| Author |
|
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:39pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Wade Duvall wrote:
You might claim there was hints of Northstar's gayness prior to #107 |
|
|
A claim which is backed up by John Byrne himself.
Wade Duvall wrote:
To me it was a gimmick to boost sells of a faultering comic by Marvel. |
|
|
Then you were wrong.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Wade Duvall
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 November 2006
Posts: 767
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:39pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Northstar wasn't really that well established before Alpha Flight and nothing to suggest that he wasn't or couldn't be gay.
Ok, I guess I am not being clear again. What I meant to articulate was that Northstar wasn't "established" as being gay prior to the reveal in #107. Therefore, there was no need to make him gay when up to that point he clearly (not counting the hints some mentioned) hadn't been presented as such in my teenager comic reading eyes.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:40pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Northstar's Gayness
I already posted it, but since you're still arguing you apparantly haven't
read it.
Read it, then admit that you were wrong so we can leave this nonsense
behind us.
Edited by Jacob P Secrest on 19 January 2007 at 12:41pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Wade Duvall
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 November 2006
Posts: 767
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:46pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Wow, Wade, you can question the feedback from those of us who've followed the comic and this site for some time without taking this argumentative tone. It isn't OUR argument, it is how JB layered the title.
Not argumentative Dave. Just asked for someone to mention where and what was said prior to #107 that would lead someone to the conclusion that Northstar was gay. I figured someone like yourself should be able to produce such common info since as you mention you've followed the comic and are a veteran of this site. Please do (and I mean that in the nicest most non-argumentative way).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
David Whiteley
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 2748
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:46pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I do think 106 was an attempt, a poor one, by Marvel to make a RELEVANT comic. Based on what I have read, I don't think they anticipated the attention that issue would receive.
edited to fix issue number
Edited by David Whiteley on 19 January 2007 at 1:13pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Wade Duvall
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 November 2006
Posts: 767
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:48pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I already posted it, but since you're still arguing you apparantly haven't
read it.
Jacob I did read it and JB did not mention where or what was said that would lead one who was reading AF in the 80s that Northstar was gay. Maybe you can tell me what the hints were. Were they obvious? What were they? Please tell.
Edited by Wade Duvall on 19 January 2007 at 12:49pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:50pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Wade, read the FAQ entry that I have posted twice.
That without any room for argument shows that Northstar was intended
by JB to be gay, plain and simple.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:52pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
They weren't obvious, they couldn't be, the Comics Code wouldn't allow
it, but what you are (or were) arguing is that Northstar was turned gay,
something that simply isn't true.
I don't know how JB specifically got the word out on the gayness, why
don't you ask him?
If you do ask him, I suggest you start a new thread (I don't think he
follows this thread), and clarify that you're asking how he showed
Northstar was gay and not whether he was originally intended to be gay
(if you don't clarify it might be locked since the question is in the FAQ).
Edited by Jacob P Secrest on 19 January 2007 at 12:59pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18024
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:53pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Northstar was in love with Walter Langkowski, wasn't he?
He came out in 106, not 107.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Oliver Staley
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 02 January 2007
Posts: 447
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:53pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Gay or not, I liked Northstar's complexity as a character, including his
militant Quebec seperatist past and the moral ambiguity of using his powers
to make himself a champion skier. Plus he was a jerk in an era when most
characters weren't, which made him interesting.
I lost a bit of intetest in Aurora when JB redesigned her costume and cut her
hair. No offense, JB, but not my favorite costume.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18024
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:57pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Well put with regard to Northstar being a jerk. He wasn't very nice, but he was certainly interesting.
Aurora would look good in a plaid leisure suit!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
David Whiteley
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 2748
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 12:58pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
The two-parter in Montreal with Deadly Earnest (7-8, I think) contain a lot of hints about Northstar and an older gentlemen who helped him accept who he was.
Guardian refers to how Northstar seemed interested in a lot of aspects of fame, but not the girls.
Aurora retaliates against Northstar when he accuses her of using her sexuality with a cold refernce to "you of all people should not question that" or something similar.
Multi-layered and open to interpretation, but the dots are all there to be connected.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
