Coates has left no doubt he can write a comic book. Black Panther #1 was a good read. Stelfreeze's art was eye candy. The reveal at the end was satisfying to behold though it begs a major question. Still not a fan of the Wakandan on Wakandan violence as I would prefer a Wakanda against the world theme (not literally the planet but external threats). I think we have something positive to talk about once more people get to read the comic book later on today.
Coates has left no doubt he can write a comic book. Black Panther #1 was a good read. Stelfreeze's art was eye candy. The reveal at the end was satisfying to behold though it begs a major question. Still not a fan of the Wakandan on Wakandan violence as I would prefer a Wakanda against the world theme (not literally the planet but external threats). I think we have something positive to talk about once more people get to read the comic book later on today.
Beyond the Trailer reviews Coates' Black Panther 1(spoilers):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY)
Is this where we post our thoughts on Issue #1 and beyond?
My thoughts....The artwork is great. Not sure about the story yet. Coates has presented a lot of problems for T'Challa to deal with, he's having to face a lot of failure so hopefully he won't be hapless and ineffectual for long. I'm not sure about the Dora Milaje part. I don't want Coates to make T'Challa into a misogynist (a charge black men are often labeled with IMO). So for me, an okay start. The jury is still out.
Hello faithful, old heads, and those I have not met. I will pick this up tomorrow and give it a read. It has been a while but I am hoping that one of my favorite writers and current black thinkers can get me back in.
Coates has left no doubt he can write a comic book. Black Panther #1 was a good read. Stelfreeze's art was eye candy. The reveal at the end was satisfying to behold though it begs a major question. Still not a fan of the Wakandan on Wakandan violence as I would prefer a Wakanda against the world theme (not literally the planet but external threats). I think we have something positive to talk about once more people get to read the comic book later on today.
Coates has left no doubt he can write a comic book. Black Panther #1 was a good read. Stelfreeze's art was eye candy. The reveal at the end was satisfying to behold though it begs a major question. Still not a fan of the Wakandan on Wakandan violence as I would prefer a Wakanda against the world theme (not literally the planet but external threats). I think we have something positive to talk about once more people get to read the comic book later on today.
While the Wakandan internal battles theme isn't my favorite, and is trite at this point, Coates at least wrote it in a manner that made it quite palatable. I look forward to reading the 2nd issue.
Coates has left no doubt he can write a comic book. Black Panther #1 was a good read. Stelfreeze's art was eye candy. The reveal at the end was satisfying to behold though it begs a major question. Still not a fan of the Wakandan on Wakandan violence as I would prefer a Wakanda against the world theme (not literally the planet but external threats). I think we have something positive to talk about once more people get to read the comic book later on today.
My LCS is opening soon and my copy is already reserved. I already mused that...while I'm not loving yet another Wakandan Civil War idea...it can be an incredible engine in the right hands; and Coates is one of five writers ( CJP, RH, MCDUFFIE, COATES, GREVIOUX ) that I would off top trust to handle TChalla right in a Civil War.
I really hope Shuri TSyan TChan and Ramonda are alive. I really hope none of them are genuinely plotting against TChalla.
I predicted this when I heard Coates got this gig, and I'm gonna say it again: these first 12 issues are gonna be crazy ill.
Beyond the Trailer reviews Coates' Black Panther 1(spoilers):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY)
Is this where we post our thoughts on Issue #1 and beyond?
My thoughts....The artwork is great. Not sure about the story yet. Coates has presented a lot of problems for T'Challa to deal with, he's having to face a lot of failure so hopefully he won't be hapless and ineffectual for long. I'm not sure about the Dora Milaje part. I don't want Coates to make T'Challa into a misogynist (a charge black men are often labeled with IMO). So for me, an okay start. The jury is still out.
Is this where we post our thoughts on Issue #1 and beyond?
My thoughts....The artwork is great. Not sure about the story yet. Coates has presented a lot of problems for T'Challa to deal with, he's having to face a lot of failure so hopefully he won't be hapless and ineffectual for long. I'm not sure about the Dora Milaje part. I don't want Coates to make T'Challa into a misogynist (a charge black men are often labeled with IMO). So for me, an okay start. The jury is still out.
I was so hyped for this that I blindly bought it along with all the variants and then got home read it............and was disgusted. There wasn't even an indigenous Afrikan word for gay or homosexual before you know what so to see that ish in my fav comic character's book......I guess I can still read it to my daughters and just reiterate how that type of behavior is not right and exact and produces nothing but I hate that I have to do that but that is the world we live in. Nothing against homosexuals but I am against the proliferation of homosexuality. I'm hoping Ayo and Aneka DO get killed early so that ish won't keep popping up in the book. I guess everything else was cool, kinda echo's the Panther's Prey story by McGregor and Turner with the female baddie and her love interest? And of course the reveal at the end, now's a good time to catch up on Infinity and Time Runs Out to see what Thanos did to my girl.
Beyond the Trailer reviews Coates' Black Panther 1(spoilers):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5ieY7-sBkY)
It's funny, because the people in her video pretty much said that she has no idea what she's talking about, and that her review had the opposite effect on them. That was the overwhelming consensus. That the (very superficial and short-sighted) complaints she had are over the things that they actually liked.
Yea tat was a painful watch, you know when its like someone is just trying to fund something to complain about? Thats how it felt there, and really just felt like she just didn't have an idea of anything about BP. Like why make a review about something you know nothing about. Also i cringed when she kept saying Coates name wrong lol.
Is this where we post our thoughts on Issue #1 and beyond?
My thoughts....The artwork is great. Not sure about the story yet. Coates has presented a lot of problems for T'Challa to deal with, he's having to face a lot of failure so hopefully he won't be hapless and ineffectual for long. I'm not sure about the Dora Milaje part. I don't want Coates to make T'Challa into a misogynist (a charge black men are often labeled with IMO). So for me, an okay start. The jury is still out.
I was so hyped for this that I blindly bought it along with all the variants and then got home read it............and was disgusted. There wasn't even an indigenous Afrikan word for gay or homosexual before you know what so to see that ish in my fav comic character's book......I guess I can still read it to my daughters and just reiterate how that type of behavior is not right and exact and produces nothing but I hate that I have to do that but that is the world we live in. Nothing against homosexuals but I am against the proliferation of homosexuality. I'm hoping Ayo and Aneka DO get killed early so that ish won't keep popping up in the book. I guess everything else was cool, kinda echo's the Panther's Prey story by McGregor and Turner with the female baddie and her love interest? And of course the reveal at the end, now's a good time to catch up on Infinity and Time Runs Out to see what Thanos did to my girl.
After the storm the creators of 100 are facing after killing a Lesbian character, Marvel would probably change that even if it was intended.
I enjoyed this first issue. Granted it's on my pull list no matter what (lol), this definatly felt like Priest part 2, reading it. Shuri's state of being is perplexing because since T'Challa used the time stone to fix things, she would have never died, her current state of being is definitely a barn burner.
The two gay characters? Well, I was like "Well, saw that coming. I mean, they aren't supposed to talk to no other man anyways right? What are they supposed to do, since T'Challa doesn't do anything with his wives in training other than honoring its traditions?"
I picked up issue 1. My first BP related comic in a few years. I had to stop after Marvel decided to "roll back" some of the gains to the character's place in the Marvel U that Reggie established in his series. First the art in this issue was amazing. I think the new design of Wakanda and the new Tech is amazing. Black Panther used to have one of the most simple but bad ass costumes in comics. I think it would be great to go back to something like that. Coates vision for the Black Panther I am ok with overall. There were however some issues with the writing. The dialog between characters often felt disjointed except for the communication between the Lesbian Dora Milaj. On the politics of the issue. Um guys reading some of your comments it is almost like a catch 22 where some of your criticisms uphold some of the points made about sexism and the black man. Reggie was pretty political in his run. I don't think doing that again will work for Coates. That kind of is what is expected with his reparations article. I will make a subscription to the series to how it plays out.
And this is why one reason I said it is hard to write socially conscious stories which (I forgot to say last time) sell well. No community is monolithic in their views and there will always be disagreement about what is the proper portrayal of any issue. (I wouldn't be surprised to find numbers of the LGBT community who find these characters offensive.)
I picked up issue 1. My first BP related comic in a few years. I had to stop after Marvel decided to "roll back" some of the gains to the character's place in the Marvel U that Reggie established in his series. First the art in this issue was amazing. I think the new design of Wakanda and the new Tech is amazing. Black Panther used to have one of the most simple but bad ass costumes in comics. I think it would be great to go back to something like that. Coates vision for the Black Panther I am ok with overall. There were however some issues with the writing. The dialog between characters often felt disjointed except for the communication between the Lesbian Dora Milaj. On the politics of the issue. Um guys reading some of your comments it is almost like a catch 22 where some of your criticisms uphold some of the points made about sexism and the black man. Reggie was pretty political in his run. I don't think doing that again will work for Coates. That kind of is what is expected with his reparations article. I will make a subscription to the series to how it plays out.
I picked up issue 1. My first BP related comic in a few years. I had to stop after Marvel decided to "roll back" some of the gains to the character's place in the Marvel U that Reggie established in his series. First the art in this issue was amazing. I think the new design of Wakanda and the new Tech is amazing. Black Panther used to have one of the most simple but bad ass costumes in comics. I think it would be great to go back to something like that. Coates vision for the Black Panther I am ok with overall. There were however some issues with the writing. The dialog between characters often felt disjointed except for the communication between the Lesbian Dora Milaj. On the politics of the issue. Um guys reading some of your comments it is almost like a catch 22 where some of your criticisms uphold some of the points made about sexism and the black man. Reggie was pretty political in his run. I don't think doing that again will work for Coates. That kind of is what is expected with his reparations article. I will make a subscription to the series to how it plays out.
I have to agree with this...it's particularly disturbing to read comments by two of the posters on here regarding approaching feminist, sexist, and homosexual issues in this comic. Your comments largely underscores WHY Coates probably feels the need to address this as it also underscores the particular sexism and attitudes towards black people who are homosexual. And why many black women in academia and the arts in particular are largely disappointed with black men due to black on black misogyny.
It's LARGELY disturbing to see one poster "hope" that the two lesbian Dora Milaje are killed off early...simply because of the "ish" of them being gay. Imagine how a lesbian comics fan might feel reading that. You're pretty much telling her she shouldn't exist or belong in African fantasy or sci-if and at worst, she should die. Hopefully your daughter won't turn out to be gay with such an attitude.
Coates while being fully outspoken on black issues has always been a liberally minded academic who is quite sensitive to other issues regarding other people as well and like it or not, there will probably be many black women comic fans straight and gay who will appreciate his efforts. And I seriously doubt he'd kill them off because of that.
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLACK-PANTHER-2-GREENE-CONNECTING-B-VAR-377d4.jpg[/url])
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP202002-col-a7b1f.jpg[/url])
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP202003-colREV-d93b1.jpg[/url])
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP202004-col-e1c57.jpg[/url])
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
Thanks for posting the panels. My concern is growing. This is just an impression, but not a final judgment since the issue hasn't come out. But what are we presented with here? T'Challa in discussion (similar to his endless bull sessions in DoomWar), and maybe about to do something, but not actually in action. However we see images of black women being roughed up by black men, until they are saved by the likely two lesbian heroes.
I'm starting to suspect that Coates's "Black Panther" series might be a Trojan Horse to really write about two black lesbian heroes. If that is the case, it will be celebrated and seen as 'bold' and 'progressive'. It will certainly make Coates even more toasted among the intelligentsia, but T'Challa will not be elevated by it. We might still be left with a series where the greatness we know that T'Challa possesses is not displayed to its fullest, if at all, so whatever success this book might achieve won't be based on fans, old and new, gaining an appreciation for Panther and his world, but perhaps more so for the two Dora Milaje lovers or whatever other vetted liberal causes that Coates will feel compelled to write about, as long as it isn't racism, colonialism, or imperialism.
As I looked at these panels, if they are preview panels, this doesn't do anything to promote T'Challa. He's talking. The Dora Milage are acting. What makes a non-Panther fan, a casual reader want to read this book? Admittedly the art remains good.
It makes me think that perhaps there is some kind of twisted, inverted logic that happens where black characters are concerned. That all the things that are acceptable to do to them in the name of making them supposedly relevant or A-list are not done for white characters who get that push, or would not even be considered. How is making your supposedly main character a side character a good thing for that supposedly main character? This happened in DoomWar as well, and I suspect that it might be the case during Coates' run?
How is a constant state of deconstruction, with the hero losing all the time a good thing for them? I don't have a problem with characters losing sometime, but I want them to come back and be better than before. But if you're losing all the time, why would a reader want to read that? Where is the power fantasy aspect? And I think that is part of the issue too with black superheroes. It might be hard, heck, damn near impossible for white creators, white editors, etc. to imagine themselves as these characters, to empathize with them in that way, to see them as aspirational not to black people, but to them. If they were aspirational to them then maybe they would treat these characters better and let them be badasses, just like these white creators might imagine they would be or hope to be and so so with white characters. There is likely no vicarious living through black characters. Black skin and features, the black experience is too alien, too threatening. The fears of black anger, black violence, of black vengeance might be too unsettling.
So they shackle these black characters yet call it progress. Perhaps in their minds it is progress. But to me its a sign of disconnection. Where the black writers are concerned, you have those that accomodate or resist (within limits). I saw Priest as trying to accomodate but still do his own thing whereas I didn't see Hudlin accomodating (and I wonder if that was really the reason his series drew such ire). From just what little I've seen of Coates, he's right now in the accomodationist camp. That might change. The jury is still out, but right now, that's where I see him.
I understand what your saying and truth be told. I don't want this to be a story were Ayo and Aneka are being propped up at the cost of T'Challa and Wakandan males being thrown under the bus. I think it's good to have the them doing things. But now the stories from now on should be 75% focus on T'Challa and 25% on the DM, the villains and whatever else. The first issue did a good job setting the tone. And in Priest's run it made sense for T'Challa to feel like a guest because it was to add to the mysterious feeling of no one, not ever the readers knowing what T'Challa is thinking, and readers and villains alike were surprised when he started closing trap door's. In this case we see T'Challas inner thought's and so we need to have a bigger focus, and I think we will. I don't think Ayo and Aneka are gonna become the stars of this story because it's a Black Panther story, not Wakanda or Dora Milaje. But it's still only the first issue so we will find out by issue 4 what kinda story it Is
I haven't read it yet. Please tell me that crack/dope was not reintroduced to the country.
I haven't read it yet. Please tell me that crack/dope was not reintroduced to the country.
No, however I suspect Wakanda is under the influence of an adversary with Shadow King-esque power. If so, an unsavory, uncharacteristic, even distasteful view of Wakandans is to be expected. Shadow King stories have been some of the most uncomfortable I've ever read. Yet, we BP fans have been so mistreated and taken for granted for such a long time, my hope is that Coates and Marvel would spare us any overly drawn out plot development and allow Wakanda its overdue, deserved measure of recovery, hopefully with T'Challa affecting Wakanda's and his own personal restoration. References to Wakanda as a shining beacon for humanity, Coates stated desire for his work to be regarded as the best, the obvious amount of research done and several other factors give me hope that he has an end game in mind that will resonate favorably with us. Most of us...no one before Coates, not Priest, not Hudlin, certainly not Hickman (gave him about 8 issues) got T'Challa/Wakanda perfect.
Peace,
Mont
I understand the concern. But again it's only the first issue and previews, it was said on the CBR forums and I'll say it here, Coates said he didn't want to just show the light side of things. Wakanda isn't immune from human corruption, they should definitely be above it to a certain extent as they are kinda the beacon of hope for human advancement. To be honest yes j don't want this to be a promo and prop up for Ayo and Aneka, not because of their sexual orientation, but simply because this is the Black Panther mythos and they are supporting characters and as such should take the back seat to T'Challa as he is the title character.
I know why Priest did what he did as well. He was ahead if the times and had to do what he had to do to get Panther popular. Yes I had issues with his story as well as Hudlin's but both of those writers have written the best BPs to date and will always be the OGs that set the tone for how T'Challa should be and what the movie will be depicting
Something I've been thinking about, regarding A. Curry's post. When Curry said that Coates book might draw in more female readership or at least appreciate his efforts. Does Curry feel that didn't happen with Shuri? I mean Shuri was the Black Panther for quite a time. And I actually thought handled well in Maberry's initial run, the "Power" arc. Why is the promotion of a lesbian couple more inviting than the elevation of Shuri to headline a Black Panther series, and even heading the "Klaws of the Panther" miniseries?
I understand the concern. But again it's only the first issue and previews, it was said on the CBR forums and I'll say it here, Coates said he didn't want to just show the light side of things. Wakanda isn't immune from human corruption, they should definitely be above it to a certain extent as they are kinda the beacon of hope for human advancement. To be honest yes j don't want this to be a promo and prop up for Ayo and Aneka, not because of their sexual orientation, but simply because this is the Black Panther mythos and they are supporting characters and as such should take the back seat to T'Challa as he is the title character.
I know why Priest did what he did as well. He was ahead if the times and had to do what he had to do to get Panther popular. Yes I had issues with his story as well as Hudlin's but both of those writers have written the best BPs to date and will always be the OGs that set the tone for how T'Challa should be and what the movie will be depicting
I picked up issue 1. My first BP related comic in a few years. I had to stop after Marvel decided to "roll back" some of the gains to the character's place in the Marvel U that Reggie established in his series. First the art in this issue was amazing. I think the new design of Wakanda and the new Tech is amazing. Black Panther used to have one of the most simple but bad ass costumes in comics. I think it would be great to go back to something like that. Coates vision for the Black Panther I am ok with overall. There were however some issues with the writing. The dialog between characters often felt disjointed except for the communication between the Lesbian Dora Milaj. On the politics of the issue. Um guys reading some of your comments it is almost like a catch 22 where some of your criticisms uphold some of the points made about sexism and the black man. Reggie was pretty political in his run. I don't think doing that again will work for Coates. That kind of is what is expected with his reparations article. I will make a subscription to the series to how it plays out.
I have to agree with this...it's particularly disturbing to read comments by two of the posters on here regarding approaching feminist, sexist, and homosexual issues in this comic. Your comments largely underscores WHY Coates probably feels the need to address this as it also underscores the particular sexism and attitudes towards black people who are homosexual. And why many black women in academia and the arts in particular are largely disappointed with black men due to black on black misogyny.
It's LARGELY disturbing to see one poster "hope" that the two lesbian Dora Milaje are killed off early...simply because of the "ish" of them being gay. Imagine how a lesbian comics fan might feel reading that. You're pretty much telling her she shouldn't exist or belong in African fantasy or sci-if and at worst, she should die. Hopefully your daughter won't turn out to be gay with such an attitude.
Coates while being fully outspoken on black issues has always been a liberally minded academic who is quite sensitive to other issues regarding other people as well and like it or not, there will probably be many black women comic fans straight and gay who will appreciate his efforts. And I seriously doubt he'd kill them off because of that.
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Speak on it Ture,
Though I do take issue. I don't see the LGBT community as a whole disenfranchised. They do have the right to vote and they are wielding political power a whole lot more effectively than black people are these days. But I agree wholeheartedly about how you say that Coates is using the It group of the moment.
And you had some really good ideas that Coates could've taken with the series instead of this trendy, and faux controversial move. It's not controversial at all if almost every celebrity in Hollywood supports LGBT rights, the President supports LGBT rights, LGBT reality stars and characters are on television. Also more LGBT characters are in comics, with at least two heading series at DC, Batwoman and Midnighter. Also Catwoman was revealed to be bisexual. Heck, Empire, the most popular show on television, has a gay character as the main character, or at least the main hero character. So there is nothing revolutionary about having a lesbian couple in a comic book. And gender bending has become celebrated, such as Jaden Smith becoming the face of a women's clothing line. There were some griping about that around the margins, but nothing major. It's almost at a point where we don't wonder who is gay, but who isn't gay.
It's not bold at all, to be honest it feels like a sucker move. He won't take on racism (at least at first, according to him), despite having a little beef just this year over Bernie Sanders's lack of support for reparations, but yet he will go with an issue that has wide support among liberals. He isn't taking a hard road, he's just going with the flow.
This Better Not Be Wakanda!
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP202003-colREV-d93b1.jpg[/url])
Coates and/or Stelfreeze said they were going to give us a Wakanda that we would want to live in and I'll go so far as to say this kind imagery makes their comment all the more incredulous. Obvious attempt at invoking some Boko Haram ish.
([url]http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ta-nehisi-582x757.jpg[/url])
Concerning the lesbian couple, Coates isn't addressing LGBT concerns, he's touting his comic book by exploiting the it victim group of the moment. McGregor paralleled this when he bought crack into Wakanda as did Gillis with the Supremacist. The LGBT community isn't the only disenfranchised group.
Far be it for one to tell a story of the Black Panther hunting and capturing the many police officers that killed innocent Afrakan youths. Why not demonstrate the superiority of a socialized medical care where all citizens receive such quality healthcare that the Wakandan life expectancy is more than double that of the world's average.
Coates could have reversed Maberry's nonsense of making the Dora Milaje into an army and have them be the two potential wives of T'Challa. After a failed marriage with an outsider the Black Panther looks inward. It is here that Coates could have explored the internal workings of polygamy and the family dynamic.
Coates could have taken on the social ills of child soldiers and highlighted that although Wakandan children are trained in the craft of war and the martial sciences they are not utilized in the same manner. He could have centered the story on two Wakandan youth trying to debrief child soldiers from a neighboring nation.
There are many social issues and their victims that can be addressed. Where are the ones that deal with the physically handicapped and mentally challenged. As it stands at the moment, Coates' Damisa-Sarki flirts with an irrelevancy that denies both T'challa and Wakanda.
Of course this is only the first issue and some previews but in the immortal words of Kieth Sweat "There's a good and a bad way to love somebody." Show the love for the Damisa-Sarki.
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
Thanks Brother Ture,
I've just started to think more about black misandry recently. I mean black misogyny is brought up quite a bit especially when it comes to hip hop, and with mainstream gangsta rap I don't disagree that it is misogynist. But it is also misandrist. It dehumanizes both males and females, but the misandry is not as noticeable because I don't think the concept is one that a lot of people know about or perhaps even believe, and it's not something that is really talked about. Plus its male rappers primarily who are the ones who are spouting misogynist and misandrist lyrics and promoting those negative images. I also believe that mainstream rap is anti-black as well. But once again the color of a majority of rappers obfuscates seeing how anti-black mainstream rap, like the gender of many rappers hides the misandry.
We have come to accept as truisms some very negative things about black men. We nod our heads and laugh at them when we hear the litanies. But there are some black men who speak up or encourage and chastise black men to do better in terms of their treatment of women, but there aren't really any prominent black females or black males for that matter who speak out about misandry. Now I don't necessarily blame black women for misandry, they are the front line soldiers, like many men are for misogyny. I think we've both drunk from a poisoned chalice and are taking out our pain on each other. And that pain is deep, its immediate, and its stoked by external forces as well, so its hard to look beyond the pain and see the bigger picture, to understand context. Its far easier to lash out at the people closest to you or to react to them, rejecting them because either one of them did it or looks like the people who did hurt you.
And while hip hop and other media have created a sexist portrait of black women, they have also created a misandrist one for black men. As I alluded to before, the idea of black men being worthless is accepted, its a joke we all laugh at now because we know it's 'true'.
Speak on it Ture,
Though I do take issue. I don't see the LGBT community as a whole disenfranchised. They do have the right to vote and they are wielding political power a whole lot more effectively than black people are these days. But I agree wholeheartedly about how you say that Coates is using the It group of the moment.
And you had some really good ideas that Coates could've taken with the series instead of this trendy, and faux controversial move. It's not controversial at all if almost every celebrity in Hollywood supports LGBT rights, the President supports LGBT rights, LGBT reality stars and characters are on television. Also more LGBT characters are in comics, with at least two heading series at DC, Batwoman and Midnighter. Also Catwoman was revealed to be bisexual. Heck, Empire, the most popular show on television, has a gay character as the main character, or at least the main hero character. So there is nothing revolutionary about having a lesbian couple in a comic book. And gender bending has become celebrated, such as Jaden Smith becoming the face of a women's clothing line. There were some griping about that around the margins, but nothing major. It's almost at a point where we don't wonder who is gay, but who isn't gay.
It's not bold at all, to be honest it feels like a sucker move. He won't take on racism (at least at first, according to him), despite having a little beef just this year over Bernie Sanders's lack of support for reparations, but yet he will go with an issue that has wide support among liberals. He isn't taking a hard road, he's just going with the flow.
again everything said here is "gay is a white problem and not a black one"
Every character you mentioned in your post is white...the Empire guy...ooohhh you can point out one gay black character among the many on TV and in movies. And even he's getting a lot of backlash...by other black people. He's not even the central character on Empire and the issues he's suffering from his own father and the community he lives in in the show is pretty much an enactment of the issues the director Lee Daniels went through himself...not because he was black but because he was gay.
Jaden Smith's gender bending was met with a HUGE amount of bile and ugly personal attacks by black people on various social sites...not only of himself but of his parents as well.
Whats not being got is while the "LGBT agenda" is a popular movement with white liberals, what Ta-Nehisi Coates is doing by bringing it in a black hero's comic is dealing with the issues and non-inclusion of black LGBT people within the black community itself. The very community they should feel welcome in and included but often are either ignored or condemned.
Again, the fact your opinion is that they should have a secondary or non-existent focus in the Black Panther's comic underscores this.
And disenfranchisement can happen in many ways...just because one can vote and marry doesnt mean they are accepterd or included by many as a whole or on a social level. Republicans could say the same thing about blacks...how are you disenfranchised? You can vote, marry, go where you want, do whatever. But that doesnt mean you dont face social injustices. And LGBT black people face that not only from white but their own.
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
Thanks Brother Ture,
I've just started to think more about black misandry recently. I mean black misogyny is brought up quite a bit especially when it comes to hip hop, and with mainstream gangsta rap I don't disagree that it is misogynist. But it is also misandrist. It dehumanizes both males and females, but the misandry is not as noticeable because I don't think the concept is one that a lot of people know about or perhaps even believe, and it's not something that is really talked about. Plus its male rappers primarily who are the ones who are spouting misogynist and misandrist lyrics and promoting those negative images. I also believe that mainstream rap is anti-black as well. But once again the color of a majority of rappers obfuscates seeing how anti-black mainstream rap, like the gender of many rappers hides the misandry.
We have come to accept as truisms some very negative things about black men. We nod our heads and laugh at them when we hear the litanies. But there are some black men who speak up or encourage and chastise black men to do better in terms of their treatment of women, but there aren't really any prominent black females or black males for that matter who speak out about misandry. Now I don't necessarily blame black women for misandry, they are the front line soldiers, like many men are for misogyny. I think we've both drunk from a poisoned chalice and are taking out our pain on each other. And that pain is deep, its immediate, and its stoked by external forces as well, so its hard to look beyond the pain and see the bigger picture, to understand context. Its far easier to lash out at the people closest to you or to react to them, rejecting them because either one of them did it or looks like the people who did hurt you.
And while hip hop and other media have created a sexist portrait of black women, they have also created a misandrist one for black men. As I alluded to before, the idea of black men being worthless is accepted, its a joke we all laugh at now because we know it's 'true'.
Hip Hop has largely objectified women and made popular the terms "bitches" and "hoes"...we just recently celebrated a biopic about a rap group who not only largely objectified women and who were misogynistic, but the leader (Dr. Dre) is a known woman abuser who beat several women severely and beat down and ruined the the career and future prospects of another woman simply because she wrote a piece that he found less than flattering.
The genre shows most of the black men in it as heroes who are "thugs" and "playas", an image many of us not only accepted is seen as cool. Where is the "misandry"?
Is there a male equivalent for "bitch" and "Hoe"? No "dog" doesnt count and has nowhere near the same power.
This point of view is a popular tactic called re-focusing...and its one people use when they are uncomfortable dealing with judgmental points against their own group.
like when white people re focus discussions about racism on reverse racism.
I understand what your saying and truth be told. I don't want this to be a story were Ayo and Aneka are being propped up at the cost of T'Challa and Wakandan males being thrown under the bus. I think it's good to have the them doing things. But now the stories from now on should be 75% focus on T'Challa and 25% on the DM, the villains and whatever else. The first issue did a good job setting the tone. And in Priest's run it made sense for T'Challa to feel like a guest because it was to add to the mysterious feeling of no one, not ever the readers knowing what T'Challa is thinking, and readers and villains alike were surprised when he started closing trap door's. In this case we see T'Challas inner thought's and so we need to have a bigger focus, and I think we will. I don't think Ayo and Aneka are gonna become the stars of this story because it's a Black Panther story, not Wakanda or Dora Milaje. But it's still only the first issue so we will find out by issue 4 what kinda story it Is
I'm not as optimistic as you are. While reading your post the Blade television series from Spike came to mind. It was ostensibly a Blade series, that was supposed to be about Blade, I mean he was in every episode (if I recall), right? However the series was really about a brand new, and white character, Krista Starr. All the personal stakes were for her. Avenging a lost brother, becoming a vampire, her romance with her brother's vamp killer. Blade became a co-star (at best), but really a supporting character in the series that bore his name. Blade was the wrapper, the branding for story about Krista.
This could very well be the case with T'Challa. I don't mind a bigger focus on the Dora Milaje as a whole, but I don't think we need a certain percentage of time given to them. I think it should be organic. And though I am concerned about how homosexuality has to be in everything now like its an edict from on high, it's not a deal breaker to me because I watch shows with homosexual characters, I've read comics with homosexual characters. So having a lesbian couple in Black Panther, among the Dora Milaje, does make sense to me like one of the above posts said. I was reading recently that Grant Morrison's Wonder Woman: Earth One book will have Wonder Woman in a lesbian relationship and possibly an interracial relationship, and those two things alone will not stop me from purchasing that book.
But as I said before, and let me restate, I wish that more heterosexual, intraracial and positive, healthy romantic and sexual black relationships were portrayed in the media. Portraying otherwise seems to me to be saying that black men and black women can't get along, that black heterosexual love is impossible, that it encourages other kinds of relationships. Basically black men and women can't work and live together in peace and harmony, that we can't build together. So that kind of thinking weakens us as a whole.
I also don't assume that we will get an active T'Challa in this series. Maberry kept promising big things for Storm and T'Challa in DoomWar and it never materialized. So I don't assume, I'll just see what happens.
Something I've been thinking about, regarding A. Curry's post. When Curry said that Coates book might draw in more female readership or at least appreciate his efforts. Does Curry feel that didn't happen with Shuri? I mean Shuri was the Black Panther for quite a time. And I actually thought handled well in Maberry's initial run, the "Power" arc. Why is the promotion of a lesbian couple more inviting than the elevation of Shuri to headline a Black Panther series, and even heading the "Klaws of the Panther" miniseries?
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
Thanks Brother Ture,
I've just started to think more about black misandry recently. I mean black misogyny is brought up quite a bit especially when it comes to hip hop, and with mainstream gangsta rap I don't disagree that it is misogynist. But it is also misandrist. It dehumanizes both males and females, but the misandry is not as noticeable because I don't think the concept is one that a lot of people know about or perhaps even believe, and it's not something that is really talked about. Plus its male rappers primarily who are the ones who are spouting misogynist and misandrist lyrics and promoting those negative images. I also believe that mainstream rap is anti-black as well. But once again the color of a majority of rappers obfuscates seeing how anti-black mainstream rap, like the gender of many rappers hides the misandry.
We have come to accept as truisms some very negative things about black men. We nod our heads and laugh at them when we hear the litanies. But there are some black men who speak up or encourage and chastise black men to do better in terms of their treatment of women, but there aren't really any prominent black females or black males for that matter who speak out about misandry. Now I don't necessarily blame black women for misandry, they are the front line soldiers, like many men are for misogyny. I think we've both drunk from a poisoned chalice and are taking out our pain on each other. And that pain is deep, its immediate, and its stoked by external forces as well, so its hard to look beyond the pain and see the bigger picture, to understand context. Its far easier to lash out at the people closest to you or to react to them, rejecting them because either one of them did it or looks like the people who did hurt you.
And while hip hop and other media have created a sexist portrait of black women, they have also created a misandrist one for black men. As I alluded to before, the idea of black men being worthless is accepted, its a joke we all laugh at now because we know it's 'true'.
Hip Hop has largely objectified women and made popular the terms "bitches" and "hoes"...we just recently celebrated a biopic about a rap group who not only largely objectified women and who were misogynistic, but the leader (Dr. Dre) is a known woman abuser who beat several women severely and beat down and ruined the the career and future prospects of another woman simply because she wrote a piece that he found less than flattering.
The genre shows most of the black men in it as heroes who are "thugs" and "playas", an image many of us not only accepted is seen as cool. Where is the "misandry"?
Is there a male equivalent for "bitch" and "Hoe"? No "dog" doesnt count and has nowhere near the same power.
This point of view is a popular tactic called re-focusing...and its one people use when they are uncomfortable dealing with judgmental points against their own group.
like when white people re focus discussions about racism on reverse racism.
You are right that hip hop has objectified women. But you have also pointed out that whereas women are called bitches and hoes, men are called thugs and niggas. Men are shown to be subhuman, perhaps in a different way than women but still dehumanized. The idea that you can see one and not see the other, I cram to understand.
I think it gets confusing because men are the main rappers, they seem powerful in these videos or songs, but all they are doing is confirming coon and brute stereotypes, its just wrapped in bling.
I understand what your saying and truth be told. I don't want this to be a story were Ayo and Aneka are being propped up at the cost of T'Challa and Wakandan males being thrown under the bus. I think it's good to have the them doing things. But now the stories from now on should be 75% focus on T'Challa and 25% on the DM, the villains and whatever else. The first issue did a good job setting the tone. And in Priest's run it made sense for T'Challa to feel like a guest because it was to add to the mysterious feeling of no one, not ever the readers knowing what T'Challa is thinking, and readers and villains alike were surprised when he started closing trap door's. In this case we see T'Challas inner thought's and so we need to have a bigger focus, and I think we will. I don't think Ayo and Aneka are gonna become the stars of this story because it's a Black Panther story, not Wakanda or Dora Milaje. But it's still only the first issue so we will find out by issue 4 what kinda story it Is
I'm not as optimistic as you are. While reading your post the Blade television series from Spike came to mind. It was ostensibly a Blade series, that was supposed to be about Blade, I mean he was in every episode (if I recall), right? However the series was really about a brand new, and white character, Krista Starr. All the personal stakes were for her. Avenging a lost brother, becoming a vampire, her romance with her brother's vamp killer. Blade became a co-star (at best), but really a supporting character in the series that bore his name. Blade was the wrapper, the branding for story about Krista.
This could very well be the case with T'Challa. I don't mind a bigger focus on the Dora Milaje as a whole, but I don't think we need a certain percentage of time given to them. I think it should be organic. And though I am concerned about how homosexuality has to be in everything now like its an edict from on high, it's not a deal breaker to me because I watch shows with homosexual characters, I've read comics with homosexual characters. So having a lesbian couple in Black Panther, among the Dora Milaje, does make sense to me like one of the above posts said. I was reading recently that Grant Morrison's Wonder Woman: Earth One book will have Wonder Woman in a lesbian relationship and possibly an interracial relationship, and those two things alone will not stop me from purchasing that book.
But as I said before, and let me restate, I wish that more heterosexual, intraracial and positive, healthy romantic and sexual black relationships were portrayed in the media. Portraying otherwise seems to me to be saying that black men and black women can't get along, that black heterosexual love is impossible, that it encourages other kinds of relationships. Basically black men and women can't work and live together in peace and harmony, that we can't build together. So that kind of thinking weakens us as a whole.
I also don't assume that we will get an active T'Challa in this series. Maberry kept promising big things for Storm and T'Challa in DoomWar and it never materialized. So I don't assume, I'll just see what happens.
Something I've been thinking about, regarding A. Curry's post. When Curry said that Coates book might draw in more female readership or at least appreciate his efforts. Does Curry feel that didn't happen with Shuri? I mean Shuri was the Black Panther for quite a time. And I actually thought handled well in Maberry's initial run, the "Power" arc. Why is the promotion of a lesbian couple more inviting than the elevation of Shuri to headline a Black Panther series, and even heading the "Klaws of the Panther" miniseries?
well...
I must say...You really seem to have problems with this lesbian couple which is telling...especially since this point intentionally or unintentionally missed out on not only whats been shown in the comic, but what I said.
I said women AND LGBT people might be drawn more to the comic and/or appreciate his efforts...so yes two strong female and lesbian characters might do this. Along with the fact that other women in the book, such as Ramonda and the antagonist, seem to be and will continue to be central and strong characters as well. This could be a draw for straight AND LGBT women.
Shuri is not, I believe, a gay black woman. So where would a gay black woman see herself included with her?
Shuri I will admit also was not promoted well and also was a character, a younger sister, who took up the main MALE character's mantle. Some women would not see her as her own character but just continuing the legacy of a male character who would always be seen as THE main black panther.
Not to mention Shuri as of this date has always been written by men and arguably never dealt with women's issues as a social gender. Simply putting a woman in a costume and making her kick ass just like most male heroes isnt really addressing her or writing her as a woman or even a black woman that will focus on issues specific to black women.[/list]
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
Thanks Brother Ture,
I've just started to think more about black misandry recently. I mean black misogyny is brought up quite a bit especially when it comes to hip hop, and with mainstream gangsta rap I don't disagree that it is misogynist. But it is also misandrist. It dehumanizes both males and females, but the misandry is not as noticeable because I don't think the concept is one that a lot of people know about or perhaps even believe, and it's not something that is really talked about. Plus its male rappers primarily who are the ones who are spouting misogynist and misandrist lyrics and promoting those negative images. I also believe that mainstream rap is anti-black as well. But once again the color of a majority of rappers obfuscates seeing how anti-black mainstream rap, like the gender of many rappers hides the misandry.
We have come to accept as truisms some very negative things about black men. We nod our heads and laugh at them when we hear the litanies. But there are some black men who speak up or encourage and chastise black men to do better in terms of their treatment of women, but there aren't really any prominent black females or black males for that matter who speak out about misandry. Now I don't necessarily blame black women for misandry, they are the front line soldiers, like many men are for misogyny. I think we've both drunk from a poisoned chalice and are taking out our pain on each other. And that pain is deep, its immediate, and its stoked by external forces as well, so its hard to look beyond the pain and see the bigger picture, to understand context. Its far easier to lash out at the people closest to you or to react to them, rejecting them because either one of them did it or looks like the people who did hurt you.
And while hip hop and other media have created a sexist portrait of black women, they have also created a misandrist one for black men. As I alluded to before, the idea of black men being worthless is accepted, its a joke we all laugh at now because we know it's 'true'.
Hip Hop has largely objectified women and made popular the terms "bitches" and "hoes"...we just recently celebrated a biopic about a rap group who not only largely objectified women and who were misogynistic, but the leader (Dr. Dre) is a known woman abuser who beat several women severely and beat down and ruined the the career and future prospects of another woman simply because she wrote a piece that he found less than flattering.
The genre shows most of the black men in it as heroes who are "thugs" and "playas", an image many of us not only accepted is seen as cool. Where is the "misandry"?
Is there a male equivalent for "bitch" and "Hoe"? No "dog" doesnt count and has nowhere near the same power.
This point of view is a popular tactic called re-focusing...and its one people use when they are uncomfortable dealing with judgmental points against their own group.
like when white people re focus discussions about racism on reverse racism.
You are right that hip hop has objectified women. But you have also pointed out that whereas women are called bitches and hoes, men are called thugs and niggas. Men are shown to be subhuman, perhaps in a different way than women but still dehumanized. The idea that you can see one and not see the other, I cram to understand.
I think it gets confusing because men are the main rappers, they seem powerful in these videos or songs, but all they are doing is confirming coon and brute stereotypes, its just wrapped in bling.
You missed the part where I said black men being called "thugs and playas" and even "niggas" are embraced as positive things in hip hop and even largely in black american culture. THEY called themselves this. Its seen as something cool and embraced by rappers who are seen as heroes like Tupac, who popularized "Thug Life" and called himself a thug. Black men call THEMSELVES "nigga" all the time.
so no, "bitches and hoes" is not the same thing.
Speak on it Ture,
Though I do take issue. I don't see the LGBT community as a whole disenfranchised. They do have the right to vote and they are wielding political power a whole lot more effectively than black people are these days. But I agree wholeheartedly about how you say that Coates is using the It group of the moment.
And you had some really good ideas that Coates could've taken with the series instead of this trendy, and faux controversial move. It's not controversial at all if almost every celebrity in Hollywood supports LGBT rights, the President supports LGBT rights, LGBT reality stars and characters are on television. Also more LGBT characters are in comics, with at least two heading series at DC, Batwoman and Midnighter. Also Catwoman was revealed to be bisexual. Heck, Empire, the most popular show on television, has a gay character as the main character, or at least the main hero character. So there is nothing revolutionary about having a lesbian couple in a comic book. And gender bending has become celebrated, such as Jaden Smith becoming the face of a women's clothing line. There were some griping about that around the margins, but nothing major. It's almost at a point where we don't wonder who is gay, but who isn't gay.
It's not bold at all, to be honest it feels like a sucker move. He won't take on racism (at least at first, according to him), despite having a little beef just this year over Bernie Sanders's lack of support for reparations, but yet he will go with an issue that has wide support among liberals. He isn't taking a hard road, he's just going with the flow.
again everything said here is "gay is a white problem and not a black one"
Every character you mentioned in your post is white...the Empire guy...ooohhh you can point out one gay black character among the many on TV and in movies. And even he's getting a lot of backlash...by other black people. He's not even the central character on Empire and the issues he's suffering from his own father and the community he lives in in the show is pretty much an enactment of the issues the director Lee Daniels went through himself...not because he was black but because he was gay.
Jaden Smith's gender bending was met with a HUGE amount of bile and ugly personal attacks by black people on various social sites...not only of himself but of his parents as well.
Whats not being got is while the "LGBT agenda" is a popular movement with white liberals, what Ta-Nehisi Coates is doing by bringing it in a black hero's comic is dealing with the issues and non-inclusion of black LGBT people within the black community itself. The very community they should feel welcome in and included but often are either ignored or condemned.
Again, the fact your opinion is that they should have a secondary or non-existent focus in the Black Panther's comic underscores this.
And disenfranchisement can happen in many ways...just because one can vote and marry doesnt mean they are accepterd or included by many as a whole or on a social level. Republicans could say the same thing about blacks...how are you disenfranchised? You can vote, marry, go where you want, do whatever. But that doesnt mean you dont face social injustices. And LGBT black people face that not only from white but their own.
I don't buy that the black community is so doctrinaire homophobic. Even Michael Sam has recently said that he experienced more racism in the white gay community than hostility in the black community. I think the rampant black homophobia thing is overblown. What major black thought leader today is anti-gay? Even Charles Barkley, who threw shade on Mike Brown, has come out to speak against the LGBT legislation in North Carolina.
You say Empire is getting backlash and it is, but I bet you that the rock solid support that show is getting is from black people and it is praised and celebrated throughout black media, in addition to white media as well. So if blacks were so homophobic why are they supporting the hell out of Empire?
I understand what your saying and truth be told. I don't want this to be a story were Ayo and Aneka are being propped up at the cost of T'Challa and Wakandan males being thrown under the bus. I think it's good to have the them doing things. But now the stories from now on should be 75% focus on T'Challa and 25% on the DM, the villains and whatever else. The first issue did a good job setting the tone. And in Priest's run it made sense for T'Challa to feel like a guest because it was to add to the mysterious feeling of no one, not ever the readers knowing what T'Challa is thinking, and readers and villains alike were surprised when he started closing trap door's. In this case we see T'Challas inner thought's and so we need to have a bigger focus, and I think we will. I don't think Ayo and Aneka are gonna become the stars of this story because it's a Black Panther story, not Wakanda or Dora Milaje. But it's still only the first issue so we will find out by issue 4 what kinda story it Is
I'm not as optimistic as you are. While reading your post the Blade television series from Spike came to mind. It was ostensibly a Blade series, that was supposed to be about Blade, I mean he was in every episode (if I recall), right? However the series was really about a brand new, and white character, Krista Starr. All the personal stakes were for her. Avenging a lost brother, becoming a vampire, her romance with her brother's vamp killer. Blade became a co-star (at best), but really a supporting character in the series that bore his name. Blade was the wrapper, the branding for story about Krista.
This could very well be the case with T'Challa. I don't mind a bigger focus on the Dora Milaje as a whole, but I don't think we need a certain percentage of time given to them. I think it should be organic. And though I am concerned about how homosexuality has to be in everything now like its an edict from on high, it's not a deal breaker to me because I watch shows with homosexual characters, I've read comics with homosexual characters. So having a lesbian couple in Black Panther, among the Dora Milaje, does make sense to me like one of the above posts said. I was reading recently that Grant Morrison's Wonder Woman: Earth One book will have Wonder Woman in a lesbian relationship and possibly an interracial relationship, and those two things alone will not stop me from purchasing that book.
But as I said before, and let me restate, I wish that more heterosexual, intraracial and positive, healthy romantic and sexual black relationships were portrayed in the media. Portraying otherwise seems to me to be saying that black men and black women can't get along, that black heterosexual love is impossible, that it encourages other kinds of relationships. Basically black men and women can't work and live together in peace and harmony, that we can't build together. So that kind of thinking weakens us as a whole.
I also don't assume that we will get an active T'Challa in this series. Maberry kept promising big things for Storm and T'Challa in DoomWar and it never materialized. So I don't assume, I'll just see what happens.
Something I've been thinking about, regarding A. Curry's post. When Curry said that Coates book might draw in more female readership or at least appreciate his efforts. Does Curry feel that didn't happen with Shuri? I mean Shuri was the Black Panther for quite a time. And I actually thought handled well in Maberry's initial run, the "Power" arc. Why is the promotion of a lesbian couple more inviting than the elevation of Shuri to headline a Black Panther series, and even heading the "Klaws of the Panther" miniseries?
well...
I must say...You really seem to have problems with this lesbian couple which is telling...especially since this point intentionally or unintentionally missed out on not only whats been shown in the comic, but what I said.
I said women AND LGBT people might be drawn more to the comic and/or appreciate his efforts...so yes two strong female and lesbian characters might do this. Along with the fact that other women in the book, such as Ramonda and the antagonist, seem to be and will continue to be central and strong characters as well. This could be a draw for straight AND LGBT women.
Shuri is not, I believe, a gay black woman. So where would a gay black woman see herself included with her?
Shuri I will admit also was not promoted well and also was a character, a younger sister, who took up the main MALE character's mantle. Some women would not see her as her own character but just continuing the legacy of a male character who would always be seen as THE main black panther.
Not to mention Shuri as of this date has always been written by men and arguably never dealt with women's issues as a social gender. Simply putting a woman in a costume and making her kick ass just like most male heroes isnt really addressing her or writing her as a woman or even a black woman that will focus on issues specific to black women.[/list]
Thanks for letting me know why some people might have issues with Shuri and not see her as the MAIN Black Panther (though I could see that rationale if it came from a straight black male being considered sexist and misogynist). However, that leads to another question, would some of these supporters have rallied to Shuri if she had been gay? Does she have to be black and gay to get that support? To me you are conflating LGBT and women's issues together. While there is doubtless overlap, as there are with LGBT and the "dreaded" straight black male issues, there are also differences.
A larger question, does the gay identity supersede the black identity for some gay black people?
I understand what your saying and truth be told. I don't want this to be a story were Ayo and Aneka are being propped up at the cost of T'Challa and Wakandan males being thrown under the bus. I think it's good to have the them doing things. But now the stories from now on should be 75% focus on T'Challa and 25% on the DM, the villains and whatever else. The first issue did a good job setting the tone. And in Priest's run it made sense for T'Challa to feel like a guest because it was to add to the mysterious feeling of no one, not ever the readers knowing what T'Challa is thinking, and readers and villains alike were surprised when he started closing trap door's. In this case we see T'Challas inner thought's and so we need to have a bigger focus, and I think we will. I don't think Ayo and Aneka are gonna become the stars of this story because it's a Black Panther story, not Wakanda or Dora Milaje. But it's still only the first issue so we will find out by issue 4 what kinda story it Is
I'm not as optimistic as you are. While reading your post the Blade television series from Spike came to mind. It was ostensibly a Blade series, that was supposed to be about Blade, I mean he was in every episode (if I recall), right? However the series was really about a brand new, and white character, Krista Starr. All the personal stakes were for her. Avenging a lost brother, becoming a vampire, her romance with her brother's vamp killer. Blade became a co-star (at best), but really a supporting character in the series that bore his name. Blade was the wrapper, the branding for story about Krista.
This could very well be the case with T'Challa. I don't mind a bigger focus on the Dora Milaje as a whole, but I don't think we need a certain percentage of time given to them. I think it should be organic. And though I am concerned about how homosexuality has to be in everything now like its an edict from on high, it's not a deal breaker to me because I watch shows with homosexual characters, I've read comics with homosexual characters. So having a lesbian couple in Black Panther, among the Dora Milaje, does make sense to me like one of the above posts said. I was reading recently that Grant Morrison's Wonder Woman: Earth One book will have Wonder Woman in a lesbian relationship and possibly an interracial relationship, and those two things alone will not stop me from purchasing that book.
But as I said before, and let me restate, I wish that more heterosexual, intraracial and positive, healthy romantic and sexual black relationships were portrayed in the media. Portraying otherwise seems to me to be saying that black men and black women can't get along, that black heterosexual love is impossible, that it encourages other kinds of relationships. Basically black men and women can't work and live together in peace and harmony, that we can't build together. So that kind of thinking weakens us as a whole.
I also don't assume that we will get an active T'Challa in this series. Maberry kept promising big things for Storm and T'Challa in DoomWar and it never materialized. So I don't assume, I'll just see what happens.
Something I've been thinking about, regarding A. Curry's post. When Curry said that Coates book might draw in more female readership or at least appreciate his efforts. Does Curry feel that didn't happen with Shuri? I mean Shuri was the Black Panther for quite a time. And I actually thought handled well in Maberry's initial run, the "Power" arc. Why is the promotion of a lesbian couple more inviting than the elevation of Shuri to headline a Black Panther series, and even heading the "Klaws of the Panther" miniseries?
well...
I must say...You really seem to have problems with this lesbian couple which is telling...especially since this point intentionally or unintentionally missed out on not only whats been shown in the comic, but what I said.
I said women AND LGBT people might be drawn more to the comic and/or appreciate his efforts...so yes two strong female and lesbian characters might do this. Along with the fact that other women in the book, such as Ramonda and the antagonist, seem to be and will continue to be central and strong characters as well. This could be a draw for straight AND LGBT women.
Shuri is not, I believe, a gay black woman. So where would a gay black woman see herself included with her?
Shuri I will admit also was not promoted well and also was a character, a younger sister, who took up the main MALE character's mantle. Some women would not see her as her own character but just continuing the legacy of a male character who would always be seen as THE main black panther.
Not to mention Shuri as of this date has always been written by men and arguably never dealt with women's issues as a social gender. Simply putting a woman in a costume and making her kick ass just like most male heroes isnt really addressing her or writing her as a woman or even a black woman that will focus on issues specific to black women.[/list]
Thanks for letting me know why some people might have issues with Shuri and not see her as the MAIN Black Panther (though I could see that rationale if it came from a straight black male being considered sexist and misogynist). However, that leads to another question, would some of these supporters have rallied to Shuri if she had been gay? Does she have to be black and gay to get that support? To me you are conflating LGBT and women's issues together. While there is doubtless overlap, as there are with LGBT and the "dreaded" straight black male issues, there are also differences.
A larger question, does the gay identity supersede the black identity for some gay black people?
Shuri was never promoted enough and was pretty much a legacy type character. Everyone knows T'Challa would be the Panther again and would be the MAIN Black Panther and she, a character that was secondary.
I've long had an issue with how Marvel promotes and markets black characters, or black-led books, the few and far between. I didn't know how many people did know about Shuri outside of comic fans, and even among comic readers, that was probably a smaller slice. And mainstream comics in general have been terrible in how they've handled black female characters, not to mention the minuscule representation of black female talent behind the scenes. As for the legacy character though, good point, though sometimes legacy characters do go on to supplant the originals like Barry Allen, Hal Jordan, Michael Holt, and Jamie Reyes. I guess there really aren't Marvel equivalents though. It remains to be seen how long the new Thor and Wolverine will last.
I and no one can say for certain other than that she wasnt heavily promoted if women would have come to Shuri. Her being a woman im sure some black women would have come if she also was written socially as a woman and not just someone taking on the mantle of her brother. And though LGBT lack women may have seen some of themselves in her, they wouldnt have seen that part of them that is often not depicted in most mainstream media and is not acknowledged in their communities.
Yeah, I don't know either. I mean we just haven't had that experience really in mainstream comics. Even the Storm comic was written by a man. There was a Vixen miniseries a few years back, written by a white woman. But off hand, I can't think of any mainstream series written by a black woman. Felicia D. Henderson was at DC for a moment, I think she wrote a few Teen Titans stories and then she was gone.
YOU seem to be conflating LGBT and women's issues together...I never said their issues were the same across the board I merely included them as TWO SEPERATE GROUPS within the black community. Ayo and Aneka are both WOMEN and LGBT so that is something black women and black LGBT women can see themselves in...Ive also stated the other female characters in the book are something black women as a whole can see themselves in as well.
I'm not conflating anything. In your writing you kept saying LGBT and women like they are together on the issues so I assumed that's what you were thinking.
You particularly seem to want or need to see LGBT as something seperate from being black...Im saying overall with this book there is something for LGBT and straight black women to see in this book...and not just with Ayo and Aneka though the LGBT black women who rarely see themselves depicted in any meaningful way will see themselves especially in Ayo and Aneka
I don't need to separate anything. I don't why you keep saying I need to do this. That's fine that there is something for LGBT and black women to see in this book. Though I would argue that perhaps there was something to see before that as well. But I get it, it definitely feels special when one of your own is in a book, is the star of a book, or is prominent. I feel that way myself so I get that. My issue is that I don't think this relationship should dominate the Black Panther title, making T'Challa a supporting character in a book that bears his name. Now that might not be the case, but I got a feeling it will turn out to be.
Your last question; The fact that one has to ask that question is the problem. Its like asking a gay black person to choose and they shouldnt have to. BOTH often are equally important though depending on how and where theyve grown up, they may be demonized and take personally one moreso than the other. Racism to a large extent they accept as a fact of life, but rejection and exclusion from their own people isnt always expected and is more personal.
Thanks for sharing that insight with me.
Youre obfuscating the point that there IS homophobia in the black community...i never said the black community was so "doctrinaire" homophobic or more homophobic than any other. And why are you now comparing "racism" to "homophobia" specifically faced by black LGBT? Were talking about what black LGBT goes through in their own communities...not the greater issue of white racism. Your Michael Sam point has nothing to do with it. Stop focusing on white people's racism in this instance and focus on the point about black LGBT in their own communities.
you seem to do this "refocus" thing a lot.
The very fact you have a problem with a black lesbian couple being center characters in a black comic book shows how some black people like you exclude lack LGBT and dont want them being seen or theyre stories told...especially in any instance over racism.
And of course you dont think its a problem in the black community...it doesnt affect you and from your posts black LGBT people are mostly invisible to you since you seem to think its "another people's" problem...why wouldnt their trials be invisible to you also?
and SOME black people are supporting the hell out of Empire, many despite the gay character in it who again is not even the main focus. Many black fans of the show watch it anyway but prefer he wasnt in it or wasnt gay.
The same way you and a few other posters on here will still buy and read this comic despite the lesbian couple in it.
I can totally keep up, and have been doing so for the last few pages...but bringing up and comparing another issue that affects YOU personally when someone is talking about an issue that affects others is CLASSIC redirecting or refocusing, White people who dont want to deal with issues focusing on white supremacy and racism do it all the time and men who feel uncomfortable being the focus of their issues in regards to sexism bring up almost non-existent issues in a patriarchal society like misandry do the same.
So its okay that Aneka and Ayo's relationship affects you personally, or LGBT issues seem to affect you personally? But I can't talk about something that affects me (and a good deal of other black people too) personally? Black Panther to this point has not centered on LGBT issues, but has to some extent touched on issues of race, colonialism, etc. So is it that much of a stretch to assume that the latest volume would also address those topics, particularly since the writer is a person well versed on those topics? I haven't said that sexism in the black community doesn't exist, so what am I redirecting or refocusing from? What I don't want to see is the image of black men brutalizing black women without context and without a balancing of images because too often society has shown black men as brutes, denying our humanity, while also denying the humanity of black women in other ways. It is my hope that a buy as insightful as Coates doesn't pull from that well.
For instance, your viewpoint on hip hop and sexism...black men called THEMSELVES thugs and niggas...black women didnt give them that name....and they use it proudly and consistently. MEN called women "bitches and hoes" and many black women called out against it...they only up unitl recently started "reclaiming" the words as some movement but those words carry a far bigger weight in society. A woman being a "ho" is looked on far worse than a dude being a "thug" or "playa" which is seen as cool. Thats the difference. Trying to compare the two as equal is futile and dishonest.
I think you make a good point here about who is doing the calling and name calling. That was something I hadn't considered before. But that doesn't discount that black men/black rappers have also demonized black men. And the word 'thug' today is used by some as substitute for nigger like 'urban' is for black. President Obama even referred to the 'thugs' during the situation in Baltimore. Women rightly have protested being called those names, but some black men have also spoken out against that as well, some of them straight black men (a surprise to you I'm sure) have been critical of rap and its misogyny. I do think it is worse for a woman to be called bitch for than for a man to be called a playa, which is still a compliment, but a thug, I do see it having dehumanizing aspects. Not as damaging as bitch, but still damaging. I never said they were equal, and to accuse me of doing so is showing a dishonest streak yourself.
Michael Sam never said his experiences as a gay black man among blacks wasnt "so bad"...just that his experiences among whites was worse. And im sure it was. That doesnt mean BOTH cant be focused on.
Fine, focus on both. My point was that the black community is depicted too often IMO as a cauldron of homophobia and that depiction needs revision.
And no one said you were an "evil straight black male"...stop with the exaggerated and emotionally reactionary defensive victim posturing. Again, fragile male egos cant take criticism about faults that focus on them in particular.
Fair enough you didn't say I was evil...yet. I have no reactionary defensive victim posturing. Is that the new phrase the academia made up this week? Here we go with the 'fragile' male ego thing. What's up with not taking criticism? What criticism? And why should straight black males be criticized exactly? Who's doing the criticism and why? And can those criticizers in turn also be criticized themselves?
And it really looks like YOU cant keep up because no one said anything about either racism or homophobia being the "bigger" issue...wasnt and never was the damn point. Racism is an overall bigger issue but that doesnt mean that homophobia as a thing outside and inside the black community cant be addressed too. Black people can focus on more than one thing at once...especially if that other thing affects a large segment of black people.
Read my previous posts, I've never said homophobia was outside the black community. I think you have these talking points and you are trying to fit me within them. Now sometimes my views might fit, but other times not.
You listed all the things racism can cause, but havent of course listed how being a gay black person can and has had black LGBT people thrown out of their parents homes, beaten up and even killed by others and their own, ostracized from their communities, their relationships not acknowledged by their families, and their images excluded from things including by a poster on here who think they dont belong in a black panther comic. But no, "do that sh*t in a seperate comic", right?
Thanks for listing some of the terrible things that happen to LGBT people. Admittedly I don't always see the costs associated with being a member of that community. But I'm fine with it being in a separate comic. Why does it have to be in a Black Panther comic?
Again, Coates has spent his entire career talking about racism, the Black Panther's book has had multiple runs dealing with racism and colonialism, but the writer himself takes time to focus on this issue inside one comic thats never been used to address it and all of a sudden racism is taking a backseat to depicting LGBT people and issues. Plus its only the first issue and we dont know WHAT he's ALSO going to focus on later. And you dont see the or refuse to see the exclusionary attitude in that.
I touched on this a little in a missive above, but to this point let me add. Coates himself said he talk of racism was being delayed, so its not my fevered brain that made that up. And it is one issue, but we've seen just in the preview for issue two that the Midnight Angels will be saving black women from evil black men. Outside of the romantic relationship we don't know if other LGBT issues will even be addressed yet. We don't know what he's going to focus on in the future true and I've written that sentiment multiple times, but we already know what he has focused on. And the question is why?
Its funny and sad at the same time.....
See, here's the thing...Ayo and Aneka"s relationship doesnt affect ME personally because Im not gay...this assumption you keep making just because im mature enough to care about other people's issues and that im able to judge other straight black men like me and myself in our communities is the problem...you assume I MUST be gay and all these false and bitch made defensive claims of me saying "straight black man is evil" and how "its a surprise to me that straight black men call out misogyny" is telling of your overall view. Im a straight black man who f*cks women who calls out misogyny and homophobia. so please, miss me with the subtle guilt trip for judging straight black men bullsh*t. youre talking to one.
I just happen to be a progressive male that can care about more than one issue affecting black people at a time and even champion issues that dont affect me directly. Because im f*cking human. Just like Coates obviously is. Go figure.
And stop bullsh*tting dude. You HAVENT been just talking about issues that affect you personally, of course you can do that...what youve been doing is talking about issues that affect you personally and using them to compare and dismiss the ones bought up in this book. FOH.
I dont want to see the images of black men brutalizing women either and not sure why Coates has Wakandans doing that, but that has nothing to do with the topic weve been talking about and the reality of homophobia or sexism that exists in the black community.
And see, I never said that Black Panther's comic SHOULDNT focus on racism and never complained when it did. Youre the one for three pages now who has a problem with homosexuality being depicted in it or being in the forefront after one issue. I said it could do both. See how inclusion works? You dont have to exclude one group to include another.
And youve been redirecting or refocusing by bringing up one issue to compare and combat or dismiss another. You did it with your "hey, what about misandry?" point when misogyny was bought up, and you did it with using racism when homophobia was bought up. THAT has nothing to do with you saying anything in the black community doesnt exist. Keep up and focus on whats actually been said.
And if you werent victim posturing why come up with the silly "evil black male" line when no one said that sh*t? And what's up with you saying...yet? Dude, in your assumption that Im gay or maybe a woman youre trying to manipulate in a subtle way the viewpoint that because Im saying these things, I must hate and see straight black men as bad. Meanwhile I am one Again, FOH with the defensive posturing. Thats you trying to lead others reading this into an assumption thats not even there. And its hugely dishonorable. Pointin out issues WE have in our own communities isnt hating us or thinking were evil.
And why shouldnt we straight black males be criticized if some of us do dumb sh*t thats sexist and homophobic? Black men, women, and others are doing the criticizing and sure, they can be criticized as well but not in an attempt to redirect the argument like youve been doing. Take the criticism and deal with the damage some of us do in our own communities.
And nothing in that line you answered said anything about you saying homophobia was outside the black community. you may make fun of academia but it could help you with your reading comprehension because nowhere in that line did I say that.
And why ask why this has to be in a Black Panther comic? Why shouldnt it be in a Black Panther comic? Black Panther focuses not just on Tchalla but an entire nation of people...so none of them may be LGBT and it cant be in his comic? Would you ask that question if the focus was on a soldier in a wheelchair? Or a blind Dora? Or a wakanda soldier with PTSD or who was a former child soldier? Of course not. Any and all of these images or topics can be approached in a black Panther comic along with LGBT because all of it affects black people. So again, why shouldnt it e in this comic? There are other issues that various Black people face other than racism.
And why? Why cant it simply be that Coates thought this was an interesting and important topic to focus on along with other other topics he may focus on in the near future? Why is it so hard to find a reason why a straight black male like him or even myself would actually care about these issues that dont directly affect us, but other black people we may know and love or simply have empathy for?
Rhetorical question...I already know the answer
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
Thanks Sal and Booshman. I tried to keep it mostly civil, even after the cursing and name calling, which I did find funny in retrospect, with bitch being a horrible misogynist word, and it is, but being 'bitch made' is perfectly acceptable to use as an insult. But once we get to the name calling stage the conversation is pretty much over as far as I'm concerned.
I think some black folks think being for 'everyone' proves their moral superiority and that being a nice person will make them seem less threatening and will get results. That if we extend our hands, 'in love' (like Common suggested), hands will extend back to us, and we'll all hold hands together as we skip down the road of togetherness to Wonderland. What often has come back instead is not an extended hand, but a fist.
And even the allies who aren't swinging on us, aren't rushing to our defense. They are too busy getting with the people doing the swinging or trying to. They use us when its convenient but discard us at a moment's notice once our usefulness as cannon fodder and symbols is over. And then they have the gall, or the wizardry to use figures, songs, quotes, and other Civil Rights stuff often to 'reinforce' their points.
Now does that mean that every member of the groups of our 'allies' does that? No. It does not, but those numbers are minuscule and not something I think we should be wasting our time trying to find out. If you ride with us, you ride, but its a waste looking for the 'good' people among our allies. Wasn't it Socrates that went around with a torch looking for one honest man? Who has time for that.
People respect strength and power, they don't respect weakness and begging. They don't respect people trying to fit in. At best they pity them. And it's funny as well that some feminists would likely decry strength and power as 'masculine' but at the same time some feminists will celebrate seeing Furiosa or Rey kick ass, and what are they displaying exactly? Strength, power, agency. So its not a matter of those things as concepts being 'wrong', its who is using them, or who is displaying them. But some people, IMO, get it twisted and go whole hog, buying the whole thing, hook, line, and sinker. And if they are in fact wrong, then some of these feminists are wrong or hypocritical for praising them. But wait? Feminists, or members of the LGBT aren't wrong, ever, it seems for some folks.
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
Thanks Sal and Booshman. I tried to keep it mostly civil, even after the cursing and name calling, which I did find funny in retrospect, with bitch being a horrible misogynist word, and it is, but being 'bitch made' is perfectly acceptable to use as an insult. But once we get to the name calling stage the conversation is pretty much over as far as I'm concerned.
I think some black folks think being for 'everyone' proves their moral superiority and that being a nice person will make them seem less threatening and will get results. That if we extend our hands, 'in love' (like Common suggested), hands will extend back to us, and we'll all hold hands together as we skip down the road of togetherness to Wonderland. What often has come back instead is not an extended hand, but a fist.
And even the allies who aren't swinging on us, aren't rushing to our defense. They are too busy getting with the people doing the swinging or trying to. They use us when its convenient but discard us at a moment's notice once our usefulness as cannon fodder and symbols is over. And then they have the gall, or the wizardry to use figures, songs, quotes, and other Civil Rights stuff often to 'reinforce' their points.
Now does that mean that every member of the groups of our 'allies' does that? No. It does not, but those numbers are minuscule and not something I think we should be wasting our time trying to find out. If you ride with us, you ride, but its a waste looking for the 'good' people among our allies. Wasn't it Socrates that went around with a torch looking for one honest man? Who has time for that.
People respect strength and power, they don't respect weakness and begging. They don't respect people trying to fit in. At best they pity them. And it's funny as well that some feminists would likely decry strength and power as 'masculine' but at the same time some feminists will celebrate seeing Furiosa or Rey kick ass, and what are they displaying exactly? Strength, power, agency. So its not a matter of those things as concepts being 'wrong', its who is using them, or who is displaying them. But some people, IMO, get it twisted and go whole hog, buying the whole thing, hook, line, and sinker. And if they are in fact wrong, then some of these feminists are wrong or hypocritical for praising them. But wait? Feminists, or members of the LGBT aren't wrong, ever, it seems for some folks.
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
See, here's the thing...Ayo and Aneka"s relationship doesnt affect ME personally because Im not gay...this assumption you keep making just because im mature enough to care about other people's issues and that im able to judge other straight black men like me and myself in our communities is the problem...you assume I MUST be gay and all these false and bitch made defensive claims of me saying "straight black man is evil" and how "its a surprise to me that straight black men call out misogyny" is telling of your overall view. Im a straight black man who f*cks women who calls out misogyny and homophobia. so please, miss me with the subtle guilt trip for judging straight black men bullsh*t. youre talking to one.[/quote]
I wasn't sure if you were gay or not, but since you attacked me, accusing me of not supporting something because it doesn't personally affect me, and you've been riding hard on the homosexuality issue, for this instance particularly I did wonder if that was the case. Also the way you wrote about Shuri and gay black women's perspective regarding her, I wasn't sure. But find the evidence where I have made this assumption repeatedly? You can't, because I haven't. It's not an issue of straight black men calling out misogyny at all. If you read my post you would see that I said that some straight black men have done so. There is nothing wrong with that at all. I don't like misogynist lyrics in rap. I don't get the insults here coming from you.
I just happen to be a progressive male that can care about more than one issue affecting black people at a time and even champion issues that dont affect me directly. Because im f*cking human. Just like Coates obviously is. Go figure.
You're assuming things about me again, but you've been doing that from jump, so no difference there. You're a progressive male, bravo for you.
And stop bullsh*tting dude. You HAVENT been just talking about issues that affect you personally, of course you can do that...what youve been doing is talking about issues that affect you personally and using them to compare and dismiss the ones bought up in this book. FOH.
So ,wait I haven't been talking about issues that affect me personally or have I? And I haven't dismissed the issues brought up in this book. I've speculated on why those issues were put in the book first and foremost. I think you are very defensive and accusing for such an allegedly progressive person.
I dont want to see the images of black men brutalizing women either and not sure why Coates has Wakandans doing that, but that has nothing to do with the topic weve been talking about and the reality of homophobia or sexism that exists in the black community.
What is the topic we're talking about then? Black men brutalizing black women doesn't fit within a discussion of sexism in the black community? And how the imagery of black brutes has been used to demonize black men shouldn't be discussed? So please tell me what should I talk about? You've been good at putting words in my mouth so far, you might as well write them too.
And see, I never said that Black Panther's comic SHOULDNT focus on racism and never complained when it did. Youre the one for three pages now who has a problem with homosexuality being depicted in it or being in the forefront after one issue. I said it could do both. See how inclusion works? You dont have to exclude one group to include another.
You're going on about exclusion when you display an exclusionary mindset for anyone who doesn't co-sign your 'progressive' views. I didn't say they shouldn't be in the book, but you're right about my wishing they were not at the forefront. The book is supposed to about Black Panther. It's not about Aneka and Ayo. Black Panther was on the cover (s). The book has been marketed as a Black Panther book. Now it might remain so, or it might turn into something else. If the story is going to be about Aneka and Ayo Marvel and Coates need to be honest about that up front and not use Black Panther as a cover to promote Aneka and Ayo.
And youve been redirecting or refocusing by bringing up one issue to compare and combat or dismiss another. You did it with your "hey, what about misandry?" point when misogyny was bought up, and you did it with using racism when homophobia was bought up. THAT has nothing to do with you saying anything in the black community doesnt exist. Keep up and focus on whats actually been said.
Now I'm redirecting as well? In addition to refocusing. I guess I can only discuss what you want me to talk about. I brought up misandry to put things into context. I wasn't dismissing misogyny at all, like you seem to think I was.
And if you werent victim posturing why come up with the silly "evil black male" line when no one said that sh*t? And what's up with you saying...yet? Dude, in your assumption that Im gay or maybe a woman youre trying to manipulate in a subtle way the viewpoint that straight black men are hated and villified. Again, FOH with the bullsh*t. Thats you trying to lead others reading this into an assumption thats not even there. And its hugely dishonorable.
You've been knocking straight black males from early on in your posts. I did say that the term evil was one you didn't use, however you seem to have an issue with straight black men, and perhaps feel it is your self-appointed progressive straight black male duty to set all the rest of us Neanderthals straight (not 'straight' straight of course, but in terms of making us see 'reality' or 'truth' or reality as you see it.)
And why shouldnt we straight black males be criticized if some of us do dumb sh*t thats sexist and homophobic? Black men, women, and others are doing the criticizing and sure, they can be criticized as well but not in an attempt to redirect the argument like youve been doing. Take the criticism and deal with the damage some of us do in our own communities.
Once again you seem to be telling me how I can talk and what I can talk about. So you also deem what's relevant to discuss and how to discuss it? Oh well. I never said straight black males shouldn't be criticized. I've done so myself. Even regarding President Obama. Look at some my posts over the years about him on this forum for example. But I don't like the idea that straight black males are THE problem. Criticism with context, or if necessary nuance, is what I prefer. Just slamming black men, without looking at historical and economic and other factors, without looking at other groups and what they are doing-if similar-and then dropping the mic, I'm not cool with that. That's not fair. And it continues to paint the picture of black men as dangerous, threatening, etc.
And nothing in that line you answered said anything about you saying homophobia was outside the black community. you may make fun of academia but it could help you with your reading comprehension because nowhere in that line did I say that.
You wrote about that regarding homophobia so I was responding to that. And academia is not an end-all-be-all. You can be an educated fool, or rather a miseducated one.
And why ask why this has to be in a Black Panther comic? Why shouldnt it be in a Black Panther comic? Black Panther focuses not just on Tchalla but an entire nation of people...so none of them may be LGBT and it cant be in his comic? Would you ask that question if the focus was on a soldier in a wheelchair? Or a blind Dora? Or a wakanda soldier with PTSD or who was a former child soldier? Of course not. Any and all of these images or topics can be approached in a black Panther comic along with LGBT because all of it affects black people. So again, why shouldnt it e in this comic? There are other issues that various Black people face other than racism.
Assuming again. Yes I would ask that question for all those examples. The book is supposed to be about Black Panther. I'm paying my money-in fact this Black Panther is one of the first books I ever subscribed to-because I was led to believe this book will be about him, his travails and his triumphs. I want him front and center. I don't have a problem with supporting characters in comic books, even prominent supporting characters, but I do have a problem with a supporting character (s) that reduces the ostensible main character to a background or supporting role.
Flipping the question, would you be riding so hard for this if any of those supporting characters were not LGBT? If one of the Midnight Angels was involved with one of the Hatut Zeraze for example?
And why? Why cant it simply be that Coates thought this was an interesting and important topic to focus on along with other other topics he may focus on in the near future? Why is it so hard to find a reason why a straight black male like him or even myself would actually care about these issues that dont directly affect us, but other black people we may know and love or simply have empathy for?
That very well may be the case that Coates is doing exactly what you're saying. He obviously feels strongly enough about the issue to put in the first issue of this series and from the preview will likely continue to develop Ayo and Aneka into major characters during his run. I don't find it hard at all for straight black males to 'care' about other issues, though I am disappointed that you are making an implication that I, or straight black males who might share my perspective-don't. Or that even LGBT black people 'care' more than about their own particular set of issues. To me, its assumed that LGBT people and some black women are given the benefit of the doubt, but certain straight black males seem to be the villains in your perspective, unless they are enlightened like you and Coates, excuse me, 'progressive'. You pretend to be embracing and open but you've been very exclusionary throughout most of our exchanges and dismissive especially during this latest screed.
Rhetorical question...I already know the answer
Thank you for answering for me. You're very good at assuming about me anyway.
Thanks Kimoyo for that clarification.
As for A. Curry...here we go again with the straight black male shaming. "Fragile'? Seriously? That's the best you can do? No, people are expressing disagreement so you don't like that. But of course, you can't be wrong. You read about intersectionality in a book or heard about it in a lecture, you heard the women you 'f*cks with' talk about feminism and/or womanism so it has to be right, right? So anyone that disagrees, they are wrong, they have the problem, its because of their "fragile" male egos. None of these responses I've read in disagreement to you sound 'fragile' at all. But you have to demonize, vilify, and insult to bolster your own position.
I don't think anyone here has put up a sign that says no LGBT or black women are allowed, and once again you are connecting the two even though you said you have not. There have been female posters here, but maybe they've left for a variety of reasons. You don't know for certain, but you are certain you have the answer, or rather the problem which is straight black males (surprise, surprise). You keep referring to 'large' numbers of LGBT people, but there are larger numbers of straight black males, relatively speaking, inside this country and definitely worldwide, but their perspectives aren't as important and suspect perhaps in your eyes.
And it's a shame that you attack the people who disagree with you as not having any other other concerns' beyond their own. I think that's unfair and you have no evidence to back that up, but enlightened males don't need proof though. Just like you these men have families, communities, pasts, you don't know what they've gone through or do now, you don't know what they care about. But we know what you care about, because you honed right in on criticism of an LGBT storyline.
Kimoyo pointed out how important, vital, and realistic it is to have self-determination, to highly value self-preservation, because just about every other group but blacks are doing that. If we follow your magnanimous example we would be lucky they will give us a pat on the head, or not step too hard on our heads as they ascend the ladder we're holding up for them, excuse, for everybody, because that's what it should all be about. We should be last, they should be first, it's the selfless thing to do. Some feminists and LGBT members are fighting hard as hell for the issues that matter most to them, but you see no problem with that. However if a black guy speaks up, one that isn't promoting feminism or LGBT issues, then he's selfish. I bet you don't get on forums with majority feminists and LGBT and say they 'bitch' about their oppression. You sing along with them.
Being against racism helps all black people. Now there are divisions among black people, sure, but fighting against it is important to the whole. But Coates is 'more' progressive now than writing about racism in your words. So racism is something that isn't important as the 'real' issues, like feminism and LGBT rights. Have you ever thought that since Coates is now 'beyond' writing about racism that that was the reason he was chosen to write Black Panther? And are you going to tell me, in all honesty, that most white people would rather hear about racism and colonialism than what we've seen so far in Coates's book?
And for your parting shot, the "Hotep" jab. I've been reading or hearing derision for the Hotep label for a while. I mean, its like you and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill are taking talking points directly from some feminists and some LGBT people.
Thanks Kimoyo for that clarification.
As for A. Curry...here we go again with the straight black male shaming. "Fragile'? Seriously? That's the best you can do? No, people are expressing disagreement so you don't like that. But of course, you can't be wrong. You read about intersectionality in a book or heard about it in a lecture, you heard the women you 'f*cks with' talk about feminism and/or womanism so it has to be right, right? So anyone that disagrees, they are wrong, they have the problem, its because of their "fragile" male egos. None of these responses I've read in disagreement to you sound 'fragile' at all. But you have to demonize, vilify, and insult to bolster your own position.
I don't think anyone here has put up a sign that says no LGBT or black women are allowed, and once again you are connecting the two even though you said you have not. There have been female posters here, but maybe they've left for a variety of reasons. You don't know for certain, but you are certain you have the answer, or rather the problem which is straight black males (surprise, surprise). You keep referring to 'large' numbers of LGBT people, but there are larger numbers of straight black males, relatively speaking, inside this country and definitely worldwide, but their perspectives aren't as important and suspect perhaps in your eyes.
And it's a shame that you attack the people who disagree with you as not having any other other concerns' beyond their own. I think that's unfair and you have no evidence to back that up, but enlightened males don't need proof though. Just like you these men have families, communities, pasts, you don't know what they've gone through or do now, you don't know what they care about. But we know what you care about, because you honed right in on criticism of an LGBT storyline.
Kimoyo pointed out how important, vital, and realistic it is to have self-determination, to highly value self-preservation, because just about every other group but blacks are doing that. If we follow your magnanimous example we would be lucky they will give us a pat on the head, or not step too hard on our heads as they ascend the ladder we're holding up for them, excuse, for everybody, because that's what it should all be about. We should be last, they should be first, it's the selfless thing to do. Some feminists and LGBT members are fighting hard as hell for the issues that matter most to them, but you see no problem with that. However if a black guy speaks up, one that isn't promoting feminism or LGBT issues, then he's selfish. I bet you don't get on forums with majority feminists and LGBT and say they 'bitch' about their oppression. You sing along with them.
Being against racism helps all black people. Now there are divisions among black people, sure, but fighting against it is important to the whole. But Coates is 'more' progressive now than writing about racism in your words. So racism is something that isn't important as the 'real' issues, like feminism and LGBT rights. Have you ever thought that since Coates is now 'beyond' writing about racism that that was the reason he was chosen to write Black Panther? And are you going to tell me, in all honesty, that most white people would rather hear about racism and colonialism than what we've seen so far in Coates's book?
And for your parting shot, the "Hotep" jab. I've been reading or hearing derision for the Hotep label for a while. I mean, its like you and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill are taking talking points directly from some feminists and some LGBT people.
First off, before I get into this, I do want to thank you for the suggestion of the For Harriet website. It was not my intention to get into a row with you, but once its on, its on. I wanted to better understand where you were coming from, but I'm not going to be down with slamming either me, or other straight black men, just because.
As for Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, what you consider 'polite' criticism was him co-signing an insulting post about Dr. Welsing. And also Dr. Hill did a video, perhaps on Huffpost Live about "Hoteps" which conveniently didn't include any members of the alleged Hoteps but feminist critics of them, which of course Dr. Hill co-signed. How is that for a free exchange of views? And you can't see how feminists and LGBT activists in turn could also do the same thing you say they say about the "Hotep" people (I said people because I would think there are female Hoteps as well, though it is often derided as a male thing), by policing black thought and behavior?
You say I am twisting your words, manipulating the conversation, well I know you have twisted mine. You keep harping on the 'evil' black male thing, and I said pages ago by now that you didn't say that, that was my words. Yet perhaps you skimmed over that as well.
Fragile ego male thing again? No one here has said anything about not criticizing each other, or the unenlightened straight black males. People disagree on these boards all the time. And you skimmed over what I said before about criticism of black males, and that I have done so myself. It's not criticism per se, it's the who, the why, and if it is justified? And does it go in the reverse as well? What's fragile about that? I'm not going to let you attack me, especially if it is unfair, and there is no push back. It's unrealistic to think that people are going to sit there and get bashed and not respond to it. Fragility has nothing to do with that. Fragility would be bowing to that criticism, especially if it is unwarranted or flat out wrong.
So is it only unenlightened black males that deserve to go the wood shed? Black people are often criticized in this country, talked to the way other groups are not, and its been going on for so long and we've accepted our subordinate status in so many ways, that we accept it, we think its actually a corrective of sorts. I'm not going to add on to that criticism-if it is unwarranted-and if I do criticize I'm going to try to do it with an understanding of the social, economic, and political forces that have warped black life for half a millennium. I'm not going to bash black men because it gets me in the good graces of some feminists, intellectuals, or activists.
Unlike you I am skeptical when it comes to mainstream media or comics saying they will discuss racism 'later'. Later often amounts to never. And its not the end of the world that Ayo and Aneka are in the book, stop exaggerating. My major issue with that is why they were at the forefront of the first issue. You seem to have skimmed over my saying I've read other comic books with gay characters. But for Black Panther I do want Black Panther to be the star, not two new characters. And if these two characters were heterosexuals, I doubt they would have been given the same spot light.
Black feminists and LGBT members are black, no one said they aren't. But I also know that feminism and LGBT issues are transracial causes as well, and I can easily see the whites among each group putting their interests first and the blacks going along with that. Except when they don't, which is why you do have discussions about racism in both of those camps, and black feminists renamed themselves womanists as a result of that. And talking about gay issues is not as threatening to white people as it is talking about black issues because white people can more easily see themselves in gender and gay issues, whereas they can't if race is emphasized. So you're saying that black feminists and black LGBT aren't focusing on what white people think? Black feminism is an offshoot in large part from white feminism, so how can you separate the branch from the root?
Comics are in the business of selling and how it has generally been done, by getting white readership and support. Priest attempted to do so, Hudlin went in another direction, but I would argue the post-Hudlin writers went back to trying to make Panther amenable to white readers. I don't think its a stretch for Coates to do the same, and focusing on an LGBT storyline would make white readers less uncomfortable than one about racism or colonialism. And if you couple that with T'Challa mired in failure and images of black men abusing black women all the more good. Time will tell if the increase in feminist and LGBT readership, which you think Coates has gotten, will keep the book afloat. I'm thinking that Coates new support is from white liberals who like his work at The Atlantic and became of his celebrity status.
So are you saying straight black men don't talk about issues affecting feminism or LGBT? I'm sure there are websites that do that, even ones that focus on geek stuff, like Black Nerd Problems. But surely you won't find any black males on sites like TheGrio or TheRoot not supporting feminism or LGBT issues.
One more thing, you talk about non straight black people wanting to be included in mainstream comics. That's fine, but you're assuming that straight black people are included which is an exaggeration at best, but which I feel is erroneous. You can probably count on one hand how many black creators are at either major comic book company right now. Coates, David F. Walker, John Semper (coming up on Cyborg), Christopher Priest (coming up on Deathstroke). I can't think of any others. And how many books exactly right now are headlined by black characters? Cyborg, Captain America, The Ultimates, We Are Robin, Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur, Power Man and Iron Fist, and Black Panther. That's pretty good compared to some years, but not a lot, so its not a situation where you have had a ton of straight black books, written by straight black men or straight black women. I think your perception of straight black male advantage of straight black male privilege in comic books is skewered.
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
Sigh...same Booshman..how did I know when my personal friend who posts on here called to tell me about others posting in this discussion you would be one of them using this as an opportunity to continue your petty personal feelings towards me?...and even though I've called you out on at least on two occasions to settle this particular "beef'" in person you still have with me after these many years...you've still avoided it.
And how stupid are you to still think that feminism or womanism and LGBT issues are some "other" cause when many black women are involved in it and say the same thing I've been saying on here and there is a huge segment of black LGBT people?
Or like some on here, they're simply invisible to you or you just don't acknowledge that it's a concern for black people who are different from you too?
In regards to your summation...I don't "gallivant" around opting black dudes should put anyone before themselves and don't believe that...there's a difference between putting someone before yourself and considering people ALONG WITH yourself. You can do two things at once. But of course, some negros feel threatened at the very mention of simply considering, for a moment, some other cause or someone other than themselves....even IF those people are black too.
And you obviously have no idea what "new black" is since nowhere did I say racism doesn't exist anymore.
You and most others on here don't consider anyone but yourselves and your own fragile male egos....and of course this page I notice is now devoid of any black women and any Black LGBT people at all...because you've pretty much made it a place where only straight black men can bitch about their own oppression with no regards to how non straight black men are oppressed in different ways...or how just because two black LGBT women are in a comic book you feel threatened that another "agenda" is taking over your own causes.
Thankfully Coates, who has written about racism along with other issues his entire life, is more multi-functional and progressive than that. Which is why of course he is where he is...and he's writing what he's writing.
Continue on with this small hotep boys club...the world outside, and Coates himself, will continue on without you
Can we knock off the who has a bigger stick and get back to the topic please? Squash the beef and move on.. Or don't but mkve that to private messages, this is suppose to be about BP and what's going on with him.
I wonder here how the terrorists organization "The people" if the woman in green is apart of that and if she has done sort of ties to T'Challas past. She looks Wakandan and there has to be something for why she is doing this. Any thoughts?
Can we knock off the who has a bigger stick and get back to the topic please? Squash the beef and move on.. Or don't but mkve that to private messages, this is suppose to be about BP and what's going on with him.
I wonder here how the terrorists organization "The people" if the woman in green is apart of that and if she has done sort of ties to T'Challas past. She looks Wakandan and there has to be something for why she is doing this. Any thoughts?
I don't even know why Emp bothered with that deflecting "Enlightened Negro" who gallivants around and constantly opts for black dudes to put everyone before themselves. While the opposite is rarely done for them, by said groups.
Sigh...same Booshman..how did I know when my personal friend who posts on here called to tell me about others posting in this discussion you would be one of them using this as an opportunity to continue your petty personal feelings towards me?...and even though I've called you out on at least on two occasions to settle this particular "beef'" in person you still have with me after these many years...you've still avoided it.
And how stupid are you to still think that feminism or womanism and LGBT issues are some "other" cause when many black women are involved in it and say the same thing I've been saying on here and there is a huge segment of black LGBT people?
Or like some on here, they're simply invisible to you or you just don't acknowledge that it's a concern for black people who are different from you too?
In regards to your summation...I don't "gallivant" around opting black dudes should put anyone before themselves and don't believe that...there's a difference between putting someone before yourself and considering people ALONG WITH yourself. You can do two things at once. But of course, some negros feel threatened at the very mention of simply considering, for a moment, some other cause or someone other than themselves....even IF those people are black too.
And you obviously have no idea what "new black" is since nowhere did I say racism doesn't exist anymore.
You and most others on here don't consider anyone but yourselves and your own fragile male egos....and of course this page I notice is now devoid of any black women and any Black LGBT people at all...because you've pretty much made it a place where only straight black men can bitch about their own oppression with no regards to how non straight black men are oppressed in different ways...or how just because two black LGBT women are in a comic book you feel threatened that another "agenda" is taking over your own causes.
Thankfully Coates, who has written about racism along with other issues his entire life, is more multi-functional and progressive than that. Which is why of course he is where he is...and he's writing what he's writing.
Continue on with this small hotep boys club...the world outside, and Coates himself, will continue on without you
Ohhh....ya....."your friend" told you about this page. Chances are you've been F5ing this page like the lonely loser you clearly are for, for a while. Hence why you've been adamant on meeting me in person "to squash our supposed beef." Which reminds me....
Who the hell are you again, that I would meet you in person? You're hardly important enough to warrant me meeting you. You're just an internet idiot who through his own lack of self-awareness, conflates how own self-importance, with being actually "that" important. Get the f*ck over yourself.
The reason that more women and LGBT people don't post here is the same reason that this isn't CBR or Comicvine. Because this has generally been an extremely obscure fan page. Not because of supposed "fragile egos", and your nonsense riddled implication that we're anti-women/LGBT. Which we're not. So again, you're being disingenuous; and AGAIN you're putting the onus on black dudes, instead of the people who are actually at fault for what YOU consider to be a problem.
As for "New Black". You posting the most extreme position of them, and then propping that up as the norm, so you can disassociate yourself from them, under that condition is more dis-ingenuousness from you. Moderate "New Blacks" begrudgingly accept the existence of racism (and sometimes say it mainly/only comes from black people), tend to make excuses for everyone but black folks, put the responsibility on black people for not capitulating (which they mislabel as "working alongside people"), and then call use the dismissive and feel-good label of "Hotep" for anyone who's not 100% self-sacrificing for women and LGBT. It's a piss poor attempt at shaming.
They, like you, are laughably transparent.
The rest of your moronic rant I won't even bother wasting the keystrokes over, as it's just you strawmanning and engaging in hilarious personality projecting. As usual.
I'm not going to respond to everything AC Curry said, but a few points...
You are right about the presence of black male characters in movies and I'll throw in television too, though you are forgetting about Storm, Catwoman, Amanda Waller, Tigress, Claire Temple, Lady Cop, and Vixen, all derived from the comics. And also Fish Mooney, created for the show Gotham. And Misty Knight will be in Luke Cage. So will I agree with you that there has been a serious dearth of roles for black females, its not the complete desert you describe. Let's keep it real here, if it's taken so freaking long to get a Wonder Woman film and she's the best known female superhero out there, do you really think that you are going to see a Monica Rambeau film before her? And the one black female superhero film that did get made, Catwoman was a disaster, so already if there is an uphill battle to get films based on female superheroes, and black female superheroes, then Catwoman's failure gave Hollywood the excuse it needed to not try again.
But all that being said, you seem to ignore that black men are not controlling who gets movies or who gets comic book series. If they are lucky they get to work on those series, if they are lucky, but its white men who are running the show. However your ire seems directed at straight black men, like it somehow straight black men's fault that there is a dearth of black female or even LGBT roles in comics. That being said, Arrow introduced Curtis Holt, their version of Mr. Terrific, who is a married gay man in the Arrowverse.
I've never been on Dr. Hill's page, so here you are ASSuming again. It's far easier for you to do that than to listen to what I have to say, especially if you don't agree with it. It's easier to deal with villains, that confirms your ideas about certain straight black males. I mention fragile egos because YOU keep talking about them. That's your best insult or rationale because you can't comprehend that people who disagree with you aren't troglodytes.
Coates has white liberal support. He works at The Atlantic, not a bastion of black thought, even though he has carved out a space there. Where he works is not made up, a lot of support he gets in the white media is not made up. Is he where he is because of a groundswell of support from black feminist and black LGBT activists? Or was he put on by white folks?
I didn't say that the lesbian Midnight Angels issues shouldn't be explored in a comic. Find the quote where I said that. But I have questioned and criticized why that subplot was given priority in the first issue of Black Panther over other things. And I speculated as to why that is. And to keep it real, I feel if this story line continues to develop and Black Panther is on the side lines then it will be an issue of Marvel/Coates using Black Panther as the brand to really have a story about two new lesbian characters. That is deceptive. It might shock you but I've read, and liked, some stories about Batwoman, a lesbian character. When I read those stories I was reading them expecting Batwoman to be front and center. If her straight sidekick had dominated the story and Batwoman was on the side line I would think that wasn't cool. That's not what I bought the book for. But once again you have to find something nefarious in that response, to reconfirm your own dark imaginings about unenlightened straight black men.
Regarding my alleged emotionalism, I think you are getting way out of joint due to what some people say on the internet about LGBT people on Dr. Hill's or For Harriet's, just like you have on this forum. On this forum, a handful of people have responded and expressed displeasure with aspects of Coates's first issue, but you've blown it way out of proportion to an attack on black women and LGBT. Seriously, internet commenters are going to ruin Dr. Hill's career? That dude has been a go-to Negro on FOX News and now CNN. He's been on Huffington Post, he's good. But the idea that he is above criticism, if Dr. Welsing is not above criticism then the people you revere like Dr. Hill are not above criticism either.
Gentlemen. I am happy and I am sure that Reggie is pleased about the increase in traffic discussing the Black Panther; however there are Forum rules. Please read them. While the HEF has always encouraged spirited conversations lets keep in mind that we are supposed to maintain civility. We have a place on the forums to talk about politics. Lets try to keep the discussion here related to the Black Panther. Personal insults simply sours the conversation.
I think that Coates is dead on with his presentation of political issues within the comic. Priest and Hudlin both said that you cannot have a black character and not have political overtones in the book. Coates is also in his rights to present issues related to the LGBT community. Just look at the discussion here. The continent of Africa and it's many Countries definitely have some issues related to Women's rights.
Presenting issues related to women's rights in a warrior culture is realistic. Crack in Wakanda when they are so technology advances and educated is WACK. Coates no crack in Wakanda ! lol.
I have tried to keep it civil. I haven't resorted to name calling. I don't take much stock in internet flexing.
But to A. Curry's last reply, I will say:
I did a quick look at For Harriet, nothing thorough. Checked out an article about Hillary Clinton showing up at Black Girls Rock. I agreed with some of the writer's indignation.
What seems is not always what is. I mentioned several things that I took issue with in the Black Panther's first issue, but you zeroed in on the LGBT issue. And I said early on that my major issue with the lesbian relationship was that it nearly superseded Black Panther himself in his first issue. I don't think that is a good way to go if you are reintroducing a character to veteran readers and more importantly introducing Black Panther to new readers. Somehow that has been lost in many of our back-and-forths. Though you did acknowledge it in this last reply.
I also said point blank that I do want to see more healthy, intraracial heterosexual relationships among black characters in media, because there is a dearth of them. And yes I would rather see that in a Black Panther comic with T'Challa and/or Shuri than a focus on Ayo and Aneka. That being said, I don't think gay relationships should never be in comics. It's going on in real life and I can understand the desire to see gay relationships represented. I'm not saying its something that I personally endorse, but I do understand the desire to have that representation.
I don't get the racial swipes regarding Batwoman. You agreed that LGBT issues are transracial, so shouldn't a progressive like you embrace all LGBT characters in comics? Though I didn't pick up Batwoman because she was a lesbian character. I knew that going in, but I was intrigued by the character, liked the artwork, and thought the initial books had a creepy vibe which set them apart from other Batfamily books.
Anyway, I've said multiple times that black homosexuals are black. That being said, I don't know if homosexuality is endemic to the African experience or have seen proof that ancient Africans practiced homosexuality.
As for black female characters I disagree that they are there solely to support (black) male characters. I think some might be often not well realized attempts at that very inclusion you cherish. And if they are there at all to support males, it is white or non-black males generally. At times we see some of these black females in romantic relationships with white men as the black male characters are often in relationships with white or non-black women. You are right that these black female characters aren't getting the push that black male characters are finally getting, but once again, that's not something black males control. That's an issue with white men and their views on the profitability of black female superheroes, and an aversion to supporting black female heroes (similar to the aversion of supporting black male heroes) in the general comic book buying public. I want to see more female heroes, and more male heroes. I've supported mainstream black female heroes when I could (Vixen's miniseries, Storm's series, Voodoo's series, a good deal of Might Avengers, along with some action figures; and I picked up Genius and Concrete Park), but the material out there is unfortunately sparse. Though not a superhero, I supported Colombiana because it was great seeing a kickass black female lead action movie.
And while the pickings are slim, when I was doing my quick counting the other day (forgot Michonne), I'm a bit surprised that we've had that many black female characters that have made it to live-action television or movies. Definitely we need more and it would be great to get a solo film with a black female character.
As for the 'b' word, isn't it a little sexist or exclusionary to attempt to insult me by assuming I'm soft? Is being soft a problem for you? Why can't I simply have a difference of opinion and leave it at that? But I have to be soft, I have to be a 'b' in order to make you feel tough or right, or self-righteous more likely.
I have gotten some things from our discussion. It's given me a deeper insight and that is always appreciated. I wouldn't go running victory laps if I were you, though then again, that's your right to do so.
You've been condescending and insulting, so I can't always be civil. But at least I didn't curse you. Can you dish it out and not take it?
Find the quote where I said that black lesbians don't belong in a Black Panther comic. Find the direct quote where I said that. Not your estimation or speculation, but the direct quote.
When I respond to you, you keep saying I'm 'misaligning' or 'refocusing' or whatever. You are basically casting aspersions on me, saying I'm being underhanded, which you have done throughout these conversations. I explained to you why I liked Batwoman. Her race had nothing to do with it. I have said over and over and over I don't want the Ayo and Aneka relationship given priority over Black Panther. If they were two new heterosexual characters I would not want them given priority either.
But let me repeat, I don't endorse homosexuality and I do believe that homosexuality is being promoted or celebrated in the media today. Jason Collins didn't get an invite to the State of the Union because of what he did on the basketball court, he got it for coming out, and that's just one example. Heck, President Obama went to Africa and lectured some Africans about LGBT rights, another example. You can call it inclusion, okay, let's call it that. But its concerted and Coates is doing that here. Of course he has the right to do so, it is a part of black life. My concern is that that will be at the forefront, because it will be more acceptable to whites, than other social, political, and economic issues that are more thornier. It's a safe route, a path of least resistance that possibly could sideline Black Panther. As I've said before, I don't know for certain. It is the first issue. But I am allowed the freedom to speculate. Unless I'm not allowed to do that either.
I said I looked at For Harriet, but I did not look at the site thoroughly, I guess I need to spell it out more directly for you, since you are always looking for something to offend you. You accuse me of being defensive, but for a good deal of these discussions you've been hyperventilating. I should stop responding a while ago, but I did want to understand where you were coming from. I read one article, which I partly agreed with on the site. Now, am I supposed to agree with every article on For Harriet?
Perhaps what you perceive as misaligning is you just not reading comprehensively what I'm writing. Or its getting twisted up in your own mind and self-righteous desire to cape and smite anyone who disagrees with you or you think disagrees with you.
I wonder if some of the issues people are having with the first issue might be answered by this being Coates first comic book. To him, this is all new territory. Serial fiction is different than other types of writing. If he had few more years of experience, maybe his approach would have been different. I don't mean he would change the substance but how he presents the substance. A more experienced comic book writer might have focused more on BP in the first issue and how Wakanda is "golden" before getting into the troubles and lives of new characters.
What Do We Walk Away With...
While we "enjoy" the inaugural issue of Coates' Black Panther, a few things stick out. First we witness scenes of rioting, attempted rape and possible human trafficking, misguided capitol punishment, anger, aggression and hatred. I want to give Coates the benefit of the doubt that there is some diabolical under current going on because how else does one explain Queen Mother Ramaonda's sentencing when it all on video. Not to mention Aneka humbled in a slave collar.
Secondly this first issue did not serve to highlight T'Challa the Black Panther. The opening page has him taking a knee while suffering from a head wound. He is castigated by his ancestors, enemy and his adored ones. We witness T'Challa casually saying "I will kill her for this." mirroring his mother's premature and fallacious judgement. Aneka and Ayo have the only standout moments and they're brand new to the mythos of Black Panther. I guess they're being set up to fly solo in the first African Lesbian ongoing. How well will this serve as a introduction to the Black Panther.
Thirdly, what maybe inferred about the nation of the Black Panther. The disturbing images shown in the wordless preview posted below may not be Wakanda. The men firing guns is a clue. Maybe it's Niganda or some other country. To make it Wakanda would be asinine, even if the creative team tries to explain it as due to Wakanda being a vast country (like the USA) with multiple regions and sprawling cities. For something like this to slip below T'Challa's radar would be the height of insult to everything the Black Panther is. Such an insult occurred under MCGregor's pen when crack was introduced into Wakanda.
(http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP202003-colREV-d93b1.jpg)
Regarding Shuri I postulate that maybe what she is suffering from currently maybe either post the incursions or a result of her choosing not to have her spirit inhabit her body until she repairs the rift between T'Challa and his ancestors. Shuri on the spirit side could produce some interesting stories.
All in all what we (especially newbies) walk away with in terms of the first issue is not the most flattering presentation of Black Panther or Wakanda. I'll just have to imagine a Black Panther comic that sells over 300,000 copies with pages of Afrakan people living and functioning in the most spiritually and technologically progressive nation on earth while utilizing and advancing traditional Afrakan culture.
A Black Panther comic that highlights the power and intelligence of T'Challa as a capable leader and inspiration for his people and ancestors. A super hero who is a major player in the Marvel universe. A lover who has chosen two Dora Milaje (one being Okoye) for intended wives. We get to witness their complicated, mature relationship and beautiful scenes of romance as they engage in high octane adventures. Concurrent with this we see Shuri as she courts two potential husbands in the Hatut Zaraze. Talk about diversity, I'm still waiting to see this.
And remember this could all be achieved while having them confront another nation's upheaval if such a story of despair, rioting, attempted rape and possible human trafficking, misguided capitol punishment, anger, aggression and hatred needs to be told. If one were so inclined it could easily be a European nation on whose behalf Wakanda chooses to intervene. The public reason for them invading Latveria maybe? Of course before such intervention, pages of Wakanda helping to advance the infra structure and technology of half the countries in Afraka would be appreciated. Lots of stories to tell.
A lot of things affect the Afrakan community. Debating perspectives is admirable if true understanding is achieved. Arguing for gay rights, civil rights, women's rights, human rights, hell, animal rights is just wrong.
Argue for Afrakan self empowerment.
Sigh...tell yourself whatever you need to sleep at night dude...as for my friend on here ask Ture. We've been friends since college. I believe he started this thread.
And wait, you've spent time for YEARS on this page and CBR posting and arguing with multiple people and on here a good amount of the time and pretty much up MY ass all the time with your personal beef and IM the lonely one?
The discussion was between me and emperor but as usual you needed to get in it cause I was involved...for my "rants" to be so moronic and strawman you certainly can't seem to be able to ignore them. That's whats laughably, sadly, transparent.
YOU need validation from other dudes like you on the internet and I'm hardly ever on here except to view discussions around what my boy posts...and nowhere on CBR...who has more of a real social life? Negro please. You came for me immediately the first time I posted on this forum over from CBR like I was trying to hide and sh*t. And you just did it again. I don't even post that often, but when I do? There you are.
And who am I? I'm the dude who youve been dick riding for years and jumps on any chance to try and attack...so I must be somebody to you. And if you've got a personal beef the way you've had for years then settle it in person and not on a message board. Your "who are you for me to meet with" excuse sounds like a punk move for someone who keeps up a personal beef from a damn keyboard.
And look dumbass...I never said you or anyone on here was "anti women or LGBT". This is what i mean your egos are so defensive you wind up arguing points that were never made. There are ways that a board could be unwelcoming just by the subject matter and people on it and points discussed without being technically "anti woman or LGBT...like dudes complaining about a lesbian couple in the first issue. Or dudes hoping the couple die early on in the book just because they're gay.
Your summation about why there is no longer any women or LGBT people on here is just that, a summation. Again, whatever helps your riding my ass self sleep at night.
Like I said, you got a personal beef? Settle it in person. Stop riding my ass from a keyboard Like you've been doing for years whenever I choose to post. Or keep it up, no matter, and show further how much of a punk you're being.
Otherwise, YOU'RE the one that needs to get the f*ck over me.
Sigh...tell yourself whatever you need to sleep at night dude...as for my friend on here ask Ture. We've been friends since college. I believe he started this thread.
And wait, you've spent time for YEARS on this page and CBR posting and arguing with multiple people and on here a good amount of the time and pretty much up MY ass all the time with your personal beef and IM the lonely one?
The discussion was between me and emperor but as usual you needed to get in it cause I was involved...for my "rants" to be so moronic and strawman you certainly can't seem to be able to ignore them. That's whats laughably, sadly, transparent.
YOU need validation from other dudes like you on the internet and I'm hardly ever on here except to view discussions around what my boy posts...and nowhere on CBR...who has more of a real social life? Negro please. You came for me immediately the first time I posted on this forum over from CBR like I was trying to hide and sh*t. And you just did it again. I don't even post that often, but when I do? There you are.
And who am I? I'm the dude who youve been dick riding for years and jumps on any chance to try and attack...so I must be somebody to you. And if you've got a personal beef the way you've had for years then settle it in person and not on a message board. Your "who are you for me to meet with" excuse sounds like a punk move for someone who keeps up a personal beef from a damn keyboard.
And look dumbass...I never said you or anyone on here was "anti women or LGBT". This is what i mean your egos are so defensive you wind up arguing points that were never made. There are ways that a board could be unwelcoming just by the subject matter and people on it and points discussed without being technically "anti woman or LGBT...like dudes complaining about a lesbian couple in the first issue. Or dudes hoping the couple die early on in the book just because they're gay.
Your summation about why there is no longer any women or LGBT people on here is just that, a summation. Again, whatever helps your riding my ass self sleep at night.
Like I said, you got a personal beef? Settle it in person. Stop riding my ass from a keyboard Like you've been doing for years whenever I choose to post. Or keep it up, no matter, and show further how much of a punk you're being.
Otherwise, YOU'RE the one that needs to get the f*ck over me.
So much self-victimization and personality projecting in this post, that it's hilarious. Calling your silly BS out isn't "riding your ass." That's just a nice, "feel good", reactionary, justification that you use. One that is filled with faux outrage, and is doled out by you to cope with being unprepared over being outed as the disingenuous idiot that you are. If you're this thin skinned, on the internet that you want to act like you want to fight people over mere words, then I'm wondering how you function in a society of laws. Because despite how badly you want to prop yourself up as "enlightened", you still act as though you want to fight someone over words. Like one of the hyperviolent, low-grade, and low-functioning "Hood Niggas" that the rest of us (even the ones who live in an urban setting, but aren't idiots) are embarrassed by.
A la, something along the lines of "Whatchu say? Meet me in da street, yo!"
You're both pathetically unhinged and (part of the reason why I converse with you) flat out amusing to me.
I haven't been "riding you" for years. Because I barely ever respond to you. (Don't be an idiot again, and do something like misinterpret the word "barely" to mean "never") I just respond to your more stupid/nutty of posts. While I opt to give you a break, with your lesser offenses. The fact that you ignored that, the obvious, and wanted to play the victim is telling.
I also like how you're now using the word "projecting", against someone else, after you were appropriately labeled as doing that, by me.
And you blatantly implied that most/enough people here were anti-women/anti-LGBT. Which is complete and utter nonsense, and in reality is just you getting angry because those who hold a different opinion than you, and know what "priorities" are, want a character's book to focus on the titular character more in the crucial beginning phase. One who actually needs to be focused on. You're doing the equivalent of getting mad at the lesser known Fatality being the focus (hypothetically speaking...she wasn't) in the beginning of the long-awaited John Stewart (the black Green Lantern) book. The book that aims to get more people to like him. And then accusing his fans of being sexist, a "Hotep", and "being a boys club" because they want a character (who gets little panel time and has been pretty isolated) in his own long-awaited book to have more focus. Which is both short-sighted and makes you a dishonest piece of crap.
And "no" your post about Maxine (who was actually one of my favorite posters here, because she was so fantastically blunt and straight-up) doesn't really have any merit. Because as I seem to remember, she flatout left due to the back and forth spats she had with a single poster here. Using that to "cleverly" malign and/or imply something about the forum in aggregate, is just you trying to be opportunistic. By making a deliberate exaggeration of the truth.
This is EXACTLY what I mean about you being a disingenuous idiot.
Now see mr moderator, my resident stalker isn't playing nice.
Sigh...
"Implication" is a loaded word and I didn't imply anything. Nowhere did I say everyone on here was anti anything but of course in your delusional obsession with me you need to make it look like that.
I remember what Maxine Shaw said and it was confirmed by someone else on here. I do remember her argument with a single poster but I do remember what she said about the board overall. Stop misremembering.
And you've responded to me more than barely on here and CBR...and always with the same vitriol...no one needs you to cut them a break. You're worked up in your feelings rants over someone you consider beneath you (yet you still get upset with yourself and respond) is just as amusing.
I use perfect English. And just because one can be "progressive" doesn't mean one can't be "street" when he needs to be. And when one uses over the top insults and words like you even the most progressive men will call someone out. Just because I'm "progressive" doesn't mean I can't and wouldn't slap you silly. Cause people are multi functional.
And uh...you know you didn't invent the word "projecting" right? And emperor doesn't need some obsessive dude who rides me like you speaking up for or protecting him.
Everything else is you as usual getting you tights in a wad over me. Move along since you can only be "hood" from a keyboard...and before you get yourself banned.
Cause lord knows you'd be lonely then.
More Evidence Perhaps, That This Is Not Wakanda...
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/Black-Panther-black-and-white-96107.jpg[/url])
Some of the guards have on the same attire as Tetu and those gathered at the Nigandan Boarder. Add to that the fact that the Black Panther is stealthily stalking and fighting his way in to... whatever that place is.
Check out how the shadow behind the guard morphs into the Black Panther. Cool. I absolutely love the art the colors, lettering and design of Coates'well written Black Panther.
More Evidence Perhaps, That This Is Not Wakanda...
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/Black-Panther-black-and-white-96107.jpg[/url])
Some of the guards have on the same attire as Tetu and those gathered at the Nigandan Boarder. Add to that the fact that the Black Panther is stealthily stalking and fighting his way in to... whatever that place is.
Check out how the shadow behind the guard morphs into the Black Panther. Cool. I absolutely love the art the colors, lettering and design of Coates'well written Black Panther.
More Shadow Physics stuff is LONG overdue. In this application, if it actually plays out in this deliberate manner, then it's even got potential to be applied in a more literal sense. Which is great. Which means that it really does equally cover both mystical and technological realms.
Now see mr moderator, my resident stalker isn't playing nice.
Sigh...
"Implication" is a loaded word and I didn't imply anything. Nowhere did I say everyone on here was anti anything but of course in your delusional obsession with me you need to make it look like that.
I remember what Maxine Shaw said and it was confirmed by someone else on here. I do remember her argument with a single poster but I do remember what she said about the board overall. Stop misremembering.
And you've responded to me more than barely on here and CBR...and always with the same vitriol...no one needs you to cut them a break. You're worked up in your feelings rants over someone you consider beneath you (yet you still get upset with yourself and respond) is just as amusing.
I use perfect English. And just because one can be "progressive" doesn't mean one can't be "street" when he needs to be. And when one uses over the top insults and words like you even the most progressive men will call someone out. Just because I'm "progressive" doesn't mean I can't and wouldn't slap you silly. Cause people are multi functional.
And uh...you know you didn't invent the word "projecting" right? And emperor doesn't need some obsessive dude who rides me like you speaking up for or protecting him.
Everything else is you as usual getting you tights in a wad over me. Move along since you can only be "hood" from a keyboard...and before you get yourself banned.
Cause lord knows you'd be lonely then.
Oh, stop with the passive-aggressive but nonetheless still fallacious (not to mention desperate) "Appeal to Authority", because you can't handle yourself and your transparent nonsense pointed out. Get your weight up and stop trying to cry to the mods to rescue you "Mr. E-Thuggin' Forums Warrior", who "can and would slap me silly." You only get the type of response that your nonsense deserves, which is filled with what you call vitriol.
Maxine's reasoning for her quitting was based off of her confrontation with the single person. She, unfortunately, tried to apply that logic and reasoning to the board in aggregate. Which was based off of her conversation with that single person, and wasn't really demonstrated by the other posters here. Since they weren't really commenting in a similar manner, or even talking about the contentious issue that she was discussing in thread where she left. Try posting with some integrity. Which you didn't show AT ALL when you tried to latch what Maxine said, about "Da Boyz Club up in hurr! U no like wimmenz!" to the mindset of people in this thread, because they want the titular character to be in the focus more.
And I never said that you invented the word projecting. Stupidly strawman a bit harder, why don't you?
But I'm done with this conversation between us, though. You're a joke, and I've more than made my point as to why you shouldn't be taken remotely serious. And because I know you have a penchant for making yourself out to be important and have no actual sense of scale/depth, "taking you serious" shouldn't be confused with me merely "replying to you period."
But as I'm said, you're a joke, whose gotten stale. So I'm ending this back and forth between us. But don't worry. Next time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you. I'm not going to stand by and watch as you slander the ideology of people here, just because they're not self-sacrificing for causes that barely support THEM in return.
I agree, as usual Ture, it would appear BP has invaded Niganda. We seldom disagree, but I do have a different take on one important point...
"I want to give Coates the benefit of the doubt that there is some diabolical under current going on because how else does one explain Queen Mother Ramaonda's sentencing when it all on video. Not to mention Aneka humbled in a slave collar.
Secondly this first issue did not serve to highlight T'Challa the Black Panther. The opening page has him taking a knee while suffering from a head wound. He is castigated by his ancestors, enemy and his adored ones. We witness T'Challa casually saying "I will kill her for this." mirroring his mother's premature and fallacious judgement. Aneka and Ayo have the only standout moments and they're brand new to the mythos of Black Panther."
If Wakanda is to be a beacon of light it cannot be just technologically advanced, it needs to be culturally and intellectually advanced as well. Ramonda's judgement was justified. No matter how egregious the offense, and the chieftain's actions were despicable, as a Dora, Aneka could easily have subdued him and had him answer to the court for his crimes. Allowing the Doras to act as judge, jury and executioner would set a dangerous and primitive precedent. I do think a terminal sentence is exceedingly harsh, but that is according to my sensibilities. I thought Ramonda was very well rendered. You do remind me however of one problem I had with T'Challa's portrayal, which was the declaration to kill the mind controlling adversary. Bad choice after similar declarations he's made. T'Challa came off as impetuous. He is no longer the boy King. He needs to be more calculating more unflappable now, not a child to be corrected by his mother.
Peace,
Mont
Wakanda should most certainly be immune to the more base human corruptibles. No hunger, no unemployment, no police brutality, no poverty, no cost housing, no utilities payments, no pollution just to name a few. Wakanda should illuminate the world or at least Afraka with its free education through post doctorate and beyond, , free medical for all for life, environmentally conscious technologies, gender equality and ethnic unicity.
Now see mr moderator, my resident stalker isn't playing nice.
Sigh...
"Implication" is a loaded word and I didn't imply anything. Nowhere did I say everyone on here was anti anything but of course in your delusional obsession with me you need to make it look like that.
I remember what Maxine Shaw said and it was confirmed by someone else on here. I do remember her argument with a single poster but I do remember what she said about the board overall. Stop misremembering.
And you've responded to me more than barely on here and CBR...and always with the same vitriol...no one needs you to cut them a break. You're worked up in your feelings rants over someone you consider beneath you (yet you still get upset with yourself and respond) is just as amusing.
I use perfect English. And just because one can be "progressive" doesn't mean one can't be "street" when he needs to be. And when one uses over the top insults and words like you even the most progressive men will call someone out. Just because I'm "progressive" doesn't mean I can't and wouldn't slap you silly. Cause people are multi functional.
And uh...you know you didn't invent the word "projecting" right? And emperor doesn't need some obsessive dude who rides me like you speaking up for or protecting him.
Everything else is you as usual getting you tights in a wad over me. Move along since you can only be "hood" from a keyboard...and before you get yourself banned.
Cause lord knows you'd be lonely then.
Oh, stop with the passive-aggressive but nonetheless still fallacious (not to mention desperate) "Appeal to Authority", because you can't handle yourself and your transparent nonsense pointed out. Get your weight up and stop trying to cry to the mods to rescue you "Mr. E-Thuggin' Forums Warrior", who "can and would slap me silly." You only get the type of response that your nonsense deserves, which is filled with what you call vitriol.
Maxine's reasoning for her quitting was based off of her confrontation with the single person. She, unfortunately, tried to apply that logic and reasoning to the board in aggregate. Which was based off of her conversation with that single person, and wasn't really demonstrated by the other posters here. Since they weren't really commenting in a similar manner, or even talking about the contentious issue that she was discussing in thread where she left. Try posting with some integrity. Which you didn't show AT ALL when you tried to latch what Maxine said, about "Da Boyz Club up in hurr! U no like wimmenz!" to the mindset of people in this thread, because they want the titular character to be in the focus more.
And I never said that you invented the word projecting. Stupidly strawman a bit harder, why don't you?
But I'm done with this conversation between us, though. You're a joke, and I've more than made my point as to why you shouldn't be taken remotely serious. And because I know you have a penchant for making yourself out to be important and have no actual sense of scale/depth, "taking you serious" shouldn't be confused with me merely "replying to you period."
But as I'm said, you're a joke, whose gotten stale. So I'm ending this back and forth between us. But don't worry. Next time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you. I'm not going to stand by and watch as you slander the ideology of people here, just because they're not self-sacrificing for causes that barely support THEM in return.
I agree, as usual Ture, it would appear BP has invaded Niganda. We seldom disagree, but I do have a different take on one important point...
"I want to give Coates the benefit of the doubt that there is some diabolical under current going on because how else does one explain Queen Mother Ramaonda's sentencing when it all on video. Not to mention Aneka humbled in a slave collar.
Secondly this first issue did not serve to highlight T'Challa the Black Panther. The opening page has him taking a knee while suffering from a head wound. He is castigated by his ancestors, enemy and his adored ones. We witness T'Challa casually saying "I will kill her for this." mirroring his mother's premature and fallacious judgement. Aneka and Ayo have the only standout moments and they're brand new to the mythos of Black Panther."
If Wakanda is to be a beacon of light it cannot be just technologically advanced, it needs to be culturally and intellectually advanced as well. Ramonda's judgement was justified. No matter how egregious the offense, and the chieftain's actions were despicable, as a Dora, Aneka could easily have subdued him and had him answer to the court for his crimes. Allowing the Doras to act as judge, jury and executioner would set a dangerous and primitive precedent. I do think a terminal sentence is exceedingly harsh, but that is according to my sensibilities. I thought Ramonda was very well rendered. You do remind me however of one problem I had with T'Challa's portrayal, which was the declaration to kill the mind controlling adversary. Bad choice after similar declarations he's made. T'Challa came off as impetuous. He is no longer the boy King. He needs to be more calculating more unflappable now, not a child to be corrected by his mother.
Peace,
Mont
True Mont it's all about sensibilities. If I may quote myself...QuoteWakanda should most certainly be immune to the more base human corruptibles. No hunger, no unemployment, no police brutality, no poverty, no cost housing, no utilities payments, no pollution just to name a few. Wakanda should illuminate the world or at least Afraka with its free education through post doctorate and beyond, , free medical for all for life, environmentally conscious technologies, gender equality and ethnic unicity.
Wakandans should be more advanced in spirituality than they are technologically. Killing the unrighteous is what Aneka did the same as T'Challa should have done. The Black Panther is a judge in Wakanda yet the perpetrators of horrendous acts get away with murder and all they receive is a stiff talking to and a stern warning.
Does not Queen Ramonda's terminal sentencing set a dangerous and primitive precedent.
Queen Ramonda herself was kidnapped, raped repeatedly and abused by Anton Petorius, who got away with it. Namor, Doom, Red Skull and Thanos all got away with their crimes against the state. Aneka's retribution was justified. Not to mention as she stated the chieftain outrages were well known. Why didn't someone check him.
If the Damisa-Sarki does not deliver vengeance,justice and righteous retribution...
Next time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
-Massive Snippet of Nothing-
(No one really wants to scroll through your ranting nonsense.)
QuoteNext time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
May I suggest one slight amendment. Feel free to argue the idea all day long. If anyone sees something that you consider to be stupid/dishonest, explain, argue, demonstrate, illustrate, etc. why that is so in your view. However, let's avoid denigrating the person promulgating said idea.
It's not a question of playing nice, it's a question of respect. If not for your fellow Heffas-in-conflict, than for the HEF community and your host. We are all guests here.
No shade on the author of the quote above; I expect he meant it in the spirit of refuting faulty ideas. Just a reminder to all. It's all good; let's keep it that way.
Yeah, I did come here to talk about something but after spending the Last twenty minutes reading all this.... I forgot what I came here for. I think it was Black Panther related. Maybe not. I got misconstrued thoughts now; kinda like almost always after reading through a thread like this.
Don't know if I want to march in a black pride rally or stand on the corner and protest that law that just passed here in NC that pretty much openly discriminates against gays.
Supreme, if you reading this, I'm gonna text ya bro!
I try, I try. Just trying to bring a lil humor in here, lol.
QuoteNext time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
May I suggest one slight amendment. Feel free to argue the idea all day long. If anyone sees something that you consider to be stupid/dishonest, explain, argue, demonstrate, illustrate, etc. why that is so in your view. However, let's avoid denigrating the person promulgating said idea.
It's not a question of playing nice, it's a question of respect. If not for your fellow Heffas-in-conflict, than for the HEF community and your host. We are all guests here.
No shade on the author of the quote above; I expect he meant it in the spirit of refuting faulty ideas. Just a reminder to all. It's all good; let's keep it that way.
On a different note, I picked up Priest's Vol 3 the same day as Issue 1. Did they drop the same day or did I just miss the release of Vol 3? I missed a few Wednesday's so my Box had well over $200 bucks worth of books to pick up....
Not that I needed the Panther collections... Spent forever searching for those single issues....
QuoteNext time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
May I suggest one slight amendment. Feel free to argue the idea all day long. If anyone sees something that you consider to be stupid/dishonest, explain, argue, demonstrate, illustrate, etc. why that is so in your view. However, let's avoid denigrating the person promulgating said idea.
It's not a question of playing nice, it's a question of respect. If not for your fellow Heffas-in-conflict, than for the HEF community and your host. We are all guests here.
No shade on the author of the quote above; I expect he meant it in the spirit of refuting faulty ideas. Just a reminder to all. It's all good; let's keep it that way.
No disrespect to you moderator, but the author of the line above refuted NOTHING because he didn't fully understand the argument, made assumptions and implications based on his own subjective and personal feelings about someone he doesn't like, and chose to intentionally misalign, misinterpret, and twist most of the points made due to his own unchecked rage and a very deep and personal bias he continues to hold and has held for years now. MOST of the things he argued or raged against were never even things directly or indirectly said.
He didn't actually argue or refute the actual points made at all, nor presented facts or direct answers on what was actually written...but exaggerated versions of the points made and hat he CHOSE to see so that he could respond in the highly insulting, denigrating, name-calling and disingenuous fashion his posts obviously show.
In other words, he was just looking for an Internet fight...and to show off.
But please make no mistake, he refuted thing that was actually said, just what he chose to read into.
I try, I try. Just trying to bring a lil humor in here, lol.
As am I. :D
No you're not...you're continuing to try and be a diva and show off...even after you said our "convo" which was never a convo in the first place but you on an emotional and biased rant arguing points that were never made, was done.
But I knew you couldn't resist. Insecure people looking for validation never can.
You've been condescending and insulting, so I can't always be civil. But at least I didn't curse you. Can you dish it out and not take it?
Find the quote where I said that black lesbians don't belong in a Black Panther comic. Find the direct quote where I said that. Not your estimation or speculation, but the direct quote.
When I respond to you, you keep saying I'm 'misaligning' or 'refocusing' or whatever. You are basically casting aspersions on me, saying I'm being underhanded, which you have done throughout these conversations. I explained to you why I liked Batwoman. Her race had nothing to do with it. I have said over and over and over I don't want the Ayo and Aneka relationship given priority over Black Panther. If they were two new heterosexual characters I would not want them given priority either.
But let me repeat, I don't endorse homosexuality and I do believe that homosexuality is being promoted or celebrated in the media today. Jason Collins didn't get an invite to the State of the Union because of what he did on the basketball court, he got it for coming out, and that's just one example. Heck, President Obama went to Africa and lectured some Africans about LGBT rights, another example. You can call it inclusion, okay, let's call it that. But its concerted and Coates is doing that here. Of course he has the right to do so, it is a part of black life. My concern is that that will be at the forefront, because it will be more acceptable to whites, than other social, political, and economic issues that are more thornier. It's a safe route, a path of least resistance that possibly could sideline Black Panther. As I've said before, I don't know for certain. It is the first issue. But I am allowed the freedom to speculate. Unless I'm not allowed to do that either.
I said I looked at For Harriet, but I did not look at the site thoroughly, I guess I need to spell it out more directly for you, since you are always looking for something to offend you. You accuse me of being defensive, but for a good deal of these discussions you've been hyperventilating. I should stop responding a while ago, but I did want to understand where you were coming from. I read one article, which I partly agreed with on the site. Now, am I supposed to agree with every article on For Harriet?
Perhaps what you perceive as misaligning is you just not reading comprehensively what I'm writing. Or its getting twisted up in your own mind and self-righteous desire to cape and smite anyone who disagrees with you or you think disagrees with you.
Im being civil now and especially after bluezulu's last post. Can't you be the bigger man and be civil or at least do as the moderator asked? Or are you looking for a fight with your "can you dish it out and not take it" schoolyard taunt? Cause I think I've shown I can take it and give out even more from various posts so far.
And I really don't see how you got me not being "progressive" enough with the whole Batwoman thing cause my post was more about you than me accepting that LGBT is transracial. Since I'm guessing you can actually read the only other conclusion is that you might be trying to misalign my points...which is a form of redirecting. I could be wrong though. And you HAVE been redirecting, which isn't necessarily underhanded but a defense tactic. Again it's akin to white people bringing up "black on black crime" when we are talking about police brutality on black people. Bringing up "misandry" when one is talking about "misogyny" like you did is the same thing.
And again, you're not being entirely truthful...you didn't just say that the Ayo and Aneka relationship should not take priority over Black Panther....you said and I quote "this doesn't belong in a Black Panther comic"..that again was a direct quote. It's supported by the fact you just said that you don't endorse homosexuality...which is your choice and right. It's my choice and right to challenge that viewpoint. You're "allowed" to do anything you want. I'm allowed to refute and speak on it.
And of course homosexuality is being promoted and celebrated in the media...and it is concerted...though there is a segment of media and even cities that still condones it. But there's nothing wrong with that because promoting something is a way of gaining acceptance. A concerted effort focuses it and strengthens the cause. And just like you "cape" for fighting racism and heterosexual black relationships...others "cape" for that AND these other issues as well. Like Coates probably does.
So your point?
Sigh...dude...if you think me laughing at you looking at one article on for Harriet and finding it not thorough is me being"offended" or "hyperventilating". You've really got other issues. I wasn't even looking for you to find it to be thorough. I was just providing you a source for a question you asked. And again, who said you had to look at or even agree with EVERY article on the site? You're projecting again.
Yeah, you should stop responding now...you're flailing about, arguing points that were never there, and obviously still looking, in your polite manner, for a fight.
Let it go.
But of course, you most likely won't.
-Massive Snippet of Nothing-
(No one really wants to scroll through your ranting nonsense.)
The only person here showing off, for a small fanbase, is you. The rambling and ranting idiot, who has a penchant for writing "Posturing and Long Winded Novels of Nothing." Which is also the proof that you're the main person here who is overly emotional.
There wasn't much to unpack in that empty block of text that you wasted the site's bandwith in typing out to and hosting, but one thing that stood out to me....and is a testament to just how phony you are...is the fact that you resort to the label of slang as "Coon Speak". Even give you a backdoor and assume that you were referring to someone else, using that label (even if that's not your belief...although it probably is) perfectly outlines just how arrogant and demented you are. It shows just how easily unhinged you can become and how quickly you will abandon your flimsy facade of being "An Enlightened Negro", when you're confronted. Which is why I called you out as being the complete fraud that you are earlier. Because that inevitable slip up is par for the course, with morons of your ilk.
You did the same thing not long after that when you used "diva", in relation to me, as a mocking pejorative. Which is pretty sexist. Again, "So much for your flimsy facade."
You are a hilariously sad little man, and no matter how much you try to mask it with "Thesis Paper Length" posts of teenager level angst, your unfortunate but (unsurprisingly predictable) degenerate nature still shines through.
The rest of your post was just you throwing canned assumptions and one-liners at a dart board, in the hopes that something would stick. Which they didn't, btw.
You're pitiful and all you've done is drag this site down.QuoteNext time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
May I suggest one slight amendment. Feel free to argue the idea all day long. If anyone sees something that you consider to be stupid/dishonest, explain, argue, demonstrate, illustrate, etc. why that is so in your view. However, let's avoid denigrating the person promulgating said idea.
It's not a question of playing nice, it's a question of respect. If not for your fellow Heffas-in-conflict, than for the HEF community and your host. We are all guests here.
No shade on the author of the quote above; I expect he meant it in the spirit of refuting faulty ideas. Just a reminder to all. It's all good; let's keep it that way.
That's exactly what it was.
No you're not...you're continuing to try and be a diva and show off...even after you said our "convo" which was never a convo in the first place but you on an emotional and biased rant arguing points that were never made, was done.
But I knew you couldn't resist. Insecure people looking for validation never can.
No. I am. As is evident to my previous response to Blanks.
But just to show for everyone that you don't actually read anything at all and are a complete moron, I also said that "when you said something stupid again, I'd be back on you". You even quoted that. But yet somehow you missed that.
Do try to keep up.
Nothing sexist about the word diva (projection tactic on your part yet again) since it can be a man or a woman who is overly dramatic and seeks attention...it's about a personality not gender...see if you read more feminist stuff and actually was educated in theater you'd know that.
I maintain, all of your posts before were all assumptions based on hat you think was being "Implied" and what you "seem" to remember and none of it argued or refuted the points that were actually written but what you chose, due to your personal bias and anger clouding your comprehension skills, to see.
And I already called you a sad little man...can you not even now come up with anything original?
Who else is still on here seeking fights and arguing points that were never actually said while still seeking to look like a hero days later and still playing tough from a keyboard?
That would be you. Delusionally thinking way more highly of yourself than you should. Per usual.
This thread is beginning to feel like a sinking boat... Time to abandon ship and start a new thread on BP.
Nothing sexist about the word diva (projection tactic on your part yet again) since it can be a man or a woman who is overly dramatic and seeks attention...it's about a personality not gender...see if you read more feminist stuff and actually was educated in theater you'd know that.
I maintain, all of your posts before were all assumptions based on hat you think was being "Implied" and what you "seem" to remember and none of it argued or refuted the points that were actually written but what you chose, due to your personal bias and anger clouding your comprehension skills, to see.
And I already called you a sad little man...can you not even now come up with anything original?
Who else is still on here seeking fights and arguing points that were never actually said while still seeking to look like a hero days later and still playing tough from a keyboard?
That would be you. Delusionally thinking way more highly of yourself than you should. Per usual.
Since Diva since its inception and to this day is still associated with women, by society....it is. If you knew anything about basic linguistics, you would have known that. And I was clearly mocking you by repeating your insult. But being a perpetual slowpoke, you missed that in your need to rush to spout out more rambling and posturing nonsense.
This thread is beginning to feel like a sinking boat... Time to abandon ship and start a new thread on BP.
The unfortunate outcome of when useless "New Blacks" (who call everyone outside of their pathetically rigid and narrow ideology a "Hotep"), invade a place that is outside their comfort zone.
Wow...you are such a liar. You were not mocking me by repeating my insult...you questioned my stance on feminism by saying using the word "diva" was sexist. See, this is what I mean about you and how you totally are dishonest in your rants and misdirect even your own points intentionally.
And if you knew anything about progressive language and how it's used to re interpret he original meanings of things...you'd know what I was talking about.
But probably being some old head stuck in your limited and dated intellectual knowledge...you probably wouldn't know and actually avoid anything new.
Wow...you are such a liar. You were not mocking me by repeating my insult...you questioned my stance on feminism by saying using the word "diva" was sexist. See, this is what I mean about you and how you totally are dishonest in your rants and misdirect even your own points intentionally.
And if you knew anything about progressive language and how it's used to re interpret he original meanings of things...you'd know what I was talking about.
But probably being some old head stuck in your limited and dated intellectual knowledge...you probably wouldn't know and actually avoid anything new.
Mocking you via "sad little man" has nothing to do with me pointing out that you're a phony feminist via your misuse of "diva". How you could mix up the two is a testament to just how unequipped you are to even keep up with the conversation at hand.
Wow...you are such a liar. You were not mocking me by repeating my insult...you questioned my stance on feminism by saying using the word "diva" was sexist. See, this is what I mean about you and how you totally are dishonest in your rants and misdirect even your own points intentionally.
And if you knew anything about progressive language and how it's used to re interpret he original meanings of things...you'd know what I was talking about.
But probably being some old head stuck in your limited and dated intellectual knowledge...you probably wouldn't know and actually avoid anything new.
Mocking you via "sad little man" has nothing to do with me pointing out that you're a phony feminist via your misuse of "diva". How you could mix up the two is a testament to just how unequipped you are to even keep up with the conversation at hand.
All it shows is that you have no idea how words in the English language can and have been reclaimed and re interpreted by various artists, academics, and intellectuals. But since you don't get out much save on this board, I wouldn't expect anything else.
And yet again, you're switching around what was actually said to try and prop up your faulty points when they're called out.
But yes, do let's keep this up on here and ruin further this thread instead of you actually acting like a man and settling this beef in person...or at least on PM.
Wow...you are such a liar. You were not mocking me by repeating my insult...you questioned my stance on feminism by saying using the word "diva" was sexist. See, this is what I mean about you and how you totally are dishonest in your rants and misdirect even your own points intentionally.
And if you knew anything about progressive language and how it's used to re interpret he original meanings of things...you'd know what I was talking about.
But probably being some old head stuck in your limited and dated intellectual knowledge...you probably wouldn't know and actually avoid anything new.
Mocking you via "sad little man" has nothing to do with me pointing out that you're a phony feminist via your misuse of "diva". How you could mix up the two is a testament to just how unequipped you are to even keep up with the conversation at hand.
All it shows is that you have no idea how words in the English language can and have been reclaimed and re interpreted by various artists, academics, and intellectuals. But since you don't get out much save on this board, I wouldn't expect anything else.
And yet again, you're switching around what was actually said to try and prop up your faulty points when they're called out.
But yes, do let's keep this up on here and ruin further this thread instead of you actually acting like a man and settling this beef in person...or at least on PM.
I "have no idea how words work" but you couldn't even tell the difference between the context behind the usage of "sad little man" and "diva". And then you attempt to mask this hilarious failing of yours, with unnesscary and long winded nonsense.
Ok.
Yeah.
You're officially out of gas now, and are just flailing along at this point.
On a different note, I picked up Priest's Vol 3 the same day as Issue 1. Did they drop the same day or did I just miss the release of Vol 3? I missed a few Wednesday's so my Box had well over $200 bucks worth of books to pick up....
Not that I needed the Panther collections... Spent forever searching for those single issues....
Yeah, I lost my entire Priest collection in a flood a few years ago. (Glad I kept Kirby and McGregor's runs in the attic.) So I've been recollecting them. I lost Doom War too, but I'm not that sad about that.QuoteNext time you step out of line and say something utterly stupid/dishonest, I'll be right back on you.
May I suggest one slight amendment. Feel free to argue the idea all day long. If anyone sees something that you consider to be stupid/dishonest, explain, argue, demonstrate, illustrate, etc. why that is so in your view. However, let's avoid denigrating the person promulgating said idea.
It's not a question of playing nice, it's a question of respect. If not for your fellow Heffas-in-conflict, than for the HEF community and your host. We are all guests here.
No shade on the author of the quote above; I expect he meant it in the spirit of refuting faulty ideas. Just a reminder to all. It's all good; let's keep it that way.
No disrespect to you moderator, but the author of the line above refuted NOTHING because he didn't fully understand the argument, made assumptions and implications based on his own subjective and personal feelings about someone he doesn't like, and chose to intentionally misalign, misinterpret, and twist most of the points made due to his own unchecked rage and a very deep and personal bias he continues to hold and has held for years now. MOST of the things he argued or raged against were never even things directly or indirectly said.
He didn't actually argue or refute the actual points made at all, nor presented facts or direct answers on what was actually written...but exaggerated versions of the points made and hat he CHOSE to see so that he could respond in the highly insulting, denigrating, name-calling and disingenuous fashion his posts obviously show.
In other words, he was just looking for an Internet fight...and to show off.
But please make no mistake, he refuted thing that was actually said, just what he chose to read into.
Yes, yes, yes.
In true conspiracy theorist fashion, "everything that you can't argue is someone misinterpreting and exaggerating everything." You've played that card already. Didn't work, then. Won't work now.
You've been condescending and insulting, so I can't always be civil. But at least I didn't curse you. Can you dish it out and not take it?
Find the quote where I said that black lesbians don't belong in a Black Panther comic. Find the direct quote where I said that. Not your estimation or speculation, but the direct quote.
When I respond to you, you keep saying I'm 'misaligning' or 'refocusing' or whatever. You are basically casting aspersions on me, saying I'm being underhanded, which you have done throughout these conversations. I explained to you why I liked Batwoman. Her race had nothing to do with it. I have said over and over and over I don't want the Ayo and Aneka relationship given priority over Black Panther. If they were two new heterosexual characters I would not want them given priority either.
But let me repeat, I don't endorse homosexuality and I do believe that homosexuality is being promoted or celebrated in the media today. Jason Collins didn't get an invite to the State of the Union because of what he did on the basketball court, he got it for coming out, and that's just one example. Heck, President Obama went to Africa and lectured some Africans about LGBT rights, another example. You can call it inclusion, okay, let's call it that. But its concerted and Coates is doing that here. Of course he has the right to do so, it is a part of black life. My concern is that that will be at the forefront, because it will be more acceptable to whites, than other social, political, and economic issues that are more thornier. It's a safe route, a path of least resistance that possibly could sideline Black Panther. As I've said before, I don't know for certain. It is the first issue. But I am allowed the freedom to speculate. Unless I'm not allowed to do that either.
I said I looked at For Harriet, but I did not look at the site thoroughly, I guess I need to spell it out more directly for you, since you are always looking for something to offend you. You accuse me of being defensive, but for a good deal of these discussions you've been hyperventilating. I should stop responding a while ago, but I did want to understand where you were coming from. I read one article, which I partly agreed with on the site. Now, am I supposed to agree with every article on For Harriet?
Perhaps what you perceive as misaligning is you just not reading comprehensively what I'm writing. Or its getting twisted up in your own mind and self-righteous desire to cape and smite anyone who disagrees with you or you think disagrees with you.
Im being civil now and especially after bluezulu's last post. Can't you be the bigger man and be civil or at least do as the moderator asked? Or are you looking for a fight with your "can you dish it out and not take it" schoolyard taunt? Cause I think I've shown I can take it and give out even more from various posts so far.
And I really don't see how you got me not being "progressive" enough with the whole Batwoman thing cause my post was more about you than me accepting that LGBT is transracial. Since I'm guessing you can actually read the only other conclusion is that you might be trying to misalign my points...which is a form of redirecting. I could be wrong though. And you HAVE been redirecting, which isn't necessarily underhanded but a defense tactic. Again it's akin to white people bringing up "black on black crime" when we are talking about police brutality on black people. Bringing up "misandry" when one is talking about "misogyny" like you did is the same thing.
And again, you're not being entirely truthful...you didn't just say that the Ayo and Aneka relationship should not take priority over Black Panther....you said and I quote "this doesn't belong in a Black Panther comic"..that again was a direct quote. It's supported by the fact you just said that you don't endorse homosexuality...which is your choice and right. It's my choice and right to challenge that viewpoint. You're "allowed" to do anything you want. I'm allowed to refute and speak on it.
And of course homosexuality is being promoted and celebrated in the media...and it is concerted...though there is a segment of media and even cities that still condones it. But there's nothing wrong with that because promoting something is a way of gaining acceptance. A concerted effort focuses it and strengthens the cause. And just like you "cape" for fighting racism and heterosexual black relationships...others "cape" for that AND these other issues as well. Like Coates probably does.
So your point?
Sigh...dude...if you think me laughing at you looking at one article on for Harriet and finding it not thorough is me being"offended" or "hyperventilating". You've really got other issues. I wasn't even looking for you to find it to be thorough. I was just providing you a source for a question you asked. And again, who said you had to look at or even agree with EVERY article on the site? You're projecting again.
Yeah, you should stop responding now...you're flailing about, arguing points that were never there, and obviously still looking, in your polite manner, for a fight.
Let it go.
But of course, you most likely won't.
Show the direct quote where I wrote what you accuse me of saying. It's easy to just look up what I've written, the passage where I wrote that, and show me and everyone else that I said that about Aneka and Ayo, show the quote and bust me. But you can't because I didn't say it. I didn't really read much else what you said here because you're just talking hot air now. You got caught out there, you thought you saw something perhaps and just went off, making assumptions and accusations against me, not to mention insults, over something I didn't even write. Doesn't sound very inclusive or progressive of you, now does it? Sounds like you were doing some of that reactionary defensive stuff you accused me of. Projecting much?
And you're recommending that I should stop responding now sounds a lot like you want me to shut up, you want to silence me. Weren't you going on and on about inclusion and other voices being heard? I guess its the voices that you consider valuable or worthy should continue talk.
But one more thing...I've been trying to figure out the best way to explain what I see as a contradiction in your whole progressive, male feminist pose. The 'b' word, as you would surely agree, has been used to denigrate women. So when a man calls another man the 'b' word he is feminizing him, which is meant to be an insult. So, by what you said to me you were attempting to feminize me, calling me 'b-made', which you elaborated on was being soft, and yet you're so down with the feminist cause. Yet when you get angry you resort to using feminizing as an insult. You don't see the contradiction in that, the hypocrisy in that? And the whole idea of seeing a 'soft' dude as lesser, yet you had an issue with 'aggressive masculinity' like a previous post. I don't know if all the ideas swirling around your head due to your books, lectures, and table talk have congealed into anything consistent in your own mind.
Enough is enough. A. Curry and Bushman take your argument or debate to another thread as suggested or pm one another. No one is interested in the deluge of oratory warfare you guys are engaged in.
I didn't start this thread for whatever it is you two got going on.
Enough is enough. A. Curry and Bushman take your argument or debate to another thread as suggested or pm one another. No one is interested in the deluge of oratory warfare you guys are engaged in.
I didn't start this thread for whatever it is you two got going on.
Enough is enough. A. Curry and Bushman take your argument or debate to another thread as suggested or pm one another. No one is interested in the deluge of oratory warfare you guys are engaged in.
I didn't start this thread for whatever it is you two got going on.
Enough is enough. A. Curry and Bushman take your argument or debate to another thread as suggested or pm one another. No one is interested in the deluge of oratory warfare you guys are engaged in.
I didn't start this thread for whatever it is you two got going on.
To be fair, I ended it a while ago.
A.Curry,
I skimmed your recent reply. Until you produce this quote there is nothing else to say. And I also find it disheartening that you would slip in there that I might have altered it. I think you're giving yourself an out here. If it's at the point where you we can't have basic trust and respect for one another's views or opinions, where you think 'winning' is more important than me laying out my viewpoints, speaking my truth, then what's the point? If you distrust me on that level there is no point continuing talking.
In
Look, I played a part in how this thread went sideways. Even though I do think the discussion we had did fall within the realm of the new Black Panther series and the issues raised in the first issue and potentially for the series's run, it is unfortunate that the discussion took on this tone and character. As I said from the very beginning when I tried to explain my position more thoroughly because I was concerned at your being disturbed by the comments regarding the first issue (one of those comments was from me), I didn't want to disturb you. I wanted to explain my position better and as we got into it, to get a better understanding of where you were coming from.
To some extent I got that, but it devolved quickly and I think in part because you came into this making assumptions and accusations based on a misreading of what I said. However, I do like to debate/argue and I played a role in this as well. It got into a tit-for-tat and now for me there is no real educational value in it for me. As soon as the insults started I should've bounced, but it takes me a while to realize the futility of some endeavors and to take my behind off the debate stage.
Apology accepted Sea King...
([url]http://media.fyre.co/qJtONpkqQfiqUJKLWMum_Black_panther.gif[/url])
([url]http://images-cdn.moviepilot.com/images/c_limit,h_1000,w_1500/t_mp_quality/sgkrg4xgocjptxnrpaxt/dawn-of-the-justice-league-shows-us-our-first-look-at-jason-momoa-as-aquaman-jason-momoa-800037.jpg[/url])
see you in 2018.
A little ginger to clean the pallet...
GQ Magazine: Black Panther, Marvel's First Black Superhero, Is Now the Star of the Year's Most Important Comic
Just over six months ago, Marvel Entertainment shocked the comics and literary worlds alike when it announced that author, Atlantic correspondent, and MacArthur Grant recipient Ta-Nehisi Coates would be writing a year-long Black Panther comic book series alongside acclaimed artist Brian Stelfreeze and colorist Laura Martin. It was huge news that instantly put all sorts of pressure on Black Panther to immediately perform—because while Coates has long professed his love for comics, he writes for an audience that doesn't necessarily read them.
You'd probably be very happy with it, too. Black Panther #1 is a great start to the year-long story that Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin will tell monthly across eleven issues, and one that's every bit as thoughtful and vivid as you'd expect from the talent assembled. And for the Black Panther, Marvel's first black superhero—it's about damn time the publisher through some serious weight into restoring the character to prominence.
However, despite having such an important, interesting role in the fiction of Marvel's comics, the comics publisher hasn't always made him a prominent part of their comics lineup. To quote Kotaku writer Evan Narcisse's excellent and comprehensive writeup of the character's history and politics, "The Black Panther has gone from being an under-utilized figure in the background of Avengers group shots to arguably being the most fearsome strategist in the Marvel Universe. His elevation to Marvel’s top tier is a fascinating meta-story." So here we are, with what might be the most highly publicized and biggest comic book series launch of the year, and Black Panther is at the center of it all.
Black Panther #1 is everything wonderful about comics. It uses grand, symbolic figures to tangibly attack and dismantle big, important ideas. It's a comic that starts with chaos—recent events in Marvel's assorted comics have left Wakanda in disarray, and its people are restless. They're questioning their king and the very idea of monarchy, and the revolution is being led by women.
It is, cleverly, a story about America and patriarchy set in a nation almost entirely devoid of white faces, a story about a world power humbled and frustrated with their traditions and the establishments built by men who claim thrones. It is about a king who discovers his kingdom has been infected by hate, and no longer seem to want him. But do they need him?
Black Panther is asking big questions out of the gate, questions that are eerily relevant to an American audience also in the middle of a search for new leadership almost entirely defined by a rejection of the previous one, an election cycle defined by passions running high and hateful rhetoric reaching a fever pitch. And therein lies the story Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin are out to tell: What happens when a nation of people discover that their perception of themselves is no longer true?
Concept art by Ryan Meinerding. Hope we see this in his solo
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf_a6n9UMAAJjWG.jpg)
Black Panther costume on display:
([url]http://i67.tinypic.com/wu08eo.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i68.tinypic.com/2nv9q13.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i68.tinypic.com/2dr84fk.jpg[/url])
More here:
[url]http://hollywoodmoviecostumesandprops.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/chadwick-bosemans-black-panther-costume.html[/url] ([url]http://hollywoodmoviecostumesandprops.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/chadwick-bosemans-black-panther-costume.html[/url])
Avengers of the New World hmmmmmm?
([url]http://i.imgur.com/XqOUDYe.png[/url])
Coates says that he’s already done the first 12 issues and signed a contract just last week to continue working on the book for years.
[url]http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2016/04/love_duty_and_politics_ta_nehisi_coates_takes_on_marvel_s_black_panther.html[/url] ([url]http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2016/04/love_duty_and_politics_ta_nehisi_coates_takes_on_marvel_s_black_panther.html[/url])
Who Gave The Black Panther His Best Debut In An Ongoing?
([url]http://www.metronews.ca/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2016/4/7/blackpanther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/panthergreatest8.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static2.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/0/4/41174-6496-46481-1-black-panther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static3.aintitcool.com/assets2011/liss7.jpg[/url])
([url]http://media.insidepulse.com/zones/insidepulse/uploads/2013/01/new-avengers-1-cover.png[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/panthericonic3.jpg[/url])
([url]http://worldofblackheroes.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/bp1.jpg[/url])
Who Gave The Black Panther His Best Debut In An Ongoing?
([url]http://www.metronews.ca/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2016/4/7/blackpanther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/panthergreatest8.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static2.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/0/4/41174-6496-46481-1-black-panther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static3.aintitcool.com/assets2011/liss7.jpg[/url])
([url]http://media.insidepulse.com/zones/insidepulse/uploads/2013/01/new-avengers-1-cover.png[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/panthericonic3.jpg[/url])
([url]http://worldofblackheroes.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/bp1.jpg[/url])
Coates is a grade A douchebag for this....
BLACK PANTHER #4
TA-NEHISI COATES (W) • BRIAN STELFREEZE (A/C)
DEATH OF X VARIANT COVER BY TBA
CONNECTING VARIANT COVER D BY SANFORD GREENE
• "A NATION UNDER OUR FEET," the first arc of the new hit BLACK PANTHER series, comes to a startling conclusion!
• Suicide bombers terrorize the people of Wakanda, further eroding any last bits of goodwill towards the royal family...
• T'Challa struggles to unite his citizens, who are choosing to side with Zenzi and The People in growing numbers...
• A familiar villain reveals his part in T'Challa's current ruination...and it's not who you think!
32 PGS./Rated T ...$3.99
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP2016004-CATALOG-ONLY-509bb.jpg[/url])
Coates is a grade A douchebag for this....
BLACK PANTHER #4
TA-NEHISI COATES (W) • BRIAN STELFREEZE (A/C)
DEATH OF X VARIANT COVER BY TBA
CONNECTING VARIANT COVER D BY SANFORD GREENE
• "A NATION UNDER OUR FEET," the first arc of the new hit BLACK PANTHER series, comes to a startling conclusion!
• Suicide bombers terrorize the people of Wakanda, further eroding any last bits of goodwill towards the royal family...
• T'Challa struggles to unite his citizens, who are choosing to side with Zenzi and The People in growing numbers...
• A familiar villain reveals his part in T'Challa's current ruination...and it's not who you think!
32 PGS./Rated T ...$3.99
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP2016004-CATALOG-ONLY-509bb.jpg[/url])
Meh. I have to wait and read the issues before and after instead of becoming reactionary. I mean comics are like a swinging pendulum when it comes to story telling. Fast forward in time to the future end of Coates run and when the next writer decides he needs to bring back elements of the Hudlin run or Priest run. The character of the Black Panther has been around for more than 50 years. You would need to develop algorithms to keep up with the continuity and story issues.
A little ginger to clean the pallet...
GQ Magazine: Black Panther, Marvel's First Black Superhero, Is Now the Star of the Year's Most Important Comic
Just over six months ago, Marvel Entertainment shocked the comics and literary worlds alike when it announced that author, Atlantic correspondent, and MacArthur Grant recipient Ta-Nehisi Coates would be writing a year-long Black Panther comic book series alongside acclaimed artist Brian Stelfreeze and colorist Laura Martin. It was huge news that instantly put all sorts of pressure on Black Panther to immediately perform—because while Coates has long professed his love for comics, he writes for an audience that doesn't necessarily read them.
You'd probably be very happy with it, too. Black Panther #1 is a great start to the year-long story that Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin will tell monthly across eleven issues, and one that's every bit as thoughtful and vivid as you'd expect from the talent assembled. And for the Black Panther, Marvel's first black superhero—it's about damn time the publisher through some serious weight into restoring the character to prominence.
However, despite having such an important, interesting role in the fiction of Marvel's comics, the comics publisher hasn't always made him a prominent part of their comics lineup. To quote Kotaku writer Evan Narcisse's excellent and comprehensive writeup of the character's history and politics, "The Black Panther has gone from being an under-utilized figure in the background of Avengers group shots to arguably being the most fearsome strategist in the Marvel Universe. His elevation to Marvel’s top tier is a fascinating meta-story." So here we are, with what might be the most highly publicized and biggest comic book series launch of the year, and Black Panther is at the center of it all.
Black Panther #1 is everything wonderful about comics. It uses grand, symbolic figures to tangibly attack and dismantle big, important ideas. It's a comic that starts with chaos—recent events in Marvel's assorted comics have left Wakanda in disarray, and its people are restless. They're questioning their king and the very idea of monarchy, and the revolution is being led by women.
It is, cleverly, a story about America and patriarchy set in a nation almost entirely devoid of white faces, a story about a world power humbled and frustrated with their traditions and the establishments built by men who claim thrones. It is about a king who discovers his kingdom has been infected by hate, and no longer seem to want him. But do they need him?
Black Panther is asking big questions out of the gate, questions that are eerily relevant to an American audience also in the middle of a search for new leadership almost entirely defined by a rejection of the previous one, an election cycle defined by passions running high and hateful rhetoric reaching a fever pitch. And therein lies the story Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin are out to tell: What happens when a nation of people discover that their perception of themselves is no longer true?
Interesting article...the line "it is cleverly, a story about America and patriarchy" is telling about some things I actually do see possibly problematic in Coates possible intentions though I'm eager to see how it plays out. It looks however that he might be forcing political and social issues into Wakanda that were arguably not there to tell a story addressing these things. For instance, I don't see the guy Aneka killed being able to do what he did for as LONG as it was suggested he did in Wakanda without no one doing anything...and if the Dora are trusts with guarding the king and the nation, why wouldn't they be able to kill someone for such a heinous crime without the overly harsh sentence of execution? Coates might be trying to speak on even some harsher political and social things in certain parts of Africa, but that's not and never has been Wakanda in that regard.
Also, "they're questioning the very idea of monarchy, and the revolution is being led by women" I don't mind this at all, and depending on how he goes about addressing the gender and black female revolutionary action along with black feminist issues...it could be a great read. However these issues shouldn't be handled or be exactly the same as they are in America and especially in certain parts of Africa...the "Boko Haram" type cells in scans shown most definitely should not be Wakanda as such a thing would never happen there...but perhaps it's a call on how Wakanda and its king should get involved in things that are happening in real world parts of Africa like this. Maybe that's what Coates is going for and if so that would be a good thing...maybe Aneka and Ayo will serve as the impetus for this involvement as I would hope an advanced place like Wakanda WOULD do something about these things happening not far from its borders.
As I've said to you before though...I think Coates is going to end monarchy in Wakanda to establish a democracy...just like in America or other more "democratic", so to speak, parts of the world. The very idea of this run questioning a monarchy and unrest with its "orphan-King" underscores this.
http://blacknerdproblems.com/black-panther-1-the-dora-milaje-come-center-stage/ (http://blacknerdproblems.com/black-panther-1-the-dora-milaje-come-center-stage/)
The above link to this article on black nerd problems site may or may not have been posted on here before, surely read by some, but it's a pretty good article thats not only praising Coates first issue (surprised there isn't some criticism on sites I've seen yet, as it's good but far from perfect) but goes into what he's trying to accomplish and definitely for you Ture (and possibly others) something that has some
points arguably worthy of criticism.
It is of course also taking a particular view of the the Dora couple whom has obviously been a source of discussion and debate on here...
as the following passage from the article shows and makes an arguable point about:
"Black America, like the rest of America, has always had a complicated, stereotyping relationship with our Gay, Lesbian, Trans, Asexual, and other Queer members. We all know the Gay Choir Director or the unmarried Butch Auntie. We have so often pushed these family members to the edges of Black society, allowing them to be erased by the very communities they call home. So for Coates and the rest of the creative team to make not only the Dora Milaje, but two Black lesbian Dora Milaje, one of the primary actors in his series is, dare I say, revolutionary? Or at least so rarely seen as to be damn near? "
Good points though "revolutionary" might be too strong of a word...but it's pretty clear as the point has been made already that Coates is attempting to address real world issues through Wakanda...which could possibly be problematic.
Who Gave The Black Panther His Best Debut In An Ongoing?
([url]http://www.metronews.ca/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2016/4/7/blackpanther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/panthergreatest8.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static2.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/0/4/41174-6496-46481-1-black-panther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static3.aintitcool.com/assets2011/liss7.jpg[/url])
([url]http://media.insidepulse.com/zones/insidepulse/uploads/2013/01/new-avengers-1-cover.png[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/panthericonic3.jpg[/url])
([url]http://worldofblackheroes.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/bp1.jpg[/url])
I think Priest had the Beat debut honestly. Followed by RH, then Coates.
What about Best cover between those? Ezyo
REGINALD HUDLIN. Salustrade
Coates is a grade A douchebag for this....
BLACK PANTHER #4
TA-NEHISI COATES (W) • BRIAN STELFREEZE (A/C)
DEATH OF X VARIANT COVER BY TBA
CONNECTING VARIANT COVER D BY SANFORD GREENE
• "A NATION UNDER OUR FEET," the first arc of the new hit BLACK PANTHER series, comes to a startling conclusion!
• Suicide bombers terrorize the people of Wakanda, further eroding any last bits of goodwill towards the royal family...
• T'Challa struggles to unite his citizens, who are choosing to side with Zenzi and The People in growing numbers...
• A familiar villain reveals his part in T'Challa's current ruination...and it's not who you think!
32 PGS./Rated T ...$3.99
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP2016004-CATALOG-ONLY-509bb.jpg[/url])
Meh. I have to wait and read the issues before and after instead of becoming reactionary. I mean comics are like a swinging pendulum when it comes to story telling. Fast forward in time to the future end of Coates run and when the next writer decides he needs to bring back elements of the Hudlin run or Priest run. The character of the Black Panther has been around for more than 50 years. You would need to develop algorithms to keep up with the continuity and story issues.
Post Hudlin, T'Challa has had a virtually uninterupted run of deconstruction wherein practically all of the positives Mr Hudlin brought to the BP mythos have been rolled back and virtually erased.
Forgive me for being scathingly unreceptive to Coates material as far as the BP mythos are concerned.
To be perfectly honest, I think the fact that the Dora's were flat out arguing that the chieftans actions were known and ignored is an indication that it's NOT exactly uncommon. It's likely not happening in the middle of the street within the golden city. But I'll wager outside of the golden city, in the more rural areas people can and do get away with a lot more. CBR's XPac
None of this BS existed within the BP mythos before Coates showed up so please stop acting like any of the garbage he's importing into said mythos, has any binding weight on what's known to long term BP enthusiasts.
As much as I disliked what Hickman did with T'Challa during his New Avengers run, there's no denying the fact that he left Wakanda in a more hopeful place at the close of Secret Wars II.
This was firmly mirrored in Ewings work in the first issue of the new Ultimates book that clearly illustrated where Wakanda was within the global pecking order.
Coates on the otherhand, has decided to regress Wakanda toa point that flies completely in the face of pre-established continuity while injecting his own personal viewpoints into a mythos that he has already clearly stated to hold in contempt.
Coates doesn't believe in the concept of a Monarchy and naturally decides to run rough shod over what existed within the BP mythos before he came along.
He holds the tradition of the Dora Milaje in disdain as see's same as being "weird" citing the ages of the Dora's as being "problematic" whilst ignoring facts relating to what obtains as the age of consent across the entirety of much of the world outside of North America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe
And he does all of this with the presumptious arrogance of an explorer who seems to think that he's more knowledgeable about things than the actual people who are about that life.
But then again, why would he not feel so entitled to make the pronouncements he's so fond of making in his interviews?
Afterall, he has been commisioned by the selfsame publishers who had no problem allowing the BP mythos to be dragged through the mud and disregarded until the trend towards the financial viability of actual diversity, forced Marvel into jumping onto the progressive bandwagon. CBR's Mr Majestic
Hey Kip, which Thanos do you think trashed the Golden City? ???
Coates is a grade A douchebag for this....
BLACK PANTHER #4
TA-NEHISI COATES (W) • BRIAN STELFREEZE (A/C)
DEATH OF X VARIANT COVER BY TBA
CONNECTING VARIANT COVER D BY SANFORD GREENE
• "A NATION UNDER OUR FEET," the first arc of the new hit BLACK PANTHER series, comes to a startling conclusion!
• Suicide bombers terrorize the people of Wakanda, further eroding any last bits of goodwill towards the royal family...
• T'Challa struggles to unite his citizens, who are choosing to side with Zenzi and The People in growing numbers...
• A familiar villain reveals his part in T'Challa's current ruination...and it's not who you think!
32 PGS./Rated T ...$3.99
([url]http://www.comicbookresources.com/imgsrv/imglib/0/0/1/BLAP2016004-CATALOG-ONLY-509bb.jpg[/url])
Meh. I have to wait and read the issues before and after instead of becoming reactionary. I mean comics are like a swinging pendulum when it comes to story telling. Fast forward in time to the future end of Coates run and when the next writer decides he needs to bring back elements of the Hudlin run or Priest run. The character of the Black Panther has been around for more than 50 years. You would need to develop algorithms to keep up with the continuity and story issues.
Post Hudlin, T'Challa has had a virtually uninterupted run of deconstruction wherein practically all of the positives Mr Hudlin brought to the BP mythos have been rolled back and virtually erased.
Forgive me for being scathingly unreceptive to Coates material as far as the BP mythos are concerned.
QFT!!! Chaos Bringer, you aint never lied. "Suicide bombers terrorize the people of Wakanda" come on, this is total regression. At least with Thanos you have a planet conquering, star destroying, nigh infinite cosmic powered adversary to contend with. And yes, T'Challa should have found a way to defeat him singlehandedly and save Wakanda. Poor writing about who the Black Panther is what is powering much of Coates' iteration. Again only one issue has made print so until the next one true believers...
A little ginger to clean the pallet...
GQ Magazine: Black Panther, Marvel's First Black Superhero, Is Now the Star of the Year's Most Important Comic
Just over six months ago, Marvel Entertainment shocked the comics and literary worlds alike when it announced that author, Atlantic correspondent, and MacArthur Grant recipient Ta-Nehisi Coates would be writing a year-long Black Panther comic book series alongside acclaimed artist Brian Stelfreeze and colorist Laura Martin. It was huge news that instantly put all sorts of pressure on Black Panther to immediately perform—because while Coates has long professed his love for comics, he writes for an audience that doesn't necessarily read them.
You'd probably be very happy with it, too. Black Panther #1 is a great start to the year-long story that Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin will tell monthly across eleven issues, and one that's every bit as thoughtful and vivid as you'd expect from the talent assembled. And for the Black Panther, Marvel's first black superhero—it's about damn time the publisher through some serious weight into restoring the character to prominence.
However, despite having such an important, interesting role in the fiction of Marvel's comics, the comics publisher hasn't always made him a prominent part of their comics lineup. To quote Kotaku writer Evan Narcisse's excellent and comprehensive writeup of the character's history and politics, "The Black Panther has gone from being an under-utilized figure in the background of Avengers group shots to arguably being the most fearsome strategist in the Marvel Universe. His elevation to Marvel’s top tier is a fascinating meta-story." So here we are, with what might be the most highly publicized and biggest comic book series launch of the year, and Black Panther is at the center of it all.
Black Panther #1 is everything wonderful about comics. It uses grand, symbolic figures to tangibly attack and dismantle big, important ideas. It's a comic that starts with chaos—recent events in Marvel's assorted comics have left Wakanda in disarray, and its people are restless. They're questioning their king and the very idea of monarchy, and the revolution is being led by women.
It is, cleverly, a story about America and patriarchy set in a nation almost entirely devoid of white faces, a story about a world power humbled and frustrated with their traditions and the establishments built by men who claim thrones. It is about a king who discovers his kingdom has been infected by hate, and no longer seem to want him. But do they need him?
Black Panther is asking big questions out of the gate, questions that are eerily relevant to an American audience also in the middle of a search for new leadership almost entirely defined by a rejection of the previous one, an election cycle defined by passions running high and hateful rhetoric reaching a fever pitch. And therein lies the story Coates, Stelfreeze, and Martin are out to tell: What happens when a nation of people discover that their perception of themselves is no longer true?
Interesting article...the line "it is cleverly, a story about America and patriarchy" is telling about some things I actually do see possibly problematic in Coates possible intentions though I'm eager to see how it plays out. It looks however that he might be forcing political and social issues into Wakanda that were arguably not there to tell a story addressing these things. For instance, I don't see the guy Aneka killed being able to do what he did for as LONG as it was suggested he did in Wakanda without no one doing anything...and if the Dora are trusts with guarding the king and the nation, why wouldn't they be able to kill someone for such a heinous crime without the overly harsh sentence of execution? Coates might be trying to speak on even some harsher political and social things in certain parts of Africa, but that's not and never has been Wakanda in that regard.
Also, "they're questioning the very idea of monarchy, and the revolution is being led by women" I don't mind this at all, and depending on how he goes about addressing the gender and black female revolutionary action along with black feminist issues...it could be a great read. However these issues shouldn't be handled or be exactly the same as they are in America and especially in certain parts of Africa...the "Boko Haram" type cells in scans shown most definitely should not be Wakanda as such a thing would never happen there...but perhaps it's a call on how Wakanda and its king should get involved in things that are happening in real world parts of Africa like this. Maybe that's what Coates is going for and if so that would be a good thing...maybe Aneka and Ayo will serve as the impetus for this involvement as I would hope an advanced place like Wakanda WOULD do something about these things happening not far from its borders.
As I've said to you before though...I think Coates is going to end monarchy in Wakanda to establish a democracy...just like in America or other more "democratic", so to speak, parts of the world. The very idea of this run questioning a monarchy and unrest with its "orphan-King" underscores this.
The fodder is there to tell due in fact to the many mischaracterizations of the Black Panther presented post Hudlin. I had a thread a few years back entitled The Many Mistakes of Reginald Hudlin in which I stated all the advances and nuances, all the logical conclusions about the Black Panther and Wakanda plied by Hudlin would be seen as things that needed to be corrected,undone i.e. the unconquered nation, the marriage to Storm, the brother and sister relationship with Shuri, the cultural leanings and expressions historical insertions that dealt well with past events. Hudlin even made being a king a cool thing with perks.
"Addressing the gender and black female revolutionary action along with black feminist issues..." are concerns Wakanda should not have. Traditional Afrakan societies exhibited gender equality simultaneously with well defined male and female roles and responsibilities.
This penchant for most writers to have Wakanda in the thralls of revolution at every writing belies any credibility in the writers creativity in visualizing a truly advanced Afrakan nation.
Instead of using contemporary social challenges in a failed attempt to "humanize" the populace and remove the stigma of 'utopia' that supposedly is Wakanda; why not focus on examples of their exemplary achievements in the arts and sciences, in their social and political workings, their economy, environmental conservation, deep space exploration and spirituality as it addresses how their society coexist and communes with their supreme being, deities and ancestors.http://blacknerdproblems.com/black-panther-1-the-dora-milaje-come-center-stage/ (http://blacknerdproblems.com/black-panther-1-the-dora-milaje-come-center-stage/)
The above link to this article on black nerd problems site may or may not have been posted on here before, surely read by some, but it's a pretty good article thats not only praising Coates first issue (surprised there isn't some criticism on sites I've seen yet, as it's good but far from perfect) but goes into what he's trying to accomplish and definitely for you Ture (and possibly others) something that has some
points arguably worthy of criticism.
It is of course also taking a particular view of the the Dora couple whom has obviously been a source of discussion and debate on here...
as the following passage from the article shows and makes an arguable point about:
"Black America, like the rest of America, has always had a complicated, stereotyping relationship with our Gay, Lesbian, Trans, Asexual, and other Queer members. We all know the Gay Choir Director or the unmarried Butch Auntie. We have so often pushed these family members to the edges of Black society, allowing them to be erased by the very communities they call home. So for Coates and the rest of the creative team to make not only the Dora Milaje, but two Black lesbian Dora Milaje, one of the primary actors in his series is, dare I say, revolutionary? Or at least so rarely seen as to be damn near? "
Good points though "revolutionary" might be too strong of a word...but it's pretty clear as the point has been made already that Coates is attempting to address real world issues through Wakanda...which could possibly be problematic.
American Afrakans like many other ethnic groups in the United States of America "has always had a complicated, stereotyping relationship with our" elders, children, fathers, mothers and our historical and cultural identity. The Afrakan family in the USA has been so beleaguered by negative imaging that some mistakenly believe that all too many so called black men want is a white woman, that all too many so called black women want is a white man or to get out of the ghetto, rap or play ball, be Hollywood housewives, drug sellers or play pimps up hoes down.
So for Coates and the rest of the creative team have yet to show T'Challa in a stable, functional relationship with a woman he would consider marrying and having children with. dare I say, that would be revolutionary? Or at least so rarely seen as to be damn near? "
Who Gave The Black Panther His Best Debut In An Ongoing?
([url]http://www.metronews.ca/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2016/4/7/blackpanther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/panthergreatest8.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static2.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/0/4/41174-6496-46481-1-black-panther.jpg[/url])
([url]http://static3.aintitcool.com/assets2011/liss7.jpg[/url])
([url]http://media.insidepulse.com/zones/insidepulse/uploads/2013/01/new-avengers-1-cover.png[/url])
([url]http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/panthericonic3.jpg[/url])
([url]http://worldofblackheroes.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/bp1.jpg[/url])
QuoteTo be perfectly honest, I think the fact that the Dora's were flat out arguing that the chieftans actions were known and ignored is an indication that it's NOT exactly uncommon. It's likely not happening in the middle of the street within the golden city. But I'll wager outside of the golden city, in the more rural areas people can and do get away with a lot more. CBR's XPacQuoteNone of this BS existed within the BP mythos before Coates showed up so please stop acting like any of the garbage he's importing into said mythos, has any binding weight on what's known to long term BP enthusiasts.
As much as I disliked what Hickman did with T'Challa during his New Avengers run, there's no denying the fact that he left Wakanda in a more hopeful place at the close of Secret Wars II.
This was firmly mirrored in Ewings work in the first issue of the new Ultimates book that clearly illustrated where Wakanda was within the global pecking order.
Coates on the otherhand, has decided to regress Wakanda toa point that flies completely in the face of pre-established continuity while injecting his own personal viewpoints into a mythos that he has already clearly stated to hold in contempt.
Coates doesn't believe in the concept of a Monarchy and naturally decides to run rough shod over what existed within the BP mythos before he came along.
He holds the tradition of the Dora Milaje in disdain as see's same as being "weird" citing the ages of the Dora's as being "problematic" whilst ignoring facts relating to what obtains as the age of consent across the entirety of much of the world outside of North America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe
And he does all of this with the presumptious arrogance of an explorer who seems to think that he's more knowledgeable about things than the actual people who are about that life.
But then again, why would he not feel so entitled to make the pronouncements he's so fond of making in his interviews?
Afterall, he has been commisioned by the selfsame publishers who had no problem allowing the BP mythos to be dragged through the mud and disregarded until the trend towards the financial viability of actual diversity, forced Marvel into jumping onto the progressive bandwagon. CBR's Mr Majestic
Again when it's said right, it's said right.
Originally Posted by Ekie of CBR
A throne for wakandan's means they (COATS) wants wakanda to be ruled by All wakandans. He wants wakanda to be more like America's political system. That's the only way to take that. The Dora's being sentenced by just the ruling party and tradition is another clue on how he wants to Americanize Wakanda by coming up with some kind of Jury system instead of a monarch just deciding death is the punishment. That's why the Dora's in this story are portrayed in such a glowing light with LGBT backing to boot. They are the heroes of Coats story and he is going to "Fix" wakanda through them and the "people". This is a story about how T'challa is going to deal with Coats bringing Western enlightenment to Wakanda.
Every interview I've read has pointed to this and the first issue as well as the previews have. It's pretty obvious.
just not with it.
The Dora's are the Heros of this story. They murdered a child molester. In America a jury of their peers would easily not recommend the death penalty and may even give a lightened sentence for such an act. But in Wakanda....Coats has shown that there is no "rational justice system" just tradition and the tyrants aka Panther clan. So the Dora's escape to fight on the injustices of the nation.
T'challa is supposed to take them down?
then the lady in green clearly states that she isn't mind controlling ppl but just fuels an already lit fire. So she's also not a villain otherwise that would villianize the people's "true desires" of democracy....again Tchalla is supposed to stop her?
T'challa is not Coats Hero.
the Doras and the "people" are.
I haven't put much though into the title of this series but what does a Nation UNDER our feet actually mean? Is The Panther clan holding down or back Wakanda?
I'm sorry but this is the obvious direction. It's one thing to have Tchalla doing some OOc things by a writer. We can all agree and disagree on those things and still love the mythos, but another to completely villainize a mythos and change it in the name of real world rational and western morality/politics/judicial values.
This WILL be a very interesting and well written story but it won't be about T'challa, Shuri, the Panther clan, or superheros overcoming the odds. It'll be about Coats ideal of what makes a nation great.
The mythos never needed fixing until unfans started writing it.
Exactly, Coats can "fix" it and will maybe even elevate the profile of T'challa and Wakanda to the white comic audience but to do so he feels he needs to change him into the Spiderman or Daredevil of his nation and his nation into the New York of Africa rather than it's ruler. That isn't the character this thread has been dominating CRB about for a decade.
I don't want T'challa or Shuri to be called King/Queen unless they are actually the King or the Queen. England can keep their Elizabeth we want rulers. If this is the case them just move him back to Hells Kitchen and write about that with less acumen that Liss did so we know what we are getting into.
I have a question, why would a guy who is one of the most critical writers against American criminal justice system, and the system itself (including capitalism), in mainstream journalism outside of Michelle Alexander...
Make Wakanda exactly like the system he's critical of?
There's absolutely no evidence the King decides guilt in this system either. Nothing in that first issue contradicted the possibility of there being a jury already.* The only thing clear is that the King's mother has the power to issue pardons. To me, that was the implicit criticism (to the extent there was any) - someone who is accountable only to the King whose authority derives from being married to the previous King has the power of clemency without any democratic oversight. The textual debate was whether a person who is legally guilty should be acquitted because their actions were morally justified.
* I know this seems an odd point to harp on, but the suggestion is Coates wants to change the criminal justice system to be more like the US's system. We don't have a clue what Coates's long-term plan is and I'm not sure everyone here is correct with the starting point.
Obviously, we'll have to see when it comes to the political thing. The fact that they said "throne" tells me those specific people want a different King, not a democracy. Where we'll end up is a different question. But we're reading a lot from so little.
Another thing to keep in mind about the Dora situation is that they didn't just kill some no name person, Aneka killed the Chieftain of another tribe.
It was basically the equivalent of the head secret service executing a Senator.
As Dora Milaje they're held to a higher standard than other citizens of the realm. That was the point Ramonda was trying to make.
Changes are coming, and I don't have much faith that they'll be changes I agree with, but I also don't think Coates is going to put in a place system akin to what we have in the U.S. Like Double 0 said Coates has continually been critical of the U.S. political and legal system.
*edit*
I think most of my discomfort with the changes that will possibly take place is the face that the mysticism of Wakanda is seemingly being ignored or downplayed. There's so much talk of "A technologically advanced nations wouldn't allow ____" that ignores that one of the more interesting aspects of Wakanda is the contradiction of them being technologically advanced while also having a deep connection to mysticism.
Funny enough this was illustrated quite well in AvsX when T'Challa spoke of the fact that he comes from a technologically advanced nation, but many of his abilities come from him ingesting an herb and communing with a deity.
Right, it seems like a good fit for both, considering their talents and ideologies.
If the Monarchy system has to change, I would be alright with the diarchy system that involves the Panther cult and the council. Seems like somewhat of a win / win, at least on paper:
-T'Challa is still King and wields the highest amount of authority in almost all sectors.
-T'Challa gets to go play superhero while being King and doesn't have to worry much about Wakanda, as the co-ruler (Shuri, for example), the Panther chieftain and the council are running the country.
-There are checks to T'Challa's rule via the co-ruler, the Panther Chieftain and the council in very specific issues and circumstances.
-The Wakandan people have a voice in governing via the council and the Panther chieftain. Especially so if T'Challa and Shuri, for example, disagree on a specific issue.
-I would add one thing: when declaring war is on the table, everyone must agree: both rulers and the strong majority of the council, which includes the Panther chieftain. Wakanda is a traditionally isolationist nation so going to war should be a big deal. Similar to how when Wakanda declared war on Atlantis, everyone was on board: the Wakandan people, the council, the military, and Shuri herself.
Still tempering my expectations greatly, but if such a system would be a hell of a surprise.
And that would be how you solve the monarch issue with out getting rid of it, doing that would allow T'Challa to still be king without losing too much and keeping the highest authority, give people a voice through the council and Panther chieftain, allows T'Challa to take on superhero adventures without leaving the kingdom to a coup as it's covered by a Queen, a chieftain and the council all capable of leading the nation should a prior power be unable to lead, moves Wakanda to a more functional government while he is away while still keeping it unique to the mythos. Funny how discussing it here we came up with a great solution to make everyone Happy. Those branches keep the rest in check as thy can't just act however they please and cannot be challenged either. If Coates did something like this and pulled it off so that in came after a triumphant victory then I'd be like
([url]http://i.imgur.com/UNY3mrM.gif[/url])
My opinion is pretty clear. If what being said is what Coates is doing...then he is westernizing Wakanda, PERIOD. Leave it be. There is nothing wrong with what I just wrote about their system and the government it has always used for 10,000 years canonically. I'm not interested in a watered down Monarchy or Government. I don't want to see Wakanda-America or Europeanized-Wakanda (via France or something)....or I don't care what type of government he is going to use. This fiction, so there isn't anything wrong with what Wakanda has always been. I have a hard time watching people jump through these massive hopes to explain and rationalize something that doesn't need "fixing". I love the guys writing. I was following him before he came on Panther. I buy his non-fiction books. He is a great writer, but if he does these things...I don't get why people seem to operate like this when writing certain characters. With T'challa and Wakanda is always from a point of limitation, placed in a box, regression instead of progression and neutering. These seems to be a extreme mental block with Suspension of belief.
T'challa being KING with full powers as a KING IS one of the CENTRAL drawing points of the character. This King in name only crap...is for the birds. Again, why would there been a need for a diarchy system? Please, what you just wrote doesn't make sense. If she can still "be out there", then so can T'challa. Again, they have always had regents. There is no need to change the current system or remove one of T'challa key traits...being a King. They are already a Oligarch with a Parliament, with a Monarch as the head of the land. What you are suggesting only makes Shuri Queen, while ignoring why people keep saying Shuri should be Queen (to run Wakanda), while removing what makes T'challa unique, effectively removing it and making it in name only.
There is nothing wrong with using Regents. Hell, you can have two Regents. One elected and one appointed (head of the council).
But I will not co-sign making Wakanda "baby France" or something.
Is The Woman standing Behind the Black Widow a Dora Milaje?
([url]http://41.media.tumblr.com/23c5c0426cb92fe43f805afd6bc96a4a/tumblr_o5uqarYd4m1v57sc5o1_1280.jpg[/url])
Here is another post by Victor Freeman, Ezyo. What do you think?QuoteMy opinion is pretty clear. If what being said is what Coates is doing...then he is westernizing Wakanda, PERIOD. Leave it be. There is nothing wrong with what I just wrote about their system and the government it has always used for 10,000 years canonically. I'm not interested in a watered down Monarchy or Government. I don't want to see Wakanda-America or Europeanized-Wakanda (via France or something)....or I don't care what type of government he is going to use. This fiction, so there isn't anything wrong with what Wakanda has always been. I have a hard time watching people jump through these massive hopes to explain and rationalize something that doesn't need "fixing". I love the guys writing. I was following him before he came on Panther. I buy his non-fiction books. He is a great writer, but if he does these things...I don't get why people seem to operate like this when writing certain characters. With T'challa and Wakanda is always from a point of limitation, placed in a box, regression instead of progression and neutering. These seems to be a extreme mental block with Suspension of belief.
T'challa being KING with full powers as a KING IS one of the CENTRAL drawing points of the character. This King in name only crap...is for the birds. Again, why would there been a need for a diarchy system? Please, what you just wrote doesn't make sense. If she can still "be out there", then so can T'challa. Again, they have always had regents. There is no need to change the current system or remove one of T'challa key traits...being a King. They are already a Oligarch with a Parliament, with a Monarch as the head of the land. What you are suggesting only makes Shuri Queen, while ignoring why people keep saying Shuri should be Queen (to run Wakanda), while removing what makes T'challa unique, effectively removing it and making it in name only.
There is nothing wrong with using Regents. Hell, you can have two Regents. One elected and one appointed (head of the council).
But I will not co-sign making Wakanda "baby France" or something.
For one, i highly doubt Coates is going to turn Wakanda into a US democracy. He is very critical of the US justice system and the system itself, so why would he turn Wakanda into something he doesn't like? Also what are you confused on about the Diarchy? A Diarchy would simply mean that both Shuri and T'Challa had equal power, if T'Challa left to go out into deep space then Shuri would make the choices. In Hudlin's run Shuri was reluctant to take charge when the US ship was docked outside of Wakanda Even though she is the Princess regent. Changing it would give her more power and T'Challas would stay the same. And with that Shuri could do stuff too but given how she has been written (by Hudlin as well) she isbt one to run off with the Avenger's, she stays in Wakanda and would more likely go around kicking teeth in the region. Us it helps keep coup in check, in Priest's run the council nor Ramonda couldn't stop Achebe, and same in Hudlin's, they still happened because T'Challa is the king and he was away and the country acted like without the leader the couldn't stop anything. This would make it harder to write revolt while away stories because they can co-rule
This reminds me of one of the major flaws of comic book writing in modern comics, that I have read about on another board. The writer has a story he wants to tell, so he forces the characters and situation to fit his story, rather than writing the stories that fit the character. The character is changed to fit the story rather than the story changed to fit the character. We have seen this when writer totally change the personality of characters (Grant Morrison on the X-Men, for example). The first Civil War was another example of this; a story that was forced and made people act in ways they shouldn't. And I said this before and will say it again, I think Coates wants to write an "Arab Spring" storyline, so he's forcing Wakanda into the story, rather than writing Wakanda as it is.
Plus, I have also been told that some stories just should not be told. Part of me hates this idea, but maybe there is truth that some stories should not be told because they damage the character too much.
Are you hoping it's a Diarchy or know it? Because a Diarchy is still a form of monarchy; and from what I've seen he thinks ruling families are not a modern, culturally mature form of government.
However, I would be surprised if he actually did end the monarchy.
Are you hoping it's a Diarchy or know it? Because a Diarchy is still a form of monarchy; and from what I've seen he thinks ruling families are not a modern, culturally mature form of government.
However, I would be surprised if he actually did end the monarchy.
Are you hoping it's a Diarchy or know it? Because a Diarchy is still a form of monarchy; and from what I've seen he thinks ruling families are not a modern, culturally mature form of government.
However, I would be surprised if he actually did end the monarchy.
Hoping for a Diarchy with a new spin Priest's notion of Bo chieftain and King/Queen of Wakanda beig separate while giving a council that act as the voice of the people. The king and queen have the highest authority (T'Challa and Shuri) Bo chieftain (Ramonda) can make decisions but ultimately is second to the King and Queen. If they disagree she would Also acr as a mediator, and if it still couldn't be solved then it goes to the council for a vote. Any major issues requires all of them present and they must all be in agreement or atleast majority of the council in top of the king, Queen and chieftain.
This would allow Coates to change the government to a more then just absolute ruke by one person. It outs checks and balances with out robbing T'Challa of his power. That's what I hoep for if Coates intends on changing Wakandas government
Are you hoping it's a Diarchy or know it? Because a Diarchy is still a form of monarchy; and from what I've seen he thinks ruling families are not a modern, culturally mature form of government.
However, I would be surprised if he actually did end the monarchy.
Hoping for a Diarchy with a new spin Priest's notion of Bo chieftain and King/Queen of Wakanda beig separate while giving a council that act as the voice of the people. The king and queen have the highest authority (T'Challa and Shuri) Bo chieftain (Ramonda) can make decisions but ultimately is second to the King and Queen. If they disagree she would Also acr as a mediator, and if it still couldn't be solved then it goes to the council for a vote. Any major issues requires all of them present and they must all be in agreement or atleast majority of the council in top of the king, Queen and chieftain.
This would allow Coates to change the government to a more then just absolute ruke by one person. It outs checks and balances with out robbing T'Challa of his power. That's what I hoep for if Coates intends on changing Wakandas government
Bro, everything you've described here, already existed in the BP mythos before Coates arrival.
Dude isn't bringing anything new to said mythos other than straight up regressionist BS.
Are you hoping it's a Diarchy or know it? Because a Diarchy is still a form of monarchy; and from what I've seen he thinks ruling families are not a modern, culturally mature form of government.
However, I would be surprised if he actually did end the monarchy.
Hoping for a Diarchy with a new spin Priest's notion of Bo chieftain and King/Queen of Wakanda beig separate while giving a council that act as the voice of the people. The king and queen have the highest authority (T'Challa and Shuri) Bo chieftain (Ramonda) can make decisions but ultimately is second to the King and Queen. If they disagree she would Also acr as a mediator, and if it still couldn't be solved then it goes to the council for a vote. Any major issues requires all of them present and they must all be in agreement or atleast majority of the council in top of the king, Queen and chieftain.
This would allow Coates to change the government to a more then just absolute ruke by one person. It outs checks and balances with out robbing T'Challa of his power. That's what I hoep for if Coates intends on changing Wakandas government
Bro, everything you've described here, already existed in the BP mythos before Coates arrival.
Dude isn't bringing anything new to said mythos other than straight up regressionist BS.
I know its already in the Mythos, Priet had it with the king and BP chieftain being two separate positions, and the Council as well as Hudlin having a council with T'Challa. But Ultimately things still came down to 1. T'Challa makes all the decisions and if he is away then its as though Wakanda can't function on its own. 2 when he is gone Coups arise since there isn't anyone on the throne to keep it in check. Having the Diarchy also allows Shuri to stay queen and not get demoted, and allows her to make sure Coups cannot arise when T'Challa is away (Hudlin had her doubting being able to do anything when the Us warships parked in front of Wakanda and it was just like "T'Challa aint here what do we do?" But she should have the power to be like "Yo US back off your out of line" and they heed the warning.
Basically its taking Priests and Hudlin's government establishment and fleshing it out so that there are other plans in place to take care of the homefront when T"Challa is away
Question for the Board...
Is such a "Diarchy" something that has ever been done well in the history of the world? Anywhere, not just Africa, anywhere in the world? Forgive my ignorance, I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not anyone can cite an example? Would it, by extension, be an example of something only an exceptionally enlightened society could accept and make work? I like to think of Wakanda as being to the rest of the world what Roddenberry's Federation would be to 21st century civilization. Would establishing a working, successful Diarchy represent a remarkable societal achievement?
As someone said earlier T'Challa being a King with the responsibilities of a true monarch has been one of the coolest aspects of his characterization. Good storytelling should acknowledge and accommodate his unique responsibilities not feel obliged to remove them. We'll see what happens?
Peace,
Mont
^And it's so sad. There was so much potential and as I said before I was pretty hyped at first but I see where this is going. I was most excited for my children to read it but like the movies Dear White People and Dope I knew that they would be grossed out. Told my oldest daughter there was a lesbian couple in it and she was like no thanks. She still has her Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur and Ms Marvel. I find it funny how people feel that others should accept everything that they accept, the fact is homosexuality grosses some people out, that's just a reality and they don't want to read about those acts or be exposed to that type of imagery and they have that right. Eating boogers is a behavior as well that grosses some people out. Funny thing is you could watch Revenge of the Nerds and no one would say you have a people eating boogers phobia of those who partake in that behavior if you didn't like Booger's character but if you don't like the black gay guy you'd probably be called homophobic which is very extreme, the definition of which needs to be redefined cause I never ever ran from the Ku Klux Klan and I never ever ran from a gay man. Then again it's not like everyone wears that sexual preference on their person as a badge of honor. Anyone can be gay, which means many police officers or security guards I ran from back in my adolescence could have been but I digress
The 100 is a sci-fi show on The CW. But I feel what you're saying about this new development in Black Panther. I got a feeling that racism, colonialism, and imperialism will take a back seat to black male sexism and promotion of alternative lifestyles, something more trendy and in keeping with mollifying liberal, homosexual, and feminist sentiments if the book continues along this line.
I'm really getting sick and tired of all these articles praising Coates.
You'd think he was reinventing the wheel as opposed to imposing his own hackneyed viewpoint upon the BP mythos.
I'm really getting sick and tired of all these articles praising Coates.
You'd think he was reinventing the wheel as opposed to imposing his own hackneyed viewpoint upon the BP mythos.
I wouldn't be surpassed for most of these articlles come from people who aren't traditional fans of BP. At the most, he's an idea to them, not a fully developed charter. I wonder how many have read a comic on the last ten years.
Small preview of Stelfreeze Issue #5 cover...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cg_uH7iXEAYFRWG.jpg)
Small preview of Stelfreeze Issue #5 cover...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cg_uH7iXEAYFRWG.jpg)
Some people are saying it could possibly be Manifold.. If it was and he became T'Challa's Protege, i could get behind that. He seemed like an interesting enough character to atleast expand upon
@Kimoyo - At this junction in the Panther's 50 year comic book career the only thing certain is the deconstruction of T'Challa and Wakanda. The use of a diarchal, triarchal, hell even an omniarchal would only service this end.
@ Sal - that article revealed that Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man. Panther again receives sloppy seconds. I wonder if Coates were writing Spider-Man if he would have injected Spiderman's reluctance at being an unappreciated superhero? Would he have dealt with the human trafficing in New York city. Would he have written two gay men dealing with so called homophobia with violence and would he have been heralded for doing such? Well maybe Coates will pull a Priest.
With some exceptions all these past decades we witnessed writers hedging the Black Panther's potential. Writing an inefficacious king who does not dispense justice, emprisonment or capitol punishment to those most deserving. I cite Zemo, the KKK, the Supremacists, the nation of Azania, Anton Petorius, Apartheid South Africa, Doom, Red Skull, Namor and Thanos. Get the picture.Nothing but fodder for a new writer of Coates' pedigree.
Instead however, we must contend with a writer who finds justification in fabricating tales of a reluctant king whose nation tolerates the abuse of women and human trafficking.
Are we going to witness yet another highjacking of the Black Panther's comic book, the usurpation of T'Challa as we did with Everett K. Ross, Kasper Cole, Shuri and now by Ayo and Aneka? First it was argued for a white narrator, then a bi-racial protagonist, next a woman, now two lesbians. Where is the argument for T'Challa the Black Panther?
Co-sign!
I might be one of the people you are referring to. It was not my intention to disturb you. I do have an issue with the promotion of homosexuality ahead of racism and colonialism in a Black Panther comic. Why did Coates delay discussing racism yet puts homosexuality front and center? I think he did so because in a way homosexuality is more acceptable to discuss and it endears him more to liberals, etc. It's a safer topic, relatively speaking. And I do think of the financial incentive as well. You don't want to be controversial, or too controversial because that might affect the bottom line.
Black misogyny is also something that's discussed and used as a charge against black men quite a bit, but what about black misandry? (Misandry=hatred or dislike of men). Misogyny is something that should be pointed out and condemned, but it is okay to portray and accuse black men of being dogs, lazy, shiftless, trifling, abusive, criminal, and stuff in popular culture, etc. and that's seen as okay. Further there is a larger issue of showing black men as ineffectual and sexless (unless it is interracial sex, homosexual sex, or dysfunctional heterosexual sex). I'm not saying that there aren't black men who aren't abusive or sexist, but at the same time black men are painted with a broad brush and seen as unworthy for a variety of reasons.
I do want this Black Panther series to be about T'Challa. He should be front and center. He shouldn't be a side character to two totally new characters and their romance. Personally I would rather see the promotion of more intraracial, heterosexual relationships in comics and across the media, more so than any other kind of romantic/sexual relationship where black characters are concerned.
I did not advocate for the death of those two characters. It's not something I promote or cheer when I see it, but I also understand that homosexuality is being promoted hard in the media right now, along with interracial relationships, and for me its an issue of just rolling with it...to an extent.
And I do have concerns that black people have to be for 'everyone' far too much. When for one, not everyone is for black people. And two, that means that often I feel black people have to put their concerns on the back burner to mollify our so-called allies or fold them into a "universal" coalition that still leaves blacks at the bottom. I am concerned that Coates might wind up doing that with T'Challa, leaving him in no better a spot than where he found him. If at the end of his run we know more about these two characters than we do about him or haven't seen him kick major ass then I think that troubling pattern will hold.
Post of the week!!!
Emperorjones, your clarity on these matters is letter perfect.
I was all excited for the first issue especially when I heard it sold out. But, now I'm reading these reviews and I'm no longer very hopeful for this series. Fact is, when Coates was announced as taking over and he started out praising that jack-ass that started the "deconstruction" BP with the whole Doom War fiasco, I kinda saw the writing on the wall, but was hoping I would be wrong. Well now we know. Oh, well. I guess I can still get my fix of T-Challa along with Blue Marvel in The Ultimates.@Kimoyo - At this junction in the Panther's 50 year comic book career the only thing certain is the deconstruction of T'Challa and Wakanda. The use of a diarchal, triarchal, hell even an omniarchal would only service this end.
@ Sal - that article revealed that Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man. Panther again receives sloppy seconds. I wonder if Coates were writing Spider-Man if he would have injected Spiderman's reluctance at being an unappreciated superhero? Would he have dealt with the human trafficing in New York city. Would he have written two gay men dealing with so called homophobia with violence and would he have been heralded for doing such? Well maybe Coates will pull a Priest.
With some exceptions all these past decades we witnessed writers hedging the Black Panther's potential. Writing an inefficacious king who does not dispense justice, emprisonment or capitol punishment to those most deserving. I cite Zemo, the KKK, the Supremacists, the nation of Azania, Anton Petorius, Apartheid South Africa, Doom, Red Skull, Namor and Thanos. Get the picture.Nothing but fodder for a new writer of Coates' pedigree.
Instead however, we must contend with a writer who finds justification in fabricating tales of a reluctant king whose nation tolerates the abuse of women and human trafficking.
Are we going to witness yet another highjacking of the Black Panther's comic book, the usurpation of T'Challa as we did with Everett K. Ross, Kasper Cole, Shuri and now by Ayo and Aneka? First it was argued for a white narrator, then a bi-racial protagonist, next a woman, now two lesbians. Where is the argument for T'Challa the Black Panther?
To me, Reginald Hudlin will always remain the only writer to chronicle the Black Panther Mythos in a manner that was focused, dedicated and straight up unapologetically BLACK.
There was ZERO ambiguity in Hudlin's take on the mythos and for that, I will always remain grateful.
Coates is no friend to the Black Panther mythos.
Small preview of Stelfreeze Issue #5 cover...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cg_uH7iXEAYFRWG.jpg)
Some people are saying it could possibly be Manifold.. If it was and he became T'Challa's Protege, i could get behind that. He seemed like an interesting enough character to atleast expand upon
I want it to be Killmonger.
A thought hit me today regarding this current take on Wakanda. To us, it is a unique nation with a unique culture, unique identity, and so on. We might have different visions of it, but we know it doesn't have the ills of modern Africa.
Now whether Coates is just ignorant of what its history means or he views the traditional view as simplistic, unrealistic or even childish, I don't know, but he created a this harsher more "real-world" vision of Wakanda.
According to Coates Twitter, it is Indeed Manifold, so he may become T'challa's Protege, and who knows, maybe then people of Wakanda won't have to worry about T'Challa leave as he can teleport right back, same the with excuse of him not being able to be in multiple teams.
Also as its been said before. I get the reason to be pessimistic i really do, but we are literally 1 issue in with absolutely no idea on how this is gonna end up. Now im not saying trust in Coates and there are things im not too fond of, but I think he does want to write a good BP story and to do that you need a strong opening, a dramatic middle, and a satisfying ending and its gonna be tough for T'Challa but because this isn't a one and done story and Coates has signed on to write BP for a few years, you can't just have a bunch of stories of deconstruction eith no sign of clear cut victories and expect the book to do good, So yea i think this arc may be rough, but for Solo's the point is to elevate the character. So i mean to act like we know how this ends already is a bit premature..
Jeez i feel like brother S.I. WHich btw where has he gone?? did he get put in limbo like QDJ!? Ezyo
@Kimoyo - At this junction in the Panther's 50 year comic book career the only thing certain is the deconstruction of T'Challa and Wakanda. The use of a diarchal, triarchal, hell even an omniarchal would only service this end.
@ Sal - that article revealed that Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man. Panther again receives sloppy seconds. I wonder if Coates were writing Spider-Man if he would have injected Spiderman's reluctance at being an unappreciated superhero? Would he have dealt with the human trafficing in New York city. Would he have written two gay men dealing with so called homophobia with violence and would he have been heralded for doing such? Well maybe Coates will pull a Priest.
With some exceptions all these past decades we witnessed writers hedging the Black Panther's potential. Writing an inefficacious king who does not dispense justice, emprisonment or capitol punishment to those most deserving. I cite Zemo, the KKK, the Supremacists, the nation of Azania, Anton Petorius, Apartheid South Africa, Doom, Red Skull, Namor and Thanos. Get the picture.Nothing but fodder for a new writer of Coates' pedigree.
Instead however, we must contend with a writer who finds justification in fabricating tales of a reluctant king whose nation tolerates the abuse of women and human trafficking.
Are we going to witness yet another highjacking of the Black Panther's comic book, the usurpation of T'Challa as we did with Everett K. Ross, Kasper Cole, Shuri and now by Ayo and Aneka? First it was argued for a white narrator, then a bi-racial protagonist, next a woman, now two lesbians. Where is the argument for T'Challa the Black Panther?
To me, Reginald Hudlin will always remain the only writer to chronicle the Black Panther Mythos in a manner that was focused, dedicated and straight up unapologetically BLACK.
There was ZERO ambiguity in Hudlin's take on the mythos and for that, I will always remain grateful.
Coates is no friend to the Black Panther mythos.
@Kimoyo - At this junction in the Panther's 50 year comic book career the only thing certain is the deconstruction of T'Challa and Wakanda. The use of a diarchal, triarchal, hell even an omniarchal would only service this end.
@ Sal - that article revealed that Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man. Panther again receives sloppy seconds. I wonder if Coates were writing Spider-Man if he would have injected Spiderman's reluctance at being an unappreciated superhero? Would he have dealt with the human trafficing in New York city. Would he have written two gay men dealing with so called homophobia with violence and would he have been heralded for doing such? Well maybe Coates will pull a Priest.
With some exceptions all these past decades we witnessed writers hedging the Black Panther's potential. Writing an inefficacious king who does not dispense justice, emprisonment or capitol punishment to those most deserving. I cite Zemo, the KKK, the Supremacists, the nation of Azania, Anton Petorius, Apartheid South Africa, Doom, Red Skull, Namor and Thanos. Get the picture.Nothing but fodder for a new writer of Coates' pedigree.
Instead however, we must contend with a writer who finds justification in fabricating tales of a reluctant king whose nation tolerates the abuse of women and human trafficking.
Are we going to witness yet another highjacking of the Black Panther's comic book, the usurpation of T'Challa as we did with Everett K. Ross, Kasper Cole, Shuri and now by Ayo and Aneka? First it was argued for a white narrator, then a bi-racial protagonist, next a woman, now two lesbians. Where is the argument for T'Challa the Black Panther?
To me, Reginald Hudlin will always remain the only writer to chronicle the Black Panther Mythos in a manner that was focused, dedicated and straight up unapologetically BLACK.
There was ZERO ambiguity in Hudlin's take on the mythos and for that, I will always remain grateful.
Coates is no friend to the Black Panther mythos.
Brothers, I think Kip may have been exactly right, way back when, in saying T'Challa and Wakanda's deconstruction was all but a foregone conclusion simply because of their record, unconquered and unconquerable for all of their history. A "Superman" of societies the more visible T'Challa and Wakanda would become, the more likely someone was going to want to screw with 'em. We all know stories require drama to be marketable. The hope after years of mischaracterization and deconstruction is that, as with previous creators of color, a creative team that looks more like T'Challa and most of us, could at least restore some of the pride-inducing luster a life lead as a person of color would seemingly demand, right? I don't know what's to come exactly, but I'm just not ready to assume the worst after 1 issue and a whole lot of spoilers. After the previous 3 or 4 years, actually more, I'm willing to give Coates and Stelfreeze 4 issues to tell the first of their stories and hope they don't let us down. My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
I'll be keeping up with Coates material but, that doesn't mean that I'll be paying to read his debasement/derailment of the BP mythos.
I'll be keeping up with Coates material but, that doesn't mean that I'll be paying to read his debasement/derailment of the BP mythos.
I understand. And to be honest I hope I'm right and your wrong. Not because of an I told you so moment, but because if I'm right then both of us end up benefiting from it and if your Right then we all lose
I'll be keeping up with Coates material but, that doesn't mean that I'll be paying to read his debasement/derailment of the BP mythos.
I understand. And to be honest I hope I'm right and your wrong. Not because of an I told you so moment, but because if I'm right then both of us end up benefiting from it and if your Right then we all lose
the sad thing is, you both can be right. For Sals point, it's not just where BP ends, it's how he gets there. For example, I heard from an insider in the industry that the editors of Wonder Woman often get these story-pitches where the writer wants to tell the story where Wonder Woman is brutalized (you know what I mean). Now, someone could write such a story and receive acclaim (Like Killing Joke) but that doesn't mean someone should write the story because it forever would remain with the character. So, yeah, BP could come out of this story stronger and more prominent then ever; but that doesn't mean this should have been the way, because no matter what happens, this is Wakanda now. It is no longer as unique as it once was.
I'll be keeping up with Coates material but, that doesn't mean that I'll be paying to read his debasement/derailment of the BP mythos.
I understand. And to be honest I hope I'm right and your wrong. Not because of an I told you so moment, but because if I'm right then both of us end up benefiting from it and if your Right then we all lose
the sad thing is, you both can be right. For Sals point, it's not just where BP ends, it's how he gets there. For example, I heard from an insider in the industry that the editors of Wonder Woman often get these story-pitches where the writer wants to tell the story where Wonder Woman is brutalized (you know what I mean). Now, someone could write such a story and receive acclaim (Like Killing Joke) but that doesn't mean someone should write the story because it forever would remain with the character. So, yeah, BP could come out of this story stronger and more prominent then ever; but that doesn't mean this should have been the way, because no matter what happens, this is Wakanda now. It is no longer as unique as it once was.
I'll be keeping up with Coates material but, that doesn't mean that I'll be paying to read his debasement/derailment of the BP mythos.
I understand. And to be honest I hope I'm right and your wrong. Not because of an I told you so moment, but because if I'm right then both of us end up benefiting from it and if your Right then we all lose
the sad thing is, you both can be right. For Sals point, it's not just where BP ends, it's how he gets there. For example, I heard from an insider in the industry that the editors of Wonder Woman often get these story-pitches where the writer wants to tell the story where Wonder Woman is brutalized (you know what I mean). Now, someone could write such a story and receive acclaim (Like Killing Joke) but that doesn't mean someone should write the story because it forever would remain with the character. So, yeah, BP could come out of this story stronger and more prominent then ever; but that doesn't mean this should have been the way, because no matter what happens, this is Wakanda now. It is no longer as unique as it once was.
The only reason I'm more on a wait and see what happens stance is because at the very least the story is addressing issues that have to do with continuity. I would HOPE that by the end of this, T'Challa and Wakanda come out looking like the incredible badass, don't mess with us unless you want to get burned, glory again. So that these uprising stories do not get told for a long time. I hate them. Every fan hates them, because there have been so many over bos history and its gotten old.
So I'm hoping Coates oays attention to what hebis doing and doesn't zap away cool things from the mythos. I hope he treats BP the same way Priest and Hudlin did before him. With T'Challa and Wakanda being elevated to bee heights with solid clear cut victories
The only reason I'm more on a wait and see what happens stance is because at the very least the story is addressing issues that have to do with continuity. I would HOPE that by the end of this, T'Challa and Wakanda come out looking like the incredible badass, don't mess with us unless you want to get burned, glory again. So that these uprising stories do not get told for a long time. I hate them. Every fan hates them, because there have been so many over bos history and its gotten old.
I'm just glad that the Hickman/Coates version of T'Challa didn't make it onto the big screen via Captain America:Civil War. Salutrade
QuoteI'm just glad that the Hickman/Coates version of T'Challa didn't make it onto the big screen via Captain America:Civil War. Salutrade
Let's hope not. The one thing I do find absent in the previews, write ups and spoilers is reference to the Black Panther's great intellect. Come Friday we will all know.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChbFqiWUUAEjurp.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChbFqhSUoAABwOT.jpg)
Welcome back SI.
We've Missed You.
([url]http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/5993/911952-smith.jpg[/url])
[
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV8TSIZx4aQ&lc=z12ee5bzlwu5cva3q22vyfwotzuqi14tr (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV8TSIZx4aQ&lc=z12ee5bzlwu5cva3q22vyfwotzuqi14tr)
Sorry for my absence, brethren. I have been cranking up my training. Lots of things have been poppin off round my way, and in a bit of good news...my business has been rapidly expanding. I will read this thread and get back at everyone tomorrow or the day after.
[Video]https://vimeo.com/165181590[/Video]
Why does this video seem so much more positive than all the interviews I've been reading? He's saying some of the same things, but it doesn't have the "burn it all down" tone that the interviews have had.
It's also the first time I've heard him say anything about T'Challa having a plan. Everything before now has been about how The Dora Milaje are going to save Wakanda.
That vid appears to be part of a video series to ease in new readers, apparently.
[url]http://www.fastcocreate.com/3059502/marvel-kicks-off-video-series-to-ease-in-new-readers-starting-with-black-panther?utm_content=buffer4d806&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer[/url] ([url]http://www.fastcocreate.com/3059502/marvel-kicks-off-video-series-to-ease-in-new-readers-starting-with-black-panther?utm_content=buffer4d806&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer[/url])
More vids to come, I guess.
Welcome back Brother S.I.! Ture, superb revisioning of events! Love the idea of Kasper as "Ghost Panther!" Exciting news about video series for marketing, all on the eve of "Civil War!" Exciting indeed!
Peace,
Mont
It’s an interesting prospect for comics. Stan Lee famously said that "every comic book is somebody’s first" as a reminder that these things need to be accessible, and anything that makes ongoing titles with a whole lot of history easier for new readers to pick up and get immediately is a good idea. Using some light animation, a hip hop score, and an overview from Coates himself is a clever way to market the book to people who might just be waiting for an extra push to find out what the future holds for Black Panther.
It’s an interesting prospect for comics. Stan Lee famously said that "every comic book is somebody’s first" as a reminder that these things need to be accessible, and anything that makes ongoing titles with a whole lot of history easier for new readers to pick up and get immediately is a good idea. Using some light animation, a hip hop score, and an overview from Coates himself is a clever way to market the book to people who might just be waiting for an extra push to find out what the future holds for Black Panther.
On one level, yeah, but on another level--you really shouldn't have to do homework to understand a comic.
Son of the Black Panther
Ta-Nehisi Coates takes on one of Marvel's iconic superheroes, reinvigorating the Black Panther for a new generation.
BY JONATHAN W. GRAY
April 26, 2016
This article has been edited.
... As befits the first hero of African descent published by a major comic book publisher, T’Challa interacts in significant ways with all of Marvel’s other black characters—from the Falcon to Luke Cage to Storm—and they derive inspiration from his stewardship of Wakanda, a truly independent African state that also happens to be the most advanced nation on earth. Marvel’s original rhetoric about Wakanda—unconquered by Western powers and thus untainted by neocolonialism—resembled African American discourse about Haiti in the 1850s and Ethiopia in the mid-1930s, which helps explain T’Challa’s appeal to a post-Civil Rights cohort of black Americans.
The rebooted Black Panther series engages with this shared history in important ways. Under the guidance of editor-in-chief Axel Alonso, Marvel has successfully launched a number of books featuring underrepresented characters over the last several years, including an Afro-Latino Spider-Man, a female Thor, and a Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel. Indeed, prior to Black Panther’s record-breaking debut in early April—the first issue sold through a 350,000 initial print run and has gone into a second printing—Ms. Marvel was Marvel’s top-selling comic. It speaks to the cultural capital of the comic industry in general and Marvel in particular that Coates, perhaps the most prominent contemporary writer on race and its role in American history, was interested in working for the company.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/f3138a980a198c1149e87039a75325f7fb239d76.jpeg?w=400&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=615)
Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man, but it makes sense that Black Panther is Coates’s first foray into comics; his father was once the chairman of the Maryland chapter of the Black Panther Party. And as a lifelong fan of Marvel comics, Coates is as well-versed in its fictive history as he is in America’s bloody past. Working with established superheroes places particular demands on a writer, as it involves two kinds of collaboration: An author works with an illustrator to tell a story, but the author must also build upon what earlier creative teams have established about the character. In this sense, writing a comic about a long-standing protagonist like the Black Panther—or Batman or Spider-Man—involves reconfiguring story lines written by legends like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby, as well as by less-heralded creators, into a new narrative.
There are two ways for a writer to do this. You could bring to the surface the essential traits of your character in a way that allows readers to experience these familiar qualities anew, as Frank Miller did for Batman with The Dark Knight Returns (1986) and Batman: Year One (1987), and Grant Morrison achieved with All-Star Superman (2008). The other approach is more subtle: Reread your character’s archive, gently realign his portrayal by attending to heretofore overlooked elements, and simultaneously create new supporting characters who facilitate the new direction. Alan Moore pioneered this approach with his run on Saga of the Swamp Thing from 1984-87, and Matt Fraction successfully reinvigorated the characters Iron Fist (2006-09) and Hawkeye (2012-15) using this method. Though the writer changes the character’s canon, the new iteration, if successful, supersedes the old while opening new avenues for storytelling. Coates takes the latter, more challenging approach and, based on my reading of the premiere issue along with the scripts of the first four issues, his Black Panther series succeeds wonderfully.
Coates renders the Black Panther as a reluctant king at the outset of “A Nation Under Our Feet,” which is a dramatic change. Comic fans have always accepted T’Challa’s serial absences from Wakanda as a consequence of the narrative logic of the Marvel universe, which locates all its heroes in and around New York City. An earlier Black Panther series, for example, opens with T’Challa arriving in New York alongside the Wakandan U.N. delegation, but then maneuvers him to Brooklyn, where he lives in a tenement and tussles with drug dealers who are using a Wakandan foundation to launder their profits. Despite these occurrences, earlier writers insisted that the Black Panther took his responsibilities as sovereign seriously.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/dfe561cde59e3c086804e843a9545e10b57186d6.jpeg?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=911)
Coates, on the other hand, reads that narrative as a sign of T’Challa’s reluctance to accept the responsibilities of the crown, and builds his characterization around it. Considering Coates’s assessment of Queen Nzinga, a seventeenth-century ruler of present-day Angola, in his last book—he identified most with her adviser, “who’d been broken down into a chair so that a queen … could sit”—it is unsurprising that he would chafe at writing a character who uncritically accepts his suitability to rule a nation. But Coates does more than simply reveal T’Challa’s self-doubt. In a recent New York Times discussion of the comic, he approaches the question of Wakandan governance from a different angle, wondering why Wakanda’s “educated population” would “even accept a monarchy.” The initial chapters of Coates’s Black Panther suggest democratic reform is in the offing, a radical change to the Wakandan status quo that allows Coates to interrogate the republican tradition Western readers often take for granted. In past iterations of Black Panther, those who worked to undermine dynastic rule were ultimately revealed to be either usurpers who craved the power of the throne for themselves, pawns controlled by Western powers seeking to undermine the only truly independent African nation so that they might exploit its natural resources, or both, which positioned the benevolent Wakandan monarchy as the foil for neoliberal entanglements.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/5fb844c02521d1a93a28cc00d46f8c11c359cc52.tiff?w=800&q=65&dpi=1&h=618)
While some elements of this international intrigue remain in “A Nation Under Our Feet,” Coates legitimizes at least some of the voices decrying monarchical rule. Indeed, perhaps Coates’s most intriguing new character, Zenzi, throws Wakanda into crisis by bringing the citizenry’s conflicted feelings toward T’Challa to the fore. She promises to be a formidable political foe, though the narrative hints she might evolve into an ally, depending on how the “Wakandan Spring” develops.
If superhero comics—with the notable exception of Chris Claremont’s 17-year run on X-Men—have traditionally devoted themselves to presenting the stories of heroic men, Coates works to correct this imbalance. Aside from Black Panther’s titular character, Coates allots most of his attention to female protagonists: the aforementioned Zenzi; T’Challa’s stepmother and regent, Ramonda; and Ayo and Aneka, members of the elite, all-woman Dora Milaje, which functions as Wakanda’s secret service. Coates’s Ramonda works to balance her role as trusted adviser to the king with her own instincts as a politician and her maternal concern for her son.
Ayo and Aneka are both soldiers and lovers, which violates the tradition that demands the Dora Milaje remain chaste while in the service of the Black Panther. Their relationship allows Coates to reveal the gendered violence and subordination present in even the most enlightened nation—the couple flee the palace to escape royal censure—but also frees him to address problems the patriarchal royal family has overlooked. Even in Wakanda, women’s problems receive less attention from the state. Within four issues, Coates establishes each of these women as complex characters with distinct motivations, even as he hints at the reintroduction of another important female character, T’Challa’s sister Zuri. While Zuri died protecting Wakanda in T’Challa’s absence, loyal comic readers know that death is rarely permanent.
The author shows a lapse in his research concerning Shuri.
One of the most persistent critiques of Between the World and Me, Coates’s most recent book, was that it paid insufficient attention to the ways that black women confront racial violence. His work here suggests he’s taken this critique to heart. (Coates even recently posted on his blog at The Atlantic about his enthusiasm for crafting the “feminists of Wakanda.”) Given the dearth of black women in comics—X-Men’s Storm remains the most prominent black woman in the medium, decades after her debut—Coates’s interest in female subjectivity is a most welcome change.
A.Curry will surely appreciate this.
Coates’s narrative contains a number of moving parts, which may make for tough sledding for those unfamiliar with comics as he works to set the stage; the whirl of characters can become bewildering. Issues 3 and 4 are more measured, and demonstrate Coates’s increasing command of the form. Coates has committed to writing Black Panther for the next few years, and watching a son of the Black Panther Party take the Black Panther to new heights promises to be a thrilling experience. Given the confluence of events—the last year of the Obama presidency, the ongoing Black Lives Matter protest movement, the fiftieth anniversary of the character—one expects we’ll never see a moment like this again. Pay attention to Ta-Nehisi Coates’s Black Panther. History will either mark it as an interesting detour in an important career, or herald it as a new peak for comics.
Jonathan W. Gray is an Associate Professor of English at John Jay College—CUNY and editor of The Journal of Comics and Culture.
Full unedited article here
https://newrepublic.com/article/132972/son-black-panther
Son of the Black Panther
Ta-Nehisi Coates takes on one of Marvel's iconic superheroes, reinvigorating the Black Panther for a new generation.
BY JONATHAN W. GRAY
April 26, 2016
This article has been edited.
... As befits the first hero of African descent published by a major comic book publisher, T’Challa interacts in significant ways with all of Marvel’s other black characters—from the Falcon to Luke Cage to Storm—and they derive inspiration from his stewardship of Wakanda, a truly independent African state that also happens to be the most advanced nation on earth. Marvel’s original rhetoric about Wakanda—unconquered by Western powers and thus untainted by neocolonialism—resembled African American discourse about Haiti in the 1850s and Ethiopia in the mid-1930s, which helps explain T’Challa’s appeal to a post-Civil Rights cohort of black Americans.
The rebooted Black Panther series engages with this shared history in important ways. Under the guidance of editor-in-chief Axel Alonso, Marvel has successfully launched a number of books featuring underrepresented characters over the last several years, including an Afro-Latino Spider-Man, a female Thor, and a Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel. Indeed, prior to Black Panther’s record-breaking debut in early April—the first issue sold through a 350,000 initial print run and has gone into a second printing—Ms. Marvel was Marvel’s top-selling comic. It speaks to the cultural capital of the comic industry in general and Marvel in particular that Coates, perhaps the most prominent contemporary writer on race and its role in American history, was interested in working for the company.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/f3138a980a198c1149e87039a75325f7fb239d76.jpeg?w=400&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=615)
Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man, but it makes sense that Black Panther is Coates’s first foray into comics; his father was once the chairman of the Maryland chapter of the Black Panther Party. And as a lifelong fan of Marvel comics, Coates is as well-versed in its fictive history as he is in America’s bloody past. Working with established superheroes places particular demands on a writer, as it involves two kinds of collaboration: An author works with an illustrator to tell a story, but the author must also build upon what earlier creative teams have established about the character. In this sense, writing a comic about a long-standing protagonist like the Black Panther—or Batman or Spider-Man—involves reconfiguring story lines written by legends like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby, as well as by less-heralded creators, into a new narrative.
There are two ways for a writer to do this. You could bring to the surface the essential traits of your character in a way that allows readers to experience these familiar qualities anew, as Frank Miller did for Batman with The Dark Knight Returns (1986) and Batman: Year One (1987), and Grant Morrison achieved with All-Star Superman (2008). The other approach is more subtle: Reread your character’s archive, gently realign his portrayal by attending to heretofore overlooked elements, and simultaneously create new supporting characters who facilitate the new direction. Alan Moore pioneered this approach with his run on Saga of the Swamp Thing from 1984-87, and Matt Fraction successfully reinvigorated the characters Iron Fist (2006-09) and Hawkeye (2012-15) using this method. Though the writer changes the character’s canon, the new iteration, if successful, supersedes the old while opening new avenues for storytelling. Coates takes the latter, more challenging approach and, based on my reading of the premiere issue along with the scripts of the first four issues, his Black Panther series succeeds wonderfully.
Coates renders the Black Panther as a reluctant king at the outset of “A Nation Under Our Feet,” which is a dramatic change. Comic fans have always accepted T’Challa’s serial absences from Wakanda as a consequence of the narrative logic of the Marvel universe, which locates all its heroes in and around New York City. An earlier Black Panther series, for example, opens with T’Challa arriving in New York alongside the Wakandan U.N. delegation, but then maneuvers him to Brooklyn, where he lives in a tenement and tussles with drug dealers who are using a Wakandan foundation to launder their profits. Despite these occurrences, earlier writers insisted that the Black Panther took his responsibilities as sovereign seriously.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/dfe561cde59e3c086804e843a9545e10b57186d6.jpeg?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=911)
Coates, on the other hand, reads that narrative as a sign of T’Challa’s reluctance to accept the responsibilities of the crown, and builds his characterization around it. Considering Coates’s assessment of Queen Nzinga, a seventeenth-century ruler of present-day Angola, in his last book—he identified most with her adviser, “who’d been broken down into a chair so that a queen … could sit”—it is unsurprising that he would chafe at writing a character who uncritically accepts his suitability to rule a nation. But Coates does more than simply reveal T’Challa’s self-doubt. In a recent New York Times discussion of the comic, he approaches the question of Wakandan governance from a different angle, wondering why Wakanda’s “educated population” would “even accept a monarchy.” The initial chapters of Coates’s Black Panther suggest democratic reform is in the offing, a radical change to the Wakandan status quo that allows Coates to interrogate the republican tradition Western readers often take for granted. In past iterations of Black Panther, those who worked to undermine dynastic rule were ultimately revealed to be either usurpers who craved the power of the throne for themselves, pawns controlled by Western powers seeking to undermine the only truly independent African nation so that they might exploit its natural resources, or both, which positioned the benevolent Wakandan monarchy as the foil for neoliberal entanglements.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/5fb844c02521d1a93a28cc00d46f8c11c359cc52.tiff?w=800&q=65&dpi=1&h=618)
While some elements of this international intrigue remain in “A Nation Under Our Feet,” Coates legitimizes at least some of the voices decrying monarchical rule. Indeed, perhaps Coates’s most intriguing new character, Zenzi, throws Wakanda into crisis by bringing the citizenry’s conflicted feelings toward T’Challa to the fore. She promises to be a formidable political foe, though the narrative hints she might evolve into an ally, depending on how the “Wakandan Spring” develops.
If superhero comics—with the notable exception of Chris Claremont’s 17-year run on X-Men—have traditionally devoted themselves to presenting the stories of heroic men, Coates works to correct this imbalance. Aside from Black Panther’s titular character, Coates allots most of his attention to female protagonists: the aforementioned Zenzi; T’Challa’s stepmother and regent, Ramonda; and Ayo and Aneka, members of the elite, all-woman Dora Milaje, which functions as Wakanda’s secret service. Coates’s Ramonda works to balance her role as trusted adviser to the king with her own instincts as a politician and her maternal concern for her son.
Ayo and Aneka are both soldiers and lovers, which violates the tradition that demands the Dora Milaje remain chaste while in the service of the Black Panther. Their relationship allows Coates to reveal the gendered violence and subordination present in even the most enlightened nation—the couple flee the palace to escape royal censure—but also frees him to address problems the patriarchal royal family has overlooked. Even in Wakanda, women’s problems receive less attention from the state. Within four issues, Coates establishes each of these women as complex characters with distinct motivations, even as he hints at the reintroduction of another important female character, T’Challa’s sister Zuri. While Zuri died protecting Wakanda in T’Challa’s absence, loyal comic readers know that death is rarely permanent.
The author shows a lapse in his research concerning Shuri.
One of the most persistent critiques of Between the World and Me, Coates’s most recent book, was that it paid insufficient attention to the ways that black women confront racial violence. His work here suggests he’s taken this critique to heart. (Coates even recently posted on his blog at The Atlantic about his enthusiasm for crafting the “feminists of Wakanda.”) Given the dearth of black women in comics—X-Men’s Storm remains the most prominent black woman in the medium, decades after her debut—Coates’s interest in female subjectivity is a most welcome change.
A.Curry will surely appreciate this.
Coates’s narrative contains a number of moving parts, which may make for tough sledding for those unfamiliar with comics as he works to set the stage; the whirl of characters can become bewildering. Issues 3 and 4 are more measured, and demonstrate Coates’s increasing command of the form. Coates has committed to writing Black Panther for the next few years, and watching a son of the Black Panther Party take the Black Panther to new heights promises to be a thrilling experience. Given the confluence of events—the last year of the Obama presidency, the ongoing Black Lives Matter protest movement, the fiftieth anniversary of the character—one expects we’ll never see a moment like this again. Pay attention to Ta-Nehisi Coates’s Black Panther. History will either mark it as an interesting detour in an important career, or herald it as a new peak for comics.
Jonathan W. Gray is an Associate Professor of English at John Jay College—CUNY and editor of The Journal of Comics and Culture.
Full unedited article here
https://newrepublic.com/article/132972/son-black-panther
GREAT ARTICLE TURE.
it is disheartening a bit for myself and I'm sure others that Coates initially was interested in Spidey and not BP...hard to believe someone with his background wasn't excited at first about the prospect of working on T'Challa and Wakanda.
As for the part "I surely will appreciate"...lol...the writer of this piece shows that Coates maybe had some motivation into writing a tale that had a focus on womanist/black feminist issues through Coates himself being criticized for not addressing how black women face racism and sexism in his initial essay work...and trying to bring about the "feminists of Wakanda" through characters like Zenzi (who I'm seeing as a radical Angela Davis archetype) and Aneka and Ayo (who represent a somewhat ignored demographic among black women and an opportunity to question the practice of the Dora...something Priest himself did in his run) provides an opportunity for that. Though it can still be seen as questionable HOW he is going about it.
the part about Storm still being the most prominent black female character in comics "decades after her debut" and the dearth of black women in comics prominently featured that the writer spoke on underscores my own point I made earlier on in convo with EmperorJones regarding this. And even the black women characters that do exist when featured rarely if ever focus on women/black womanist issues.
People have spoken about Shuri before (can't believe the author misspelled her name) regarding how she is a strong female character, which she is, but having read some of her appearances before I don't recall her having dealt with these issues that could exist, but in a different way, of course, outside America. I could be wrong. (The concept of the Dora Milaje, for instance, which I like, alone would raise an eyebrow to quite a few women overall, let alone feminist types) It would likely be questionable to those looking for a woman character whom also is "woman-centered" that Shuri, for various reasons, would provide this. It will be interesting to see how Coates handles her when he eventually brings her back.
Still wary of HOW Coates is going about the subjects he seems to be tackling within the backdrop of a place like Wakanda...the HOW can be quite misplaced. But tackling the subjects themselves is an overall interesting thing to see.
QuoteI'm just glad that the Hickman/Coates version of T'Challa didn't make it onto the big screen via Captain America:Civil War. Salutrade
Let's hope not. The one thing I do find absent in the previews, write ups and spoilers is reference to the Black Panther's great intellect. Come Friday we will all know.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChEapmsWIAMDazy.jpg:large)
I loved his characterization in the movie from his fighting style to the accent. Was very impressed by Chadwick Boseman but we don't need to get all that is great about T'challa in a Captain America movie, let's save the intellect and all that other good stuff for his own movie. I do think all BP fans will love the mid credits scene but for more about the movie can we PLEASE move it to the movie section on this board? I just posted about Civil War today
Getting it to you guys straight over from the CBR Forums. Here is the Preview for Issue 2
[url]http://www.buzzcomics.net/showpost.php?p=1656833&postcount=2[/url] ([url]http://www.buzzcomics.net/showpost.php?p=1656833&postcount=2[/url])
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
That preview did absolutely nothing to dissaude my trepidation about Coates' iteration of the Black Panther. The dialogue was weak, the art not as sharp and to have such hienous acts occur on T'Challa's home turf screamed of Maberry. Is Coates is attempting to terraform Wakandan into Gotham or some analoge of a corrupt of Afrakan nation? Either way so far based on the preview it doesn't feel right. Next Wednesday tells the tale but for now let see how well BP is depicted in CACW.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
That preview did absolutely nothing to dissaude my trepidation about Coates' iteration of the Black Panther. The dialogue was weak, the art not as sharp and to have such hienous acts occur on T'Challa's home turf screamed of Maberry. Is Coates is attempting to terraform Wakandan into Gotham or some analoge of a corrupt of Afrakan nation? Either way so far based on the preview it doesn't feel right. Next Wednesday tells the tale but for now let see how well BP is depicted in CACW.
First i'll talk about what i liked, The introduction of some new characters in Hodari and Akili. I liked that the Hatut Zeraze might have a character with a name that can represent them and hopefully stays around past this Arc. I also like that the Hatut Zeraze are now apart of the royal family's elite force (thoguh it really makes me wonder who the warriors in red boots are and what organization they belong to.
I also liked how Coates has continued off where Hudlin left in regards to kilmonger and that group he formed. I thought it was a wasted opportunity for there to be no follow up on what he was doing an its good to see Coates picking up where he left off. Its also good because it explains kinda where Zenzi came from as she was in that group of Kilmongers coalition and gives her more depth as a character. Kimoyo bands its just cool straight up. I know its not this huge thing but its cool the little things to show how Wakanda is so advance in their tech. Another thing is i wonder If That statement T'Challa made about being protected against psychics is going to bite him later on. I mean he has some pretty mean defense against it, and the feats to back it up so hopefully if he is surprised by her ability, its because she is just that strong of a psychic and not that he is being chumped, if that is even the case, we will see.
What i didn't like was the Bandit compound was in Wakanda, i was hoping it would of been in Niganda because i don't really want Wakanda to have so much trafficking and rape being shown as a common place, yes they weren't royals but still, hopefully the majority of the men in this arc are not just shown as predators, abusers, rapist, against women and Children in order to prop the Doras up. as this is something i feel T'Challa wouldn't just e cool with those kinds of people in Wakanda, and I hope Coates doesn't portray it like only the Dora's care. Though i will say its giving off a netflix daredevil style showing of the Doras being akin to the Punisher so far. What they are doing is murder, but they are doing it only to the bad people who deserve it, just like in daredevil it will split people. Some will be in favor as they feel like the royal family isnt taking care of it and let it get out of hand (which is another thing altogether) and others who will be afraid as the Dora's are seen as a example of how to conduct oneself and are held at a higher standard.
I don't think the art was bad at all, i thought it was very much on point, and the dialog from what we saw seemed fine, and im sure the writing and art will stay on point through the issue. Again i do agree that i do not like the portray of the men in the story thus far as being predators. I wouldn't go so far as to say this is getting into Mayberry territory though because how i see it, its still consistent with what Hudlin and Priest has shown in their runs in terms of revolts. This run especially the part with Nigandans and the execution pit seemed very much like something we could see happening and following up on from Hudlins run, given how he portrayed the people of Niganda is something i could see happening here.
All in all there are some things i liked and things i didn't but Ultimately the issue will be the deciding factor
Son of the Black Panther
Ta-Nehisi Coates takes on one of Marvel's iconic superheroes, reinvigorating the Black Panther for a new generation.
BY JONATHAN W. GRAY
April 26, 2016
This article has been edited.
... As befits the first hero of African descent published by a major comic book publisher, T’Challa interacts in significant ways with all of Marvel’s other black characters—from the Falcon to Luke Cage to Storm—and they derive inspiration from his stewardship of Wakanda, a truly independent African state that also happens to be the most advanced nation on earth. Marvel’s original rhetoric about Wakanda—unconquered by Western powers and thus untainted by neocolonialism—resembled African American discourse about Haiti in the 1850s and Ethiopia in the mid-1930s, which helps explain T’Challa’s appeal to a post-Civil Rights cohort of black Americans.
The rebooted Black Panther series engages with this shared history in important ways. Under the guidance of editor-in-chief Axel Alonso, Marvel has successfully launched a number of books featuring underrepresented characters over the last several years, including an Afro-Latino Spider-Man, a female Thor, and a Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel. Indeed, prior to Black Panther’s record-breaking debut in early April—the first issue sold through a 350,000 initial print run and has gone into a second printing—Ms. Marvel was Marvel’s top-selling comic. It speaks to the cultural capital of the comic industry in general and Marvel in particular that Coates, perhaps the most prominent contemporary writer on race and its role in American history, was interested in working for the company.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/f3138a980a198c1149e87039a75325f7fb239d76.jpeg?w=400&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=615)
Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man, but it makes sense that Black Panther is Coates’s first foray into comics; his father was once the chairman of the Maryland chapter of the Black Panther Party. And as a lifelong fan of Marvel comics, Coates is as well-versed in its fictive history as he is in America’s bloody past. Working with established superheroes places particular demands on a writer, as it involves two kinds of collaboration: An author works with an illustrator to tell a story, but the author must also build upon what earlier creative teams have established about the character. In this sense, writing a comic about a long-standing protagonist like the Black Panther—or Batman or Spider-Man—involves reconfiguring story lines written by legends like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby, as well as by less-heralded creators, into a new narrative.
There are two ways for a writer to do this. You could bring to the surface the essential traits of your character in a way that allows readers to experience these familiar qualities anew, as Frank Miller did for Batman with The Dark Knight Returns (1986) and Batman: Year One (1987), and Grant Morrison achieved with All-Star Superman (2008). The other approach is more subtle: Reread your character’s archive, gently realign his portrayal by attending to heretofore overlooked elements, and simultaneously create new supporting characters who facilitate the new direction. Alan Moore pioneered this approach with his run on Saga of the Swamp Thing from 1984-87, and Matt Fraction successfully reinvigorated the characters Iron Fist (2006-09) and Hawkeye (2012-15) using this method. Though the writer changes the character’s canon, the new iteration, if successful, supersedes the old while opening new avenues for storytelling. Coates takes the latter, more challenging approach and, based on my reading of the premiere issue along with the scripts of the first four issues, his Black Panther series succeeds wonderfully.
Coates renders the Black Panther as a reluctant king at the outset of “A Nation Under Our Feet,” which is a dramatic change. Comic fans have always accepted T’Challa’s serial absences from Wakanda as a consequence of the narrative logic of the Marvel universe, which locates all its heroes in and around New York City. An earlier Black Panther series, for example, opens with T’Challa arriving in New York alongside the Wakandan U.N. delegation, but then maneuvers him to Brooklyn, where he lives in a tenement and tussles with drug dealers who are using a Wakandan foundation to launder their profits. Despite these occurrences, earlier writers insisted that the Black Panther took his responsibilities as sovereign seriously.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/dfe561cde59e3c086804e843a9545e10b57186d6.jpeg?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=911)
Coates, on the other hand, reads that narrative as a sign of T’Challa’s reluctance to accept the responsibilities of the crown, and builds his characterization around it. Considering Coates’s assessment of Queen Nzinga, a seventeenth-century ruler of present-day Angola, in his last book—he identified most with her adviser, “who’d been broken down into a chair so that a queen … could sit”—it is unsurprising that he would chafe at writing a character who uncritically accepts his suitability to rule a nation. But Coates does more than simply reveal T’Challa’s self-doubt. In a recent New York Times discussion of the comic, he approaches the question of Wakandan governance from a different angle, wondering why Wakanda’s “educated population” would “even accept a monarchy.” The initial chapters of Coates’s Black Panther suggest democratic reform is in the offing, a radical change to the Wakandan status quo that allows Coates to interrogate the republican tradition Western readers often take for granted. In past iterations of Black Panther, those who worked to undermine dynastic rule were ultimately revealed to be either usurpers who craved the power of the throne for themselves, pawns controlled by Western powers seeking to undermine the only truly independent African nation so that they might exploit its natural resources, or both, which positioned the benevolent Wakandan monarchy as the foil for neoliberal entanglements.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/5fb844c02521d1a93a28cc00d46f8c11c359cc52.tiff?w=800&q=65&dpi=1&h=618)
While some elements of this international intrigue remain in “A Nation Under Our Feet,” Coates legitimizes at least some of the voices decrying monarchical rule. Indeed, perhaps Coates’s most intriguing new character, Zenzi, throws Wakanda into crisis by bringing the citizenry’s conflicted feelings toward T’Challa to the fore. She promises to be a formidable political foe, though the narrative hints she might evolve into an ally, depending on how the “Wakandan Spring” develops.
If superhero comics—with the notable exception of Chris Claremont’s 17-year run on X-Men—have traditionally devoted themselves to presenting the stories of heroic men, Coates works to correct this imbalance. Aside from Black Panther’s titular character, Coates allots most of his attention to female protagonists: the aforementioned Zenzi; T’Challa’s stepmother and regent, Ramonda; and Ayo and Aneka, members of the elite, all-woman Dora Milaje, which functions as Wakanda’s secret service. Coates’s Ramonda works to balance her role as trusted adviser to the king with her own instincts as a politician and her maternal concern for her son.
Ayo and Aneka are both soldiers and lovers, which violates the tradition that demands the Dora Milaje remain chaste while in the service of the Black Panther. Their relationship allows Coates to reveal the gendered violence and subordination present in even the most enlightened nation—the couple flee the palace to escape royal censure—but also frees him to address problems the patriarchal royal family has overlooked. Even in Wakanda, women’s problems receive less attention from the state. Within four issues, Coates establishes each of these women as complex characters with distinct motivations, even as he hints at the reintroduction of another important female character, T’Challa’s sister Zuri. While Zuri died protecting Wakanda in T’Challa’s absence, loyal comic readers know that death is rarely permanent.
The author shows a lapse in his research concerning Shuri.
One of the most persistent critiques of Between the World and Me, Coates’s most recent book, was that it paid insufficient attention to the ways that black women confront racial violence. His work here suggests he’s taken this critique to heart. (Coates even recently posted on his blog at The Atlantic about his enthusiasm for crafting the “feminists of Wakanda.”) Given the dearth of black women in comics—X-Men’s Storm remains the most prominent black woman in the medium, decades after her debut—Coates’s interest in female subjectivity is a most welcome change.
A.Curry will surely appreciate this.
Coates’s narrative contains a number of moving parts, which may make for tough sledding for those unfamiliar with comics as he works to set the stage; the whirl of characters can become bewildering. Issues 3 and 4 are more measured, and demonstrate Coates’s increasing command of the form. Coates has committed to writing Black Panther for the next few years, and watching a son of the Black Panther Party take the Black Panther to new heights promises to be a thrilling experience. Given the confluence of events—the last year of the Obama presidency, the ongoing Black Lives Matter protest movement, the fiftieth anniversary of the character—one expects we’ll never see a moment like this again. Pay attention to Ta-Nehisi Coates’s Black Panther. History will either mark it as an interesting detour in an important career, or herald it as a new peak for comics.
Jonathan W. Gray is an Associate Professor of English at John Jay College—CUNY and editor of The Journal of Comics and Culture.
Full unedited article here
https://newrepublic.com/article/132972/son-black-panther
GREAT ARTICLE TURE.
it is disheartening a bit for myself and I'm sure others that Coates initially was interested in Spidey and not BP...hard to believe someone with his background wasn't excited at first about the prospect of working on T'Challa and Wakanda.
As for the part "I surely will appreciate"...lol...the writer of this piece shows that Coates maybe had some motivation into writing a tale that had a focus on womanist/black feminist issues through Coates himself being criticized for not addressing how black women face racism and sexism in his initial essay work...and trying to bring about the "feminists of Wakanda" through characters like Zenzi (who I'm seeing as a radical Angela Davis archetype) and Aneka and Ayo (who represent a somewhat ignored demographic among black women and an opportunity to question the practice of the Dora...something Priest himself did in his run) provides an opportunity for that. Though it can still be seen as questionable HOW he is going about it.
the part about Storm still being the most prominent black female character in comics "decades after her debut" and the dearth of black women in comics prominently featured that the writer spoke on underscores my own point I made earlier on in convo with EmperorJones regarding this. And even the black women characters that do exist when featured rarely if ever focus on women/black womanist issues.
People have spoken about Shuri before (can't believe the author misspelled her name) regarding how she is a strong female character, which she is, but having read some of her appearances before I don't recall her having dealt with these issues that could exist, but in a different way, of course, outside America. I could be wrong. (The concept of the Dora Milaje, for instance, which I like, alone would raise an eyebrow to quite a few women overall, let alone feminist types) It would likely be questionable to those looking for a woman character whom also is "woman-centered" that Shuri, for various reasons, would provide this. It will be interesting to see how Coates handles her when he eventually brings her back.
Still wary of HOW Coates is going about the subjects he seems to be tackling within the backdrop of a place like Wakanda...the HOW can be quite misplaced. But tackling the subjects themselves is an overall interesting thing to see.
That preview did absolutely nothing to dissaude my trepidation about Coates' iteration of the Black Panther. The dialogue was weak, the art not as sharp and to have such hienous acts occur on T'Challa's home turf screamed of Maberry. Is Coates is attempting to terraform Wakandan into Gotham or some analoge of a corrupt of Afrakan nation? Either way so far based on the preview it doesn't feel right. Next Wednesday tells the tale but for now let see how well BP is depicted in CACW.
I think there is reason to hope Coates renders a more than palatable Black Panther/Wakanda; the attention to African language, history and custom for example, there could turn out to be quite a bit to like about his rendition. I liked the way he said T'Challa has a plan. However, there cannot be prolonged, unexplained out of character developments. Coates will need to offer a plausible explanation for the actions of the chieftain Ayo killed and the actions of these rogue Wakandans of this camp in the northern region of the country and sooner rather than later.
Peace,
Mont
I think there is reason to hope Coates renders a more than palatable Black Panther/Wakanda; the attention to African language, history and custom for example, there could turn out to be quite a bit to like about his rendition. I liked the way he said T'Challa has a plan. However, there cannot be prolonged, unexplained out of character developments. Coates will need to offer a plausible explanation for the actions of the chieftain Ayo killed and the actions of these rogue Wakandans of this camp in the northern region of the country and sooner rather than later.
Peace,
Mont
Well said, Mont.
However, how would you define "sooner, rather than later"? Before or by issue 4?
New Entertainment Weekly article on BP coming soon.
([url]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiHTWvyVIAEFulk.jpg:large[/url])
Totally Awesome Hulk #10 cover
([url]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cht8NcxWEAAINrR.jpg[/url])
[url]http://youtu.be/WVqAnQe_xGw[/url] ([url]http://youtu.be/WVqAnQe_xGw[/url])
courtesy of CBR's Dboi, Realdealholyand Nj06
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Some people are on that Coates Koolaid to such a degree that he can write T'Challa and Wakanda into the ground, and some readers will still be hailing him as a BP writer per excellence.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Some people are on that Coates Koolaid to such a degree that he can write T'Challa and Wakanda into the ground, and some readers will still be hailing him as a BP writer per excellence.
I don't know if I'd say he's on the Coates Kool-Aid...supreme seems to be concerned and has a somewhat negative view about how Coates is writing Wakanda, but separating that from how he's handling T'Challa...I'm guessing Salustrade that your viewpoint in regards to my question is that writing Wakanda in a negative light mirrors how Panther is seen as well? Or do you think Coates is writing T'Challa specifically bad as well?
Funny enough, I stopped by to see reactions to the latest issue...I personally found it better than the first and Panther definitely saw some action though some things regarding the issues with Wakanda is still and increasingly problematic as I'm sure most will find. There also is definitely a "feminist" push going through centering around the two Dora, and I wouldn't be surprised if they got there own series after this...lol. But as I said, the topics Coates is trying to address in this kinda seems misplaced within the backdrop and continuing mythos of Wakanda.
I also agree that a Wakanda that has these things going on within it even post trauma DOES reflect negatively on T'Challa himself. An explanation would have to be given why the things shown have been happening under his nose.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Some people are on that Coates Koolaid to such a degree that he can write T'Challa and Wakanda into the ground, and some readers will still be hailing him as a BP writer per excellence.
I don't know if I'd say he's on the Coates Kool-Aid...supreme seems to be concerned and has a somewhat negative view about how Coates is writing Wakanda, but separating that from how he's handling T'Challa...I'm guessing Salustrade that your viewpoint in regards to my question is that writing Wakanda in a negative light mirrors how Panther is seen as well? Or do you think Coates is writing T'Challa specifically bad as well?
Funny enough, I stopped by to see reactions to the latest issue...I personally found it better than the first and Panther definitely saw some action though some things regarding the issues with Wakanda is still and increasingly problematic as I'm sure most will find. There also is definitely a "feminist" push going through centering around the two Dora, and I wouldn't be surprised if they got there own series after this...lol. But as I said, the topics Coates is trying to address in this kinda seems misplaced within the backdrop and continuing mythos of Wakanda.
I also agree that a Wakanda that has these things going on within it even post trauma DOES reflect negatively on T'Challa himself. An explanation would have to be given why the things shown have been happening under his nose.
The Koolaid reference was in no way directed towards Supreme Illuminati whohas as you have stated, expressed a level of discomfort with what Coates is doing that more or less in line with concerns most of us have raised thus far.
Having read BP #2, it's pretty obvious to me that Coates fully intends to keep pushing the Wakandan Boko Haram trope as a way to provide a platform for the equal push of a strong feminist agenda within the book.
The fact that there have never been any gender based problems evident throughout the BP mythos (prior to Coates) seems to have been lost on the writer.
I've found your assessement of Coates output in this regard, to be spot on.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Some people are on that Coates Koolaid to such a degree that he can write T'Challa and Wakanda into the ground, and some readers will still be hailing him as a BP writer per excellence.
I don't know if I'd say he's on the Coates Kool-Aid...supreme seems to be concerned and has a somewhat negative view about how Coates is writing Wakanda, but separating that from how he's handling T'Challa...I'm guessing Salustrade that your viewpoint in regards to my question is that writing Wakanda in a negative light mirrors how Panther is seen as well? Or do you think Coates is writing T'Challa specifically bad as well?
Funny enough, I stopped by to see reactions to the latest issue...I personally found it better than the first and Panther definitely saw some action though some things regarding the issues with Wakanda is still and increasingly problematic as I'm sure most will find. There also is definitely a "feminist" push going through centering around the two Dora, and I wouldn't be surprised if they got there own series after this...lol. But as I said, the topics Coates is trying to address in this kinda seems misplaced within the backdrop and continuing mythos of Wakanda.
I also agree that a Wakanda that has these things going on within it even post trauma DOES reflect negatively on T'Challa himself. An explanation would have to be given why the things shown have been happening under his nose.
The Koolaid reference was in no way directed towards Supreme Illuminati whohas as you have stated, expressed a level of discomfort with what Coates is doing that more or less in line with concerns most of us have raised thus far.
Having read BP #2, it's pretty obvious to me that Coates fully intends to keep pushing the Wakandan Boko Haram trope as a way to provide a platform for the equal push of a strong feminist agenda within the book.
The fact that there have never been any gender based problems evident throughout the BP mythos (prior to Coates) seems to have been lost on the writer.
I've found your assessement of Coates output in this regard, to be spot on.
Okay, I gathered he was the only person you could've been referring to since he did say he trusted Coates in his handling of T'Challa specifically, just not Wakanda, in that post you copied, and probably because of the strong disagreements you've had about Hickman before...Plus for various reasons I didn't think you meant that for me. Not sure who "some people" are than.
Because if that referred to me it's a highly questionable assessment since 1: the question I posed to supreme that you highlighted was in no way giving positive credit to Coates but bringing up the overall objective question on whether or not writing Wakanda in this negative light reflects on T'Challa negatively as well, as Supreme seemed to be in his assessment separating Coates handling of the two...and 2: I've stated in recent posts over the last few pages that HOW Coates is going about doing this and involving this LRA/Boko Haram thing in the mythos of Wakanda and within its borders is a mistake...as I've even said Wakandan society is too evolved to have these particular and ugly issues...even post trauma.
Or maybe you were referring to other fans elsewhere.
Either way, glad we agree on my assessment of Coates output in the regard you spoke of.
When this series was announced, we knew Coates was dealing with the aftermath of recent attacks on Wakanda. Those attacks were weakening the faith of the people in their royalty. But those pages of the bandits camp... That is an indication that there is something rotten in Wakanda and it has been there for a long time, like for generations. Those things don't just pop up over night. It's not a king's failure to defend from the external, it's his failure to rule internally.
Coates could have written a story where the people were unhappy that their warrior-king failed to defend, without resorting to that camp.
I wanted to follow-up my statement. In a warrior culture, where the king holds his office by "trials by combat", it is logical that the people might start wondering about T'Challa and Shuri after their recent short-comings. I could see very well, that some might see this as a time to challenge the king. I could even see some people wondering if this form of government is best in this "Age of Marvels", but none of that requires what we saw.
(And even blaming them for Thanos and the Phoenix Force attacks is really short-sighted of the people. Thanos has obliterated entire civilizations more technologically advance than Wakanda and warrior races that number more than the entire earth with far greater ease than Wakanda gave and apparently, Wakanda survived. Thanos is a being who could hold his own against Odin (when he wasn't even trying to hurt Odin). The Phoenix Force (even at 1/5th power level) is even more powerful than Thanos, and Wakanda survived. No other nation on earth could have done so. Really, those battles are hard because they scared the nation, but they survived what no one else could have.)
^^^This post and the post of my esteemed HEF brethren taken in aggregate lead me to also voice concern and frankly a rather sharp dislike of the perception that Coates has of Wakanda, the nation, and her people as a whole.
I mean...I get it. The Perfect Nation Trope absolutely sucks for a writer. In my fanfic...which also deals immediately with the afteraffect of Killmonger, in Chapter 1...I point out that Wakanda isn't perfect, by a long shot. In fact, her unmitigated superiority springs from the unique equilibrium attained and maintained by her 12 major ethnic groups.
But THIS is HORRIBLE. I mean...that Bandit Camp? Hell no. That's Rwanda without the genocide. There is no way. None. That the people of Wakanda and the Security Forces of Wakanda would allow such a thing to exist. TChalla wouldn't even have to devote his own personal energy to such a thing, because the very formative and perpetuating factors of Wakandan civilization eliminate such outrages. The cultural and spiritual reserves of the nation permanently. And completely. Prevents such things from being even remotely possible.
Again. I definitely like many of the things that Coates has done with TChalla. I am not worried that Coates will do TChalla specifically and personally wrong.
I definitely do not like what Coates has done with this Bandit Camp in Wakanda, and I dislike how TChalla says that his warriors would fall prey to this mysterious woman's powers of the mind. I don't think that such a thing is plausible under these circumstances, given the fact that TChalla has already faced and defeated the likes of Somberr, Karnaj, Cruel, and a whole host of magic slinging baddies native to Wakanda.
Furthermore, during the 4 issue arc dealing with Solomon Preyy, the story noted specifically that Wakanda has a mesh of tech, magic and perhaps psi and/or Ka as the energy powering its basic tech expression. Our own R to the H specified in his record breaking first year that Wakandans view science and magic as being expressions of the same continuum [ this was the issue dealing with The Cannibal taking and changing hosts in Wakanda ]. Brother Voodoo was talking to a Wakandan Master when this exchange happened.
I take the combination of the above to mean that literally all of the warriors of The Golden City and to a lesser extent all of Wakanda are protected against primary psi, magic, Ka and tech attacks including involuntary compulsion to a respectable degree...and of course ALL of the Royals are FAR BETTER PROTECTED than the average citizen.
So I fail to see how ole girl can be such a threat to everyone in Wakanda except TChalla...unless ole girl is rockin near Omega level mental powers. And even then? A Wakandan Inhibitor Field would ruin her day...and her powers. Such Fields would be erected over and/or between many areas of Wakanda, as a routine and formidable method of security used for millenia, now. Such Fields and a myriad of multilayered interlocking synergistically amplifying security measures would be long added to Wakanda's already especially formidable interior defenses. Interior defenses which, let us not forget, even Maberry wrote made Wakanda essentially invulnerable to assault from any exterior military force.
Yes, I know that there needs to be a good in-story reason to explain why the King of Wakanda would risk himself one on one against this woman, but...that right there is a weak weak reason.
The in-story reason should arise from especially formidable responses by a very intelligent, very prepared, very dedicated small group of [ whatever ole girl and her homie's name is ] native Wakandans headed by the primary villains in this opening arc. to Off top, I would say that ole girl was of course a native Wakandan, she was helped to escape detection by Nakia and Killmonger, was aided wreaking havoc by her male partner, etc.
Although it's way too soon to draw strong conclusions...it's only issue 2, and it's Beginning Writer 101 to play withthe plot construction and unspooling that Coates is playing with now...I definitely am not loving what I see of Coates' depiction of Wakanda. It's...jarring, and definitely unpleasant. I mean...the average woman of Wakanda is a warrior, too. The whole freakin society and civilization top to bottom are all formidable warriors and Olympic caliber athletes whose collective intellgence average is higher than anything we find in allegedly elite IQ groups like MENSA. Seeing this Rwanda-like repulsiveness smacks strongly of a distinct rejection of some of the seminal aspects of what makes Wakanda..."Wakanda". The Golden City. The hope, beacon, light and leader of humanity.
While again...I am not worried about TChalla himself under Coates' pen, I expect Coates to keep doing a good job overall regarding TChalla specifically...when it comes to many matters involving Wakanda? I expected more at this very early point in the story from a writer of Coates' caliber.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Some people are on that Coates Koolaid to such a degree that he can write T'Challa and Wakanda into the ground, and some readers will still be hailing him as a BP writer per excellence.
I don't know if I'd say he's on the Coates Kool-Aid...supreme seems to be concerned and has a somewhat negative view about how Coates is writing Wakanda, but separating that from how he's handling T'Challa...I'm guessing Salustrade that your viewpoint in regards to my question is that writing Wakanda in a negative light mirrors how Panther is seen as well? Or do you think Coates is writing T'Challa specifically bad as well?
Funny enough, I stopped by to see reactions to the latest issue...I personally found it better than the first and Panther definitely saw some action though some things regarding the issues with Wakanda is still and increasingly problematic as I'm sure most will find. There also is definitely a "feminist" push going through centering around the two Dora, and I wouldn't be surprised if they got there own series after this...lol. But as I said, the topics Coates is trying to address in this kinda seems misplaced within the backdrop and continuing mythos of Wakanda.
I also agree that a Wakanda that has these things going on within it even post trauma DOES reflect negatively on T'Challa himself. An explanation would have to be given why the things shown have been happening under his nose.
The Koolaid reference was in no way directed towards Supreme Illuminati whohas as you have stated, expressed a level of discomfort with what Coates is doing that more or less in line with concerns most of us have raised thus far.
Having read BP #2, it's pretty obvious to me that Coates fully intends to keep pushing the Wakandan Boko Haram trope as a way to provide a platform for the equal push of a strong feminist agenda within the book.
The fact that there have never been any gender based problems evident throughout the BP mythos (prior to Coates) seems to have been lost on the writer.
I've found your assessement of Coates output in this regard, to be spot on.
Okay, I gathered he was the only person you could've been referring to since he did say he trusted Coates in his handling of T'Challa specifically, just not Wakanda, in that post you copied, and probably because of the strong disagreements you've had about Hickman before...Plus for various reasons I didn't think you meant that for me. Not sure who "some people" are than.
Because if that referred to me it's a highly questionable assessment since 1: the question I posed to supreme that you highlighted was in no way giving positive credit to Coates but bringing up the overall objective question on whether or not writing Wakanda in this negative light reflects on T'Challa negatively as well, as Supreme seemed to be in his assessment separating Coates handling of the two...and 2: I've stated in recent posts over the last few pages that HOW Coates is going about doing this and involving this LRA/Boko Haram thing in the mythos of Wakanda and within its borders is a mistake...as I've even said Wakandan society is too evolved to have these particular and ugly issues...even post trauma.
Or maybe you were referring to other fans elsewhere.
Either way, glad we agree on my assessment of Coates output in the regard you spoke of.
I was referring to some posters over on CBR. :)
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Funny. A lot of us wanted an authentic black voice to write Panther and this is what we get. Meanwhile, Panther's best portrayal since forever is being written in Ultimates by Ewing, who has shown to respect Panther more in 5 issues in a shared team book than Panther can get in his solo.
This book is horrible. Normally I judge a book by its third or forth issue, but two issues in... How high the mighty Wakanda has fallen. This is worse than any flood could have ever done to the golden city. Normally, I'm a fan who will wait for a good pay off for a story to conclude, but after seeing Cap 3 already 4 times this past week (let's be honest, while the Cap movies are my favorite Marvel movies, this was mostly for the Panther) and wanting more of a Panther fix, this was a damn near slap in the face.
I dunno. I just.... I dunno. I'm a little numb to this book right now. I'm going to go ahead and pull the this run like I normally would, but I don't think I'll read any more until this arc is finished. Read it all in one setting. Then judge it. But as of now, coming behind Captain America 3, this series is the worst thing ever to expose new readers to the character and his mythos.
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Hmmmm...excellent points about there already having been Wakandans of less than moral fiber in continuity though I wouldn't include W'kabi having hit his wife as that was more an act of desperation and one he was sorry for immediately after. Thing is even the villains you mentioned I couldn't see stooping to things so disgusting and dishonorable as having rape camps...maybe Achebe because he's a psychopath. And was the tomorrow fund administrator Wakandan?
Two things: taking in your point, is it really highly implausible that these things wouldn't happen in a destabilized Wakanda in its outer borders given that Wakanda has had its share of morally bereft characters before, or are some of us as fans just insulted by the fact that Wakanda is being shown to have issues like this (which I agree that, for better or worse, are being storied to address a mainstream and real world issue) because we'd like to think that Wakanda as a nation entire would be above such things? Is it actually a sensible argument that these things wouldn't and shouldn't exist in Wakanda simply because we've never seen it before even though we've seen other morally bereft things happen there and the country itself has gone through destructive changes due to all that Hickman before wrought?
Also, whether these things should and could exist or not, is it plausible that a king who went all the way to America over the death of a child in a scandal during the Priest run would not know about or worse not address IMMEDIATELY similar things happening to young women in his own kingdom, even way outside the golden city?
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Hmmmm...excellent points about there already having been Wakandans of less than moral fiber in continuity though I wouldn't include W'kabi having hit his wife as that was more an act of desperation and one he was sorry for immediately after. Thing is even the villains you mentioned I couldn't see stooping to things so disgusting and dishonorable as having rape camps...maybe Achebe because he's a psychopath. And was the tomorrow fund administrator Wakandan?
Two things: taking in your point, is it really highly implausible that these things wouldn't happen in a destabilized Wakanda in its outer borders given that Wakanda has had its share of morally bereft characters before, or are some of us as fans just insulted by the fact that Wakanda is being shown to have issues like this (which I agree that, for better or worse, are being storied to address a mainstream and real world issue) because we'd like to think that Wakanda as a nation entire would be above such things? Is it actually a sensible argument that these things wouldn't and shouldn't exist in Wakanda simply because we've never seen it before even though we've seen other morally bereft things happen there and the country itself has gone through destructive changes due to all that Hickman before wrought?
Also, whether these things should and could exist or not, is it plausible that a king who went all the way to America over the death of a child in a scandal during the Priest run would not know about or worse not address IMMEDIATELY similar things happening to young women in his own kingdom, even way outside the golden city?
Son of the Black Panther
Ta-Nehisi Coates takes on one of Marvel's iconic superheroes, reinvigorating the Black Panther for a new generation.
BY JONATHAN W. GRAY
April 26, 2016
This article has been edited.
... As befits the first hero of African descent published by a major comic book publisher, T’Challa interacts in significant ways with all of Marvel’s other black characters—from the Falcon to Luke Cage to Storm—and they derive inspiration from his stewardship of Wakanda, a truly independent African state that also happens to be the most advanced nation on earth. Marvel’s original rhetoric about Wakanda—unconquered by Western powers and thus untainted by neocolonialism—resembled African American discourse about Haiti in the 1850s and Ethiopia in the mid-1930s, which helps explain T’Challa’s appeal to a post-Civil Rights cohort of black Americans.
The rebooted Black Panther series engages with this shared history in important ways. Under the guidance of editor-in-chief Axel Alonso, Marvel has successfully launched a number of books featuring underrepresented characters over the last several years, including an Afro-Latino Spider-Man, a female Thor, and a Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel. Indeed, prior to Black Panther’s record-breaking debut in early April—the first issue sold through a 350,000 initial print run and has gone into a second printing—Ms. Marvel was Marvel’s top-selling comic. It speaks to the cultural capital of the comic industry in general and Marvel in particular that Coates, perhaps the most prominent contemporary writer on race and its role in American history, was interested in working for the company.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/f3138a980a198c1149e87039a75325f7fb239d76.jpeg?w=400&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=615)
Coates originally pitched Alonso about writing Spider-Man, but it makes sense that Black Panther is Coates’s first foray into comics; his father was once the chairman of the Maryland chapter of the Black Panther Party. And as a lifelong fan of Marvel comics, Coates is as well-versed in its fictive history as he is in America’s bloody past. Working with established superheroes places particular demands on a writer, as it involves two kinds of collaboration: An author works with an illustrator to tell a story, but the author must also build upon what earlier creative teams have established about the character. In this sense, writing a comic about a long-standing protagonist like the Black Panther—or Batman or Spider-Man—involves reconfiguring story lines written by legends like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby, as well as by less-heralded creators, into a new narrative.
There are two ways for a writer to do this. You could bring to the surface the essential traits of your character in a way that allows readers to experience these familiar qualities anew, as Frank Miller did for Batman with The Dark Knight Returns (1986) and Batman: Year One (1987), and Grant Morrison achieved with All-Star Superman (2008). The other approach is more subtle: Reread your character’s archive, gently realign his portrayal by attending to heretofore overlooked elements, and simultaneously create new supporting characters who facilitate the new direction. Alan Moore pioneered this approach with his run on Saga of the Swamp Thing from 1984-87, and Matt Fraction successfully reinvigorated the characters Iron Fist (2006-09) and Hawkeye (2012-15) using this method. Though the writer changes the character’s canon, the new iteration, if successful, supersedes the old while opening new avenues for storytelling. Coates takes the latter, more challenging approach and, based on my reading of the premiere issue along with the scripts of the first four issues, his Black Panther series succeeds wonderfully.
Coates renders the Black Panther as a reluctant king at the outset of “A Nation Under Our Feet,” which is a dramatic change. Comic fans have always accepted T’Challa’s serial absences from Wakanda as a consequence of the narrative logic of the Marvel universe, which locates all its heroes in and around New York City. An earlier Black Panther series, for example, opens with T’Challa arriving in New York alongside the Wakandan U.N. delegation, but then maneuvers him to Brooklyn, where he lives in a tenement and tussles with drug dealers who are using a Wakandan foundation to launder their profits. Despite these occurrences, earlier writers insisted that the Black Panther took his responsibilities as sovereign seriously.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/dfe561cde59e3c086804e843a9545e10b57186d6.jpeg?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&fm=pjpg&h=911)
Coates, on the other hand, reads that narrative as a sign of T’Challa’s reluctance to accept the responsibilities of the crown, and builds his characterization around it. Considering Coates’s assessment of Queen Nzinga, a seventeenth-century ruler of present-day Angola, in his last book—he identified most with her adviser, “who’d been broken down into a chair so that a queen … could sit”—it is unsurprising that he would chafe at writing a character who uncritically accepts his suitability to rule a nation. But Coates does more than simply reveal T’Challa’s self-doubt. In a recent New York Times discussion of the comic, he approaches the question of Wakandan governance from a different angle, wondering why Wakanda’s “educated population” would “even accept a monarchy.” The initial chapters of Coates’s Black Panther suggest democratic reform is in the offing, a radical change to the Wakandan status quo that allows Coates to interrogate the republican tradition Western readers often take for granted. In past iterations of Black Panther, those who worked to undermine dynastic rule were ultimately revealed to be either usurpers who craved the power of the throne for themselves, pawns controlled by Western powers seeking to undermine the only truly independent African nation so that they might exploit its natural resources, or both, which positioned the benevolent Wakandan monarchy as the foil for neoliberal entanglements.
(https://images.newrepublic.com/5fb844c02521d1a93a28cc00d46f8c11c359cc52.tiff?w=800&q=65&dpi=1&h=618)
While some elements of this international intrigue remain in “A Nation Under Our Feet,” Coates legitimizes at least some of the voices decrying monarchical rule. Indeed, perhaps Coates’s most intriguing new character, Zenzi, throws Wakanda into crisis by bringing the citizenry’s conflicted feelings toward T’Challa to the fore. She promises to be a formidable political foe, though the narrative hints she might evolve into an ally, depending on how the “Wakandan Spring” develops.
If superhero comics—with the notable exception of Chris Claremont’s 17-year run on X-Men—have traditionally devoted themselves to presenting the stories of heroic men, Coates works to correct this imbalance. Aside from Black Panther’s titular character, Coates allots most of his attention to female protagonists: the aforementioned Zenzi; T’Challa’s stepmother and regent, Ramonda; and Ayo and Aneka, members of the elite, all-woman Dora Milaje, which functions as Wakanda’s secret service. Coates’s Ramonda works to balance her role as trusted adviser to the king with her own instincts as a politician and her maternal concern for her son.
Ayo and Aneka are both soldiers and lovers, which violates the tradition that demands the Dora Milaje remain chaste while in the service of the Black Panther. Their relationship allows Coates to reveal the gendered violence and subordination present in even the most enlightened nation—the couple flee the palace to escape royal censure—but also frees him to address problems the patriarchal royal family has overlooked. Even in Wakanda, women’s problems receive less attention from the state. Within four issues, Coates establishes each of these women as complex characters with distinct motivations, even as he hints at the reintroduction of another important female character, T’Challa’s sister Zuri. While Zuri died protecting Wakanda in T’Challa’s absence, loyal comic readers know that death is rarely permanent.
The author shows a lapse in his research concerning Shuri.
One of the most persistent critiques of Between the World and Me, Coates’s most recent book, was that it paid insufficient attention to the ways that black women confront racial violence. His work here suggests he’s taken this critique to heart. (Coates even recently posted on his blog at The Atlantic about his enthusiasm for crafting the “feminists of Wakanda.”) Given the dearth of black women in comics—X-Men’s Storm remains the most prominent black woman in the medium, decades after her debut—Coates’s interest in female subjectivity is a most welcome change.
A.Curry will surely appreciate this.
Coates’s narrative contains a number of moving parts, which may make for tough sledding for those unfamiliar with comics as he works to set the stage; the whirl of characters can become bewildering. Issues 3 and 4 are more measured, and demonstrate Coates’s increasing command of the form. Coates has committed to writing Black Panther for the next few years, and watching a son of the Black Panther Party take the Black Panther to new heights promises to be a thrilling experience. Given the confluence of events—the last year of the Obama presidency, the ongoing Black Lives Matter protest movement, the fiftieth anniversary of the character—one expects we’ll never see a moment like this again. Pay attention to Ta-Nehisi Coates’s Black Panther. History will either mark it as an interesting detour in an important career, or herald it as a new peak for comics.
Jonathan W. Gray is an Associate Professor of English at John Jay College—CUNY and editor of The Journal of Comics and Culture.
Full unedited article here
https://newrepublic.com/article/132972/son-black-panther (https://newrepublic.com/article/132972/son-black-panther)
GREAT ARTICLE TURE.
it is disheartening a bit for myself and I'm sure others that Coates initially was interested in Spidey and not BP...hard to believe someone with his background wasn't excited at first about the prospect of working on T'Challa and Wakanda.
As for the part "I surely will appreciate"...lol...the writer of this piece shows that Coates maybe had some motivation into writing a tale that had a focus on womanist/black feminist issues through Coates himself being criticized for not addressing how black women face racism and sexism in his initial essay work...and trying to bring about the "feminists of Wakanda" through characters like Zenzi (who I'm seeing as a radical Angela Davis archetype) and Aneka and Ayo (who represent a somewhat ignored demographic among black women and an opportunity to question the practice of the Dora...something Priest himself did in his run) provides an opportunity for that. Though it can still be seen as questionable HOW he is going about it.
the part about Storm still being the most prominent black female character in comics "decades after her debut" and the dearth of black women in comics prominently featured that the writer spoke on underscores my own point I made earlier on in convo with EmperorJones regarding this. And even the black women characters that do exist when featured rarely if ever focus on women/black womanist issues.
People have spoken about Shuri before (can't believe the author misspelled her name) regarding how she is a strong female character, which she is, but having read some of her appearances before I don't recall her having dealt with these issues that could exist, but in a different way, of course, outside America. I could be wrong. (The concept of the Dora Milaje, for instance, which I like, alone would raise an eyebrow to quite a few women overall, let alone feminist types) It would likely be questionable to those looking for a woman character whom also is "woman-centered" that Shuri, for various reasons, would provide this. It will be interesting to see how Coates handles her when he eventually brings her back.
Still wary of HOW Coates is going about the subjects he seems to be tackling within the backdrop of a place like Wakanda...the HOW can be quite misplaced. But tackling the subjects themselves is an overall interesting thing to see.
Yeah, I am getting this feeling of "Oh,no. Not again" with the flow of Coates writing this book. I had such high hopes with a black writer coming on to write this comic, but the truth is he was probably never really a fan of BP, especially if he thought Hickman was great. If he wanted to do Spiderman, it means he was all good what the writers after Hudlin and McDuffie had done. I've been on other forums on the internet and there is a alot of new fans BP has gotten based on Civil War movie. In fact, I was surprised how many black comic fans didn't know much about T'Challa at all. Alot of the old fans who have followed BP have already been in some debates with folks who are suddenly claiming htey've been with BP from Day 1 but with comments show they don't know much more than what they got off Wikipedia or nothing true to the character at all. The new fans need a real intro of the great character that many of us have followed for years. If this is there introduction to BP, I am frightened. I can see people being turned off and others accepting what is written even if Coates tarnishes the image of T"Challa. I'm trying to give Coates the benefit of the doubt, but if an improvement isn't seen by issue #4 then I won't bee collecting this book and hope that sales will drop enough that Coates or Marvel gets the message and gets a new writer. I guess it proves that just because you get a person of color to write a POC character story doesn't mean they will do that character justice. All your skinfolk are not necessarily your kinfolk.Funny. A lot of us wanted an authentic black voice to write Panther and this is what we get. Meanwhile, Panther's best portrayal since forever is being written in Ultimates by Ewing, who has shown to respect Panther more in 5 issues in a shared team book than Panther can get in his solo.
This book is horrible. Normally I judge a book by its third or forth issue, but two issues in... How high the mighty Wakanda has fallen. This is worse than any flood could have ever done to the golden city. Normally, I'm a fan who will wait for a good pay off for a story to conclude, but after seeing Cap 3 already 4 times this past week (let's be honest, while the Cap movies are my favorite Marvel movies, this was mostly for the Panther) and wanting more of a Panther fix, this was a damn near slap in the face.
I dunno. I just.... I dunno. I'm a little numb to this book right now. I'm going to go ahead and pull the this run like I normally would, but I don't think I'll read any more until this arc is finished. Read it all in one setting. Then judge it. But as of now, coming behind Captain America 3, this series is the worst thing ever to expose new readers to the character and his mythos.
agreed, and yes Ultimates is the T'challa I'm familiar with
Yeah, I am getting this feeling of "Oh,no. Not again" with the flow of Coates writing this book. I had such high hopes with a black writer coming on to write this comic, but the truth is he was probably never really a fan of BP, especially if he thought Hickman was great. If he wanted to do Spiderman, it means he was all good what the writers after Hudlin and McDuffie had done. I've been on other forums on the internet and there is a alot of new fans BP has gotten based on Civil War movie. In fact, I was surprised how many black comic fans didn't know much about T'Challa at all. Alot of the old fans who have followed BP have already been in some debates with folks who are suddenly claiming htey've been with BP from Day 1 but with comments show they don't know much more than what they got off Wikipedia or nothing true to the character at all. The new fans need a real intro of the great character that many of us have followed for years. If this is there introduction to BP, I am frightened. I can see people being turned off and others accepting what is written even if Coates tarnishes the image of T"Challa. I'm trying to give Coates the benefit of the doubt, but if an improvement isn't seen by issue #4 then I won't bee collecting this book and hope that sales will drop enough that Coates or Marvel gets the message and gets a new writer. I guess it proves that just because you get a person of color to write a POC character story doesn't mean they will do that character justice. All your skinfolk are not necessarily your kinfolk.Funny. A lot of us wanted an authentic black voice to write Panther and this is what we get. Meanwhile, Panther's best portrayal since forever is being written in Ultimates by Ewing, who has shown to respect Panther more in 5 issues in a shared team book than Panther can get in his solo.
This book is horrible. Normally I judge a book by its third or forth issue, but two issues in... How high the mighty Wakanda has fallen. This is worse than any flood could have ever done to the golden city. Normally, I'm a fan who will wait for a good pay off for a story to conclude, but after seeing Cap 3 already 4 times this past week (let's be honest, while the Cap movies are my favorite Marvel movies, this was mostly for the Panther) and wanting more of a Panther fix, this was a damn near slap in the face.
I dunno. I just.... I dunno. I'm a little numb to this book right now. I'm going to go ahead and pull the this run like I normally would, but I don't think I'll read any more until this arc is finished. Read it all in one setting. Then judge it. But as of now, coming behind Captain America 3, this series is the worst thing ever to expose new readers to the character and his mythos.
agreed, and yes Ultimates is the T'challa I'm familiar with
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Hmmmm...excellent points about there already having been Wakandans of less than moral fiber in continuity though I wouldn't include W'kabi having hit his wife as that was more an act of desperation and one he was sorry for immediately after. Thing is even the villains you mentioned I couldn't see stooping to things so disgusting and dishonorable as having rape camps...maybe Achebe because he's a psychopath. And was the tomorrow fund administrator Wakandan?
Two things: taking in your point, is it really highly implausible that these things wouldn't happen in a destabilized Wakanda in its outer borders given that Wakanda has had its share of morally bereft characters before, or are some of us as fans just insulted by the fact that Wakanda is being shown to have issues like this (which I agree that, for better or worse, are being storied to address a mainstream and real world issue) because we'd like to think that Wakanda as a nation entire would be above such things? Is it actually a sensible argument that these things wouldn't and shouldn't exist in Wakanda simply because we've never seen it before even though we've seen other morally bereft things happen there and the country itself has gone through destructive changes due to all that Hickman before wrought?
Also, whether these things should and could exist or not, is it plausible that a king who went all the way to America over the death of a child in a scandal during the Priest run would not know about or worse not address IMMEDIATELY similar things happening to young women in his own kingdom, even way outside the golden city?
Excellent points. I think its a combo of things. ther have been people of less moral fiber bringing things into Wakanda, such as back in the day the drug traffiking, and though what we are seeing now is new, and more akin to real world issue going on now, I agree now may not have been the best time to showcase this in Wakanda. It was mentioned over at the CBR forums but posters there were talking about how the story could have a similar premise but instead of all this stuff going on in Wakanda, have it happening in a neighboring nation and the issue is whether or not Wakanda should get involved, with the Dora's doing excatly what they are doing right now, but it happening to Nigandan bandits, and leaders in power, rather then Wakanda, and T'Challa trying to find the best course of action while not trying to make it seem like Wakanda is going rogue to the UN or other nations. But of course thats not what we have but it could of been a good alternative.
Also:
I think they are apart of the People. I think the point is that Tetu wants to first have Zenzi fan the flames in the hearts of the Wakandan people, then when they are going wild and violence and trafficking rings and such "The People" are going to come in as saviors (while also probably being the ones behind the scenes assisting this Jambazi Tribe with their traffiking ring), providing a safe haven for the citizens ushering them away from the bandits as a way of putting themselves in a better light. So when T'Challa comes in and starts smashing faces, they don't see it as their king coming to their aid, but as a tyrant crushing their hope of protection from the violence and rape from the Bandits and Jambazi.
Thats my theory. I think they are Tetu's men Especially since Zenzi was there. I wouldn't think she would go somewhere without some protection despite her power
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Hmmmm...excellent points about there already having been Wakandans of less than moral fiber in continuity though I wouldn't include W'kabi having hit his wife as that was more an act of desperation and one he was sorry for immediately after. Thing is even the villains you mentioned I couldn't see stooping to things so disgusting and dishonorable as having rape camps...maybe Achebe because he's a psychopath. And was the tomorrow fund administrator Wakandan?
Two things: taking in your point, is it really highly implausible that these things wouldn't happen in a destabilized Wakanda in its outer borders given that Wakanda has had its share of morally bereft characters before, or are some of us as fans just insulted by the fact that Wakanda is being shown to have issues like this (which I agree that, for better or worse, are being storied to address a mainstream and real world issue) because we'd like to think that Wakanda as a nation entire would be above such things? Is it actually a sensible argument that these things wouldn't and shouldn't exist in Wakanda simply because we've never seen it before even though we've seen other morally bereft things happen there and the country itself has gone through destructive changes due to all that Hickman before wrought?
Also, whether these things should and could exist or not, is it plausible that a king who went all the way to America over the death of a child in a scandal during the Priest run would not know about or worse not address IMMEDIATELY similar things happening to young women in his own kingdom, even way outside the golden city?
I'm one of those that feel, despite my somewhat negative feelings about the premise, that the premise has a lot of merit. Wakanda has faced a high amount of unprecedented events in its history, from infiltration (DoomWar), to biblical flood (AvX), to eventual destruction (Time Runs Out). Yes, T'Challa did bring everyone back, but it appears that enough people do remember what happened prior to their deaths. Thus, I can understand that there could be a large amount of people who could have negative feelings about the Wakandan government's inability to protect the country. A good amount of those people may even have negative feelings about T'Challa himself, depending on what they know about his actions during the Hickman run and perhaps his knack of being very involved with outsiders and events outside of Wakanda that don't involve Wakanda.
However, that currently doesn't explain how things went from apparent recovery to numerous corrupt--and lecherous--chieftains allowed to operate, as well had mischievous operations going on within Wakanda's borders. One could argue that perhaps these events have been going on prior to the Coates run. If so, that is a major red flag in the leadership of T'Challa, Shuri, and possibly T'Chaka and other previous panthers. One could also say it is a result of a mounting distrust for the Monarchy and something resembling anarchy has risen in some parts of Wakanda. If so, where's the royal family's reaction to this? Why isn't it clamping it down, rather than seemingly turning a blind eye to it?
Maybe there's something I've missed while reading, but it's as if we are currently have actions occur strictly for the sake of the plot, similar to how thing began unfolding during the Hickman run. I hope there are clear explanations for all this. More importantly, I would really like the royal family, and T'Challa in particular as King, to take a firm stance and decisive actions on panel against those situations.
Ezyo,
I actually mentioned in a post a few pages ago that this premise would have been better received and would have had more potential along with making more sense if it was happening outside of Wakanda's borders in other far more corrupt nations where these things actually do occur...Coates could have done it that way and addressed everything from gender politics to rape camps while also going into a socio-political story involving how these things came about through colonization amongst other tragedies without putting the blemish of this on Wakanda...it would have been cool even if Aneka and Ayo were the ones leading charges against these things outside of Wakanda and having caused cross-border crimes were bought forward to Tchalla to argue why Wakanda should get involved in dealing with these horrors in Africa. They could still even be involved with each other which would also still give light to black LGBT characterization while also creating another culturally involved conflict since they are supposed to be committed to the king (would be quite a scandal and still may be an upcoming one Coates already planned for) and not in love with each other. Then Wakanda and Panther would have to deal with the conflict of getting involved in other copuntries issues on multiple fronts, with America and the Avengers getting involved eventually.
I agree about them being Tetu's men...but what if the Dora are secretly working with "the People" as well and what they are doing is all a part of an overall plan? And perhaps they are unknowingly being used by Tetu and Zenzi themselves... A.Curry
Does it not arguably in a way say something about T'Challa as a leader and King if Wakanda has fallen into such debauchery despite the commendable way Coates may write him specifically? Isn't Wakanda and Panther inextricably linked enough that one mirrors the other?
Absolutely! This is the crux of the matter, excellent questions and undoubtedly the most important theme as Coates and Marvel have clearly chosen to transition T'Challa and Wakanda from Hickman's continuity, albeit with deference to previous creators as well, rather than rebooting. It is not new for there to exist within Wakanda citizens of less than enlightened moral fiber. From the earliest days there was; Man-Ape, Killmonger, the Wakandans T'Challa caught poaching Vibranium during the Kiber incident, the Tommorow Fund administrator, Achebe, Nakia/Malice, Syan's son, even the late Wakabi struck his wife during a heated dispute. I get that drama requires conflict, so drama internal to Wakanda will likely involve conflict internal to Wakanda. Coates is committed to this path. His BP legacy will hinge on whether or not T'Challa can resolve Wakandan conflict and repair the national damage, much of which has resulted from T'Challa's own malfeasance. His needs to be one hell of a plan! My two cents.
Peace,
Mont
Hmmmm...excellent points about there already having been Wakandans of less than moral fiber in continuity though I wouldn't include W'kabi having hit his wife as that was more an act of desperation and one he was sorry for immediately after. Thing is even the villains you mentioned I couldn't see stooping to things so disgusting and dishonorable as having rape camps...maybe Achebe because he's a psychopath. And was the tomorrow fund administrator Wakandan?
Two things: taking in your point, is it really highly implausible that these things wouldn't happen in a destabilized Wakanda in its outer borders given that Wakanda has had its share of morally bereft characters before, or are some of us as fans just insulted by the fact that Wakanda is being shown to have issues like this (which I agree that, for better or worse, are being storied to address a mainstream and real world issue) because we'd like to think that Wakanda as a nation entire would be above such things? Is it actually a sensible argument that these things wouldn't and shouldn't exist in Wakanda simply because we've never seen it before even though we've seen other morally bereft things happen there and the country itself has gone through destructive changes due to all that Hickman before wrought?
Also, whether these things should and could exist or not, is it plausible that a king who went all the way to America over the death of a child in a scandal during the Priest run would not know about or worse not address IMMEDIATELY similar things happening to young women in his own kingdom, even way outside the golden city?
I'm one of those that feel, despite my somewhat negative feelings about the premise, that the premise has a lot of merit. Wakanda has faced a high amount of unprecedented events in its history, from infiltration (DoomWar), to biblical flood (AvX), to eventual destruction (Time Runs Out). Yes, T'Challa did bring everyone back, but it appears that enough people do remember what happened prior to their deaths. Thus, I can understand that there could be a large amount of people who could have negative feelings about the Wakandan government's inability to protect the country. A good amount of those people may even have negative feelings about T'Challa himself, depending on what they know about his actions during the Hickman run and perhaps his knack of being very involved with outsiders and events outside of Wakanda that don't involve Wakanda.
However, that currently doesn't explain how things went from apparent recovery to numerous corrupt--and lecherous--chieftains allowed to operate, as well had mischievous operations going on within Wakanda's borders. One could argue that perhaps these events have been going on prior to the Coates run. If so, that is a major red flag in the leadership of T'Challa, Shuri, and possibly T'Chaka and other previous panthers. One could also say it is a result of a mounting distrust for the Monarchy and something resembling anarchy has risen in some parts of Wakanda. If so, where's the royal family's reaction to this? Why isn't it clamping it down, rather than seemingly turning a blind eye to it?
Maybe there's something I've missed while reading, but it's as if we are currently have actions occur strictly for the sake of the plot, similar to how thing began unfolding during the Hickman run. I hope there are clear explanations for all this. More importantly, I would really like the royal family, and T'Challa in particular as King, to take a firm stance and decisive actions on panel against those situations.
hey Wakandan,
I absolutely think Coates has taken advantage of coming off of the overall destructive occurrences including the last and recent "Time Runs Out" storyline that involved yet another blow to Wakanda, to not only tell what he might see as an eventual and redemptive "from the ashes" story but to also add