's most recent retreat I'm guessing there's still some pretty good announcements yet to come.

[Kintor]

Most credible sources I'm seeing indicate that it's just a way of examining human interactions in regards to different demographics, both good (e.g. the Civil Rights movement) and the bad (take your pick from the past year).A Merriam-Webster site does have a deffiniton that sounds like your's ("politics in which groups of people having a particular racial, religious, ethnic, social, or cultural identity tend to promote their own specific interests or concerns without regard to the interests or concerns of any larger political group". However, I don't think any one faction has the monopoly on trying to get their agendas pushed over others; modern American politics are rife with it for one. The Comicsgate group, for another, fits it to the tee.

Again, all you've offered me is another empty statement that doesn't describe how identity politics humiliates and divides people with its toxic rhetoric. If you tried to use Merriam-Webster, a dictionary website, in an academic paper you'd be laughed out of the university as a fraud. Real social science has no time for the highly destructive garbage that constitutes identity politics. It's an ideology that actively rejects human nature and despises historical records. For identity politics there can be no past and no future, only an endless now filled with shame and the persecution of anybody who doesn't accept the absurd premises of identity politics.

The same is true when identity politics infects the comic book industry, identity politics is the death of creativity and ambition. We've all seen this first-hand when Marvel's most iconic characters were systematically replaced by more diverse stand-ins. Because identity politics can't create anything new, it’s an ideology that can only subvert and repurpose the work of more talented individuals who have come before. This failure to produce any new characters of merit reflects the weakness of identity politics as a whole, it's the obsession with race or gender as the defining aspects of a person's self-worth and never going beyond the actually write these characters as realistic people.

[Tiamatty]

Again, all you've offered me is another empty statement that doesn't describe how identity politics humiliates and divides people with its toxic rhetoric. If you tried to use Merriam-Webster, a dictionary website, in an academic paper you'd be laughed out of the university as a fraud. Real social science has no time for the highly destructive garbage that constitutes identity politics. It's an ideology that actively rejects human nature and despises historical records. For identity politics there can be no past and no future, only an endless now filled with shame and the persecution of anybody who doesn't accept the absurd premises of identity politics.

The same is true when identity politics infects the comic book industry, identity politics is the death of creativity and ambition. We've all seen this first-hand when Marvel's most iconic characters were systematically replaced by more diverse stand-ins. Because identity politics can't create anything new, it’s an ideology that can only subvert and repurpose the work of more talented individuals who have come before. This failure to produce any new characters of merit reflects the weakness of identity politics as a whole, it's the obsession with race or gender as the defining aspects of a person's self-worth and never going beyond the actually write these characters as realistic people.

dothis (2).jpg

No. Screw this noise. No. This is absolute, 100% bullshit. You know how many of the characters who took over existing mantles in recent years were actually new? There's been Kamala Khan taking over the Ms. Marvel mantle, and she is the one goddamn character that all the anti-diversity pricks are careful not to go after. There's Miles Morales, who's been largely accepted. And there was Riri Williams, who didn't actually take the goddamn name of the character she was "replacing." Beyond that? Sam Wilson took over as Captain America, and he's been a Cap supporting character since the '70s. Jane Foster took over as Thor, and she's been a Thor supporting character since the '60s. Laura Kinney took over as Wolverine, and she spent over a decade as X-23, growing into her own character, before taking over her father's mantle. Amadeus Cho took over as Hulk, and he spent over a decade in supporting roles for Hulk and Hercules. Kate Bishop shares the Hawkeye mantle with Clint Barton, and again, she's been around for a decade.

And that's pretty much it. That's all the replacements. Oh, Lunella replaced Moon Boy, and boy, what an insult to Moon Boy's fans. All 8 of them.

And almost all this **** is actually frigging ending anyway, and yet you still can't stop bitching about it. Steve Rogers is back as Captain America! Tony Stark is coming back as Iron Man! Bruce Banner is coming back as Hulk! Bro-Thor is coming back as Thor! Regular Logan is back, and it won't be long before he takes back the Wolverine mantle (and with Old Man Logan running around, it's not like we ever got the chance to miss that jackass in the first place). Your oh-so-precious white guys are all back. But if characters who aren't cishet white men still get titles, and still get to matter, I'm betting you're going to keep bitching about it. Now that Tony Stark's back, if Ironheart gets a solo, are you going to just let that back be, and be glad for anyone who enjoys it? Or are you going to keep attacking her for the next decade? I know what I'm expecting of you.

You act like Marvel declared a war against white guys. You act like they banned white men from appearing in or reading comics. The reality is Marvel decided to try something different in the hopes it would bring in a few new readers. And you wanna know the truth? Having all the old guys back won't make one single bit of difference to the overall sales. You think Tony Stark being back is going to launch Iron Man into being Marvel's top-selling title? Hardly. It'll probably start around 75 000. Inside of a year, it'll be down around 30-35 000. Because that's the size of the audience for Invincible Iron Man as a title. That's what it sells now.Having a middle-aged white guy wearing the armour isn't going to get any bigger an audience. It's not going to get it new attention outside the direct market, which is where actual sales growth is occurring. You know what gets attention outside the direct market? New stuff. Stuff that appeals directly to newer readers. Something like, say, a genius black girl. We don't have any way of knowing how many new readers Riri brought to Marvel, but I can guarantee you that it's more than Tony Stark being back in the role will bring. Tony Stark back as Iron Man will appeal to the people who already read Marvel comics, it'll mean jack **** to new audiences.

And just to repeat the point I made earlier: "Identity politics" exists because of the most privileged are the ones doing the politicizing. Because of how men treat women, how white people treat POC, how straight people treat queer people, how able-bodied people treat disabled people. The people from marginalized groups would love to go through life without having to think about this ****. But the world doesn't let them. Because the world is full of systemic injustices and obstacles put in place by the same people who go on to bitch about "identity politics."

[nickytesla96]

Oh, Lunella replaced Moon Boy, and boy, what an insult to Moon Boy's fans. All 8 of them.

Loved everything you said. Just quoting what I've been thinking whenever I hear people complain about Moon Girl & Devil Dinosaur.

[Kintor]

And that's pretty much it. That's all the replacements. Oh, Lunella replaced Moon Boy, and boy, what an insult to Moon Boy's fans. All 8 of them.

Ripping-off an existing character already revealed Moon Girl to be a creatively bankrupt concept, once again standing upon the shoulders of existing talent to sell poor quality comics. What really made Moon Girl obnoxious was the way that she was forced into all sorts of other Marvel books, even when she didn't fit the story. Let's not forget Moon Girl's involvement in Secret Empire, which saw the precocious child exploring Hydra run concentration camps and seeing firsthand the genocide of her people. Moon Girl doesn't belong as part of the Marvel; her existence in the share universe has become another example of Marvel pushing demographic check-boxes over logical storytelling.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what happens with this Moon Girl cartoon in the works. I honestly think it will be a failure. Marvel is in for a rude shock if they think that Moon Girl's tame stories are going to appeal to a generation of kids who've grown up with twisted shows like Adventure Time and Rick & Morty. Maybe then, when Moon Girl bombs, Marvel might start to realise how out of touch they've been with modern audiences.

[Tiamatty]

Ripping-off an existing character already revealed Moon Girl to be a creatively bankrupt concept, once again standing upon the shoulders of existing talent to sell poor quality comics. What really made Moon Girl obnoxious was the way that she was forced into all sorts of other Marvel books, even when she didn't fit the story. Let's not forget Moon Girl's involvement in Secret Empire, which saw the precocious child exploring Hydra run concentration camps and seeing firsthand the genocide of her people. Moon Girl doesn't belong as part of the Marvel; her existence in the share universe has become another example of Marvel pushing demographic check-boxes over logical storytelling.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what happens with this Moon Girl cartoon in the works. I honestly think it will be a failure. Marvel is in for a rude shock if they think that Moon Girl's tame stories are going to appeal to a generation of kids who've grown up with twisted shows like Adventure Time and Rick & Morty. Maybe then, when Moon Girl bombs, Marvel might start to realise how out of touch they've been with modern audiences.

No one has ever given a **** about Moon Boy. People do care about Moon Girl. And her animated series will probably do fine. My Little Pony starts its 8th season this month, so it's not like there's no market for cute shows. There's also Steven Universe, which is super-positive, and hey, also puts a big emphasis on diversity and representation, imagine that.

Also, Moon Girl brought new readers. Your old white dudes don't do that any more. Moon Girl does. So maybe drop the scorn for her.

[Venomous Mask]

Is Moon Boy even around any more?

[Tiamatty]

Is Moon Boy even around any more?

Seemingly died in the first issue of Moon Girl & Devil Dinosaur. Of course, there's absolutely nothing stopping him from being brought back, beyond a lack of interest. Moon Boy was just the little monkey who rode on Devil's back. He was never actually an interesting character, he was an accessory. Moon Girl works because she is an interesting character. The book was originally intended as a Devil Dinosaur title, but when the creative team was actually figuring it out, they realized they could make it more interesting with a new partner for Devil, and then realized that Moon Girl was the star. And they were right. Moon Girl & Devil Dinosaur is far, far better than just another Devil Dinosaur, with Moon Boy, would have been.

And given how well Moon Girl has connected with readers and creators, it leaves little particular motivation for anyone to bother bringing Moon Boy back. Creators want to do Moon Girl cameos. And that still lets them do the Devil Dinosaur cameos they also want to do.

So, yeah, Moon Boy's effectively dead.

[WebLurker]

Again, all you've offered me is another empty statement that doesn't describe how identity politics humiliates and divides people with its toxic rhetoric.

Well, all you're offering me is proof by (repeated) assertion as an argument for your position. Which is worse, an empty statement written with effort to understand and be accurate, or a logical fallacy that's doesn't provide any additional information?

If you tried to use Merriam-Webster, a dictionary website, in an academic paper you'd be laughed out of the university as a fraud.

If you'd re-read my post, I was extremely skeptical of that site's claims. I apologize if I didn't make that clear, but the point was that that was really the only source I'd been able to find from a brief search that matched your opinion, which does not encourage me to find your statement credible. (Also, if this was an academic paper, I would've done more research than a few minutes Googling, made a point of corroborating sources and getting different viewpoints for a broader picture, considered sources to account for biases and credibility, and made sure to cite them so my work could be backtracked and/or be checked to see if my conclusions stacked up to the facts. I may not be correct in all my beliefs and opinions, but writing itself is what I do best. I have a college degree to my name in that field, never had trouble getting good grades in it, and did briefly hold a job in the field with some critical recognition to my contributions, so I hope you'll appreciate if I take some offense at having my competence in this field questioned.)

Real social science has no time for the highly destructive garbage that constitutes identity politics. It's an ideology that actively rejects human nature and despises historical records. For identity politics there can be no past and no future, only an endless now filled with shame and the persecution of anybody who doesn't accept the absurd premises of identity politics.

Sounds like half the junk I find online from fans of just about anything and everything under the sun. In all seriousness, though, I feel like we're having two different conversations here. I, for one, am having a very hard time following where you're going with this for whatever reason. If you give a specific example or two, I might be able to understand what you're saying and therefore understand why my responses are ostensibly "empty" (and maybe be able to make an intelligent response that furthers the conversation in a meaningful way).

The same is true when identity politics infects the comic book industry, identity politics is the death of creativity and ambition.

I wouldn't give it that much credit. Creativity, by definition, can work with just about any set of guidelines. Not all authors may be able to come up with something, but "identity politics" can be used to make an interesting story, depending on how it's approached, what the author brings to the table, and other factors. If you're talking about adding more diverse characters to comics, then it has certainly done that. Not everything may be to everyone's tastes, but you or I not liking something doesn't mean that it's a good thing or won't appeal to a different demographic.

We've all seen this first-hand when Marvel's most iconic characters were systematically replaced by more diverse stand-ins. Because identity politics can't create anything new, it’s an ideology that can only subvert and repurpose the work of more talented individuals who have come before.

Creating replacement characters has almost always been a thing. It's nothing new. With that in mind, why is it a bad thing if when its decided to create a replacement character, to make them a more diverse one? There's no rule written that a new character must be white, or the same ethnicity as the original. I think it's a case by case basis if the mantle makes sense as a legacy one and if the backstory for the successor works (for example, I personally think the Laura Kinney Wolverine passes both tests while I feel that Miles Morales is an ill-fit for Spider-Man since I feel that the mantle is too tied to Peter's personal situation to transfer and his origin story is extremely clunky at best). That said, once we assume that the mantle can be passed down, it could be about anyone with the skills to use the mantle. After all, creating a legacy character is done to give a new perspective to the series in question, so it's perfectly in theme with the concept.

Also, it's an insult to writers to suggest that adding brand-new diverse characters is not making anything original. Any character can be written to be unique (Deadpool was originally a knockoff of Deathstroke, which you'd never guess today) and there are cases where we can see that. For example, DC's Green Lantern character Jessica Cruz has more going for her beyond just being a Latina in a largely white lineup of characters and the first time that female human character has been a Lantern; her key trait is that she suffers from severe and crippling anxieties, something she has to battle to overcome every day. That sort of thing has never been done before despite the logic of it; Green Lanterns get their power by overcoming their fears and here's a character who's personal struggle is doing just that on and off the field.

Cruz is not only an original character, her being a minority is also rather incidental to the character. While her name and complexion do indicate that she's not white and she is shown to speak Spanish and celebrate some Mexican holidays, the main focus on her character is her personality, relationships with friends and family, and efforts to not her anxieties define her life. Her being Latina is just a fact about the character, much like how the ethnicity of European American characters is. I mean, DC has made more of a deal of her being the first female human to be a Lantern than being the first Latina (it was pointed out that she was the first human of her gender when first introduced and the series proper had a bit where a young girl she rescued takes positive inspiration that women can also become Lanterns -- although it should be noted that in context, it's Cruz's kind nature that's primarily allowing her to connect with the little girl). So, in conclusion, this's an example of a characters created by "identity politics" who is original in concept, three-dimensional in terms of writing and characterization, and on top of that is defined as character first and foremost.

(DC did do more with the ethnic background of Cruz's partner on the force, Simon Baz, given that him being of middle eastern descent in a post-9-11 world is important to his character, but even then while the themes of being a Muslim living in America are there, his character is more than that, with stuff like personal insecurities, complicated relationships with family, , and friendship with Cruz being just as defining to his character. So, once again, using "identity politics" to create a three-dimensional character who can be related to by both those of the demographic he's from and those outside of it. I should know, I like the character despite being a very white, non-Muslim guy.)

Finally, even if we were to assume that diverse characters only built off of other authors' work, that's exactly what long running characters are by this point. Every single classic character in print is just the author piggybacking on someone else's work. Despite that, in many cases, the new authors bring new things to the table. For example, say what you will about Dan Slott, but he did do many new things with Spider-Man. So, we know for a fact that deriving from someone else's work can still create unique runs, so it doesn't matter if it's with the original or a new character; the rules for writing characters are the same across the board. Besides, we have examples of diverse legacy characters bringing new things to their franchises. Compare an old Wolverine comic to All-New Wolverine one sometime (in fact, the latter has whole stories that hinge on the fact that Laura Kinney is different as a person than Logan). Or how Miles Morales and Peter Parker's different family lives pushed them in different directions.

[WebLurker]

This failure to produce any new characters of merit reflects the weakness of identity politics as a whole...

Tiamatty answered this pretty well, so I've almost nothing to add, except one more example; Runaways. While they did not replace any specific character, they were an extremely diverse team in everything from race, background, even powersets, seemingly "identity politics" gone off the rails. However, the series was not defined by this in the least, excusing a couple of jokes like how they looked like a politically correct gang from a bad TV show and their little plane being called "he," since the Runaways always had a female majority in membership (something that Brian K. Vaughn didn't try to do but found it to be a happy accident in light of how most superhero teams are mostly male). From a character standpoint, the main theme of the series was about the family that the Runaways formed with each other and the characters themselves where primarily defined by their personalities and decisions. So, once again, an example where diversity and "identity politics" created a well-written series (at least when Vaughn was in charge) and well-developed characters who were more than just checks on a list, and got a cult following and movie script-turned-TV adaptation that's pretty popular as well.

...it's the obsession with race or gender as the defining aspects of a person's self-worth and never going beyond the actually write these characters as realistic people.

Jessica Cruz and Simon Baz from DC and the Runaways all say hi; textbook examples that diversity in race and gender do not stop writers from creating well-written characters.

You want more examples? X-23 from X-Men. Laura Kinney was made female by the writers who created her not as some "identity politics" statement but to make her a stronger contrast to Wolverine (the opposite of a middle aged man who doesn't remember his past is a young girl who remembers every horrible thing she went through). However, her story is not defined by "I'm girl Wolverine," but her struggle to reclaim her humanity, to be something more than the dehumanized weapon her creators made her to be, to chose her own life path. Currently, in the All-New Wolverine series, having walked that path and come very far, her story is more about her trying to live up to her father's legacy and taking the chance to become the hero that she'd been striving to be all her life, as well as becoming a mentor herself to her little sister (plus being family with said sister). It's very important to note that when originally created for the X-Men: Evolution cartoon, Laura's only purpose was to be a vehicle to tell stories about Logan. She's grown from that into a character who exists for her own story and has not only been around long enough to be firmly established, but to also grow and change over time. (Heck, Laura was also the breakout star of Logan, with Dafne Keen's portrayal and the character writing earning universal praise, making Laura one of the very few characters to receive an X-Men solo movie. On top of that, the movie did the whole switch a white character's race -- movie Laura is biracial half white half Latina -- without a peep of the usual protests when stuff like that happens -- like when Michael B. Jordan was cast as Human Torch.)

Kate Bishop (Hawkeye) would also qualify. In her own series, she has personality to spare and the stories are driven by her trying to figure out the mysteries of her past and establish herself. She's also given her share of strengths and flaws (she has a strong sense of justice, commitment to helping people in trouble, and is good a developing rapport with people, but also lets her temper get the best of her, doesn't always respect the law, and has trouble asking for help when she needs it). The series does play with the idea of her struggling to define herself beyond Clint Barton's shadow and be more than the second string Hawkeye (or distaff knockoff), but it's also made clear that while Barton frequently annoys her, his mentorship did make her a better person and he is a true friend to her (this was the main theme of their installment of the Generations series, where meeting the man who mentored Barton leads Bishop to reflect how lucky she is).

Going outside of Marvel superheroes, their Star Wars comics character Doctor Aphra, a lesbian or bisexual (unclear which) Asian character from both the first Darth Vader and Doctor Aphra series. A huge breakout character, Aphra owes her popularity primarily to her irreverence and cunning. Her ethnicity and gender are never discussed (which is very normal for Star Wars) and her LGBTQ spectrum status is shown on occasion but not really that defining (not only was it established by an offhand comment months after she was introduced, but she's really the only LGBTQ character introduced post-Disney in the franchise who did not generate hype or controversy; it never comes up when official announcements about the character are made). Aphra has also been given a surprising amount of development for an originally supporting character. Her backstory was used to further her characterization; we understand why she became a criminal through it, she shown to hold contradictions (she claims to think that a strong government like the Empire is good but lives as a lawbreaker), based on comments, she wants her life to have had some kind of impact (she once expressed the idea that she wouldn't mind dying if knowing that she's scribbled something on the pages of the history books), she does have some traces of a conscience that does influence her from time to time (see Screaming Citadel).


(Also, if I'm honest, when I look outside CBR Forums, I find a lot more kind things being said about the "identity politics" characters, so I think a case can be made that they're reaching a wider audience than they're given credit for here. After all, hardcore comic collectors who started years ago are only a piece of the entire customer base.)

Even in fiction in general, you can find examples of diversity not being a roadblock to good characters. Onscreen, take movies like Big Hero 6, Power Rangers (2017), Zootopia (talking animals used to discuss tension between different people groups with conflict in the past in an Oscar-winning movie that turned out to be extremely timely for America, given the current issues we're dealing with and the administration in power), Moana, Wonder Woman, and Lilo and Stitch, as a few examples.

On TV, try Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., which had some pretty diverse representation, but defined the characters by who they were. Or Star Trek, which was often at it's best when dealing with social issues; the Original Series, regarded as one of the greatest programs of all time and a piece of TV history, was created to represent people from around the world at a time when such a thing was not very common or that widely accepted (at the height of the Cold War, they were showing a future where Americans and Russians would be not only living in peace but working together to common ends, and a black character as a social equal and in an important position during the Civil Rights movement). Some of the most powerful Deep Space Nine episodes, like "Duet" and "Far Beyond the Stars," were centered on racism and interactions between people of different backgrounds.

So, I'm not buying it. Bad characterization comes from bad character writing, not "identity politics." We've got too many examples where stuff that leads right into "identity politics" material has shown good characterization or used such themes to tell good stories. Not saying that it always works (one can create such a character or story and tell it badly), but it doesn't track that diversity harms storytelling.

Ripping-off an existing character already revealed Moon Girl to be a creatively bankrupt concept, once again standing upon the shoulders of existing talent to sell poor quality comics.

See above as to why that doesn't track. (Cliff Notes: good writing can make just about anything work and the scenario you're describing applies to all long-running classic characters by default).

[WebLurker]

What really made Moon Girl obnoxious was the way that she was forced into all sorts of other Marvel books, even when she didn't fit the story. Let's not forget Moon Girl's involvement in Secret Empire, which saw the precocious child exploring Hydra run concentration camps and seeing firsthand the genocide of her people. Moon Girl doesn't belong as part of the Marvel; her existence in the share universe has become another example of Marvel pushing demographic check-boxes over logical storytelling.

By your logic, Deadpool doesn't belong in Marvel either (he's tonally very distinct and his fourth wall breaking clashes with most of the other comics where the forth wall is unbreakable). While one could discuss whether Moon Girl's use in other stories best served her character and those stories, there's nothing inherent about her that prevents her from being in the Marvel Universe (it's not the first time that more kid-oriented stories have coexisted alongside more adult ones). Besides, variety is better than samey-ness.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what happens with this Moon Girl cartoon in the works. I honestly think it will be a failure. Marvel is in for a rude shock if they think that Moon Girl's tame stories are going to appeal to a generation of kids who've grown up with twisted shows like Adventure Time and Rick & Morty. Maybe then, when Moon Girl bombs, Marvel might start to realise how out of touch they've been with modern audiences.

Seeing as we don't know a thing about how the series will turn out, let's wait and judge it on its own terms. Besides, it might skew more to a younger audience than what you're talking about or might have enough quality to be liked even if it's not that edgy. I recall that the Nick TMNT cartoon did pretty well with kids despite not being as edgy as the shows you're describing or being the lowbrow comedy that's typical of Nick.

[Barbatos666]

Aaron on anything Thor is a no.
Coates on anything is sleep inducing.
Spencer = Fail
Burnt out on Slott
Dont care about Carol Danvers and her 1000th relaunched ongoing.

Cates on Venom and maybe Immortal Hulk are the only ones worth a damn for me right now. Still waiting for more announcements but Marvel is in a creative rut.

[Username taken]

Is Moon Boy even around any more?

My thoughts exactly.