Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SplitInfinity

Pages: [1]
1
General Discussion / Re: Minorities in Hunting culture
« on: October 16, 2007, 08:24:14 pm »
Like Chris said, only in America do people go hunting on a full stomach.

Hunting for sport or for profit happens all over the world. Foxhunts in England, poaching in Africa, commercial fishing in Asia, etc.

Personally, I prefer target shooting to hunting. No blood, no killing, no wandering around the boonies for hours.

2
Black Panther / Re: If Black Panther could steal a Villain
« on: October 16, 2007, 07:50:31 pm »
I'm typically against the use of "arch-nemesis" villains for anyone except the hero they're paired with, except in small amounts(like an arc or two every once in a while). The reason for this is that there is always a significant reason the villain dedicates so much of their time to fighting a particular hero and conflict with anyone else comes off as more of a distraction as far as the villain, than a genuine conflict. At least to me.

So, I wouldn't steal Green Goblin, Magneto, Loki, or Mr. Sinister for Black Panther. Doom I make an except for since a conflict between two world-class monarchs is too good to pass up.

Apocalypse could make a very interesting challenge for T'Challa. To combat a foe of En Sabah Nur's caliber, T'Challa would have to use a significant amount of his available resources, and likely have an assist from his wife, but I think it could be done. Apocalypse doesn't(or shouldn't, there has been a lot of bad writing to the contrary) go down easy: he's a team-buster.

Another factor is that, unlike Sinister and Magneto, Apocalypse isn't inherently bound to the mutant concept. He's a warlord who wants to conquer and let the weak die. That makes it far more plausible for him to leave the mutants alone and set his sights on Wakanda(a prize any warlord would lust after).

3
I'm curious about your thoughts on this. I remember when I was younger, I bought a Spidey with Black Panther in it. My mom saw it and said he was a horrible stereotype, and Marvel was racist for having such a character. Now I know Hudlin, and I think Priest before him, have tried very hard to show that BP is not just a stereotype, but a strong black role model.

So the question is, when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby originally created BP were they just reinforcing racial stereotypes, or were they trying to bring down racial barriers by making a strong black character? Could it be both? Can someone be good intentioned, and yet still racist? And if that's the case, is it okay?

Thoughts?

I think it was the opposite of reinforcing old stereotypes. Before the superhero genre really took off in the 60's and 70's, most comics were pulp magazines. These were typically mystery or adventure stories with little in the way of plot or depth(pulp didn't just refer to the quality of the paper!). One scenario that was fairly common back then was for the hero to met and battle "savages" in Africa, South America, in the past, etc. In a typically racist way, these "backwards" cultures often resorted to magic to combat the technological prowess(guns) of the heroes. I think Black Panther was a subversion of that trope. Instead of the natives using magic to fight the technology of outsiders, they instead used tech that was far superior(which also plays into Arther C. Clark's famous quote about any sufficiently advanced technology being analogous to magic)!

Pages: [1]