I've got a lot to say about this but one thing I was gonna say is that if this is about moving with the times then why have DC decided to make everybody younger? Don't we have an increasingly older population and isn't that ageism? In particluar Jay Garrick used to be old and I think it kinda made him interesting.
There isn't anything inherently wrong with making Alan Scott gay and they have to find a way in which different groups within society get representation. But to be quite honest this seems to be more about being contraversial and selling comics. Based on what they did to Mr Terrific and how the sales went I have a feeling they're not going to do this well.
On a quick note when Captain America was replaced by Patrick Walker lots of people complained about it. Patick Walker looks essentially just like Steve Rogers. When people complain about changing race, or sexual orientation it's not always because they're prejuidiced it's because people don't like change and that doesn't make you a bad person that makes you human. Bare in mind people having been reading about comic characters since they were children and into adulthold. To an extent people kinda 'fall in love' with characters and as it was stated in the movie Unbreakable superheros are just the modern equivalent of gods. So it's understandable that people get upset when a character is changed especially when something was working really well already.
Wow... those scans are really kind of off putting seeing Alan behaving like that. Talk about another bad cliche gay character with a horribly forced script. Robinson really is a just a hack these days.
And it feels kind of cheap and dirty doing that to a character, changing his sexuality just to try to make the comic "progressive" and controversial and desperately attempt to grab some news time. I mean if they took a gay character and altered him or rebooted him as straight there would be all kinds of complaints about how that was part of what he was and "you can't just change that". I wonder what the late creator of Green Lantern Alan would think of a scene like that - nice respect for someone's work, DC.
I'd be interested to see if any comic writer out there was up to the challenge of coming up with an entirely new gay male superhero and making him popular, or at least just interesting and readable.
Beh, who cares about Alan being gay? The problem as someone has mentioned is that Alan was old, he was mature, that kind of brought some elegance to the character. I know that Alan was supposed to be young back in the day, but the changes certainly take away from the established character. New Alan can be done correctly, but it still feels like being cheated out of old Alan.
I have no problem with gay characters in comics. I have no problem with making Alan Scott gay. What I do have a problem with is Robinson's terrible reasoning behind it which makes the whole thing come off as cheap.
Really? Alan's younger in Earth-2, which means Obsidian obviously can't be used because he's Alan's son, so the logical decision is "Hey, let's make Alan gay!"? That is, frankly, idiotic beyond belief. Robinson then turns around and says that Alan will still be that heroic, charismatic, noble man whom we all know and that his sexuality is incidental. How does that work when you literally just decided to make him gay because A.) you needed a gay character for diversity's sake (which isn't bad in of itself) and B.) Obsidian can't be used, so the decision was may as well make Alan himself gay?
I think that when a character's identity is changed to reflect shifting attitudes/diversity/social representation, people fear that their character will be reduced to that change.
I haven't read the whole issue introducing Alan or his changed orientation, but the bits that I have read didn't really seem to support some of the ways that people are freaking out about this.
The interview was pretty dumb though.
I'm actually a little annoyed by this. When I had originally thought about them changing Alan (still don't know how I came to that conclusion, it was just a random thought in my head), I thought they were going to make him one of those older, classy but still a little fabulous gay guys.
Not what was in the comic, which honestly bums me out a little...
It's the fact that they made him younger, methinks. It is easier to accept a male homosexual, for reasons that we won't describe because they become creepily pedophilic, but we're just wired to see old men in a different eye that young men.
Social conventions? Instinct? No idea.
It also helps that Alan was a very classy character and I could see him work somewhat, probably that's what most people on DC thought when the change was suggested.
Originally posted by -Pr-
I'm actually a little annoyed by this. When I had originally thought about them changing Alan (still don't know how I came to that conclusion, it was just a random thought in my head), I thought they were going to make him one of those older, classy but still a little fabulous gay guys.Not what was in the comic, which honestly bums me out a little...
À la Ian McKellen?
