Saturday, June 02, 2012

Great Scott

The big news in comic books this week is that a character based on the Golden Age Green Lantern,  created by Bill Finger and Martin Nodell in the 1940s, is gay. Pundits and groups have decried the decision to reboot Alan Scott, the old man and spiritual father of the Justice Society as a young gay man as nothing more than a publicity stunt. Maybe it is.

But that's okay, really. As long as a positive message of diversity, no matter the intent, is disseminated and represented as much as possible then that ultimately helps people and lets them know they are allowed to thrive.

Few comic book companies have avoided presenting gay characters in their books though often they were hesitant or clumsy in their presentation (though not so misguided as much as it was well-meaning as most of the depictions of African-Americans in the comics of the 60s and 70s). Among the current higher profile gay characters are of course Archie's Kevin, Marvel's Northstar, who has been out for years and DC's Batwoman. The latter two being good examples of characters the respective companies have been mostly at a loss since their creation as to how to portray them.

A few groups had issue with the news of Northstar getting married to his long-suffering boyfriend and the re-introduction of Alan Scott as gay. They claimed an agenda on the part of the comic companies and the usual tired old argle-bargle of the negative influence of comics. They have been mostly dismissed and marginalized by those motivated to be vocal about the issue. I'm cynical enough to believe that the only agenda Archie, Marvel and DC have is to make money. It is from the increased national discourse on homosexuality and the demands for equal human rights that companies like DC can comfortably exploit (and I mean that in the best way) sensitive political and cultural issues. That their savvy marketing direction can also positively add to the discourse in however a small way is a benefit.

In the 1970s Marvel  successfully tapped into the sentiment of the young on many hot-button issues, a trend that benefited the bottom line well into the 1980s. From the 1960s through the 1970s DC was the company that had the most precedent, albeit steeped in subtext, in exploring gay issues though this was found mainly in the pages of the various romance titles amd one had to read between the lines and ignore the conclusions to most of the tales to see it. Marvel, however, reveled in being relevant and routinely tackled social issues such as class and race. This was all about what the audience would accept and want. The same company that railed against "The Man" in the 70s was fully behind the institution of authority a decade or so earlier even in the progressive and socially conscious 1960s, when mainstream comic companies adhered to the idea of Camelot and the Cold War.

Both Marvel and DC had comical, if not insulting, missteps along the way concerning homosexuality. Marvel infamously managed to draw a lot of criticism over the stereotypical depiction of sexual predators as being gay in an issue of The Rampaging Hulk magazine. DC most recently appeared to be at loss of what to do with Batwoman after the initial PR interest in her being a lesbian faded. The Golden Age Alan Scott had a son who was a gay superhero/villain but he was rarely utilized and often was often depicted as nothing more than a menacing shadow haunting the headquarters of the JSA. Take that how you will.

DC also missed an opportunity to introduce the first openly gay Green Lantern back in the 1990s. When Kyle Rayner (whom I always thought of as bi-sexual) was injured he sent his ring for safe-keeping back to Earth to his intern Terry, a gay man. My expectation was that Terry would spend the next several issues using the ring, going through a steep learning curve and maybe experiencing some interesting character growth. That didn't happen. The next issue Kyle reclaimed his ring and continued his adventures as if nothing had happened and it seems DC either dropped the ball or felt they dodged a bullet.               

However progressive a comic book might be it isn't going to change the world in and of itself. Alan Scott being gay and Northstar getting married won't change anyone into a homosexual anymore than the Teen Titan Spotlight book featuring Starfire ended Apartheid. What it might do, hopefully will result in, someone feeling better about themselves in spite of what the cranks, superstitious, evil and simply backwards have to say to the contrary. Being gay is not different. Being gay is not evil. Being gay is not wrong. It just is.


  1. I just find the cynicism that drove this promotional campaign overwhelming. After all this time, I find it impossible to accept the thoughtless reimaginings of characters older than those making such changes. But then, as will be this case, the changes end up temporary (remember when Superman 'died'? Can you name all the incarnations of Robin?) so no doubt this Green Lantern will be replaced by yet another when DC finds the curiosity-driven sales dry up.

  2. Keir -- Umm, you are aware this is Alan who has been around since the 40s? He was already replaced in the 60s. They might end the Earth 2 book, but Alan will always be in the character stable and always be around.

    And while I can think of rollbacks from a lot of retcons, power changes being undone, switches to villainy and back, origin changes, all sorts of roll-backs... I have yet to see a character who has been outed changed back to straight. In fact, we were discussing Alan's history and his major love interests are supervillainesses and he was never exactly a lustful character in those stories. The writers usually go with characters who have never had notable love interests or brand new characters, and they did say this was the first time they were going to take a previously straight character and reimagine him.

    But... as someone who is a fanatic about Green Lantern and has adored Alan Scott appearances since the first GL comic she ever read, those two pages with a dude show more sexual chemistry than the character has ever had with his female love interests. And in the old DCU, he was one of the most reserved and repressed characters in the franchise (and I adore him for it.) It's not exactly out of left field and I'm normally a deeply cynical fan (especially with Robinson), but it seems to suit Alan so far and I think after all this to-do he'll be staying on that team in the future even if Earth 2 tanks.

    I say this as someone who got into Superman through Death of Superman TRADES (so yeah, I knew he was coming back when I started the storyline) and can name all the incarnations of Robin. Just because there's a lot of Green Lanterns doesn't mean they just go away, and again, I have never seen any character's orientation get backtracked to straight after being outed. It's the one change they never undo.

  3. Ragnell- thanks for taking the time to explain things; I appreciate your take on it. I knew he was the first one, and assumed he was stuck on earth 2 or wherever the Golden Age characters that have no place in the current DC universe are cast-off; like bat-mite and Solomon Grundy. These characters always seemed two-dimensional to me in the first place, a clean slate one could fill in if one were so inclined. But to have to suddenly assign sexual orientation onto a character that's been around since the war for no other reason but that this happens to be the topic of this particular week seems an injustice to the character whilst at the same time, because this character is not the one most have grown up with and recognise (Hal Jordan wouldn't begin again sequel getting out of bed with his boyfriend), half-hearted and cowardly.


Moderation enabled only because of trolling, racist, homophobic hate-mongers.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.