InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "why not both?"

sandoz_iscariot (sandoz_iscariot) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-08-09 21:17:00

Current mood:	sleepy
Entry tags:	char: fantomah, creator: fletcher hanks, era: golden age, theme: racism

Fantomah from Jungle Comics #7.
More insanity from Fletcher Hanks, this one featuring my favorite of his creations, Fantomah.

...wat.

(note to mods: the comic is in the public domain, so I'm posting the complete story.)

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-08-10 08:12 pm UTC (link)
	I don't think the jungle is particularly necessary for Fantomah to work, especially since there's no origin story for the character, though you'd miss some of the more cracktacular "oh wow a giant spider is fighting an elephant" bits. Maybe have her hang out in space with Stardust. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

dr_hermes
2009-08-10 09:27 pm UTC (link)

Or to make it palatable, establish an uneasy relationship between her and the natives. Some have come to rely on her too much, some want to expel her somehow from the area, some have fled to neighboring tribes and live as self-imposed exiles. Fantomah is not a pleasant Mary Marvel type, and the natives would have a variety of reactions to her. I'd try building them up as characters and leave Fantomah enigmatic and capricious-- sort of like the Greek gods.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

skalja
2009-08-11 12:08 am UTC (link)

That doesn't really solve the fundamental problem of "we're setting this comic in an area which is almost entirely populated by black people, and yet we still need to make it about a white person," and then writing said comic in the tarzan subgenre, which has this whole loaded racist and colonialist history.

I mean, if you're going to develop the tribespeople and make Fantomah enigmatic, why not write a comic about the tribespeople, and have Fantomah as a side character? (Putting aside the issue of whether or not said comic would sell.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

schmevil
2009-08-16 04:00 pm UTC (link)

I think that's kind of what he was going for... develop a much wider cast of characters, and do some of the stories from Fantomah's pov, and some from various other characters. But Fantomah features prominently in the majority of the stories, and is a background presence even when she's not around. This way you keep the history of the character, but you can interrogate the race/sex/colonialism issues. Just speaking structurally, this would help put those issues at the forefront. By necessity, you'd have to address them more often, and in the hands of a skillful writer/artist team, that would be one cool comic.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	schmevil 2009-08-16 04:10 pm UTC (link)
	He, meaning Doc Hermes, that is. (Reply to this) (Parent)

houbanaut
2009-08-10 10:32 pm UTC (link)

The Fletcher Hanks Redux project that was linked to from a previous post had a pretty good Fantomah story that provided an origin, partially addressed the "white woman's burden" issue (Fantomah is an Egyptian woman whose hair has been bleached white, not a Caucasian blonde), and if I remember correctly put her in an urban setting (which might still be in Africa). I think it would be a perfectly workable premise, and could retain a lot of the specific character of the original.

The site seems to be down right now, but since that also goes for the whole college website, I'm guessing it's just a temporary outage.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

skalja
2009-08-10 11:47 pm UTC (link)

Speaking generally without having seen the site, with an Egyptian character with bleached hair there's the issue of "hero of color whose appearance has been conveniently tweaked to be more like a white person's/more palatable to white readers," though. There's a long, loaded history of that in the arts, and just because it would be via retcon this time doesn't make it's a good idea.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

houbanaut
2009-08-11 02:12 pm UTC (link)

White people find chalk-white hair more acceptable than black hair?

Aren't we getting a little extreme here? It's starting to seem like a white artist can't do anything that won't be interpreted as racist: If black characters look "too black" they're a racist caricature. If they don't look black enough they've been "tweaked to be more palatable to white readers". If they're not major actors in the story they're "depicted more as cattle than as human beings", and if they didn't appear at all I'm sure we'd hear about them being excluded.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

skalja
2009-08-11 04:02 pm UTC (link)

Look, I'm not sure what to tell you except to look into the history of black actors (and in this case, black characters) in the media and relevant media criticism before having this discussion, because if you're seriously trying to use those kinds of strawmen then there's no point in having this discussion. I'm not trying to be mean or dismissive; it's just that the whole context of what I was saying is the long history of film/television/print media's established preference for lighter-skinned, whiter-appearing black people. If we don't share that context, then we'll be talking in circles.

On rereading my earlier comment I should probably clarify that I wasn't saying this hypothetical Fantomah-whitewashing would be done (or has been done?), deliberately, but it's directly playing into that whole problem (which is still alive and well today).

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

houbanaut
2009-08-11 05:24 pm UTC (link)

I'm not denying that the history exists. I just don't think it's particularly relevant here.

First, Fantomah-as-Egyptian is not "black" as usually understood, she's an ancient Egyptian. The Egyptians were a semitic people, and as depicted in their own art their facial physiognomy was not (usually) markedly different from that of "white" people. In modern depictions, including in comics, they're usually depicted as European- or Arab-looking, with light brown or olive skin and with black hair.

Secondly, as I hinted at in my previous post, I find the idea that chalk-white rather than black hair could be considered a tweak to appeal more to white people bizarre. White hair is considered a sign of old age or poor health (including poor mental health) in our culture, while black hair (on white people) is somewhat unusual but not unheard of, and often considered attractive and a sign of strength, virility etc. (And many superheroes consequently have black hair, including Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, etc.)

Thirdly, I think there's a fundamental difference between creating or using a black or other "ethnic" character while toning down their racial identity to go down more easily with white readers on the one hand, and re-conceiving an existing white character as being of a different ethnicity while still retaining certain identifying characteristics of the original on the other. One is whitewashing, the other is "partially see-through blackwashing".

Finally, I don't think I was using any strawmen. Every example I gave was a direct quote of something someone has said in this thread. And yes, I think taking all these sensitivities together, we're setting up a standard where artists aren't free to take any chances, to be bold, or stray at all from the tightrope of political correctness. And that means that non-white characters can only be depicted in the blandest, most boring way. Who does that serve? Even knowing the raw history that motivates the sensitivity, I would rather cut artists some slack, and try to distinguish between what is expressly racist, what's well-meaning but stereotyped or somewhat patronizing, and what simply expresses the perspective of the artist's background (e.g. a story set in some suburbs may not have any black people).

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

dr_hermes
2009-08-11 07:54 pm UTC (link)

Possibly part of the hubub comes from the fact that there is not a single committee voting on what art is acceptable. There are all kinds of readers, each interpreting comics art individually. The same page will be seen by some as horrifying, some as quaint and amusing, some as no big deal.

In short, you can't please everyone. Artists have to go with their own approach and, no matter what they do, some readers won't like it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

skalja
2009-08-14 12:04 am UTC (link)

Uh ... I think we'll have to agree to disagree on whether it's relevant? (See below.) There's potential there for going in circles.

You're actually right to remind me that an ancient Egyptian Fantomah wouldn't be ethnically black-as-we-understand-it-now, but she would be a person of color. Whitewashing is not a phenomenon exclusive to black characters -- the current Avatar: The Last Airbender controversy is a really good example of this. (If you're not aware, the summary:
pseudo-Asian (rather than the usual pseudo-European) high fantasy cartoon is being made into a movie ... but with all the main characters except the bad guy cast as white.)

As to the hair -- hair color can't be interpreted without being put in context. In comics, white hair on a young person with no other visual cues means they're extremely (platinum or peroxide) blonde, not that they're ill: Felicia Hardy/Black Cat or Tandy Bowen/Cloak are good examples of this. As for black hair, I don't believe I ever said it was considered a bad thing, but all of your examples are black hair on white people. I'm talking about the specific implications and political significance of giving a female character of color white (read: blonde) hair rather than brown or black, when black women and other women of color are being constantly blasted by images in the media and by social pressure suggesting that having hair like a white person's is better than whatever they have naturally. In other words, it is really not cool.

As to your third point, I disagree, because I don't think a character of color's design can be removed from political context, whereas a rebooted character's design has no consequences other than the (un)happiness of fans; their being a PoC matters more than their being a white character's reboot.

I wasn't accusing you of using strawmen by making up arguments out of whole cloth -- I was suggesting that you were oversimplifying and taking people's words out of context. Which, well, you were. As for your artist's dystopia of blandified creators terrorized by the specter of false accusations, this is another old, old strawman. Four points for you to think on.
1) Promoting awareness of history and racial sensitivity is not stifling art, and genuinely bold artists are bold enough to handle criticism.
2) An artist who depicts characters of color blandly in an attempt to avoid criticism on grounds of being racist is much more of a racist than someone who attempts to face racial issues head-on and makes a few mistakes. Most people realize this.
3) It is more than possible to discern between different racist offenses, their reasons and context, and things which are not racist without cutting anyone slack.
4) Not all artists are white.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

sandoz_iscariot
2009-08-14 01:09 am UTC (link)

black women and other women of color are being constantly blasted by images in the media and by social pressure suggesting that having hair like a white person's is better than whatever they have naturally. In other words, it is really not cool.

And this is very relevant to comics today. See also: the controversy over Misty Knight and Monet St. Croix being whitewashed in their respective books, or the debates about Storm's hair that have been going on for decades. (I seriously cannot think of a time that anyone has looked at Ororo's hair and mistaken her for someone old or ill--but I can think of examples where people like Kitty have marveled over how "extraordinarily beautiful" or "unique" her light hair makes her.)

Fletcher Hanks died an unknown (even Will Eisner could barely remember him) and there appears to be no surviving documents or interviews that shed light into his creations. (The mystery is possibly one of the things that make bizarre characters like Stardust appealing.) There is no way to know if he spouted hate speech daily or if he genuinely thought he was being progressive in his depiction of African people. So for all this talk about whether he was "well-intentioned or not"...we'll never know. The work has to speak for itself. Depictions of yellow peril villains named "Slant-Eyes" and good but childlike, nameless, and voiceless Africans who need a powerful white protector--are racist. And come on, of course you can be artistically bold and daring without being potentially racist.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	skalja 2009-08-14 01:36 am UTC (link)
	I never read Generation X and "met" Monet St. Croix while reading X-Factor, so you can imagine how startled I was when I first saw art of her from the GenX era. (Reply to this) (Parent)

houbanaut
2009-08-15 05:33 pm UTC (link)

Your argument that over-sensitivity to imagined racial slights isn't a real issue would be more convincing if you weren't using it to bolster an absurd claim that giving Fantomah an Egyptian origin story is an example of "whitewashing" (without having even seen the story), thereby providing a perfect example of the kind of nonsense I'm talking about.

If anything, this is an example of the phenomenon of reimagining characters of the culturally normative group (e.g. white/male/straight) as a "minority" (POC/female/gay) in an attempt to be more politically correct.

I find that the rest of your post is an attempt to change the subject to other topics, and responding to it would just confuse the issue. I will say a few words about hair color, though:

You've not convinced me that white hair is not, in general, seen as a sign of infirmity, even (or especially) in young characters. The best example I can think of in comics is Hippolyta Hall in Sandman. Even when white is seen as representing platinum blonde hair, I think it's tied in to a stereotype of the spaced-out, childlike blonde - seen as mentally or emotionally weak. The fact that not every character conforms to this pattern just shows that hair color is not rigidly coded in our culture, and - as you say - must be seen in context. The site hosting the comic is back up now, so you can see the context for yourself.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	schmevil 2009-08-16 04:30 pm UTC (link)
	skalja didn't say that making the character Egyptian is an example of whitewashing. She said that making her a blonde Egyptian might be whitewashing. ie. The character has been rebooted as a woman of colour, with 'good hair'. Good hair being long, straight, blonde hair. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	skalja 2009-08-10 11:37 pm UTC (link)
	I seem to have missed Stardust. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-08-10 11:43 pm UTC (link)
	Sadly it looks like the person who posted several Fletcher Hanks stories here deleted them...a shame, because there were some fantastic reactions...I'll see if I can find the "De Structo and the Headhunter" story because that's the stuff of legend. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	skalja 2009-08-10 11:48 pm UTC (link)
	Oh dear, that sounds rather epic. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-08-11 12:25 am UTC (link)
	Posted! (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	skalja 2009-08-11 12:08 pm UTC (link)
	! (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -