The "retroactively making old DC characters gay/bi/biracial" thread

[Ascended]

We live in the 21st century these days.

If you want to go into DC's "past", you need to aim more for the 20th century (which for DC would cover the 1930s through the year 2000).

.....that's some serious nitpicking man. You know what I meant.

[Ascended]

Although I'm not as fond of using historic characters linked to those in the present day, this is another way to bring new and diverse characters to the Golden Age without seeming too forced. This could also provide contrasts to present day heroes and villains. After all, someone and their ancestor don't both need to be good or bad.

Exactly. And you could use that connection to tackle the differences in social mindsets and traditions and whatnot.

The Amazing Man of the 30's might've had to fight against racism and maybe even wear a whole mask to protect himself from the people he saved (I know he didn't in All-Star Squadron, I'm just using hypotheticals here) and might've even been labeled a villain by the press, but the modern day version wouldn't have to deal with any of those problems but would have different ones, and his descendant in the 31st century would have completely different social issues to deal with.

I really think using the Legion and JSA to bookend the DCU opens up some doors for great social exploration and commentary, DC just needs to build those bridges a little wider and put more traffic on them.

[Jim Kelly]

The funny thing about the Will Everett Amazing-Man is that Roy Thomas named him for Bill Everett the creator of the Centaur Amazing-Man. So Roy meant for us to see the connection.

I explain it this way—on Earth-Two, Centaur publishes fictional super-hero comics and they used the real Amazing-Man as the model for their character, but they made him white, because they didn’t think a black super-hero comic would sell.

***

For those interested in the history of black cartoonists and the African-American press, there’s a book by Tim Jackson called PIONEERING CARTOONISTS OF COLOR.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

My only issue with Amazing Man, Tsumami, Tarantula and the rest of the retconned-in "1940s" characters created during the 1980s is that their costumes look too modern. They look like they are wearing '80s costumes rather than something a cartoonist would have come up with during the '40s.

I know this is a minor quibble, but I kinda wish Jerry Ordway (at least I think it was him) had tried to emulate the '40s aesthetic a little more.

[CaptCleghorn]

My only issue with Amazing Man, Tsumami, Tarantula and the rest of the retconned-in "1940s" characters created during the 1980s is that their costumes look too modern. They look like they are wearing '80s costumes rather than something a cartoonist would have come up with during the '40s.

I know this is a minor quibble, but I kinda wish Jerry Ordway (at least I think it was him) had tried to emulate the '40s aesthetic a little more.

I get it. We expect clothing, vehicles, and other items to look period appropriate. I'm with you on this, but admittedly my aesthetic appreciation is not one of my strong points. Are there artists who can properly emulate the design stylings of the forties? Who would people suggest to create a proper Golden Age look, even if they didn't do the art only designs?

[astro@work]

I get it. We expect clothing, vehicles, and other items to look period appropriate. I'm with you on this, but admittedly my aesthetic appreciation is not one of my strong points. Are there artists who can properly emulate the design stylings of the forties? Who would people suggest to create a proper Golden Age look, even if they didn't do the art only designs?

Darwyn Cooke would have been the perfect choice, but sadly he’s no longer with us. Would have loved to see his take on Amazing Man.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Darwyn Cooke would have been the perfect choice, but sadly he’s no longer with us. Would have loved to see his take on Amazing Man.

Given what Cooke established for "John Henry" in the 50s and what Johns established for Amazing Man in the 60s, there's a potentially great story just sitting there for someone to pick up those threads. Perhaps the aforementioned The Other History of the DC Universe that's coming out.

[Robanker]

Darwyn Cooke would have been the perfect choice, but sadly he’s no longer with us. Would have loved to see his take on Amazing Man.

Michael Cho is pretty good at approximating that vibe as well. I'd be remiss in my fandom if I didn't also mention Evan "Doc" Shaner, but as I understand it, he doesn't want to get typecast as the retro guy and wants to work on more current stuff.

[kjn]

Coming late to this thread, but it has been an interesting read.

I'd say that changing fundamental characteristics such as ethnic background or sexual orientation should be done with lots of care and respect for the old comics. But that doesn't say it shouldn't be done—only that it's hard to do right. It would also need a compelling story tied to any such revelation or change, otherwise I doubt the change would stick. The main exception is Wonder Woman, where her being bi- or pansexual totally fits with her background, both in- and out-comic, and more should be expressed as a fact.

But when I looked through my admittedly limited comic book knowledge, one character leapt out at me as having an extremely high potential when it comes to repressed sexuality: Batman.

If there is any character within comics who more embodies puritanical ideals, repressed feelings, and living a double life, I don't know who it would be. You also have his past relations with women, where he usually is fundamentally unchanged by gorgeous women throwing themselves at him. In a way, he would be a homosexual who wished he was heterosexual, and his reaction to Catwoman would not be "I wish this woman wasn't a criminal" but rather "I wish I could feel something more than admiration for this woman".

Not saying DC should go this way, but it fits for the character.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Coming late to this thread, but it has been an interesting read.

I'd say that changing fundamental characteristics such as ethnic background or sexual orientation should be done with lots of care and respect for the old comics. But that doesn't say it shouldn't be done—only that it's hard to do right. It would also need a compelling story tied to any such revelation or change, otherwise I doubt the change would stick. The main exception is Wonder Woman, where her being bi- or pansexual totally fits with her background, both in- and out-comic, and more should be expressed as a fact.

But when I looked through my admittedly limited comic book knowledge, one character leapt out at me as having an extremely high potential when it comes to repressed sexuality: Batman.

If there is any character within comics who more embodies puritanical ideals, repressed feelings, and living a double life, I don't know who it would be. You also have his past relations with women, where he usually is fundamentally unchanged by gorgeous women throwing themselves at him. In a way, he would be a homosexual who wished he was heterosexual, and his reaction to Catwoman would not be "I wish this woman wasn't a criminal" but rather "I wish I could feel something more than admiration for this woman".

Not saying DC should go this way, but it fits for the character.

While I think there should absolutely be a parallel Earth somewhere in the Multiverse with a totally gay Batman & Robin, the chances of DC doing it to the main continuity Batman are about the same as Trump publicly admitting he's in over his head and resigning out of respect for the office of the Presidency

[MajorHoy]

My only issue with Amazing Man, Tsumami, Tarantula and the rest of the retconned-in "1940s" characters created during the 1980s is that their costumes look too modern. They look like they are wearing '80s costumes rather than something a cartoonist would have come up with during the '40s.

I know this is a minor quibble, but I kinda wish Jerry Ordway (at least I think it was him) had tried to emulate the '40s aesthetic a little more.

Tarantula was a 1940s character who appeared in Star-Spangled Comics. It was only his later outfit that was "retconned-in" to distinguish him from the look of Sandman during that time period.

See: Golden Age Tarantula (John Law) Appreciation Thread for more on Tarantula's history.

From All-Star Squadron #18:

Coming late to this thread, but it has been an interesting read.

I'd say that changing fundamental characteristics such as ethnic background or sexual orientation should be done with lots of care and respect for the old comics. But that doesn't say it shouldn't be done—only that it's hard to do right. It would also need a compelling story tied to any such revelation or change, otherwise I doubt the change would stick. The main exception is Wonder Woman, where her being bi- or pansexual totally fits with her background, both in- and out-comic, and more should be expressed as a fact.

But when I looked through my admittedly limited comic book knowledge, one character leapt out at me as having an extremely high potential when it comes to repressed sexuality: Batman.

If there is any character within comics who more embodies puritanical ideals, repressed feelings, and living a double life, I don't know who it would be. You also have his past relations with women, where he usually is fundamentally unchanged by gorgeous women throwing themselves at him. In a way, he would be a homosexual who wished he was heterosexual, and his reaction to Catwoman would not be "I wish this woman wasn't a criminal" but rather "I wish I could feel something more than admiration for this woman".

Not saying DC should go this way, but it fits for the character.

Please, tell me you never heard of a 1950's book by Fredric Wertham called Seduction of the Innocent?

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homose...tman_franchise

[kjn]

Please, tell me you never heard of a 1950's book by Fredric Wertham called Seduction of the Innocent?

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homose...tman_franchise

Yes, I've heard about it in relation to the CCA mess.

But what I'm seeing isn't a happy gay Batman who has a rainbow collection of Batman suits in the Batcave; more the Miller take on a homosexual Batman: one who represses his sexuality and uses Bruce Wayne as a beard.

[Jim Kelly]

I don’t agree with Wertham that there was anything sexual between Bruce and Dick. That was a father-son relationship. To say there was something sexual doesn’t make Batman gay—it makes him a pedophile. So, of course, DC wants to avoid that reading of the characters.

You could do an Elseworlds where Wayne and Grayson are men of the same age in a loving relationship. Frankly that’s the sense I get about the Marvel movies Steve and Bucky—and I think they should have made that intentional.

Different artists worked with Roy Thomas on ALL-STAR SQUADRON, INFINITY INC. and YOUNG ALL-STARS—so the designs are all over the map. But if you dig into vintage comics, you find a lot of innovative designs. And each publisher had a different look.

It’s a rainy day project, but you could go through all the old comics to see if there are similar designs from Quality, Nedor, Fawcett, MLJ, Centaur, Fox, Harvey, Lev Gleason et al.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Tarantula was a 1940s character who appeared in Star-Spangled Comics. It was only his later outfit that was "retconned-in" to distinguish him from the look of Sandman during that time period.

You're right, I am referring to his retconned-in new costume, which looks great, but in no way looks like something a Golden Age character would be wearing.

[dancj]

I thought the big reason ppl didn't want Alan gay was that would erase his kids Jade and obsidian?

It was the other way round. James Robinson made him gay because Obsidan had been erased.