Usagi Tsukino, the crybaby, poor study, bad girl of movement in the clunker.
Contributing Authors
Recent Tweets @WebsnarkOnline

So I had a long essay discussing the current Interviewing Trey chapter… without actually linking to the current Interviewing Trey chapter.

suck at marketing.

When writing fiction with any sense of awareness of self or culture, one has to deal with cultural imperatives as well as dramatic ones.

Okay, ‘has’ is strong. Plenty of people don’t. Plenty of people don’t even think about it. I know. I was one of them. But….

Well, that has to change, and that means it has to change for me as well. Which brings me to today’s Interviewing Trey chapter.

The stuff I’m going to discuss is spoiler ridden, so it goes behind a break. You know, if you care about being spoiled for the story. If not, or if you read it (and thank you if you did), feel free to continue.

Read More

demiurgent:

@kelli217 and I have been having a conversation in regards to Man of Steel, which I’m electing not to see based on the reviews by Mark Waid and others. I’ll try to be spoiler-free.

The aforementioned kelli217 asked a good questions as part of this — what about the rookie argument? (IE — what if Superman’s being so new to this means he makes choices we don’t care for.) My response, informed by Waid’s on similar responses, was they could have made a Superboy movie but didn’t. If you make a Superman movie, you don’t get graded on a curve.

The response to that was “What if Superman is not YET worthy of the name, doesn’t realize his potential to realize ideals?”

It’s a good question. The answer requires Myth Criticism.

In Mythological Literary Critical Theory, fiction in all media follows certain archetypical paths, which can be decoded in many ways. One of the hallmarks of these archetypes are failed attempts to reach the archetype. In Greek Myth, where this is most famous, the archetypical Greek hero is Perseus: Perseus strives with Gods but never places himself above them. He succeeds with his strength and heart but never succumbs to foolishness or hubris. And, he is rewarded without punishment, and he and his fellows eventually enter the stars themselves.

Failed attempts to get to the archetypes are ectypes. Ectypes have elements of the archetypical, but fail to achieve that zenith. Examples include Theseus (who abandoned Ariadne, forgot to change the sail of his ship, and ultimately was imprisoned in Hades, his memory stripped, for daring to try and kidnap Persephone), Jason (who betrayed Medea, who killed their children in revenge, and had the favor Hera showed him rescinded, leaving him to be crushed to death by the rotting prow of the Argo alone and unloved), and Bellerophon (whose hubris grew so great he attempted to fly Pegasus to Olympus itself, causing Zeus to either strike him with a thunderbolt or to have a gad-fly sting Pegasus, throwing Bellerophon to death far below).

Likewise, Superman is an archetype. He is, in the end, the hero who gets it right. He makes hard choices, and finds another way. He inspires us not because of his great power, but because his great power is not what makes him a hero. 

If he fails at this? He fails at the archetype. He is an ectype instead. If he acts as Superman but is unable to be Superman, he cannot become Superman. He can still be a hero, of course, but he cannot achieve the archetype.

I wasn’t being flippant in my first answer. Superboy can fail at this ideal. He is, as stated, a rookie. He’s new, learning his way and learning his power. The entire 10 season run of Smallville was about Clark Kent learning all he needed to know and becoming all he needed to be before he could actually be Superman. Had they elected to make (in Waid’s words) Boy of Steel, the crux issues wouldn’t be issues. They might be controversial, but they wouldn’t reflect a core failure of the character.

Once the mantle of Superman is assumed, the character is not becoming, he has become, and at that point the burden is on the writers — he is the figure who finds the other way, who makes the right choice. Barring intentional deconstructions or subversions of the character (Elseworlds, Injustice: Gods Among Us, the Justice Lords on Justice League, and so forth) in the end he will succeed.

In making their character Superman, they make the question of whether he’s ready to be Superman academic. In the end, their figure is a failed ectype and not the archetype. And at that point, there is no going back.

Their ‘Superman,’ in the end, isn’t. And as a result, he can’t be.

A ton of people disagree with me on this, for the record, and that’s fine. God knows I’m not the final word on anything. But, that’s (the major reason) why I’m not going to the movie, and that’s why the character fails for me.

demiurgent:

You can understand why people consider female superheroes a losing proposition in mass media — I mean, after the failure of key female superhero properties like The Powerpuff Girls and Kim Possible we’ve demonstrated that—

Wait, what was that? Those were both immensely successful television shows? But… how could that be? That would imply that female action oriented figures who were allowed to act like (in the former case) actual little girls and (in the latter case) actual young women would appeal to the female segment of their audience and pull in strong viewership numbers. Now, how can that be?

No, that’s ridiculous. We know from mass market movies that women won’t go to see such things. Just look at the Hunger Games — as soon as you put a woman at the center of such an action oriented….

What was that? Hrm. Okay, bad example.

All right. Look at Tomb Raider. Here’s a prime example of a traditional, male oriented unrealistic heroine in an action environment. No more of these silly ‘female appealing qualities,’ just Angelina Jolie in a tank top hurling herself in slow motion over—

DOUBLED IT’S FREAKING PRODUCTION BUDGET? NOW COME ON! No. No… that’s okay. Look at its sequel. Its sequel clearly… grossed $156 million off a production budget of $95 million before things like DVD sales.

All right! All right! Elektra! Here’s a movie that was devoid of any strong characterization that itself was a sequel of a movie that underperformed at the box office. It was based on a relatively obscure comics property that was, admittedly, beloved of comic book fans. With all of that stacked against it, obviously it was a monumental flop, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that female led superhero movies are simply not a viable proposition.

Wait, what was that? Elektra made money? Not a lot — not enough to justify a sequel — but the studio came away with more cash then they paid, on a movie pretty universally known to have been total crap?

Jesus. Um….

Catwoman! A truly terrible movie with a horrible script, terrible CGI, bad acting, a terrible premise, which literally moved away from the comics character of the previous sixty years and created a new one purely so they could get Halle Berry (because Heaven knows putting a black woman in a white woman’s role couldn’t happen) with an execrable plot and absolutely the worst word of mouth any movie has ever received both before and during release failed at the box office and lost money. The Superhero equivalent of Heaven’s Gate failed so utterly that it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that having a superhero movie with a female lead, regardless of any other factors or any other movie experiences, is entirely nonviable in today’s market.

Obviously. Duh.

Meant to put this over here as well. So sorry!

For folks who haven’t seen this in my personal Tumblr, Twitter, Google Plus or other such things… well, consider this my notice that Banter Latte, my fiction site, has come back for at least a multi-week stay (I can say that with confidence, since that content’s already written).

For those that have already seen this, perhaps multiple times… um… well, I hope you find fifty dollars in the street and have the best cup of coffee you’ve had all month later today.

If you don’t drink coffee, then I’m not sure my blessings and well wishes will be of particular help, but you could always use the fifty dollars to buy some other kind of beverage.

I… I….

I’m… pretty sure this is prostitution.

(From Kevin and Kell)

bigbigtruck:

“Now, back to the part about no insurance. I know that the first instinct any time this kind of terrible bad luck hits someone is to try to donate to help them with their medical bills. The thought is appreciated, but please… DO NOT GIVE US DONATIONS. Donations are very unlikely to cover the bill, but they are guaranteed to make Michael ineligible for the existing financial aid options. Instead, if you really want to pitch in, please go to either our Etsy shop or our online store and buy the original Errant Story comic pages. Those purchases will put money into the business, and won’t affect Michael’s eligibility for financial aid. No matter how this turns out in the long run, they’re beautiful pieces and a good investment for you, and the money going into the business will give us options to figure out what on earth we’re going to do when this is over. So that’s the best way to help. Well, unless you’re a comic artist. Then you could maybe give us fan art or fan comics to run on the site for a while. Either Does Not Play Well With Others or Errant Story fan comics would be awesome, and hell, if you’ve got pent up Exploitation Now fandom bubbling away inside you, we’ll gladly run with that, too.”

More info at the linked page.

A couple of (cool) people have pointed out that TVTropes has the “Five Man Band" page, and how it predated Chris Sims’s breakdown of the core five elements to a Superhero team. Different folks pointed it out for different reasons, but a recurring theme was, essentially, “hey, Chris Sims didn’t come up with this.”

Well… obviously he didn’t come up with the concept of the 5-team. However… I honestly think Sims’s interpretation is superior to the TVTropes page.

Let’s look at the five:

  1. TVTropes: The Leader vs Chris Sims: The Leader. Um… obviously no change here, so we move on.
  2. TVTropes: The Lancer vs Chris Sims: The Wild Card. This is a significant change. The Lancer, in many ways, is a codified second in command. He or she might be hotheaded vs. a cool headed leader, or it might be the opposite. There might be sarcasm or snark, or taciturn quiet. Lance (duh) from Voltron. Skye, from Power Rangers: SPD.

    The Wild Card, on the other hand, is just that. The Wild Card may not be a team player at all. He or she may need active reining in, and will likely foment conflict between one or more of the participants. And there’s little chance the Wild Card will be second in command. In fact, the Wild Card is likely to be on probation at best. Guy Gardner. Gambit. Early Wolverine. Hawkgirl. Harley Freaking Quinn.
  3. TVTropes: The Smart Guy vs. Chris Sims: The Brain. Let’s set aside the fact that it is “the Smart Guy,” IE — can’t be a girl. It’s significant and wrong, but let’s set it aside. The Smart Guy is intelligent, often nerdy — “played for comic relief.” Generally physically unimposing. Pidge, from Voltron. Billy, from MMPR. The geek, the dork. Not the hero except in very special episodes.

    The Brain, on the other hand? Is BATMAN. Intelligent, wise, tactical. Uses intellect to not just level the playing field but stack the deck against the villains. Brainiac 5. Batman. Oracle. Amanda Waller. Far from being the comic relief or the nerd, the Brain is what makes the superteam something other than a pack of jocks beating up muggers.
  4. TVTropes: The Big Guy vs Chris Sims: The Muscle. The Big Guy (again — guy) is just that. Big. Strong. A little goofy, generally. Maybe dumb. Hunk, from Voltron. Ryū/Tiny/Hooty from Gatchaman. There’s little more to say about him.

    The Muscle is the sheer power a superhero team can bring to bear, be that physical or some other kind. This power may be overwhelming or even uncontrolled, or may be tightly reined in. Superman or Wonder Woman, depending on if one is the leader. The Hulk or She-Hulk. Thor. Carol Danvers. John Stewart. Starfire.
  5. TVTropes: The Chick vs Chris Sims: The Heart: Well, on the one side we have—

    …we have….

    You know what? No. This one’s just flat out a ‘no.’ The Chick is just that. In the Five-Man Band trope there’s one girl — maybe two. And that girl is perhaps a touch sassy but is also the kind, mediating influence who everyone’s a little in love with and no one ever bangs. And yeah, I love Voltron too, but Princess Allura — at least in the original run — is there to be slightly incompetent, beloved and in distress. Princess/Jun from Gatchaman isn’t nearly so professionally helpless, but still. This is not something for a modern western superhero comic to emulate.

    The Heart is a necessary component for a team comic. Someone who binds the team together, who exemplifies the reasons they fight, who smooths over the conflicts, especially between the Wild Card and everyone else. Someone to inspire everyone when things are at their darkest. You know who the Heart of the Avengers was during the Roger Stern era? (For my money, the best of the 80’s and one of the best of all time?) Captain America. While Janet Van Dyne and Monica Rambeau were leading the team, Captain America was the glue that held it together. Cosmic Boy or Element Lad of the Legion, depending on the era. Kitty Pryde or Cyclops, once upon a time before… well, before. J’onn J’onzz.

Look, I’m not knocking the TVTropes entry. It’s an accurate entry, describing a recurring trope in several media. But it’s not a blueprint for what a successful superhero team comic needs. Superteams need a balance that gives each character a reason to be in the comic, without making them too cardboard or, worse, indistinguishable. There needs to be something that makes the team work while also building intra-team conflict. The Five-Man Band doesn’t try to do any of that. 

In other words, it’s the difference between a formula, and a well thought out cast.

Five Man Bands still exist and still work. Heck, I just saw a well composed one launch on Power Rangers: Megaforce. (The Yu-Gi-Oh rangers! Collect all the power cards!) But part of the reason they work is because they’re traveling well worn paths. There are no surprises to be had, there. And all too often, the stories they tell are simplistic.

Not always, by any means. But all too often.

Chris Sims may have been inspired by the Five Man Band, but what he laid out in his article was more subtle, less stereotype. That makes the conversation very different, and for my money a lot more interesting.

One more post, before I sink back into torpor, because this crossed my radar and it’s fascinating, and I quoted it last post:

demiurgent:

“Assuming that we’re not just going to go with a bunch of characters that I like — which would really just be Batwoman, Batgirl, Huntress, Oracle and… oh, you know, what’s her name, that blonde kid who was Robin for a hot minute — I think there’s a pretty easy formula you can use to slap together a team of super-heroes. You really just need to fill five roles: the Leader, the Brain, the Muscle, the Heart and the Wild Card.”

— Chris Sims breaks down superteams, Super Sentai and everything in between in one short paragraph. (via websnark)

Having reblogged that (it’s from his “who would I pick for an all female Justice League or Avengers” article), I find myself pondering JL lineups, if we ignore market or brand management concerns.

And yes, the Justice League is generally more than five members. I’m going to ignore that for the moment — we can always assume there are other folks floating around in the background. What we’re looking for are the essential elements of the team. Anyone else will lose screen time. Anyone who isn’t one of these five is officially “and the Rest.” Which, as anyone who watched the black and white season of Gilligan’s Island can tell you, are those members you figure aren’t significant enough to get credited in the opening credits.

Another reason I want to skip the ‘and the rest’ part of the Justice League for now? All too often, ‘the rest’ includes ‘the chick we need to put in because we have to,’ or ‘the black guy.’ As far as I’m concerned, if I fail the diversity test in these main five, then I’ve failed the diversity test, period.

(Oh, to forestall something in the comments — as I’ve said before… yes, there’s a diversity test. There’s always a diversity test. Any time you don’t have as close to 50% women and appropriate breakdowns of people of color on your superhero team, you’ve failed the diversity test. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t matter to you. It matters. And as I’ve said before — the compositions of these teams are editorial decisions, period. No one loses a job because they’re not put on a fictional superhero team. End of minirant.)

Here’s a few, in order of team role, after the read-more:

Read More

Assuming that we’re not just going to go with a bunch of characters that I like — which would really just be Batwoman, Batgirl, Huntress, Oracle and… oh, you know, what’s her name, that blonde kid who was Robin for a hot minute — I think there’s a pretty easy formula you can use to slap together a team of super-heroes. You really just need to fill five roles: the Leader, the Brain, the Muscle, the Heart and the Wild Card.
Chris Sims breaks down superteams, Super Sentai and everything in between in one short paragraph.

I’m breaking my… well, let’s call it retirement though this isn’t any kind of announcement. It just sounds better to be retired or semi-retired and occasionally pop up than to call the sometimes months between six or seven posts ‘hiatus.’ But I digress.

I’m breaking said retirement because this Something Positive strip highlights something I think the best writers know, but often times the best readers don’t. Kharisma, who’s currently going by ‘Nancy,’ has gone through tremendous character development since her first appearance. In her time of being disinherited, working at soul crushing jobs, becoming a phone sex worker specializing in being an ex-cheerleader being demeaned by the geeks she once demeaned, attempting to marry creepers for their money, being set on fire, attempting to kill horrible people as a part of a game (for their money), being wrongfully convicted of murder, being broken out of prison and ultimately going on the run accompanied by… by… a thing that may or may not be real… Kharisma has developed and grown. She’s gained depth and emotions and empathy. She’s learned many things, not the least of which is how to use Robert’s Rules of Order properly in a sentence.

What she hasn’t done, at her heart, is stop being a completely terrible person. She’s grown enough of a soul to feel badly about it, though she can get used to it.

That’s a good thing. Character evolution doesn’t have to mean evolving to the better. Sometimes, it’s just just a new kind of terrible.

grognardpedant:

I am, by nature, a roleplayer.

This perhaps isn’t a shock given the existence of this blog in the first place. I play roleplayings. Occasionally, I write for roleplaying games. I’ve got two roleplaying games fleshed out and ready for a creation that may never happen. When given Doctors’ diagnoses, I mentally argue why I deserve a saving throw.

This, naturally, extends to the online arena. I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time playing MMOs. While I’d tried Everquest back in the day, it wasn’t until City of Heroes — now so painfully gone — that the form sunk its hooks into me. Since then, CoH, along with Champions Online, Star Trek Online and Star Wars: The Old Republic have all grabbed my cerebral cortex and refused to let go. Among others, of course, but that’s not important right now. 

However, there has often been a question… are these really roleplaying games? Do they truly constitute the assumption of a role, the playing within the context of that role, and the resolution of that role’s activity. Given the lack of a proper gamemaster responding to your actions, is there really a role being played, or is there just a well constructed avatar? And doesn’t everyone more or less just admit this isn’t any kind of RPG? They used to be called MMORPGs — Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games. Now… they’re MMOs. It’s still ‘massively multiplayer,’ with thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions of players, but the ‘role playing game’ is left off.

It’s actually a more complicated question to answer than you might think.

Read More

My first really long essay in a while, on my Grognard Pedant blog. It’s mostly about RPG theory fu, to warn.

This is webcomics — my own entertainment is paramount.
John Troutman

The start of the school year — or “f’ing September,” as we tend to call it — is a brutal thing. Nothing not school related happens, and it has gotten worse over the years. This year, we had an exceptionally tough summer with some heavy infrastructural upgrades and network expansions/changes/reformulations, and none of it is known to work until you have a full student body using it.

As a side note — so far it’s going very well indeed. But I digress.

Needless to say, my already pitifully small number of posts became “no posts at all,” and that’s the way it was. Honestly, I’m in no position to pick back up (in part because I have a rather ambitious plan for online doings — no, it does not involve a Kickstarter — that will shape what my online life for 2013 and beyond will look like, and so this is not the time to redevote my scrivenorial efforts to essay-writing) anytime soon.

But I just had a discussion with a coworker that I absolutely needed to pass along to you, the folks who I like passing stuff along to.

The discussion was on a technique he used for commenting code, and through it composing and documenting code. And it’s brilliant.

And it would work for almost any form of writing, cartooning, or creative endeavor just as well.

More after the break. I’m Terry Gross, and this is Fresh Aire.

Read More

Sometimes, even at this late date, people ask me why I’m so fast to disregard Authorial Intent in a work.

It’s a fair question. After all — all creative people feel inexorably bound to their creations, for good or ill. It feels like a tiny chunk of you has been wrapped up in descriptive text, imagery, lyrics, melody or what have you. And for many (not all) people, there is generally something you’re going for. Something you want to say, whether directly or indirectly. Something you want to imply. Some meaning behind your words. That meaning may be prosaic — sometimes a running gun battle is just a running gun battle — or obscure. (Sometimes a running gun battle is a metaphor for the individual finding himself opposed by his own dark reflection while the world of conformity around him is shattered in collateral damage which rains down upon the innocent and guilty alike. Also there are doves. Just accept that part, okay?)

Read More