After #FireRickRemender, Can We Have a Real Conversation?

[Captain Haddock]

What it comes down to for me is that the 'fire Remender' outrage was based on something that was factually and provably incorrect. The 'Call Me Alex' speech was open to interpretation - but age is not. You can look twenty if you're thirty... but you're still thirty, it's a fact. Jet was 23, Sam was however the heck old he is with the sliding timeline (presumably somewhere in his 30s? Guesswork though) both legally adults and old enough to know what was going on. People who point the vaguely worded 'infants' in a recap page are ignoring the fact that right there on the page it is said she is now 23, and that's where it should end. It was no more a retcon than finally specifying an exact age between 'late teens to early twenties' as she was intended to be.

The real problem was Romita Jr being unable to draw children with any accuracy - they seem to look very similar from the ages of about 1 to around 14-15. Quite a lot of the problem was people mistaking Ian for Jet and vice versa... that's on the artist not the writer unless Remender put in his script 'the kid' every single time.

[Iron Maiden]

What it comes down to for me is that the 'fire Remender' outrage was based on something that was factually and provably incorrect. The 'Call Me Alex' speech was open to interpretation - but age is not. You can look twenty if you're thirty... but you're still thirty, it's a fact. Jet was 23, Sam was however the heck old he is with the sliding timeline (presumably somewhere in his 30s? Guesswork though) both legally adults and old enough to know what was going on. People who point the vaguely worded 'infants' in a recap page are ignoring the fact that right there on the page it is said she is now 23, and that's where it should end. It was no more a retcon than finally specifying an exact age between 'late teens to early twenties' as she was intended to be.

The real problem was Romita Jr being unable to draw children with any accuracy - they seem to look very similar from the ages of about 1 to around 14-15. Quite a lot of the problem was people mistaking Ian for Jet and vice versa... that's on the artist not the writer unless Remender put in his script 'the kid' every single time.

I think anyone that has seen JRjr's work on KickAss would see that sometimes the cast did appear younger I suppose. I keep pointing to the case of Valeria Richards. In the MU she is supposed to be around 3 years old, even though she has been a part of the title for around 10 years or so. Franklin is probably 9 going on 10 by now but many times Valeria is drawn to be almost as tall as he is.

For some reason, many readers latched on to that one recap page like a dog with a bone and would not let go. "Jackie" started it all and continued to read a book by a writer she professes to have extreme distaste for his work, a practice that many here have questioned. I think we can all agree that these are valid reasons to question our own perspective as fans of the medium. My view is that the recap page should not have been held to the same standard as what the writer has on the page. We are not even sure who is writing those and they could be some inexperienced assistant editor. In the past with Stan being the only editor and co-writer of just about everything in Marvel, fans would point this kind of thing out and get a no prize. Granted the implications of a character's age is a valid concern in scenes of a sexual nature but it really seemed highly illogical for "Jackie" to dismiss out of hand the age given in the story.

To go off on a bit of a tangent, I've been making it a point, especially since the forum reboot, to avoid contact with certain posters who I find to be toxic and will put them on my ignore list. My only problem with that is when someone quotes the person I am ignoring. You can tell they are replying to your post and you are so tempted to reply to it. I do make a response sometimes but avoid quoting them. That probably might not be a good idea either.

[hawkeyefan]

I like Remender's writing even if I've found it and his behavior to be baffling more than once. It's engaging and he comes up with great ideas. Even what he was going for with the Havok speech was a great idea, but it was executed terribly. It's ironic that Bendis -- whose writing I usually can't stand -- got what was so wrong with it.

To elaborate on that, coming together and being one people does not mean we should -- or even can -- "ignore labels." It means we embrace the differences in one another, not overlook them or tolerate them. It means legitimately valuing the differences of people who aren't like you. The reason Havok's speech wasn't well received among many people, especially minorities, is that the things we don't have in common with others are as vital and important to who we all are as the things we do share in common. What sets us apart is as important to identity as the things that don't, whether that be race, taste in music, talents, language or anything else.

I have a fairly privileged (yes, I'm using that word) position to view this from as I'm half-Mexican but look White. I have some Hispanic traits that may become apparent after a person knows what they're looking for, but in my entire life (I'll be 28 next month), I've only had one person ever clue in to the fact that I'm Hispanic without being told. Once. Ever. I've even had a manager at a previous job call me into the office a year after I was hired to ask if I put myself down as "Hispanic" on my application in the hopes of getting an interview. They even straight-up asked "Did you play us?" That was both uncomfortable and annoying.

Being that I identify as Hispanic, I've often wished this stark contrast wasn't the case, though I'm well aware that my appearance has benefitted me.

Anyway, I know what Remender's intention was when he wrote that, and I've never been angry at him about it. Even as I read it I knew what his intention was, even though the wording was heartbreakingly off the mark. I do think he should have been given more benefit of the doubt, but he also handled himself poorly not just in writing that scene but in how he responded to those who took issue with it. I like to think that he's learned from both the poor writing and the poor handling of that incident, though, and that we could, indeed, have a real conversation with Rick Remender at this stage in the game.

As for stuff like this #FireRickRemender controversy, that should never have happened. I can understand that there were a few people confused by the error in the recap of issue #4 referring to both Jet and Ian as infants, but, really, anyone who read even just issue #1 should have been able to see that Jet was no infant there, despite Romita Jr.'s major shortcomings in the depiction of anyone who isn't an adult. Even without all that, Jet herself stating her age in issue #22 should have put the matter to rest before it could ever be a thing.

To bring this brief round of musings full circle with the topic of the thread, I think we certainly can have a real conversation, and not just with Rick Remender, but with anyone we're willing to have a conversation with. In this age of Twitter and tumblr, though, people don't always want to have a real conversation. They want to get others incensed and rally them into sharing an opinion.

That's what I believe happened with this #FireRickRemender thing. It began with one person who not only isn't a fan of Remender, but passionately dislikes him for reasons all their own. They were given an easy opportunity to turn the tide of public opinion against him and hopefully achieve what they wanted -- i.e. Rick Remender unemployed.

Maliciousness such as that is shocking to imagine, and I hate to conclude it to be the case, but, as others have noted in this very thread, the Internet has a startling way of dehumanizing us. Not just in how we see others, but in how we ourselves behave. It's somehow easier for many people to be cold in cyberspace, where, in speaking to or of another person, we aren't unavoidably confronted with things that remind us of all-too-human traits such as anxiety, pain and fear.

Again, yes, we can have a real conversation as long as we remember that it's other human beings -- with all their similarities to us and all their differences -- we are talking to.

Well said, TresDias.

My initial stance was that I didn't agree that it could be interpreted that Havok's speech was meant as anything like assimilation or anything like that. I have since come around and I acknowledge that I can see how some would interpret it that way.

I'm glad that even though that's how it came across to you, that you still recognized his intent. Which I think many people refuse to acknowledge.

I think part of the problem is that our culture has shifted a bit. I think labels used to be something that people did not want applied to them. Nowadays, people seem to wear their labels like badges of honor.

Not saying either side is inherently right, just that I think there are two somewhat contradictory schools of thought about it.

[oldforce]

There are plenty of grievances to air against a certain writer. What's important is that people not try to dismiss anyone's concern right off the bat for a "variety" of reasons. We could talk about calling Sunfire a walking atom bomb, his fascination with impaling female characters, his less than delicate handling of Daken's sexuality, Iron Nail, the implications of the "M" word a la the "N" word, making the POC in Secret Avengers disappear without reason only to replace them with straight, white males, etc. So the defense of "everything comes back to UA" is false.

I keep on promising myself that I'll write an analysis of Uncanny X-Force and Uncanny Avengers/Captain America, but I never get around to it because: babies. However, I'm increasingly sure that Remender is trying to form an explicit criticism of problems in comics regarding racism, sexuality, and the image of women - the very things that are being interpreted in the opposite context because of a growing image of him as a reactionary (something his twitter comments helped exacerbate).

Briefly: Sunfire as "atom bomb" peeling back the subtextual racism of his power-set and characterization (which in the fact that he hasn't been written solely as a hot-tempered Japanese xenophobe). The "fascination" with impaling women feels like a component of his stories where he has the wounded character (actually all of his characters, not just or even mostly women) overcome or banish the threat/memory of violence with communal support (super hero teams sort their problems) or a resurgence of a individual will/actualization of an inner strength - often expressed through a command of their power set when pushed to the brink (Psylocke who self-impales due to the threat of her future self actually literally saves herself).

I don't really remember how he treated Daken's sexuality off the top of my head.

Iron Nail is so obviously a comment on Yellow Peril characters that Remender has him *peel off his skin to reveal the monster of the imagination beneath*, and not only that, has him be right. I admit this one is tricky because you can't really have the Iron Nail win in a Captain America comic (which maybe is the bigger problem, was that the venue to comment on racism and American Imperialism? I guess I'd argue yes.)

Didn't read all of his Secret Avengers so don't know what you're talking about there.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up fridging Sharon Carter but I suppose that is a story not yet completely told. Suffice it to say I thought Agent Carter was super badass in the Dimension Z arc and fully expect her to save the day again soon.

I want to impress again that this is just how I felt reading these comics as they came out (usually on the Wednesday or maybe the weekend after they were first available at my LCS), and my eye read these interpretations pretty effortlessly before I engaged in reading any of the other responses/reactions from comic fans. I want to further insist that the readings that find these images/ideas/characterizations incredibly problematic and far messier than I make them out to be here (for the sake of brevity and the sake of not having the comics in front of me. An in-depth analysis would of course incorporate the divergences/gaps/incompleteness of my reading), are vital readings, true readings, not readings to be dismissed. In fact I think they've informed my own reading and helped me to develop and complicate how I think about these comics, and for that I thank you! Rick Remender is probably in my top five favorite comic writers right now so it's important to me that I understand everything that is in the text, not just what I get out of it.

[Pat Thomas]

I keep on promising myself that I'll write an analysis of Uncanny X-Force and Uncanny Avengers/Captain America, but I never get around to it because: babies. However, I'm increasingly sure that Remender is trying to form an explicit criticism of problems in comics regarding racism, sexuality, and the image of women - the very things that are being interpreted in the opposite context because of a growing image of him as a reactionary (something his twitter comments helped exacerbate).

Briefly: Sunfire as "atom bomb" peeling back the subtextual racism of his power-set and characterization (which in the fact that he hasn't been written solely as a hot-tempered Japanese xenophobe). The "fascination" with impaling women feels like a component of his stories where he has the wounded character (actually all of his characters, not just or even mostly women) overcome or banish the threat/memory of violence with communal support (super hero teams sort their problems) or a resurgence of a individual will/actualization of an inner strength - often expressed through a command of their power set when pushed to the brink (Psylocke who self-impales due to the threat of her future self actually literally saves herself).

I don't really remember how he treated Daken's sexuality off the top of my head.

Iron Nail is so obviously a comment on Yellow Peril characters that Remender has him *peel off his skin to reveal the monster of the imagination beneath*, and not only that, has him be right. I admit this one is tricky because you can't really have the Iron Nail win in a Captain America comic (which maybe is the bigger problem, was that the venue to comment on racism and American Imperialism? I guess I'd argue yes.)

Didn't read all of his Secret Avengers so don't know what you're talking about there.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up fridging Sharon Carter but I suppose that is a story not yet completely told. Suffice it to say I thought Agent Carter was super badass in the Dimension Z arc and fully expect her to save the day again soon.

I want to impress again that this is just how I felt reading these comics as they came out (usually on the Wednesday or maybe the weekend after they were first available at my LCS), and my eye read these interpretations pretty effortlessly before I engaged in reading any of the other responses/reactions from comic fans. I want to further insist that the readings that find these images/ideas/characterizations incredibly problematic and far messier than I make them out to be here (for the sake of brevity and the sake of not having the comics in front of me. An in-depth analysis would of course incorporate the divergences/gaps/incompleteness of my reading), are vital readings, true readings, not readings to be dismissed. In fact I think they've informed my own reading and helped me to develop and complicate how I think about these comics, and for that I thank you! Rick Remender is probably in my top five favorite comic writers right now so it's important to me that I understand everything that is in the text, not just what I get out of it.

I do my best to read my comics without having read anybody else's opinions on them beforehand. I've found out that I have a much easier time forming my
own opinion without anybody else's influence swaying me before I read. Isn't the feeling you have reading a comic the true barometer of whether you like it
or not, regardless of what others say? I mean, who are we reading these books for? For ourselves, or to impress others with our awareness? This is supposed
to be a fun thing that you choose to spend extra money on, but too many people place way too much importance on these stories. I just want to be able to
relax for a while and get caught up in something exciting. They certainly don't have any place in my real life, but for a large contingent here, I can't say the
same.

[Cmbmool]

I'm surprised it took that to make people notice Rick Remender, but not all the other stuff he did to his comics. Sad way how people see things in today's comics.