Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 31 Next >>
Topic: And the Contempt Continues (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Koroush Ghazi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1681
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 5:52pm | IP Logged | 1  

I can definitely understand the frustration, having dealt with it your whole career. But I think it would have been a good opportunity to set the guy straight and make sure that at least a couple of sentences on this very issue were put into the article to clarify it for a wider audience as well.

The again, chances are this guy might have used your clarification as an opportunity to belittle the situation, saying something like "but don't call it 'underwear' or you'll upset the fans!". So I can see the risks as well.

In any case your analogy is a good one: no-one dares call sports uniforms 'costumes' or 'underwear', because they look up to sportsmen and women (despite these people often not being worth looking up to as human beings); yet super-heroes, which set a good role model for everyone (or at least used to), are made fun of to downplay their righteousness. I guess society doesn't like perfect heroes, they always want to bring the good guys down to their level.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Ray Brady
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3740
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 6:29pm | IP Logged | 2  

How can choosing not to comment possibly be an "overreaction" to anything? If anything, the omission of action would have to be a underreaction.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Brad Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 December 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1717
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 7:00pm | IP Logged | 3  

I wonder if UNDEROOS has some blame here.

I remember my sister getting Wonder Woman Underoos in the late 1970's and her underwear was made to look as similar to the Lynda Carter Wonder Woman TV series trunks as posible.

Just wonder if that had some carry-over.  I am not excusing outright contempt for the medium, which is clearly occurring in many circumstances.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Koroush Ghazi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1681
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 7:06pm | IP Logged | 4  

This sort of thing doesn't help:

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Jesus Garcia
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 April 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 2414
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 7:09pm | IP Logged | 5  

Each superhero generation could be expected to use whatever materials they had on hand to fashion themselves an "action costume".

Other than characters like Superman who might have access to Kryptonian fabrics, or mystics like Green Lantern and Dr. Fate who probably whipped up magic costumes, characters like The Batman, The Sandman, Wildcat, The Atom, and Starman would have used leather/cotton/wool and maybe silk. Few would have used "nylon".

Now cotton and wool are not trademarked or brand names.

But the newer generation of Americans are hopelessly brand aware and name this and that using trademarks and brand names. "Spandex" becomes inevitable not because it's associated with off the rack tight fitting outfits but simply because it's the trademark/brand name most people are familiar with. And, in the late 20th / early 21ist century, brand awareness means coolness.

Stan and Jack for the most part seemed to stay away from brand names, although I recall Nasa and IBM being mentioned. While they might have pointed out that Sue wore Dior, they would not have suggested that the guys wore Pierre Cardin. Perfectly normal to suggest real brand names in Sue's case as females were very brand aware in the 60's.

Now enter the 90's and later and we have males -- effectively the whole readership -- becoming brand aware and this naturally spills over into comics.

Hence suggesting superheroes wear spandex 'cause, y'know, brand trademark awareness means you're in.

Same thing with Kevlar. With not "impact resistant" or "ultra-stable molecules"?

Naaaahhhh. Too cerebral. Kevlar means you got attitude. Attitude is cooler than cerebral.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Wallace Sellars
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 17700
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 8:01pm | IP Logged | 6  

Hey, guys! I've been reinstated!

Would the average person say this guy is in his underwear?
---
The average person seeing a wrestler wearing trunks would NOT refer to
them as underwear.

Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Mike Norris
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4274
Posted: 25 June 2010 at 8:21pm | IP Logged | 7  

I will admit than when I was five I told my family I wanted to wear my underwear outside my pants like Batman. ( this was when the TV show was popular) But since then I dont think I've ever referred to Batman's trunks as "underwear". ( Their answer was a resounding "NO!", by the way)
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Andy Mokler
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2799
Posted: 26 June 2010 at 12:59am | IP Logged | 8  

Over reaction. Sure. Because if we don't "over react" to the little parts of the big problem, the big problem will fix itself.Yeah. That's how the world works.

But how does refusing to respond to a separate question help fix anything?  I'm in perfect agreement with your thoughts on the terminology subject but I wouldn't expect someone to just "know" that your decision to decline comment was based on mis-use of terminology about superhero attire.

How can choosing not to comment possibly be an "overreaction" to anything? If anything, the omission of action would have to be a underreaction.

I think declining to answer because of something that was realistically innocuous, is an overreaction.  Not in any extreme sense but the way the situation was described seems to me that JB was judging the writer's intentions and thoughts on comic books by his use of the term underwear.

And, just to be fair, if Diana was wearing her civilian clothes and had the Wonder Woman clothing on underneath, it isn't such an egregious leap of deduction to consider the blue starred portion to be "under"wear.  I think it is much more logical to assume that than it would be to call them swimwear for example.

I also don't think the intent would necessarily be derogatory.  The effect perhaps but not the intent.  Maybe the writer is one of the bad media and it all would be moot anyway if JB took the time to explain.  Maybe they would have taken JB out of context or used his explanation as a way to paint JB in a bad light.  Maybe.

But declining to comment certainly won't be taken as a positive and I still think it is a wasted opportunity to at least try to explain the importance of using correct terminology in regards to how comic books are perceived by the general public.




Edited by Andy Mokler on 26 June 2010 at 1:00am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
James Revilla
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2266
Posted: 26 June 2010 at 3:23am | IP Logged | 9  

This reminds me if an arugement I heard an ex bf and a friend get
into. The ex asked my friend if he was anTrekkie too, to which my
friend said "No, I am a fan of Star Trek." The ex asked what's the
difference? Friend replied "Do you call a person who likes guns a
gunny? A fan of baseball a basey? I am a fan of Star Trek, not a
Trekkie." The ex then asked "What's the difference?"

One is the correct term for it and one is what people who have no idea
call us. Uniform is the correct term, spandex, underwear and pajamas
are what people who have no idea call it.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Philippe Negrin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 August 2007
Location: France
Posts: 2644
Posted: 26 June 2010 at 4:01am | IP Logged | 10  

Super heroes have been reduced to pornstars with super powers. it's quite a logical next step for non-specialists  to declare they run and fly around in their underwear. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Philippe Negrin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 August 2007
Location: France
Posts: 2644
Posted: 26 June 2010 at 4:03am | IP Logged | 11  

Since the late 90's, superhero artists have been showing the bumps and mounds (what's that desert animal?) underneath the female superhero costumes. Are they not more to blame than that journalist ?
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133551
Posted: 26 June 2010 at 4:45am | IP Logged | 12  

The average person seeing a wrestler wearing trunks would NOT refer to them as underwear.

••

Precisely. And how about these folk. . .

Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 31 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login