I own some 90s Catwoman comics. Because I'm a total nerdo, obviously. Despite the overtly pinup design, I always liked anti-hero(ine)s and it was nice to read a graphic novel about someone non-male that wasn't a total goody-goody. Though I cringed at exploitative close-up pictures of her T&A, I liked that she was someone seemingly strong, dark, and a subverter of Batman's plans to restore stolen artifacts to other rich thieves that happened to have a title on them. But, alas, Catwoman turned out to be not only a foil to the main hero, Batman, but also a fantasy figure that is altered, primped and corseted to change not for the purpose of character development but in order to appease the ever-changing desires and sexual fulfillment of the men who write her. And the men who don't read her, as I doubt very much that she has a striking male fan base.
In my 90s stories, she is Selina Kyle, former-Juvie, daughter of a drunken abuser and international cat burglar, enjoying massive stolen wealth "earned" by her acrobatic techniques and sleight of hand talent. In the movie Batman Returns, she is Selina Kyle, again, only now she is the lonely and oft-tortured secretary of a vicious businessman. He throws her out of a window, she is reborn in vengeance. In newer versions of the graphic novels, she's an ex-prostitute, looking to escape an asshole pimp, and in the movie they made with Halle Berry, which was beyond suck, she was renamed Patience Phillips and her powers were explained through some Egyptian convoluted story arc that made no sense.
But Batman hasn't been changed or re-written. He has always been and always will be Bruce Wayne, wealthy orphan. Genius. Crime fighter with a dark side. His name is never changed, he's never needed to be "revamped" or "redone" to keep sales flowing and interest piqued. He doesn't need to suddenly be rewritten as a gigolo trying to make peace with his situation, or a former junkie dealing with extended desires for a fix. And everyone knows Superman is Clark Kent/Kal El, the last son of Krypton, and so on and so forth. There is no constant makeover and change.
First of all, I think Frank Miller (he who felt she must now be a hooker) is a douche. I wouldn't care as much if she started out that way (hey, hookers should have their stories told, too), but she didn't, and he did it for titillation purposes, which is gross. Despite the fact that every woman in his Sin City graphic novels who have agency are prostitutes or strippers, he is clearly feeding into Porno America's consumption of women: Up the Stakes, Make it Kinkier, Normalize Subjugation. And that's annoying anyway, but when it happens to a character I kind of like, it's even more of a bitch slap. I shudder to see what happens to Buffy in the movie they're putting out.
The interchangeability of her race was interesting to me, I have to say. The lack of representation for African-Americans in all forms of media is despicable, but to not even take the time or effort to write or create a new character for the likes of someone with a draw like Halle Berry is both lazy and offensive. I'm assuming that to be either black or a woman is so tokenized that they think they're throwing a bone to both by rewriting her as a black woman...and black women themselves--forget it. The reworking seems akin to the Hillary Clinton/Sarah Palin motive during the last election. I truly believe that the McCain Klan saw the success of Hillary Clinton's campaign as indicative that "Women are IN this year" so he went and snagged one, any one, to jump on his bandwagon because, obviously, one is the same as the next.
4 comments:
Sin City was kind of a gross-out for me, and I think it's because it was just violence against women, over and over again.
I'm not looking forward to the new Buffy movie >.<
If the subject matter seems less compelling, remember that youth – and boys in particular – follow the comics medium closely, which gives it tremendous power really, to shape and inform their many opinions. GN’s (graphic novels) have been here (and been popular) since the 40’s. That’s a lot of minds down through the years, and a lot still today, with TV and film mining comics for source material.
Obviously then, these portrayals are a genuine problem. “Heroic” hookers, who find ways to get back at bad men, are still hookers, the only feminine archetype with agency in the story. The translation is: active woman = whore, even if a hero; passive woman = virtuous, even if ineffectual. Great pair of choices! Harlot or violet, of the shrinking variety. Sorry ladies. Guess that's all you have it in you to be.
Now, if Frank Miller (SC) does this tongue-in-cheek, as a satire on how society sees women, that’s at least an artistic statement. Maybe not even a bad one. If he utterly lacks that sense of irony, then he’s done his share to set back women, in a medium slanted that direction already, by a mostly male readership.
Catwoman’s ruined. Don’t really know what else to say, that Jamie hasn’t said already. To me, the character is dead. Betrayed and killed by greedy publishers ready to try any angle, no matter how sleazy, or out of character. It’s a rotten, fucking shame, because outside of Wonder Woman, no female superhero was as iconic as Catwoman. An entire generation of young readers now – male and female, with all the implications implicit for each – will know her only as a hard-bitten prostitute. Not the death-defying, man-defying free spirit she was. One icon down, one to go in the culture war.
My hopes for Buffy are as dismal as yours.
I just wanted to comment to let you know that this is one of my favorite blogs (like IBTP) and that I wish I had the energy or courage to type out thoughtful responses more frequently. I also wish *you* had the time or energy to write on a daily basis, because that would rock (and it would increase the percentage of time when my procrastination is actually worthwhile).
I love what you write and I love how you analyze.
I agree, Erica: Sin City sucked the big stick.
Post a Comment