Author Topic: Termination and Liberation for the Damisa-Sarki Coate's Black Panther Finale  (Read 774915 times)

Offline KIP LEWIS

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
    • View Profile
Hey Kip, which Thanos do you think trashed the Golden City?  ???


According to Starlin, it would be "the other guy," not his.  (It kind of makes sense since Starlin has been writing this story with Thanos, Warlock, Annihlus, that seemingly has nothing to do with Hickman's or Ultimate's storyline.)

Offline KIP LEWIS

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
    • View Profile
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





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...


I am hoping that the "suicide bombers" are going to turn out to be mind-controlled individuals, rather than real suicide bombers.  It still doesn't improve this total deconstruction for Wakanda, but it there is a super-villain behind it is better than alternative. 

You know, eventually this deconstruction of heroes is going to end. It started in the 80s and has just continued to get worse.

Offline A.Curry

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
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/

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? "




1) Agree with you about the Hudlin run regarding how they pretty much "rolled back" most of what he established...though I wasn't a fan of the run regarding what I saw as a lack of sophistication in the writing and some of it being too contrived...I thought the ideas were sound. But I honestly don't think, outside of the fact that some were obviously virulently not accepting of the Storm marriage, that most of these writers know what to do in terms of writing a comic or character that is a king...let alone the king of an advanced and seen as "perfect" society that's never been conquered. Heck, Namor's most popular run by Byrne involved him NOT being a king...and though I loved David's Aquaman where he was established as king some fans didn't...and i argued with Kurt Busiek when he took on the book as he took this viewpoint that becoming king was the "end of the story" and that there was nowhere to go with it.  Strongly disagreed.  Point being, I think most writers and these companies in general don't know what to do or are comfortable with writing a king/superhero type.

And the problem with establishing a society that's never been conquered as Hudlin did?  Is that some writers are going to be tempted to write a story where it IS actually conquered.  But they've totally gone all over the place with doing this to the point where the mythos is getting unrecognizable to most long term fans.

 It's also possible Coates is trying to avoid that misguided viewpoint of Panther being a "Mary-sue", which was never true, by injecting all of these social issues from his respectable but limited American liberal outlook along with making the character himself more "human" by making him more "flawed".  Focusing on the societal accomplishments you listed would be a great thing, but then focusing solely on these things does make it sound like a "perfect" society that most writers would want to inject conflict and drama in...though I agree there are more creative ways of doing that other than yet again another "revolution"...though this time I really think it's for a singular purpose: Coates is going to end monarchy in Wakanda

2) I'm not sure what African Americans, like other ethnic groups, (including Africans in Africa) always having a complicated, stereotyping relationship with our community has to do with the said writers specific and focused viewpoint about our complicated relationship with black LGBT people leading to, as the writer said, being pushed to the edges of our society or "otherized" or their erasure and even and often enough virulent verbal and even physical attacks upon their person.  The relationship always being there underscores that it's still an issue...one arguably in need of addressing.  Though I did say "revolutionary" may be too strong of a word in regards to the inclusion of Aneka and Ayo

Your viewpoint about the negative images of AA in this society is totally agreed with and THAT should be addressed as well...more hetero black on black relationships should be shown in all media especially comics though I don't feel personally as beleaguered with negative imagery as times before or even some still do.  Again we have a black on black relationship in the white house with daughters and all...and there are some in movies and TV outside of the housewives brand and pimps and hos though arguably there could be more.  Even Panther has had two highly well known relationships in his mythos...both with Black women.

Panther having a relationship NOW would be a good thing...but it's not like other characters including Captain America and Iron Man, who arguably has UNhealthy relationships, aren't void of this as well.  I just think for most superhero characters especially ones being pushed into a list like Panther is now, writers don't think "family man" superhero type goes over as well.  It's an arguable point though.

« Last Edit: April 20, 2016, 06:17:36 am by A.Curry »

Offline A.Curry

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
Who Gave The Black Panther His Best Debut In An Ongoing?
















Best Debut and overall run so far goes to PRIEST.  for contemporary times highly enjoyed Liss as well.

Hickman debuted in NA with him very admirably (outside of him not saving ONE of those kids) but quickly lost his way with the character.

Offline A.Curry

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
Quote
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


Quote
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

Again when it's said right, it's said right.

This was all boldly stated and mostly true.  I thought when Coates got the job that though he was high profile he was limited because he actually is an essayist specializing on sociopolitical issues and NOT a fiction or science fiction writer...so even I'd say his imagination is limited and he's writing from a perspective he's comfortable with and knows.

2 things: arguably, just because something was not shown in a mythos before doesn't mean it couldn't be said to have been there or have happened...this is true in reality as well as comics as it happens all the time though I am uncomfortable with something like a tribal leader in Wakanda taking advantage of young women and such and no one doing anything.  THAT seems unreasonable knowing Wakanda and Tchalla.  It's also not like the monarchy or leadership in Wakanda has never been questioned before.

Also, the Dora was approached as possibly being problematic in the PRIEST run when Nakia lost her mind and T'challa questioned Okoye to speak frankly on what she thought of the order and it's possible unfairness to them...especially since they are for him merely ceremonial and he doesn't plan on marrying them. Tchalla himself questioned whther the Dora should end as a practice or not in that issue.

That being said, though Panther is an African fictional character he is an American property...and I can totally see some fans, especially women and black feminist minded types. being uncomfortable with two younger females being "chosen" from two seperate factions to marry a powerful man out of duty rather than love...especially if the man has no real intention of doing anything with them.  The Dora was always a concept that was ripe for re-interpretation and conflict and judgement as Priest, the one who introduced the concept, even began to show its fallacies in his run.  Though it does happen in other parts of the world (as does other things that some, even people IN those parts, see as problematic) it's something that isn't widely accepted in mainstream America.





Offline Ture

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2839
    • View Profile
    • Pya Kule Design Group
When and Where Can I Get This?!?





Aesthetics 6250 A.U. - axis afrakan. expression unlimited.
http://pyakule.com/magazine.html
Special Black Panther Edition and more

Offline Ture

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2839
    • View Profile
    • Pya Kule Design Group
Quote
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.

That is about as clear as it gets. Add a touch of theChaos Bringer...

Quote
The mythos never needed fixing until unfans started writing it.

a little more Ekie...

Quote

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.

Nuff said.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2016, 10:27:43 am by Ture »
Aesthetics 6250 A.U. - axis afrakan. expression unlimited.
http://pyakule.com/magazine.html
Special Black Panther Edition and more

Offline Ezyo

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3158
    • View Profile
I would counter with these points:

Quote from: Double 0;1957770
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?


Quote from: Mike_Murdock;1958007
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.


Quote from: Kasper Cole;1958405
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.


Will Things change? i think they will, But is Wakanda going to adopt a Western Democracy because Coates is highly critical of it and making Wakanda into something he doesn't like makes zero sense.

One thing myself and Realdealholy from CBR discussed was a possibly of this:

Quote from: Realdealholy;1958545
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.


Quote from: Ezyo1000;1958662
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


[/b][/size]

Offline Kimoyo

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
    • View Profile
What a fascinating debate!  Eerily similar in some respects to one recently left in smoldering ashes.  This instead exemplifies an anxiety clearly born from unfulfilled promises past.  A mistrust earned by Marvel and its creative agents dangling the carrot of greater prestige, respectability and competence from the rod of preference and favoritism.

I feel the angst from Brothers Ture, Sal and others and I appreciate the calm and reason of Brother Ezyo and others.  The wait and see approach has not been fruitful for Wakandan faithful of late.  As has been pointed out, even HEF's most well received BP creators have struck a sour chord or two in telling their tales of Wakanda.  Preist caught flak for "Ross," Reg caught flak for dialog, Liss caught flak for T'Challa spurning Storm, all had their chance to tell their tale.  Both Priest and Reg introduced the idea of the monarchy being supported by a Wakandan Council.  Hopefully Coates is doing nothing more to diminish Wakandan royal rule?  Coates' 12th issue is in the can so whatever he's done is done and we'll find out over the course of the year if any faith in him was warranted.  A familiar position for us to be sure.  Perhaps, I'm destined to be an unrequited optimist -- I just don't want to believe right now, this early on, that Coates is going to chump T'Challa and Wakanda out and let us all down like some think.  I certainly don't blame any for being too jaded to have faith in him, however.  It's not like we haven't been down this road before. 

Peace,

Mont

Offline Ture

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2839
    • View Profile
    • Pya Kule Design Group
Is The Woman standing Behind the Black Widow a Dora Milaje?



Here is another post by Victor Freeman,  Ezyo. What do you think?

Quote
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.
Aesthetics 6250 A.U. - axis afrakan. expression unlimited.
http://pyakule.com/magazine.html
Special Black Panther Edition and more

Offline KIP LEWIS

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
    • View Profile
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.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2016, 05:18:38 am by KIP LEWIS »

Offline Ezyo

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3158
    • View Profile
Is The Woman standing Behind the Black Widow a Dora Milaje?



Here is another post by Victor Freeman,  Ezyo. What do you think?

Quote
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.



Yo answe your question, yes I believe it's been confirmed that she is a Dora Milaje, I think she is more of a cameo then anything though. But apparently she says something to Widow about being able to kick her ass or something.

As for the reply, I actually did respond to it in that forum

Quote from: Ezyo1000;1962468
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 


[/size][/b]

Offline Ezyo

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3158
    • View Profile
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.

I completely  understand where your coming from and I agree that it's something that needs to be handled right. AvX, Doom war, ED/TRO all bhad cases as well where characters are written in a way that damages them. T'Challa and Storm wouldn't have chosen sides in AvX and would of taken a third-party  position acting in order to solve the issues. Doom war was just crap designed to say "look how great Doom is. While I make everyone else look like dog crap" and tro.. Well we all know how that happened there.

But with Coates tun I think it's a little different because he is addressing those other issues and actually following continuity instead of ignoring what's happened prior to his run. It's not the story we wanted (I hate this premise) but it makes the most sense this time around then any other because of continuity. So if this clears everything up and allows us to get to a  point where we aren't getting coups every time he leaves then that will be good, so long as the change Coates is making isn't taking T'Challas power to a dramatically diminished position. If it must change then a Diarchy system would be a good alternative, and having a Panther chieftain as second to the King and Queen (T'Challa and Shuri) and a council to go with it. That way T'Challa has the highest authority as well as Shuri, and he can superhero around without a coup arising when he is gone. We will see what Coates has ib store. May 7th can't come faster

Offline KIP LEWIS

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
    • View Profile
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.

Offline Salustrade

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1361
    • View Profile
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.

Nothing suprises me as regards writers mangling the BP mythos post Reginald Hudlin.