Tuesday, May 19, 2009

The Joe Quesada/Marvel Divas Scandal Made Simple

I've noticed that a lot of bloggers are now rushing to the defense of Marvel Comics and Editor In Chief Joe Quesada in the wake of his comments regarding the feminist backlash against Marvel Divas, based on a summary of the book concept written by the author and a preview of the cover of the first issue. Most of them are saying that it's blatantly unfair of them to be judging the book without reading it - neatly side-stepping the issue, as Joe Quesada did in answering one readers' letter...


About the “hating” on Marvel Divas, let’s call it what it really is—criticizing how sexist this book appears to be. If Marvel produces comics that are offensive to female readers, why shouldn’t people “hate” on it? Why would I want to support a company that produces offensive, sexist material? Why shouldn’t everyone speak out against it? While the book hasn’t come out yet, what has been released so far is blatantly sexist. But what troubles me the most is that Marvel thinks people want to read this, and this constitutes strong female characterization. Does Marvel actually want to attract female readers or is the whole point that Marvel Comics are only for guys?

I’m going to go on a limb here and assume you’re a Marvel reader. It’s an assumption I’m making based upon the fact that you’re responding to this column. If you’re Marvel reader and truly feel we’re sexist, then why are you reading our books? Now, perhaps you’re not a Marvel reader, then if that’s the case, I’m not quite sure what you’re criticizing if you don’t read our books?

...You haven’t read a lick of this story yet! Please, I can buy you saying that you’re cautiously pessimistic based upon what you’ve heard so far, but to throw around allegations like that is completely unfair, not just to Marvel or myself, but to the creators and editors who are working on this book. Have you ever read any of Sacasa’s work? Have you ever found him to be a sexist writer? Is the cover image provocative, perhaps, but it’s no more or less than any other book we do.

The cold hard reality of publishing and trying to sell our books to as many people as possible, so here’s an example of what happens more often than you may think here at Marvel. From time to time, we’ll be launching a title that doesn’t focus very heavily on the super heroic. From time to time I’ll get a cover sketch and it doesn’t have a costumed hero or villain on the cover, what we internally refer to as a “quiet cover.” On those occasions, more often than not, I ask my editors to direct their cover artist to give me at least a first issue cover with the characters in costume. Why? Because it will help launch a book that will most likely have trouble latching onto a large audience. We want to give every title the best possible chance to be successful. Marvel Divas is no different and that’s why you’re seeing our strong female leads in their super hero personas. Let me try an example outside of comics. I’m a huge fan of Pink, I really dig her music and love her voice. Love her or hate her, I would say that she’s an amazingly strong and intelligent female performer and song writer in the pop genre. In many of her songs she even criticizes the over sexualized female pop stars of the day and their over the top videos. But when you look at Pink’s CD covers, while she’s looking strong and like she’s looking like she’s having fun, she’s also looking really sexy. The reason is simple, she’s trying to grab people’s attention and sell some albums. Comics are no different and as much a part of the entertainment business as any other medium, and the cold hard truth is that if we were to launch Marvel Divas with a “quiet cover,” I guarantee you the book would be canceled before it hits the shelves. That’s it in a nutshell, I could sugar coat it for you and give you a million other reasons that would sound plausible, but that’s not what I do.

So, where does that leave us? Ultimately, it’s up to you. If you somehow feel you know what this book is about sight unseen, then by all means just pass it up when it hits the stores. If you feel like giving it a try, drop me a line and let me know what you think. What I’d like you to avoid however is globally unfair statements like Marvel is sexist. And if you feel like you’re not being heard or like your opinion doesn’t matter, just look at how much column space I devoted to your question. Most companies would just duck stuff like this, but you guys are the reason we do what we do and if you have a concern or criticism, I want to try to address them as best I can. Thanks again for writing and for your question.




Uh-huh. So basically, here is Joe's defense, paragraph by paragraph.

1. I don't know why you're indulging in this double-plus ungood behavior. If you don't like our books, you shouldn't be reading them. And if you aren't reading our books, you shouldn't complain. Therefore, you don't like our books, so you have nothing to complain about.

2. I know I'm already assuming you don't read anything we publish, so I feel safe in telling you the man we've hired to write this book has never written anything anyone would find sexist. Also, I'm not saying the cover is sexist, but even if it were it's no more dehumanizing to women than all the covers for the books we publish that aren't aimed at a female audience.

3. Sex sells and it has to be used to sell anything that is aimed at women. Even angry grrrrl punk rock stars dress sexy to appeal to the men in their audience - not because they want to wear what they damn well please. So you see, it's not my fault that the industry is sexist... it's the fault of sexy rocker grrrls.

4. Remember - your opinion matters, even though I completely ignored your question and dismissed your right to make any complaint because I don't think you actually read anything we publish.


So to everyone who is rushing to Joe's defense and complaining about how we can't judge a book by its' cover? Bullshit! Take it from a trained librarian - our entire publishing industry, comics included, is based around the concept that not only can you judge a book by its' cover but that you need to devote as much effort toward packaging your book as you do creating it.

Thousands of graphic artists are employed to make covers appealing to the eye. Millions of marketing people are employed to argue over how to best promote new products, works and ideas. And the whole idea behind Marvel Previews and all the little extras and previews put up on Marvel.com or the Marvel MySpace page is to catch the interest of potential readers and get them to try new products BASED ON THE COVER OF THE BOOK!

That's why everyone is refusing to buy this book, Joe. And that is why they have every right to criticize the promotional materials they were given. You tried to promote this series as being something women would want to read - Sex In The City with superheroines - and you failed miserably. You asked them to make a judgment and then got pissy when the judgment was the exact opposite of what you wanted.

You tried to give women what you thought they wanted and are now trying to ignore them as they try to tell you what they want.

The problem here is not only that this promotion failed to snare its' target audience - it has failed in an epic fashion and alienated most of the potential audience Marvel was trying to reach. And Joe Quesada's reaction to the outraged audience has been to dismiss their concerns and ask why they're reading giving him money in the first place if they honestly think he's sexist.

Good question, Joe. But probably the last one that you should be asking a bunch of pissed off fans who are asking you why they SHOULD read your comics if crappy cheesecake like this and promises of "sudsy fun" are your idea of a what a comic for women should be like.

13 comments:

  1. There is no logic in the JoeQ arguments at all.
    "If you don't like sexism why are you reading our books"
    So ... let me get this straight. If I disagree with *1* aspect of your books I should stop reading them all together?
    If the question pages are just there to tell people how awesome Marvel is instead of actually providing feedback on the books, they should really just stop publishing them and put in more ads.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So ... let me get this straight. If I disagree with *1* aspect of your books I should stop reading them all together?
    Hence my "doubleplus ungood" comment. The way he says it is ALMOST Newspeak.
    The party is always right. Freedom is Slavery.
    If the question pages are just there to tell people how awesome Marvel is instead of actually providing feedback on the books, they should really just stop publishing them and put in more ads.
    See, I'm surprised there's anyone who thinks Marvel Comics is still awesome who is able to write.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Eh, sounds like him doing some damage control. He knew it'd come across as sexist when he approved it and still thought it was the way to go. I'm just talking previews here, not content.
    Joe still can't stop with the exaggerations. Did he just guarantee a book would be canceled before it hits the shelves?

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, but it doesn't speak too highly of the book, Joe's confidence in said book or Joe's belief that Marvel can actually create a comic that will appeal to women when he basically admits that they had to use sexualized covers to sell the book in the solicitation stage because he didn't think there was any way the middlemen retailers would buy a comic intended for a female audience for their stores without J. Scott Campbell art.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I especially loved the way Joey Q put words into her mouth.
    Her: "Marvel has produced material that I find sexist"
    Joey Q: "OMG how dare you say Marvel is sexist, that is totally unfair!!"
    Yes, it would be unfair if she had said that. Frankly, there's a lot of psychology to unpack there with him making the mental leap from "this one product is sexist" to "your entire company is sexist."
    And I'm far from the first one to say this, but would he be as dismissive if this were a person of color complaining about perceived racism in a Marvel book? Hell to the no. (Though, I would love to see him try to pull the whole "I can't be racist because I'm Hispanic" the way he does "I can't be sexist because I have a daughter")
    I have a whole slew of other complaints that just center on the way Aguirre-Sacasa and his work are being used throughout this whole debate, but that would probably get way too tl;dr.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Books, Covers and Joe-Spouting, Oh my!
    This was a well-thought post, so thanks for writing it. You had me reexamining where I end up in the Diva's Cup O'Joe Disaster Fallout (seriously, their attempts to promote/discuss this book there are just astonishingly bad), which is always a good thing.
    So to everyone who is rushing to Joe's defense and complaining about how we can't judge a book by its' cover? Bullshit! Take it from a trained librarian - our entire publishing industry, comics included, is based around the concept that not only can you judge a book by its' cover but that you need to devote as much effort toward packaging your book as you do creating it.
    I agree, and then I don't. We should judge and we should react and voice our dissatisfaction loudly and with persistent emails every time there's one of these covers (excusing it by it being an industry standard, Joe? Way to rise above the tripe), but negating the content completely is something that I think is counter-productive. It's important to give the content a chance, and to make room for the correction of mistakes.
    For the rest of your post, you're right. Joe Q. doesn't know how to talk to women. Clearly. That's probably the most redundant thing I'll type this year. While it's a frustrating thing to see, it's easy for me to blow off. I really can't give a damn what Joe Q. thinks or says most of the time, because he's so prone to this sort of nonsense (remember how his marriage was boring and Peter's would've been too? Gag.). He's the Fanboy's Fanman. That's what a large aspect of his job is and I don't care about what he thinks about things or why--in fact, paying attention to it kills a few of my brain cells. He and I exist on two different planets, so when he spouts off about sex selling and how that's justification for what Marvel's done--he's not wrong, either, but he is demonstrating clearly his willingness to cling to a sexist standard--I just ignore him.
    He's an idiot. Throw a rock and we'll hit ten more, yeah?
    Anyway, I've gone on long enough. Good post, again, and thanks for the comment space. :)
    -Kristina W.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As before, my stance on "Comics is dead to me" is reinforced once more.
    *Sigh*

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, except for Green Lantern, which is cool enough to peruse on Free Comic Book Day.
    And Conan. :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yeah. It's a whole other issue that - in creating this book starring four superheroines that was aimed at women - nobody thought that maybe they might benefit from having an actual woman involved in the creative process at some stage.
    How do you mean "the way Aguirre-Sacasa and his work are being used"? You mean the way that Joe has also used him as a shield from complaints of homophobia in the past and that he's one step away from "I'm no bigot! We have a gay man writing this book!"

    ReplyDelete
  10. Re: Books, Covers and Joe-Spouting, Oh my!
    This was a well-thought post, so thanks for writing it.
    Thanks. I was afraid this might be redundant given all the other wonderful blogs that have covered this subject already.

    I agree, and then I don't. We should judge and we should react and voice our dissatisfaction loudly and with persistent emails every time there's one of these covers (excusing it by it being an industry standard, Joe? Way to rise above the tripe), but negating the content completely is something that I think is counter-productive. It's important to give the content a chance, and to make room for the correction of mistakes.

    Personally, I'm all for giving content a chance and not pre-judging books. That doesn't negate the fact that the, for the most part, marketing is devoted toward style, not substance. And that's fine when the question marketing asks is "How do we best promote the content?". The problem comes when the question marketing asks is "How do we sell this?"
    That may sound like the same question but there's a world of difference between the two approaches. One looks at the product and gives you a broad summary, hoping to snare your attention based on the individual merits. The other tries to grab your attention with as little direct information as possible, usually by telling you about the pedigree of the writer or by using a quote from a famous and/or
    It's like the advertising for a school play (Baumfach High will be presenting Our Town on May 17th in the Hoot Smalley Memorial Auditorium at 8pm) vs. a Broadway touring company (Krunk! The latest stage musical by Flava Flav. Roger Ebert says "It's totally radical, dudes!")
    My point is (and it's about time I got to it) that while the realities of marketing and promotion are harsh mistresses, the problem (i.e. we can't sell a product to our core audience without sex) is never going to get better until a different solution is tried. Like, say... trusting the book concept you apparently liked enough to consider it worth publishing to sell itself without having to slap four women with the same body and face in skin-tight lycra on the cover when the book is supposed to be about their lives out of costume.
    Of course given that this book was apparently created by editor fiat and Joey Q saying "We need something the broads will like - get the token gay guy to do something like that show my wife likes! With tits galore on the cover so the common rubes will buy it too!"
    Of course I'm exageratting a bit with that last paragraph... but given Joey Q's reaction to all of this, would anyone be totally shocked if that was how it went down?

    ReplyDelete
  11. How do you mean "the way Aguirre-Sacasa and his work are being used"?
    Well, what you said, but he also seems one step away from saying "Ladies, chill out! You all love gay men, right? It's the next best thing to having a woman writing it!" Plus the way everyone seems to be emphasizing his work on Sue Storm-Richards; I've read those issues, and his Sue wasn't all that spectacular. She had basically two modes: worrying about her family and fighting off bad guys who threatened her family. He wrote a good mother, but that is such an incomplete portrait of any woman. And I mean, is the bar for writing women characters so low that as long as they're not dressed and speaking like porn stars, it's considered a rousing success? No thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, I have my own issues with that book and Aguiree-Sacasa. But they stem from the fact that he was basically a hired gun brought in to write a story that nobody wanted based around a concept so horribly awful that the ensuing fan revolt actually cracked the Marvel website in half when Bill Jemas announced that he was taking Mark Waid and Mike Wieringo off Fantastic Four so they could revamp the book with Reed as a wacky failed inventor living in Suburbiam.
    I think someone got stoned watching Honey I Shrunk The Kids that weekend...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Re: Books, Covers and Joe-Spouting, Oh my!
    I... I find it all too easy to imagine that happening.
    Especially since, if you're going to ask a group of people to spout out the first thing-girls-like that pops into their head, without putting any real depth of thought into it, the first 5 items on the list will probably be the colour pink, chocolate, boys, sex and the city, and shopping. Shoes and chick-lit or romance novels may also feature in there, somewhere.

    ReplyDelete