Why are they no new Iconic characters at Marvel?(or in comics)

[ed2962]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Every character has a sexual/ethnic/gender/religious identity. How does the choice of one impact the choice of other character traits? And why only if it isn't straight/white/male/western Christian? What about other character traits, such as heroism or intelligence?

What do you mean by "main thing in mind"?

I'm sure he means when a character is created as a token or representation of particular group, but no thought is given to character beyond that. It can be a valid criticism but it should done on a case by case basis. I don't think it's fair that whenever a minority or girl hero shows up these days, some fans immediately think the comic will be shallow or only exists for some sort of "agenda" without reading it.

[ed2962]

double post

[KurtW95]

People comparing Kamala to Static. Static actually has depth, a driving purpose for his exploits, and a personaly that is more than a goofy bit.

[Baseman]

People comparing Kamala to Static. Static actually has depth, a driving purpose for his exploits, and a personaly that is more than a goofy bit.

The two's stories are pretty similar. Both comic book nerds who become hero's because they wanted to be hero's rather than some sad back story.

Its not hard to see why people compair the two.

[KurtW95]

The two's stories are pretty similar. Both comic book nerds who become hero's because they wanted to be hero's rather than some sad back story.

Its not hard to see why people compair the two.

Unlike Kamala, Static has a unique backstory, flaws, a complex personality, struggles, and wasn’t stealing the mantle from an unrelated superhero to boost his popularity or is linked to another group of established heroes. He’s wholly unique and a great character. People like McDuffie, they succeeded in writing great minority characters because they wrote diversity as something that comes naturally and the minority characters as people first. He also created original heroes that weren’t riding the coattails of more popular ones that came before. The powers that be at the moment don’t know how to do that and make the character’s minority identity their selling point while lazily skipping the important parts of telling a story and giving a character depth because they don’t care about it remotely as much as the whole “representation” thing. Now, I’m not going to lie and say that such an aspect wasn’t important to McDuffie because it was, but he made sure they were a character first and made sure nothing ever felt forced.

[CRaymond]

I feel it’s a little gross how much you’re fighting against Kamala.

Came here to say X-23 and Ms. Marvel will probably be seen as iconic in time.

[JudicatorPrime]

What we consider to be iconic characters are generally just reflections of a cultural/tribal/social paradigm or generational zeitgeist. Given the cyclical nature of the human condition, it should surprise no one that the old icons have such staying power. That this occurs in a business medium only serves to further augment the place of existing icons.

[KurtW95]

I feel it’s a little gross how much you’re fighting against Kamala.

Why? She was the example brought up and I’m just laying it out why I think they’re wrong.

[wubwub]

I'm sure he means when a character is created as a token or representation of particular group, but no thought is given to character beyond that. It can be a valid criticism but it should done on a case by case basis. I don't think it's fair that whenever a minority or girl hero shows up these days, some fans immediately think the comic will be shallow or only exists for some sort of "agenda" without reading it.

Sure, if we were taking about side characters without any real significance to the plot, that is not really uncommon, but that's not representation. Given how these discussions tend to revolve exclusively around main characters, that argument doesn't actually hold. A writer would have to purposefully write a "story" without any conflict what so ever. That seems pointless to me. If a conflict is present, the writer has to have put some thought into the characters actions in trying to resolve it, therefore adding character traits. How much character is needed depends on the story the writer wants to tell (e.g. character or action focused) and can ultimately only be judged subjectively by the reader.

My main problem with that quote is, how it ties into my previous argument. As in why is it more complex to create bad character for representation than the opposite. I would think that, diversity is pointless, if the diverse characters are not well crafted representations, to the best of the writers ability.

[frizb]

Plenty of possible names have been mentioned that may become iconic, but "New" & "Iconic" don't go together. These possible names aren't well established yet. Takes time. Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc weren't considered iconic until many years after they premiered. Super popular, sure. Kamala may fit that bill. She will have to retain that popularity and continue to grow for quite awhile longer. New characters are also fighting against the amount of comics that can be put out on shelves vs the amount they can sell. There are already too many comics being pushed out that don't deserve their own monthly title. Kind of a catch-22. To get the masses to notice a new character you almost have to debut them in a major title, but then they become a secondary character more often than not. Who knows, 25 years from now, Moon Girl may be the biggest name around.

[ed2962]

Sure, if we were taking about side characters without any real significance to the plot, that is not really uncommon, but that's not representation. Given how these discussions tend to revolve exclusively around main characters, that argument doesn't actually hold. A writer would have to purposefully write a "story" without any conflict what so ever. That seems pointless to me. If a conflict is present, the writer has to have put some thought into the characters actions in trying to resolve it, therefore adding character traits. How much character is needed depends on the story the writer wants to tell (e.g. character or action focused) and can ultimately only be judged subjectively by the reader.

My main problem with that quote is, how it ties into my previous argument. As in why is it more complex to create bad character for representation than the opposite. I would think that, diversity is pointless, if the diverse characters are not well crafted representations, to the best of the writers ability.

I agree with your second paragraph. I can think of times when I've seen a minority in a work of fiction and while not exactly "racist" was presented as such a stereotype or poorly written, that I would have preferred not to have even had that character there. But that leads into what separates "good" writing from "bad" writing, a person can have good intentions yet still turn in hack writing.

[ed2962]

double post

[frizb]

Plenty of possible names have been mentioned that may become iconic, but "New" & "Iconic" don't go together. These possible names aren't well established yet. Takes time. Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc weren't considered iconic until many years after they premiered. Super popular, sure. Kamala may fit that bill. She will have to retain that popularity and continue to grow for quite awhile longer. New characters are also fighting against the amount of comics that can be put out on shelves vs the amount they can sell. There are already too many comics being pushed out that don't deserve their own monthly title. Kind of a catch-22. To get the masses to notice a new character you almost have to debut them in a major title, but then they become a secondary character more often than not. Who knows, 25 years from now, Moon Girl may be the biggest name around.

[jump]

On the topic of staying power, Mark Gruenwald once stated in the 90s that Squirrel Girl (who used as an example rather than specifically) is a nothing character that wont last long. She's actually has a lot more staying power than a lot of 90s creations.

[wubwub]

Unlike Kamala, Static has a unique backstory, flaws, a complex personality, struggles, and wasn’t stealing the mantle from an unrelated superhero to boost his popularity or is linked to another group of established heroes. He’s wholly unique and a great character.

So, like Kamela??? I can't think of another character at Marvel (or in general in TV series or movies) with a similar background, not sure why you would claim, that she doesn' t have flaws, complex personality or struggles, if you had actually read the comics and the rest of the sentence is completely made up.