I meant to write this a while ago, but, y'know... stuff.
Since I delayed, I no longer can find (well, not with just the energy I care to spare) the WFA-linked blog post where someone idly wondered why there weren't more feminist comments regarding Adam Warren's series, Empowered.
As someone who's read not only Empowered, but a lot of Warren's other work, I may be able to provide an answer, of sorts.
Part of the reason, as has been pointed out elsewhere, is that while Empowered does indeed trade in cheesecake and bondage, which you think might tweak a bunch of the fangirl feminists, the characters are complex, multi-layered, and engaging, even when they're clad in skintight spandex and trussed up in rope. Titillating, sure, but that's not the only thing going for the story. Therefore, you could surmise that whatever faults a feminist might find with the series would be mitigated by the feminist-positive elements.
[Depending, of course, on the feminist, no hive mind, your mileage may vary, etc. I remember reading an exchange between him and a visitor to his DeviantArt page who was absolutely convinced that a woman who had captured Emp in the first book had finger-raped her; despite Warren's claims that no such thing had taken place, the gal leaving comments rejected the direct word of the author and artist to insist that it had happened and that Emp's proper reaction would be to become a shattered wreck after the incident. Disclaimer: It's been a while, I may have some of the exact details wrong. Still, I think the gist is right.]
Now, I confess this is pure speculation on my part, but I submit to anyone bothering to read this far that the other main reason that Empowered hasn't been causing more fuss is that, either consciously or unconsciously, comics feminists realize that what they say and think probably isn't going to have any effect at all on the way Adam Warren makes his comics in the future. Which doesn't mean I think Warren is sitting around going "screw you, feminists!" as he draws Empowered, but that he's secure enough in his own mind that appeasing feminists or any other group would rank low on his list of priorities.
He's not Marvel or DC, after all. You can't say he's making comics that kids might read, because they're pretty clearly aimed at adults. His publisher Dark Horse is not likely to cave in under pressure, as they're the ones making an effort to reprint John Norman's Gor novels (how's that going, I wonder? Haven't heard much lately). A lot of the arguments you might use to try and sway the mainstream publishers lose their bite in his case. Mostly what you have left, then, is the idea that drawing bondage and objectifying cheesecake is morally wrong on the face of it, and I don't think Warren shares that view.
Warren, it should be noted, didn't start drawing cheesecake and bondage with Empowered. The series itself, he claims, arose when he was doing those themes in commissioned artwork, so that's a sign he has no moral compunction against that kind of material. That, and the fact that he's worked it in to a number of his other projects, like The Dirty Pair books and Gen13.
Years ago I saw Jon Stewart on one of the late night talk shows (Leno or Letterman , I can't remember), and the topic of George W. Bush's then-fresh search for Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq came up. To paraphrase Stewart's statement:
"Oh, I don't think Bush'll be embarrassed if no WMDs are found. Someone'll say, 'Sir, there's no WMDs in Iraq, never were', and he'll go, 'Huh. How about that," and go back to whatever he was doing..."
I could see it, if someone was raging at Adam Warren, complaining about his comics. "This is sexist!"
"Huh. How about that."
It's difficult to shame someone into changing when they don't feel the shame you think they should.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
It isn't that Adam Warren has no shame, it is the fact that he is making a satire of female superheroes and the way they are treated in American superhero comics. He said in his explanation of Empowered's genesis that the series was a reaction to him constantly being asked to do cheesecake bondage commissions.
The way you end your essay, you make it sound like the guy never considers how his characters will be perceived. If you go back to his Deviant Art page and look through that "discussion" with the offended person, you can see that he really tries to make a connection with her as a creator. He explains that he feared that her view is exactly how that scene would be viewed.
Warren isn't worried about the major demographic for American comics, the white males that are 18-35; they are gonna buy it for the cheesecakey bondageness no matter what. It's his female fans that he is thinking and worrying about because the guy has a lot of them. (And he has a lot of them because he does have flawed, multi-layered, complex characters and all his works prominently feature female characters.)
He reads WFA, the very vocal Lea Hernandez is an old friend of his. He isn't just just shrugging his shoulders and saying "Hunh, how about that?"
"He said in his explanation of Empowered's genesis that the series was a reaction to him constantly being asked to do cheesecake bondage commissions."
Yeah, didn't I mention that in my post? I also mentioned that he drew those commissions, he didn't say "oh, gosh, no, I couldn't do something like THAT".
While Empowered is indeed a satire of superheroine fetishes, it also portrays those fetishes in great detail. Adam Warren spends a lot of effort drawing multiple panels of Empowered (and other characters) tied up and in various states of undress, more than is REALLY required to tell the story. You'd have a hard time getting me to believe Adam Warren sits at his drawing board going "this is so wrong!" as he draws the comic.
And, like I said, Empowered isn't the first comic where this happens. While bondage isn't the point of the comics, there have been instances of female characters being trussed up in Dirty Pair and Gen13, and cheesecake abounds. Which is probably why he's been approached with bondage commissions in the first place.
"The way you end your essay, you make it sound like the guy never considers how his characters will be perceived."
Oh, I think he does thoroughly consider it, but that ultimately it isn't going to dissuade him from doing it anyway. His work is very self-aware, even when delving into the fetishy territory. (I meant to make a statement about that in my original post, not sure how it got omitted, but here we go.)
Look at it this way. The disagreement we both cite revolved around a misperception of an incident in the comic. Adam Warren discusses it, makes an effort, because he tries to correct that impression.
But he draws bondage and cheesecake while at the same time acknowledging that some find it distasteful (and acknowledging that others find it hot). So if someone was offended by the bondage and cheesecake itself, how would that conversation go? What COULD he say?"
"This is bondage! That's offensive!"
"Yep, I know."
Self-awareness is different than shame. He's already demonstrated his willingness to go ahead and draw the stuff anyway. I can't imagine any scenario where someone expresses unhappiness with the bondage and cheesecake and Adam Warren has a complete change of character, saying "good lord, you're right! This IS tacky and offensive and I'm gonna stop doing it in all of my comics forever and ever!!"
It is for that and other reasons that I think Warren may be nearly immune to most feminist criticism. Being self-aware means you probably can't tell him anything he hasn't already considered. Being willing to do it anyway means he's considered the arguments and decided doing his comics the way he wants is a greater priority in his life. Self-aware but not shameful.
It's one thing to chastise Joe Hotcoverartist for drawing some sleazy pinup cover, if you think the artist somehow doesn't realize his work is offensive, or perhaps his publisher can be convinced his work would be bad public relations, but it's quite another to bring such concerns to a situation where such concerns probably don't really matter that much.
Again, I speculate that some who do find even Adam Warren's depictions to be offensive and/or objectifying also recognize that their criticisms lose strength in this situation.
Just my impression.
Maybe...I know you probably haven't considered this...but maybe there are barely no feminist complaints because Empowered is a very feminist comic. Which it is. And what I *have* read from feminists has been very positive about Empowered. (the reviews are out there!)
Warren himself is obviously a feminist. I've been reading his work since I was 12 - Dirty Pair to Gen13 - and all his stuff has contained a feminist message somewhere.
Warren rocks!
"Maybe...I know you probably haven't considered this...but maybe there are barely no feminist complaints because Empowered is a very feminist comic. Which it is."
Maybe... I know you probably haven't read my original post closely enough to notice... but I did touch briefly upon that.
I do allow that the pro-feminist elements are a mitigating factor. Certainly if the book was ONLY "Empowered gets tied up and pushed around some THE END," I imagine there'd be harsher criticism.
It does, I confess, seem a little counter-intuitive to me to think that the same crowd that worked themselves up into such frenzies over things like the Mary-Jane statue and the Heroes for Hire cover would not only stand quietly by but even give praise to Warren's work, when there's MORE bondage, MORE potential objectification, just blended in with some pro-feminist messages.
Does this mean that if, say, someone in the HfH crew had a word balloon on that cover going "wow, this is kinky and weird," it would have deflected the brunt of that blogostorm? A little dose of self-awareness, acknowledging the fetishy elements without changing them at all, and the fuse sputters out? I wonder...
Hey! Same anonymous from earlier - I don't have a blog, sorry.
You say:
"MORE bondage, MORE potential objectification, just blended in with some pro-feminist messages."
And I think this is a very surfacey way to look at Empowered. I don't think that the bondage, objectification and the pro-feminist messages are separate from one another. Warren is using the utter ridiculousness of bondage and objectification in superhero comics to *create* the feminist message. He did much the same thing in his Gen13 run, and particularly in Dirty Pair: Plague of Angels.
"Does this mean that if, say, someone in the HfH crew had a word balloon on that cover going "wow, this is kinky and weird," it would have deflected the brunt of that blogostorm?"
Is that what Empowered does? I see it as much deeper than that. It shows the effect that such percieved standards of sexiness and unwarranted objectification has on Emp - Warren shows how it hurts her and how she triumphs over it. He uses humour to disarm the reader and show how stupid it all really is. *And* he gives us a healthy, loving relationship between Thugboy and Emp, and a friendship between Emp and Ninjette where they talk about things *other* than men and aren't bitchy with one another! I don't really see how all that can compare to a flippant remark being added to the H4H cover.
Having said that, I do see where you are coming from here. However, I think that Empowered is a lot more complex than you are giving it credit for.
You are right that is a shame that more people haven't written about it. I would like to see more - hell though, I would love to see Warren's work discussed more, period! I think that it can become easier to focus on the bad rather than the good. You can feel beaten by what sometimes seems like relentless sexism and it can blind you. Girl-wonder does have that "Comics we like" section though - maybe I should recommend Empowered to them?
"I don't really see how all that can compare to a flippant remark being added to the H4H cover."
There is some matter of scale between the two, since the cover is a single image and Empowered as a whole offers far more breadth in which to explore issues.
One more reiteration and I'll let it drop: While you make some good points about all the pro-feminist messages Warren puts into Empowered, I still think it's interesting how much it lets him get away with in terms of depicting the bondage and cheesecake.
If you removed all the text from the book, and were left with just the images to deal with, that'd be a lot of individual panels of fetishy stuff going on, there.
It'd be kind of like making a comic whose star was a serial killer, in order to show how bad murder was. You could depict a hundred horrible deaths in graphic detail, but would it make it all okay for the anti-violence protesters if you salted it with enough "this death and destruction is hurtful and harmful" messages?
(I've been going on about this, and it has occurred to me that by arguing this point there's the possibility that I'll convince some feminists to take up arms against Empowered. A slim possibility, since nobody really listens much to everything else I say, but still, that'd be irony packed full of suck.)
Hey - same anonymous again here!
"It'd be kind of like making a comic whose star was a serial killer, in order to show how bad murder was. You could depict a hundred horrible deaths in graphic detail, but would it make it all okay for the anti-violence protesters if you salted it with enough "this death and destruction is hurtful and harmful" messages?"
Well - that depends. Is the comic actually a satire about violence or is it using the "hurtful and harmful" message as an excuse to show violence?
I think that Warren's work falls into the realm of satire. I don't think it is just an excuse to show tits and arse. I don't think Warren is trying to "get away" with anything. I just think he is telling a very funny and very insightful story that skewers its inspiration with whip-smart accuracy. But thats the thing you see - context. Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with cheesecake or tits. It just isn't very nice when something is reduced down to being nothing but tits or nothing but violence. (more than that - it often isn't even very interesting)
Maaaaybe I am reading into it too much. It's a possibility. But having followed Warren's work for 12 years or so, his work has always been drenched with satire and humour, so I do think that he is intentionally writing Empowered as such. (I would have gotten bored with The Dirty Pair many years ago if Warren hadn't written/drawn Kei and yrui as such interesting and multi-faceted characters who can kick a whole lot of ass in tiny bikinis without ever posing for the reader)
So...I guess basically is that readers can feel the intent of the author. And I think Warren has a lot of female fans because they can feel the intent of his work and aren't marginalised by it. Of course, it is possible that every one of us has gotten it wrong, but I think that a good writer/artist can always get their intent across.
"One more reiteration and I'll let it drop:"
Well, I'll check back to see if you have replied anyway, because I thought your post was interesting. It forced me to put into words why I like Empowered and also, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about it!
"Well - that depends. Is the comic actually a satire about violence or is it using the "hurtful and harmful" message as an excuse to show violence?"
I think a comic like that can be more than one thing at once. In Warren's case, I think it is a satire but ALSO at the same time it is a reason to draw cheesecake and bondage.
I find it difficult to believe that Warren would draw as much bondage in Empowered if he had zero interest at all in it, but I also think that by being self-aware, by using satire, he deflects criticism.
This may not mean that he's intentionally trying to evade criticism, or "put one over" on his female fans. His satire and criticism probably comes from genuine opinions on the subject. That doesn't stop him from drawing it, and it doesn't prevent him from drawing the bondage in a way that would appeal to fans of bondage.
"I appreciate the opportunity to talk about it!"
And I genuinely appreciate that you're actually TALKING about it instead of just telling me how wrong I am...!
Yes - it's me again, your anonymous Empowered commenter!
"I think a comic like that can be more than one thing at once. In Warren's case, I think it is a satire but ALSO at the same time it is a reason to draw cheesecake and bondage."
You know what? I think you might have a point here.
You can't stop the dog from seeing the rabbit, right? I have to admit, it is very sexy art (although, as a straight woman I have to say that Thugboy's bulding muscles are actually quite a turn-off! but that's just me)
Personally, I think that Warren is more interested in the satire side of the work than the cheesecakey side, but I can't prove that. It is just how I feel about it and the impression that Warren gives me.
So perhaps what Warren has hit on with Empowered is a good balance. After all - there isn't anything specifically wrong with enjoying cheesecake, bondage and whatever. My problem with it has always been when it is used at the expense of the character - posing instead of fighting, gratuitous ass shots, etc. Empowered may have a lot of cheesecake and bondage in it, but when Emp is kicking ass (or Ninjette) that is what they are doing - kicking ass. Also, I really appreciate the diverse range of facial expressions. As I think I said in an earlier comment - Empowered isn't *just* the tits and ass - it is humour and personality and warmth and romance and action all wrapped up in a snarky satiric message. People may not *buy* Empowered because of the message (although some might!) but it is still there and I reckon that is a positive thing.
I think that Empowered doesn't feel like it is *excluding* you as a female reader, and that counts for a lot.
If only all cheesecake could be so well done!
(sorry it takes me so long to reply to you, but I have to admit that I am being quite the bad employee and doing this at work - but as I said, I think you have said some interesting things. I will have to check out your other posts.)
"I will have to check out your other posts."
Hmm, well... as some of my posts have been far less well-received, I hope you won't be too terribly disappointed...
When is your next post. I like reading them.
"When is your next post?"
I post pretty much when the mood strikes me, when I think I have something interesting to say (at least, interesting to me).
Something will eventually come up, I'm sure, but right this second there's not much I want to talk about...
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your discussion. Thank you for making it available.
Oops... that last was is a DIFFERENT Anonymous ;-) I'm just the conversational spectator here...
Post a Comment