The Right Geek Podcast: Karl K. Gallagher
In the above podcast, Karl Gallagher and I chat about the "superversive" movement and the promise of indy publishing. Note in particular my remarks at the end regarding our wide-open path to genuine inclusivity and how it doesn't track through the closed structures of tradpub. Ahem.
The Hate Campaign Against "Diversity & Comics"
I don't recall how exactly I stumbled upon the "Diversity & Comics" YouTube channel several weeks ago, but I've been listening to this guy semi-religiously ever since. Why? Because the problems he discusses in re: the comics fandom are oh so relevant to the literary science fiction fandom. Painfully relevant, in fact.
D&C's primary beef with today's comics is distinctly "Puppy-ish" in flavor. He believes the industry's powerhouses - Marvel especially - have abandoned good storytelling and positive audience engagement in favor of hard-left politics. And he doesn't just assert this opinion unsupported. In most of his videos, he sits down and reads these books - in real time and cover to cover - to demonstrate that perceived political skew.
The dude has really inspired me; in fact, I've toyed with starting a video series that tackles the short SFF market in a similar way. But as you might expect, the targets of D&C's overall critique have not responded so positively. Indeed, as of this moment, they have maligned him as a "serial harasser," have declared him guilty of -ist and -ism, and have enlisted sites like Bleeding Cool News to spread their bile. Worse, there has been at least one serious attempt to dox him, and some are now conspiring to bully him at Baltimore Comic Con in order to intimidate him into silence.
Folks:
D&C is not a harasser. He's not perfectly polite either, but his accusers are a thousand times more toxic and hostile. Personally, I don't think you have the right to complain about D&C's references to "purse puppies" and "Party City wigs" if you are buddy-buddy with his doxxer or are on record advocating violence against supposed "cis-scum." And don't give me that nonsense about "punching up" versus "punching down." D&C is not in a position of power in this situation; you guys are. You guys are creators with corporate backing -- not to mention the support of influential media outlets ready to publish your preferred party line at your beck and call.
D&C is not a racist, a woman-hater, or a whatever-phobe either; he's an old-school individualist. He believes people should be promoted in the industry based on their merit, not their identities. He also believes "muh representation" is an insufficient basis for a superhero character -- that any superhero character should be written as fully three-dimensional and should earn respect within his/her universe through demonstrably virtuous behavior and hard work. He doesn't roast Riri Williams or America Chavez because they are not straight white men; he roasts them because they are shallow as all hell and get in-text plaudits handed to them for merely existing. He also hates the latter in particular because she's a hideous stereotype who speaks in fake Spanglish; that the SJB faction is so fired up to defend America reveals much.
I grok D&C because my friends and I are in the same camp. I feel like such a broken record every time I address "social justice" in geekdom, but I guess I have to keep repeating myself because the usual suspects keep electing to distort what we're saying. Once again, from the top: We small-L liberals are not opposed to diversity in SFF literature/comics/games/etc. On the contrary, we simply have a richer notion of what such diversity entails. We understand that diversity of skin shade or genitals or what we choose to do with our genitals offers little in the way of creative dynamism and thus seek diversity of thought and life experience instead.
SJB's Against Aspirational Storytelling
Back home in literary SFF, we are now being told by our own identitarian scolds that if we write "characters-of-color" without referencing the current-day struggles minorities face, we are most assuredly Doing It Wrong. Apparently, in order for a character to be, say, "authentically black," he or she has to be defined by the legacy of slavery or the horrors of police brutality. Even if he or she did not grow up in the US. Even if he or she lives five-hundred years in the future on a colony orbiting Alpha Centauri.
This is a profoundly stupid notion.
I happen to believe that human nature is not especially malleable and that in-group/out-group fighting will always be with us. But why should we suppose that such tribalism will always manifest in the manner it does in this particular time and place? Protestants and Catholics are no longer killing each other over doctrinal differences; does that not suggest that tribal feelings change over time?
Further, while I may doubt the likelihood of our completely dispensing with prejudice and bigotry amongst ourselves, I see the value of fiction in which such utopianism is embraced. Remember: I'm a Star Trek fan. I know the impact Uhura's presence on the Enterprise bridge had on black Americans growing up in the 1960's (which is why I'm not opposed to "representation" in principle); I also know she had that impact because her position as a Starfleet officer and consummate professional was portrayed as wholly unremarkable -- by design.
Gene Roddenberry understood that the key to breaking down racial barriers was and is to emphasize our common humanity, not what divides us. That the left seems to have lost sight of this fundamental truth in recent years is a tragedy.
Got here via Sarah Hoyt. Am entirely in agreement with you on these issues, and this isn't the first time I've seen D&C in the cross-hairs recently.
ReplyDeleteThe bad attitudes are, however, not all one-sided. I recall how upset the fanbois were when the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica came out. ZOMG, Starbuck is a girl!! Boomer too! And she's a hot Asian chick. (sorry)
There are a lot of legitimate criticisms to make about that series, especially after the second season, but that sort of carping is just silly. Oddly enough no one complained when Sam Jackson took on the role of Nick Fury. I, personally, am still having trouble with female Thor. Thor is a man, dammit.
Much of that comes from bad writers. They are incapable of developing compelling new heroes, so they shoehorn their favorite gender/race into an existing (popular) hero instead.
Yeah -- I think you're always going to see suspicion and push-back from fans when you change an existing canon, and it's not always warranted in retrospect. In fairness to the fanbois, though, I don't recall their carping all that much once it became clear the rebooted BSG was a good show (at least initially). I also don't recall a relentless media campaign portraying said fanbois as inherently misogynist for their doubts. The creators behind BSG just focused on making a quality product and didn't try to trade on the "OMG, woman-haters!" nonsense.
DeleteYou're so right, that the "key to breaking down racial barriers was and is to emphasize our common humanity, not what divides us."
ReplyDeleteThat Democrats instead are invested in identity politics is not a tragedy -- it's a deliberate Dem Strategy. They're terrible for doing this, but it's their attempt at getting votes by the disaffected minorities. Victims. The poor.
Race, sex, gender; and class. The Dem policies are not to make fewer poor folk, but to try to change the rules so that living a poor culture lifestyle and being poor is more comfortable.