PERMISSION TO SPEAK

This weekend, if you've got a moment, and if the weather is nice and you're sitting comfortably, and you're not too hungry and your shoes aren't too tight, please spare a thought for poor Chuck Austen, current writer of UNCANNY X-MEN and forthcoming writer on THE AVENGERS and one or other of those Superman titles.

Austen, in a recent interview with the Pulse that was rather melodramatically billed as 'The Last Interview', has announced that he's taking a break from the public eye (such as it is in the comics fishpond) because he's tired of facing the negativity of the readers.

Whatever one thinks of Austen's talents, it's easy to appreciate why he's exercising the better part of valour. Austen is dabbling in the world of comics' most popular and successful icons, and the fans of those characters can be extremely possessive and all too keen to share their views on what they think should be done with them. Austen says it's got to the point where he's received a death threat. (Mind you, I've heard about death threats from comic fans before, and it strikes me that they're about as scary as a declaration of war by Liechtenstein.)

'It's an attitude that shows just how unsophisticated the industry is.' The general level of discourse in many online comics fora is underwhelming to say the least. Too many readers take a personal affront to the creator, and attack the artists when they should be appraising the art. Austen's assessment? "You can tell from the comments that I've upset their personal little apple cart, and there is some kind of agenda at stake for these people," he claims.

Certainly he has a point; there's plenty of infantile behaviour in evidence. On the other hand, when valid criticism is offered, those inside the industry are often just as self-indulgently childish about it as those on the outside. Austen's statement above isn't confined to passing judgement on the lunatic fringe. He's using the same brush to tar all his critics, including those who have been quite measured in their assessment of his flaws as a writer and artist. He rather petulantly suggests that his detractors might be "jealous", and desperately asserts that his commercial strength on UNCANNY X-MEN is sufficient rebuttal to all his critics.

(As has been widely observed, his run on UNCANNY has benefited from the twin promotional gimmicks of a 25 cent issue and a multi-million dollar summer blockbuster, and those factors must surely deserve some of the credit for the book's sales gain. Austen hasn't been able to launch a hit, even when a book's been as heavily promoted as CALL OF DUTY/THE CALL.)

'Those inside the industry are often as childish as those on the outside.' Austen is not unique in dismissing his critics. Too many creators - and fans - have been heard to express the view that if you can't say anything nice, you shouldn't say anything at all. After all, it's a struggling industry, and if you want to support comics, you have to be supportive of the people who put in the hours of hard graft. My Industry, Right Or Wrong.

It's an attitude that shows just how immature and unsophisticated the industry still is, and it smacks of a deep insecurity among the people who have committed their working lives to comics. It's a poor politician who complains that people are being mean to him. It's a dismal artist who runs from bad reviews when he could be coming back with something better.

There is a great deal of hot air on the message boards and forums, but that stuff's not hard to identify and dismiss, even if it can be hard to ignore. If we want the levels of discourse to improve, creators should seek out - and rejoice in the existence of - those people who actually challenge the work, because those are the people taking it seriously. The best commentators give praise and criticism where it's due. The best reviewers are the ones whose recommendations have not been devalued by sycophancy. The best writers are the ones whose only agenda is a desire for better comics. Those who would flee from them will drive this industry to a creative dead-end.

GET USED TO IT

And now, a mini-update on that whole gay thing.

When I first became an outspoken proponent for the greater representation of homosexuals in comics, a few of my friends asked me a very simple but fair question. How should it be done?

Actually, it wasn't one simple question; it was a whole bunch of questions, such as: How can straight creators put gay characters in their books without preaching? How can they do it without being accused of - or being guilty of - tokenism? Is it enough to just put gay characters in the background? If you bring them to the fore, do you have to write stories about their being gay? Even if the book isn't about sex, are we obliged to demonstrate that the gay character isn't sexless?

The best answer I could come up with at the time was that creators should approach each character as an individual.

'How can straight creators write gay characters without preaching?' Now I don't need to answer at all. Recent months have produced two comics from the mainstream that I can point to that I think get it right. The first - and more obvious - is the DETECTIVE COMICS spin-off police procedural series GOTHAM CENTRAL. In the recent six-part 'Half A Life' arc by Greg Rucka and Michael Lark, a detective was outed as gay to her co-workers and her family. It's a story that immediately resonates to a gay audience, and has a tremendous amount to say to a straight audience.

Superhero books are often clod-hoppingly graceless and sensationalistic in their handling of sensitive issues like this. 'Half A Life' avoids the clichés and the moralising, and tells a story that is driven by and faithful to its characters. It's a story by straight creators, but they can tell a convincing and affecting 'gay story' simply by being the best storytellers they can, and by treating the characters as realistically as they can imagine.

That's a story that very much is about 'being gay', of course. The other book I want to make note of is PUNISHER. A very unlikely place to turn for positive representation, especially as writer Garth Ennis has been singled out in the past for his worrying fascination with sodomy, yet in the five part 'Streets Of Laredo' (currently three parts in, so I suppose it could still all go wrong), a gay character is introduced who defies most stereotypes and is afforded as even-handed a treatment as any character in an Ennis tale.

Indeed, it's the first time I've seen such a typically macho writer as Ennis use a gay character to typify macho ideals. In this case, while the character's relationships are important to the story, his sexuality could in effect have been decided with the flip of a coin. Having decided the character is gay, Ennis then deals with the ramifications with gratifying directness.

That's how it should be done.

Incidentally, in reference to this year's Gays In Comics panel at the San Diego Comic Con, the question was raised - as it always is every year - about why the debate about queer representation in comics focuses so much on the mainstream. It's my view that the comics mainstream is where the message of diversity can have the most positive effect. Even so, I hope to address other queer issues in future columns, because there is a hell of a lot more still to talk about.

In the meantime, this year's Small Press Expo in Bethesda, Maryland, will play host to a panel on queer representation in alternative and independent comics on September 6th. I can't make it out there, but if you can, I strongly encourage you to do so - it's a great convention, and it promises to be a great panel. If you can't make it, but you'd still like to (politely) debate the issues, I can personally guarantee that The Gays & Comics Forum would be more than happy to make your acquaintance.

Andrew Wheeler is a London-based entertainment journalist.

This article is Ideological Freeware. The author grants permission for its reproduction and redistribution by private individuals on condition that the author and source of the article are clearly shown, no charge is made, and the whole article is reproduced intact, including this notice.