Well, it’s been interesting to see Flashpoint get off to a running start, as it were. However, it has been even more fascinating to watch the potential controversy brew around the event, as more than a few commentators have been quick to point out some… unfortunate decisions made by the DC editorial staff in relation to the event. The most recent such controversy errupted over the recently-published “World of Flashpoint” map, included below. Click to enlarge, and pay particular attention to Africa.
Yes, that’s right, the company somehow thought that it might be interesting to label Africa as “ape-controlled”, which was inevitably going to stir up controversy. Which, of course, it has. Add this to the equally unfortunate implications of a gendercide perpetrated by the all-female Amazons, and that’s one big controversy brewing right there. Allegations are already flying about the racist and sexist nature of these decisions.
While I can appreciate the arguments and sensitivity around these concerns, it’s hard to imagine this was anything other than a lose-lose situation for DC. If they had to apply any description from the map to Africa, it would be equally controversial. Imagine the allegations of racism flying if the region were conquered by Nazis (colonisation!) or flooded by Aquaman (a throw-away continent!) or became the land of the undead (voodoo zombies! that’s not even the right racist stereotype – voodoo is strongest in the Caribbean!). Hell, if they left Africa off the event entirely, people would claim that editorial were being racist for ignoring the continent.
I’m going to come flat-out and say it. I have to think very hard before throwing around words like “racist” and “sexist.” Those are allegations and labels which stick and which scar – which end up defining a person or industry. It’s not a stain you can easily wipe from your record, nor do I believe that it should be. There are people out there who can watch No Country For Old Men and suggest that psycho killer Anton Chigurh is clearly intended to be an angel, so there are people who can read anything into anything – and there’s a point at which anything can be construed as politically incorrect, or outdated.
But still, that’s pretty damning. Turning Wonder Woman’s all-female compatriots into a bunch of man-killing and castrating super-harpies was just asking for trouble. Allowing a super-powered monkey (well, ape – but few will care about the valid distinction) to conquer Africa was always going to sit uncomfortably. I find it amazing that it didn’t occur to anybody in the office – and perhaps they might have done something to mitigate it. Hell, labeling Africa as “Grodd-controlled” would at least add an extra degree of separation between the offensive content.
However – and this is the thing – it makes sense from a story point of view. If the point of Flashpoint is to show a world upside down, then these decisions make perfect sense, are quite logical and potentially fascinating from a story-telling point of view. Since the event focuses on the Flash, it makes sense that his characters are front and centre. Gorilla Grodd has always lived in Africa. Because that’s where Gorillas come from. He has always had ambitions of world-domination. Because that’s what super-villains have. Since he lives in Africa, and wants to conquer, it makes sense that he would conquer Africa. I imagine producing a map labelling “Russia (Ape-Controlled)” might have left more than a few commentators scratching their heads, and then sparked a similar debate about why Grodd shouldn’t conquer Africa. They’d claim the company was going a little too far to avoid a controversy, and wonder why.
Similarly, the theme of the event seems to be picking apart heroes and (generally) putting them in positions which are in marked contrast to their standard roles. Superman, the champion of truth, justice and (formerly) the American Way, is treated as an alien. Batman isn’t Bruce Wayne, isn’t really especially heroic, and is indifferent to cold-blooded murder. Captain Cold, the leader of the Flash’s villainous Rogues, is now a beloved hero. So something has to be done with Wonder Woman – and, logically, her all-female island. In mainstream continuity, Paradise Island is a calm a tranquil haven, so the logical way to reverse that dynamic is to turn them into a bunch of cold-blooded conquerers. Since their peaceful nature in the regular universe is defined by their gender (Paradise Island is, implicitly, a paradise because there are no men), so their violence here is defined by their gender.
It does make sense from a story point of view and, to be entirely honest, I credit writer Geoff Johns for daring to play with the concepts. He’s doing his job, and he’s not afraid to shake things up. After all, it would seem kind of pointless to have Wonder Woman unaffected by the historical revisions, and it would be seem strange not to use Grodd. These storyline possibilities just flow from their status quo.
And, if you ask me, there lies the problem. The issue isn’t necessarily that a wave of female violence is a sexist idea, but that it draws attention to just how sexist the idea of Paradise Island actually is. Similarly, it isn’t that the idea of having Grodd conquer Africa is racist, just that it underscores how potentially offensive the idea of “Gorilla City”, a state run by super-intelligent monkeys in central Africa, actually is. These two concepts were drafted decades ago, and have sat int he background of comic books since. We don’t give too much thought to them, because they’ve always been there. And, true to form, it’s only when the concepts are shaken-up that we notice how potentially inflammatory the ideas are. If you need to wear kid-gloves to re-jig a classic concept without provoking a PR nightmare, it’s a sign of how outdated the concept is.
The idea of the Amazons is a fundamentally sexist idea. The notion that a world without men exists as some sort of idyllic paradise (and that paradise couldn’t exist with men) is completely nonsense. We just don’t notice it because the idea of “the amazon” long pre-dates Wonder Woman. Let’s shake things up a notch, and pitch a similar idea today. Imagine walking into an office at DC and pitching “Wonder Male.” It’s a series in which a young female character stumbles across an island populated entirely with men. This island is perfect, because the men have sequestered themselves away from the corruption and vice of ladyfolk. If you weren’t greeted with silence, you’d be laughed out of the meeting. Why do we tolerate this idea in reverse?
Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea of Wonder Woman. Even today, there are far too few female action icons for young girls to look up to. There’s a great scene in the animated feature film, where Diana teaches a young girl (sick of being made to play the role of the princess in all the boys’ games) how to fence and fight with the best of them. It’s that great Joss Whedon response to the question he always gets about why he creates so many strong female characters. He replies, “Because you’re still asking that question.” So my problem isn’t with Wonder Woman.
It’s with this idea that the Amazon nation is some sort of crazy paradise. If the nation had been steadfastly pacifist in the face on unchecked aggression during Flashpoint, feminists would (understandably) be just as upset. They’d suggest that the female characters were allowing themselves to be victimised to fulfil a meek gender stereotype. Some commentators might suggest the nation was climbing into the fridge. However, the opposite approach, an (overly) aggressive response, produces an equally offended reaction. Many claim it’s the subtle misogyny of the comic book world being expressed – the fear of “icky” girls expressed through the threat of castration. Even if Cold’s sensationalist comment about literal castration (which, I’d argue, says more about him than the series) wasn’t present, people would be quick to suggest that the Amazons represent a metaphorical castration of phallocentric political structures (because, despite the Queen, British politics is still dominated by men).
None of this is to be snide, or to dismiss these suggestions. They are all valid, and they all would be valid, no matter what. Which is exactly the point. If writers can’t do anything to change the status quo of a particular bit of comic book lore, then perhaps it’s a sign that there’s something wrong with it. If Paradise Island were suggested today, I don’t doubt it would be hugely controversial. However, because it has existed for so long, it gets a free pass until something controversial happens.
The same is true of Gorilla City. In the fifties, Gorillas sold comic books. I mean, really, that’s why there are so many super-intelligent gorilla characters dating back to the Silver Age. I like to believe that it’s perhaps due to the relatively recent (at that point) discovery of the gorilla – long thought an urban myth of the African continent. Cynics might argue that the books were popular because they appealed to engrained racial stereotypes of the time. I honestly can’t make an argument either way. However, there’s no denying that the issue of super-intelligent gorillas living in Africa was potentially controversial – especially when it seemed “Gorilla City” was the only reason any superhero would ever go to Africa.
Again, this is an idea that – were it pitched today – would probably get shot down as two controversial. However, much like Paradise Island, it came from a different time, and it kinda escaped controversy because of its history. Like Paradise Island, it only becomes controversial when you try to shake things up.
So this is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation. These are two fairly important parts of the mythos around Wonder Woman and the Flash, so DC can’t simply ignore them in the same way they ignored Hal Jordan’s rather racist nickname for his eskimo sidekick (“Pieface”). Even if they did re-write these elements to either change them entirely, or make them less controversial, the hardcore fans would be up in arms – accusing Johns of tinkering with continuity.
I don’t think that these new slants are the product of a racist or sexist thought-process. I do, however, think that they demonstrate the need to seriously re-think some of the “classic” comic book concepts that we take for granted.
I don’t think it’s racist or sexist, but it doesn’t sound good. When I read the map, the ridiculousness of it made me laugh straight away, so you’d think someone would have picked up on the potential for misunderstanding.
Flashpoint as a whole seems pointless, simply reversing things (Batman=villain, Captain Cold=hero) doesn’t make a story interesting.
I don’t know, I kinda like the concept. Sadly, alternate universe stories are the only time that writers aren’t constrained too much by editorial edict, the status quo or tying into other stories. I think that an alternate universe story can be especially fascinating if it tells us something insightful about a character (for my money, Red Son is on the shortlist of best Superman stories ever, as is Kingdom Come). I haven’t said that Flashpoint has done so or anything as drastic. But I’ll give it a chance.
Take the Grodd one-shot, for example. What happens when Grodd succeeds? He defines himself by his opposition, so he seems to have everything he could ever want (though I doubt he’ll find peace)… It’s something we don’t ever get to see and – if done right – could give us a wonderful look at his character. Thomas Wayne as a father’s revenge fantasy instead of an orphan’s promise is an interesting take on Batman, at least to me. Superman treated as an alien rather than a saviour is a clever take on the hero, and Scott Snyder’s plotting has me interested.
On the other hand, some of them are just incredibly banal. Deathstroke… the Pirate? Maybe we’ll get a swimming/stroke joke, but I’m not holding out for more. As you said, Citizen Cold seems a bit odd. What has ever led us to believe that Cold wanted public credibility? So it’s a mixed bag. But at least it’s a tad more ambitious than Fear Itself (and I’m a Matt Fraction defender).
if it’s about going the route of what the characters don’t do in the normal DC universe then grodd taking control of africa is not playing against type, and it’s not a damned if you do damned if you don’t situation, just take a step back and look at it until you think of something different, labelling africa “ape controlled” just seems lazy to me, black adam should have been the focus for africa, powers from ancient egytian gods, and a human face to avoid the racism claims
@ Neil: I think Black Adam might have been just as controversial, because he looks white (even if he’s actually Egyptian) and then there’s the whole “colonisation” thingy. But I agree in principle. Or Black Manta, who actually, in a few of the comics I’ve read, has a thing about the oppression that black people have suffered over the years, and those would make a logical fit (and also, like in Alex Ross’ Justice, make a nice little point about how he himself plans to oppress them).
Still, it’s a Flash event, and Grodd is perhaps one of the biggest Flash baddies (behind the many Reverse Flashes and the Rogues as a group), so it would seem odd not involve him somehow. I think allowing him to essentially “win”, which is against type for this sort of character, makes for an interesting reversal. I love the idea of villains being redundant and useless and unhappy without the heroes who usually foil them – the fact that, as Cold put it in Rogues’ Revenge, “the game wasn’t meant to be won.”
But whoever thought “ape-controlled” as an adequate description (instead of something like “Grodd-controlled”) deserves a slap of some kind.
Nice Article.
I think sometimes people forget to think about intent when it comes to these sorts of issues. Was it their intention to be racist?
You make a good point about continuity. Nearly all these comic book characters were created in a time of different attitudes and behaviour. I can imagine that in a couple of decades, some of our current attitudes will be put under the spot light.
The important thing is we recognise and learn from our mistakes.
I don’t know whether cultural view point is an issue here. The fact that people were offended means that there is an imbalance is how different cultures are viewed. Is the idea of an intelligent gorilla controlled city a western idea?
I do think it is time for writers to stop referring to the continent as a whole and approach each country that makes up Africa separately. Wouldn’t an Egyptian hero/villain be different to a South African hero/villain?
I would say there is something very cool about super-intelligent primates, regardless of where they come from. Super intelligent primates who can do kung fu are even cooler.
Thanks Amit.
You’re right, that’s a pet-peeve as well, with way Africa is treated as some sort homogenous geographic and political entity. It’s not just in comics, but this is a very good example. In fairness to Judd Winnick, when he was talking recently about his post-Flashpoint Batwing book, I was quite impressed that he made a point to acknowledge the trend and to clearly state he wouldn’t be doing it.
I just like Grodd as a character. I loved that Action Comics issue. With the mighty combat spoon with which to eat delicious brains!
Pingback: Acts of Vengeance: Uncanny X-Men – Wolverine, Jubilee & Psylocke vs. The Mandarin (Review/Retrospective) « the m0vie blog