Judge Anderson pc or not pc

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

Just read Judge Anderson Triad and it was interesting to see the varying takes on her general appearance.
Mick Austin drew her so she looked, gosh darnit, almost like a normal person; but David Roach and Mark Farmer, (despite otherwise excellent work) chose to show her as the usual spray-on-uniform, unfeasibly (and impractically) big breasted Barbie stereotype.
Do you think the latter approach is
a) a cynical attempt to appeal to the adolescent mentality of the (supposed) target audience
or
b)The artist getting his rocks off?

Only asking folks
and yes I am a humourless feminist. So bite me.

Hasdrubal · Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2006 3:27 pm Post subject: Re: Judge Anderson pc or not pc

That's a pity, my dentist told me to stop biting feminist. :wink:

Either choice (A) or (B) could be correct, but it's probably not accurate to categorize comics buyers as adolescents. The price of comics has become prohibitive towards teens on allowances collecting. Most of the customers in my local comics shop are now men in their 30's and 40's.

You might "broaden" your point of view if you consider more than two possible choices. You've overlooked the influence of commercial capitalism, and the law of supply and demand. If the psychology of middle aged men demands a few "little white lies" found in sexy comics art, someone will supply it. Idealized comics women do no harm to any real woman, unless she's very insecure about herself. I've never heard of any man abandoning his wife, to take up with Wonder Woman......(although some of us still day dream of such things). A wise woman might find ways using a man's fantasy life to her advantage and learn to appreciate it.

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

Adolescents - men in their 30's to 40's - and your point is?

Of course there will always be a market for soft porn, I just object to the creeping sexualisation of ostensibly mainstream work. As Mick Austin demonstrates, it is perfectly possible to draw an exciting attractive female character without strapping a pair of melons to her chest so why fall back (fnaar fnaar) on tired and lazy stereotypes.

As for 'do no harm to any real woman' - come down from Planet
Mong and live on earth for a while! We are continually, and I mean continually, being bombarded with idealised images of women which we are unable to live up to. You have to be pretty damn secure not to feel demoralised. Where do you think the (recent) boom in plastic surgery is coming from?
And don't even start me on lads' mags - 'win your girlfriend a boob job' indeed!

Call me crazy but somehow I don't feel able to appreciate a fantasy life that necessitates me having my body carved up or (worse) going to the gymn - (how can you improve upon perfection, thats what I say) - anyway enough of the feminist polemic I'm off to do the dusting.

p.s. If you broaden your point of view doesn't it make it er, not a point any more?

electranaut · Forum Member Joined: Jan 03, 2004 Posts: 91

We're certainly living in an increasingly sexualized world. True, one can point the finger at the way women who conform to a male fantasy sterotype are used to sell products but the sword cuts both ways.

Good looking guys are increasingly used to appeal in a commercial way to the female market, though I will admit that the situation is currently stilll very much one-sided. I don't think this overall appeal of attractive people to the opposite sex is ever going to change and I suspect what makes the sexes attractive to each other on a physical level is going to change much. It's based on real physiological drive and deeply primal genetic coding which no amount of rational debate can erase.

Personally, I'm not that bothered what characters in a comic look like, unless the storyline in question demands it as a key point. I just like or dislike the story. But the comic medium in particular is traditionally about extremes in all areas and encourages a suspension of disbelief and the idea of escape to a fantasy world.

Also, other forms of media- by women for women, and by men for men- are also just as guilty of upholding the same principles. We know that in fashion magazines, attractive, tall, slim women are still used to market products at other women, while gym-toned, thick-haired, hunk types are used to promote products to them. Just because these approaches are used to enhance the appeal of male or female-oriented products to themselves, we all know that it's done to make us think that if we buy product x that some of that sex appeal will transfer on us and we'll be as gorgeous to the opposite sex physically as the models in the magazines presumably are.

It's all a minefield, I tells ya.

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

I take the point about men coming under pressure too - kind of an equality of misery.
However I don't buy the idea that we are all physiologically attracted to a single type - most of what is considered beautiful is a societal construct - you only have to take a swift walk round the local art gallery to see that - the ideal woman has variously been : small breasted, full bellied (middle ages)
size 16 plus everywhere (18th century) petite with small waist (victorian) comparitively small waist but otherwise hefty (edwardian) - and that's just in Western culture.

Also I can admire a well turned ankle in a man as much as the next gal but I would hate to see the high street awash with identical clones of the bland-featured muscle boys women are supposed to prefer.
Variety is the spice of life.

electranaut · Forum Member Joined: Jan 03, 2004 Posts: 91

Totally agree that we are conditioned to a certain extent by stereotypes of what is considered attractive, though there are some pretty well documented scientific explanations why certain features are reckoned to be advantageous in producing healthy offspring. I what attracts us is a mixture of the two, to be more precise.

Sometimes, it's a "flaw" in the stereotypical image that makes someone particularly attractive to us. Personally, I think marketing people and, in our case, comic producers usually forget that when presenting us with these images. Personally, I'd love to see some leading male and female characters that deviated a little more from the obvious. I think such quirks draw you closer to those characters, in a way.

palmers · Forum Member Joined: Jun 07, 2002 Posts: 379

Speaking as a bland-featured muscle boy... Oh, okay then.

There's a place in comics as in other forms of entertainment for work designed to remove rocks. It's called Vampirella. I think creators and marketers should be honest about what it's about, and I think there are very important questions about explicit sexual content, whether it objectifies women or otherwise, in mainstream titles like Identity Crisis. I've referred to that book as "rape entertainment", and although I'm being deliberately unfair, I do feel very strongly that the rape shouldn't have been there. I feel just as strongly about the ludicrous third issue of All-Star Batman & Robin, in which Black Canary cripples a barfull of men because some of them come on to her. Shocking to see such vicious and demented rubbish from the pen (or keyboard) which has produced some of the best-written comics ever.

Certain character styles can be counter-productive, though. I'd never picked up an issue of Lady Death, because of what it pretty obviously was, until I noticed one which depicted her as a slim Gothic bird in full-body armour. Where's the snow-white football-sized cleavage, I thought, and out of curiosity... discovered an adequate comic.

I do think that men are just about as much objectified and used sexually in advertising and marketing now as women are. You can't watch an hour's TV without some bloke's bare arse promoting deodorant (and that's not even where he sprays it), and ever since Ally McBeal it's been okay to giggle about a knee to the groin but not about a punch in the tit. Double standards cut both ways.

IMP.
_________________
RIVER: skin on the outside. First chapter FREE from www.ianmpalmer.com

electranaut · Forum Member Joined: Jan 03, 2004 Posts: 91

Actually, on the subject of marketing using sexist stereotyping, I read that it's kind of backfired in at least one case. Coca Cola are desperately trying to market Diet Coke to men as well as women now. Since their ad campaign of a few years ago with all the office women going weak-kneed over the bare-chested adonis types they see at work, it's been seen as a women's drink and men don't buy it. They're trying to pitch it now to rival their arch enemy Pepsi, whose Pepsi Max equivalent sells to both sexes quite well because it's more of a hip, adrenaline-lifestyle drink in the eyes of Joe Public.

Apparently men don't buy Cadbury's Flake's either, because although the ads invariably used very attractive women, they were always suggestive about how they ate them and men can't psychologically get their heads around that aspect of it.

palmers · Forum Member Joined: Jun 07, 2002 Posts: 379

There's also the matter of how the character's supposed to look. If her original artist - Bolland? - and the artist of her first solo story - my guess is Ranson, but I'm not sure - made her small-chested, then a subsequent artist who casts Pamela Anderson, unless he or she's been asked to by the editor, is simply getting it wrong. I know there are artists known for their busty women, but if the character's not thus equipped, the opportunity's not there.

As for unconventional character looks, yes. Even in superhero comics, where characters tend toward the generic - or iconic - and most characters are expected to be good-looking, we have certain established looks for Superman, and actual casting - Fred MacMurray - for Captain Marvel. In our own work, we should make the effort to make characters look individual, and personally I look for opportunities - and found one with Justice, one of the things I'm working on - even to make some of them a bit ugly.

If we're working on established characters, it helps to know what others have done with them. My Superman is a bit Christopher Reeve, my Wonder Woman would either be Alex Ross's cornfed beauty or Frank Miller's savage Amazon, and Atom or GL would have to have a Gil Kane physique.

I try to cast characters when I design them, taking a nose from an actor, eyes from someone I know, both because it results in better art and to get away from Vicky and Mike. And - not to forget that this thread's about breasts - I try to do the same with body types. My Anderson wouldn't have anything huge on which to hang her badge, but my She-Hulk would.

On the chocolate analogy, I was amused by the Yorkie campaign a couple of years ago: Not for Girls.

IMP.
_________________
RIVER: skin on the outside. First chapter FREE from www.ianmpalmer.com

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

Wasn't that the bar that was described as 'big rich and thick, a milk chocolate ... brick'. Definitely one for the girls I'd say.

Also, (to my annoyance) I think most of the male hunk type adverts are playing more to a gay audience, either wittingly or because the creators do not have a clue about female desires
So the guys win out again.
(commiserations to Hasdrubal btw on his unfortunate Mapplethorpe experience btw - I can sympathise, as I am constantly being hit on by guys in whom I have no interest whatsoever - but thats just the price we pay for being gorgeous I guess).

Ah well.

I enjoyed Vampirella and have no problems with large breasts myself (take that how you like) as such - I just think it results in a better story when the characters are portrayed as individuals rather than generic fantasy figures, and yes, I think it makes them sexier too.
Interestingly, although (I concede) scientific research shows that we are generally attracted to basic visual physical indicators of health and fertility, there is also a lot of research indicating that an individual's pheremone signature is just as potent as appearance.
Scratch and sniff comics anyone?

palmers · Forum Member Joined: Jun 07, 2002 Posts: 379

I've read a lot of comics which stank. Does that count.

IMP.
_________________
RIVER: skin on the outside. First chapter FREE from www.ianmpalmer.com

Hasdrubal · Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:04 am Post subject:

Lec, I'm still curious about two things.

1)Why did you purchase a comic you didn't like?

2)Which finger are you trying to display on your avatar picture? (It's suggestively funny without being over stated.)

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

1)a Because I'm an artist and it is always instructive to study other people's work regardless of personal preferences
b Did I say I didn't like it? That doesn't mean I have to be blindly uncritical of every aspect

2)Thank you kind sir, I was trying to display the four fingers that are actually displayed.
You could take it as meaning V for Victory, V for Violent temper, V for Vendetta or maybe another word beginning with V ....

alternatively it could be my interpretation of Live long and Prosper.

Hasdrubal · Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:02 pm Post subject: Re: Judge Anderson pc or not pc

Different styles are worth studying when you can find a difference. Individual art styles have become harder for me to identify. It seems like most of the artists working today are carefully aping Byrne's stint on the X-Men, or some hideously over-worked variation of Japanese Animie style. I'm often puzzled why Byrne became so popular. He was just another artist until Terry Austin became his inker.

The uniformity in present comics makes me prize my older books which were printed when you could tell the difference between Jack Kirby, Gil Kane, John Buscema, Gene Colon, Neal Adams, Bill Everett, and all the rest at a glance.

It's encouraging they're not all drawing Anderson the same.

lectatege · Forum Member Joined: Mar 14, 2006 Posts: 203

Its not the visual drawing style as such I'm looking at, more the way the story is structured.
I always think if you try and imitate another person's visual style you just end up with a second rate copy, however good you are. You can learn from others but whatever you take you should make your own - as Picasso said : "Poor artists borrow, great artists steal"

I think a lot of the distinctiveness in older work arises from the fact that the artists were experienced draughtsmen. Drawing is by its physical nature such an expressive medium that if you do a lot of it and are willing to explore the mark making process you cannot help but be individual in your work, (she said somewhat pretentiously) whatever medium you go on to use afterwards - but that should really be a post for the homogeneity debate.

And that is my point re:Anderson , my problem isn't that she is being drawn differently in one story but that she is being drawn from a bog standard in all the others , in this regard I must respectfully disagree with Palmers, just because a female character was represented a certain way in the original storyline doesn't mean that her identity is then written in stone, it should be possible to re-invent her for a more modern age just as (to make an analogy) the fifties Richard Greene heroic man in tights became the sharing caring crusty Robin of Sherwood in the eighties
_________________
A broken stereotype is a beautiful thing