FEAR OF A BLACK PANTHER - New Black Panther Series by Eve L. Ewing & Chris Allen

[Ezyo]

Remember Al Ewing tried to make the change by making them Tchallas' personal mercenary group. That circle doesn't square with this story because they have a role in government. But at the end for Coates first arc he rebuilt the HZ with QDJ being his first call. So its reasonably to assume that these new ones are better trained.

And remember Akili almost won the rebellion/invasion on his own. If only he turned that gun in the proper direction. Lol.

I mean..  Ewing had the HZ and DM getting SPANKED by the plant folk lol. So again, this all falls back into their ranking in publishing history. The best they have ever been was Hickmans TRO when they spanked Atlantis.

Yeah that scene with Akili completely flattened and made Tetu even more a complete laughably pathetic villain than before. Which made the invasion even more unbelievable as it was idiotic.

[CvilleWakandan]

I guess I see it alot as blackness being the only defining trait of character as of late. And it gets old. Again, I'm not asking for a reskinned white character. There's nothing wrong with getting into African roots, culture and history. It's what makes Wakanda interesting as it has kept all it's traditions and culture in tact. What I don't like are racial stereotypes and black dysfunction. Or turning Wakanda onto a Western analogue for slavery, and Columbus, with them needing to pay reparations (Coates). What I am saying is two fold. One T'Challa shouldn't ONLY be defined as a black hero and should be written as a CHARACTER first. And then further his character by showing his African heritage. And two, writers shouldn't completely shy away from it either and make him reskinned white

While Ridley hasn't done all that, he IS reinforcing another trope that Coates really pioneered onto the mythos which is black women being shown constantly as either the heroes who are faultless or the smarter off the two constantly telling Black men how wrong they are. Also the men being inert, traitors and just generally poorly written as a whole.

Ridley's T'Challa is good in having disdain for democracy with the strong argument of how easily it can spin it's wheel's trying to decide WHAT to do rather than taking action.

I don't care for how the writers though continue to use real world rules to fantasy in painting a absolute monarch as inherently bad and democracy as inherently good.

The women ain't looking too good. The PM is ineffective, Omolo(sp) claims to love Tchallas' friend, but cheats on him with multiple people. Shuri accused her and that turned out to be wrong. Which essentially leads to the circular firing squad of accusations which put Tchalla in the position hes currently in. I don't see him saying women are better than men.

[Ture]

Courtesy of CBR's Redjack

1. Evan and I could make the franchise a showpiece.

2. There comes a point where there's almost zero chance my pitches for the character(s) would get anywhere near what the company wants for them, regardless of sales. We may be past that point. I have no interest in furthering the mythology as it's progressed over the last few years and my Big Pitch, without being an attack on any of that work (it's not. I never attack the prior writers for doing with their ideas exactly what i would do with mine if i was driving) would still be too far away from they seem wot want for T'Challa and Wakanda.

3. If the THOR book suddenly stopped being about Thor and focused instead on all the supporting characters who live in Asgard, the audience would riot, no matter how well-written or drawn.

4. I don't think it's possible now for ANY Black Panther run to exist without massive controversy. Trust me. if MARVEL called me tomorrow and said, "Green Light, brother, do anything you need to do with the title." THE INSTANT that became news, the knives would come out ,calling me every name in the book before anyone had read one word.

I don't actually care about that chatter (as if) but that's what would happen. And my run would absolutely remove everything I don't like about the last few years– in-story, without hand waves. Do we really think Marvel is signing up for that? Doubt it. Highly.

You can tell from my writing of the character what I think about him and his supporting cast. There actually is a way to have the cake and eat it vis a vis T'Challa and Shuri and all that. It's sitting right there in the existing text if they want to connect those dots. But the folks who own it have to want to and they'd need to give me at least two years to make it go.

WILDLY unlikely.

62289

First? ALL HAIL REDJACK AND EVAN. These are the real "in comics industry NOW" bruthas who'll actually do not only T'Challa but any character...especially a character from Alkebulan miscalled "Africa" or "Afrika" [ the term "Afrika" is a ROMAN term, meaning: "land of the Afri {people}", etc ] With this comment above...where did he post this comment?..he just got me onboard whatever he writes, wherever he goes.

I'm done with Marvel comics. I don't see them doing us right in no kinda way, shape, or form. And that's double unacceptable, because not only are RJ and EN [ Evan Narcisse ] out there {and there seems to be some serious iffyness in Evan from some things one of the OG HEFfas said he stated about BP} was out there, until DC swooped him up for the new BLACK ADAM series [ which I'm definitely following! I loved his Deathstroke ].

How is it that twice IN A ROW now...Coates and Ridley...they bring in bruthas with seemingly impeccable credentials, and they both come in and make T'Challa into T'Chumpa, Mayor of Suckaville [ Coates ] and T'Challa, Citizen of Suckaville [ Ridley ]? When Aaron, Ewing, etc have absolutely kilt it like Scottish man skirts...FOR YEARS, FROM ISSUE #1 FORWARD... with T'Challa?

Answer: they're trying to "misappropriate", redirect and neuter both T'Challa AND Wakanda.

With R to the H? CJP? Coogler? T'Challa and Wakanda actually directly engaged issues from our Alkebulan perspective. Were proud of our Alkebulan heritage, and both introduced and resolved thorny issues which have a perpetual racial and racist dynamic due to nonAlkebulan Racist Feudalists doing what they do.

Neither Aaron or Ewing approached these subjects at all. And that's why their depictions are very dope, desirable...but they're writing "Panther" . Anyone can be under the Panther mask of the admirable, well written, potent character they write; and I definitely feel that such was purposeful. How can we ask Aaron and Ewing to write from a Alkebulan perspective; a perspective they can never have?

The bruthas? Write BLACK PANTHER. Not just Panther. And Redjack? Was absolutely magnificent. With him? We'd have it ALL. The EVERYTHING we love, the BLACK PANTHER, not "just" a fly dope "Panther". Aaaand? We'd have the sales. Redjack? With the proper art support and company push? Would run numbers we haven't seen since R to the H.

But for LONGER, because the comic book would get a strong bounce from the MCU release of BP and the subsequent Disney+ and MCU ventures [ any Okoye or Dora Milaje or Shuri stuff, any AVENGERS stuff, any MIDNIGHT SONS stuff, etc ]. That means? Redjack would have broken ALL the records, and set up all bold face like the dominating presence of T'CHALLA THE BLACK PANTHER...

...right as the homegrown terrorists in this country and White Civilization worldwide are taking a propagandized powered hard Right turn, which is all designed to keep the corrupt creatures currently in power? Perpetually in power. And Disney? Is in this up to its NECK. Presenting the devastatingly dope, multifaction uniting BLACK PANTHER AND WAKANDA would thoroughly undermine or outright obliterate a significant facet of their hyperpowered propaganda machine visavis the younger generation. The death blow to their position of power and their further aspirations is the unification of good people across racial and economic lines into a single force recognizing that the entire 1%...all of them...are existential threats to humanity, this planet, and wherever they may roam off planet.  All of them. All. Of. Them. Need be exterminated without mercy and with the most extreme prejudice possible.

MLK was heading toward this unified multiracial, multieconomic class unity with his POOR PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN. That's why they killed him.

T'Challa is far more threatening. He's not asking anyone for anyone, he overwhelms opposition. Effortlessly. While not only uniting groups like MLK did, but also putting an invincible Black male as the head of the movement we all need. These optics? Will lift the profile of bruthas worldwide, annealing the fractures in many of our family units and propelling many and plenty T'Challa analogues in real life. This reality will reverse all this softie sucka boy image that too many of us see when we see images of Alkebulan men in media. We will speedily take control of and celebrate our images of real masculinity without allowing outside or weaker forces to compromise us further.

We'll pay attention to and rally round way more bruthas like Grandmaster Jay of NFAC.

We won't necessarily hate on people like "lil nas x" but people like him won't be dominating our music airwaves like he currently is, when we still have RAKIM, WU TANG, PUBLIC ENEMY, PARIS THE BLACK PANTHER OF HIPHOP, FAT JOE, ROYCE DA 5'9", J. COLE, KENDRICK LAMAR, etc etc around.

Redjack? Will make a pile of money for Disney while he makes BP the ultra G he always was and should be. I mean, seriously...imagine what Redjack could do with FIVE GALAXIES OF WAKANDA to play with!! When I first imagined the idea years ago and brought it to life with my Wakanda Kifalme Ya Nyota..."Wakanda's Kingdom of the Stars"...in my fanfic? I was thrilling to build threads in the main story that would take us to exploring it.

But I confess that I never thought of FIVE GALAXIES for Wakanda. I wanted to tell the story of how Wakanda Kifalme Ya Nyota came to be and how T'Challa and The Royals led it into expansion throughout this galaxy. I wanted that throwdown with everyone from The Shi'Ar to The Stranger. From Ego to The In-Betweener, from The Brood to The Living Tribunal. And? Yeah, I would have thrown some new and not-so-new heads in there. T'Challa and Adam Brashear? Would hotbox with Adam's ace bad guy, who'd joined forces with a Multiverse Inverted Adam Warlock to do our Reality all kinds of wrong.

T'Challa would have matched wits with our newly upgraded Princess Zanda as she sought to steal The Incubator...a critical facet of pre-Universal undefined power type that was responsible for propelling Galactus into our universe and helping to evolve him into The Life Giver...as well as devolve him into The Devourer.

T'Challa and Blade would have teamed up to defeat the resurgent, deadly powerful, brilliant and utterly terrifying Danquan Oheneba of the Obayifo, one of the Underworld Princes of the scarifying and lethal West Alkebulan versions of the vampire [ Obayifo ] which long predated Brahm Stoker's tales about Dracula and European vampires.

T'Challa would have been brought in by Elektra as she attempted her most daring kill yet...and T'Challa would have no choice but to answer her summons.

Moondragon would show up, and we'd learn all kinds of lusty and lethal things about their secret past together...and Moondragon would pull T'Challa into the kind of adventure that we've only once before [ under RH's pen ] seen even being hinted at, visavis T'Challa.

Storm and T'Challa would finally have that talk about their breakup, their fight, Wolverine, and everything in between. There will be clashing of wills and fighting happening.

And so. Much. More...


You know what? I'm going to get to writing again, since Ridley isn't going to do us right.

The past decade's writers consistency in the dissolution of T'Challa the Black Panther and his kingdom of Wakanda have unequivocally defined this era as the nadir of Black Panther comic books. So yes, you writing some more fan fiction about the Black Panther makes sense Supreme.

[Emperorjones]

I guess I see it alot as blackness being the only defining trait of character as of late. And it gets old. Again, I'm not asking for a reskinned white character. There's nothing wrong with getting into African roots, culture and history. It's what makes Wakanda interesting as it has kept all it's traditions and culture in tact. What I don't like are racial stereotypes and black dysfunction. Or turning Wakanda onto a Western analogue for slavery, and Columbus, with them needing to pay reparations (Coates). What I am saying is two fold. One T'Challa shouldn't ONLY be defined as a black hero and should be written as a CHARACTER first. And then further his character by showing his African heritage. And two, writers shouldn't completely shy away from it either and make him reskinned white

While Ridley hasn't done all that, he IS reinforcing another trope that Coates really pioneered onto the mythos which is black women being shown constantly as either the heroes who are faultless or the smarter off the two constantly telling Black men how wrong they are. Also the men being inert, traitors and just generally poorly written as a whole.

Ridley's T'Challa is good in having disdain for democracy with the strong argument of how easily it can spin it's wheel's trying to decide WHAT to do rather than taking action.

I don't care for how the writers though continue to use real world rules to fantasy in painting a absolute monarch as inherently bad and democracy as inherently good.

I largely agree with what you say here, but I don't buy the idea that Blackness and Character are too separate things when it comes to Black characters. How can a Black character just be a character first? Their Blackness is part of their character. I don't think there has to be an either/or choice here. That's how it's long been presented to us, as if Black people can separate themselves (or others would allow us to) from our skin color and all the history that goes along with it. And some of his persist in pursuing that, but it rarely (I believe never) works.

Like you, I don't want stereotypes, and I also cringe at the currently popular performative Blackness where people dress in more Afrocentric clothes, wear their hair natural, say a few "pro-Black" quotes or phrases to prove they are "down" but outside of that are not uplifting the community and sometimes pushing agendas that are divisive within the community. That's the kind of "Blackness" I don't care to see.

[Ture]

Here's the thing, here's the PROBLEM with the black writers they are hiring currently. They are trying to input AFRICAN AMERICAN throughts, experience, and issues. Mind of shadow says it best.

It is just lazy to be honest.

You hire within a race or ethnic group or whatever because then the writer can share ideas, motivations, thoughts, and feelings someone outside of that ethnic group wouldnt' know first hand.

But... T'challa isn't American Black. He's African. And African king of a nation untouched by colonialism. An african king of a super power.

What person on earth can "relate" to that really lol?

Professional comic writers can work with that because it is PURE FANTASY. There is nothing to connect to really... it is like writing Thor for Bast sake. So, you get these professionals like Priest, Aaron, Ewing, Hickman and company and they just role with it because they are used to writing comic book fiction.

These novelists and journalists and newbs try to impart some african-american issues on an AFRICAN KING.  And it just doesn't work. There is nothing to connect to here.

This is the difference. And what MoS is getting at is these professionals write T'Challa as a badass character who happens to be Black. They take out the black out of Black Panther and just write him as a character and not a 'Black' character. When you start to focus on the 'black' part, you start to run into the issues wee saw with Coates and what we are seeing with Ridley. A constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them.

Rarely does focusing on the characters blackness works. Hudlin managed to pull it off (unfortunately he had some hiccups being a noob to comics and we are unfortunately suffering from those mistakes today as they had MASSIVE drawbacks that are heavily derailing the franchise) but writers like Priest and Redjack wrote T'Challa THE CHARACTER first and his blackness second. They added to his World and gave it the African feel, but their focus wasn't to make it 'all black' but to make it GOOD.

I don't need only a black writer to write Tchalla. I need GOOD writers who want to write the character writing him, and it just so happens that Redjack who is black, would be the best writer for the job, followed by Ewing abd JA. The CHARACTER comes first, his personality, morals, beliefs, and traits. His race, sexual orientation, and political thoughts on IRL American politics comes second.

The challenge with so called black writers post Hudlin is their insistence on importing the thoughts, experience, and issues of so called African Americans who sought to be integrated and accepted (or as it is said today represented and included) as opposed to choosing the thoughts, experience, and issues of self liberating and autonomous Afrakans of the Americas both north and south. It is the equivalent of choosing the narrative of the tv series Roots instead the narrative espoused in the film Quilombo to express a point of view that the Wakandans would have.
 
An Afrakan centered writer, literate in traditional Afrakan culture prior to Asian, Arab or European influence, would scribe T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness not as happenstance but as a purposeful and hereditary necessity. When Afrakan cultural centeredness is ignored or removed the Black Panther winds up a disenfranchised unflattering self effacing caricature of himself.

There is no such thing as writing just a character. Superman is not just a character, he is a white character. Superman is a white character based on his phenotypical expression; his midwestern cultural values, civilian style of dress; primary language; and most telling, his parents being white.

If focusing on T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness (so called blackness) creates issues, then these issues are reflections of the writers personal ideologies and internal conflicts not T'Challa's. When a "black" writer expresses a constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them, this is a manifestation self, male and people degradation in a desparate attempt to appease a certain demographic they so believe is superior.

At their best Priest and Hudlin's comicbooks and Redjack's cartoon seamlessly integrated "blackness" into the "character." There was no character comes first and blackness comes second.



62459

[Ezyo]

We got T'Challa making accusations and about to kill Omolola because... She cheated on Jhai? He over reacts which is something tchalla has never done and he had been shown to be closer to actual characters.

The other men? Dead or traitor's. With T'Challa bumbling along or reacting to situations instead of solving them. Tell me against how tchalla doesn't identify the assassin's are Wakandan again after fighting them personally? Incompetence. After the Coates era, I have little faith on anyone who writes T'Challa this way and have zero faith on "Keep  reading it will get better or it will all make sense on the end" that goodwill was burned to the ground with Coates

[Emperorjones]

I guess I see it alot as blackness being the only defining trait of character as of late. And it gets old. Again, I'm not asking for a reskinned white character. There's nothing wrong with getting into African roots, culture and history. It's what makes Wakanda interesting as it has kept all it's traditions and culture in tact. What I don't like are racial stereotypes and black dysfunction. Or turning Wakanda onto a Western analogue for slavery, and Columbus, with them needing to pay reparations (Coates). What I am saying is two fold. One T'Challa shouldn't ONLY be defined as a black hero and should be written as a CHARACTER first. And then further his character by showing his African heritage. And two, writers shouldn't completely shy away from it either and make him reskinned white

While Ridley hasn't done all that, he IS reinforcing another trope that Coates really pioneered onto the mythos which is black women being shown constantly as either the heroes who are faultless or the smarter off the two constantly telling Black men how wrong they are. Also the men being inert, traitors and just generally poorly written as a whole.

Ridley's T'Challa is good in having disdain for democracy with the strong argument of how easily it can spin it's wheel's trying to decide WHAT to do rather than taking action.

I don't care for how the writers though continue to use real world rules to fantasy in painting a absolute monarch as inherently bad and democracy as inherently good.

The women ain't looking too good. The PM is ineffective, Omolo(sp) claims to love Tchallas' friend, but cheats on him with multiple people. Shuri accused her and that turned out to be wrong. Which essentially leads to the circular firing squad of accusations which put Tchalla in the position hes currently in. I don't see him saying women are better than men.

Good points about the depiction of women so far. While they might not be looking too hot, I doubt they will be held "accountable" like T'Challa or other black male characters will/would be for faux pas or failures (real or imagined).

[Emperorjones]

Here's the thing, here's the PROBLEM with the black writers they are hiring currently. They are trying to input AFRICAN AMERICAN throughts, experience, and issues. Mind of shadow says it best.

It is just lazy to be honest.

You hire within a race or ethnic group or whatever because then the writer can share ideas, motivations, thoughts, and feelings someone outside of that ethnic group wouldnt' know first hand.

But... T'challa isn't American Black. He's African. And African king of a nation untouched by colonialism. An african king of a super power.

What person on earth can "relate" to that really lol?

Professional comic writers can work with that because it is PURE FANTASY. There is nothing to connect to really... it is like writing Thor for Bast sake. So, you get these professionals like Priest, Aaron, Ewing, Hickman and company and they just role with it because they are used to writing comic book fiction.

These novelists and journalists and newbs try to impart some african-american issues on an AFRICAN KING.  And it just doesn't work. There is nothing to connect to here.

This is the difference. And what MoS is getting at is these professionals write T'Challa as a badass character who happens to be Black. They take out the black out of Black Panther and just write him as a character and not a 'Black' character. When you start to focus on the 'black' part, you start to run into the issues wee saw with Coates and what we are seeing with Ridley. A constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them.

Rarely does focusing on the characters blackness works. Hudlin managed to pull it off (unfortunately he had some hiccups being a noob to comics and we are unfortunately suffering from those mistakes today as they had MASSIVE drawbacks that are heavily derailing the franchise) but writers like Priest and Redjack wrote T'Challa THE CHARACTER first and his blackness second. They added to his World and gave it the African feel, but their focus wasn't to make it 'all black' but to make it GOOD.

I don't need only a black writer to write Tchalla. I need GOOD writers who want to write the character writing him, and it just so happens that Redjack who is black, would be the best writer for the job, followed by Ewing abd JA. The CHARACTER comes first, his personality, morals, beliefs, and traits. His race, sexual orientation, and political thoughts on IRL American politics comes second.

The challenge with so called black writers post Hudlin is their insistence on importing the thoughts, experience, and issues of so called African Americans who sought to be integrated and accepted (or as it is said today represented and included) as opposed to choosing the thoughts, experience, and issues of self liberating and autonomous Afrakans of the Americas both north and south. It is the equivalent of choosing the narrative of the tv series Roots instead the narrative espoused in the film Quilombo to express a point of view that the Wakandans would have.
 
An Afrakan centered writer, literate in traditional Afrakan culture prior to Asian, Arab or European influence, would scribe T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness not as happenstance but as a purposeful and hereditary necessity. When Afrakan cultural centeredness is ignored or removed the Black Panther winds up a disenfranchised unflattering self effacing caricature of himself.

There is no such thing as writing just a character. Superman is not just a character, he is a white character. Superman is a white character based on his phenotypical expression; his midwestern cultural values, civilian style of dress; primary language; and most telling, his parents being white.

If focusing on T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness (so called blackness) creates issues, then these issues are reflections of the writers personal ideologies and internal conflicts not T'Challa's. When a "black" writer expresses a constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them, this is a manifestation self, male and people degradation in a desparate attempt to appease a certain demographic they so believe is superior.

At their best Priest and Hudlin's comicbooks and Redjack's cartoon seamlessly integrated "blackness" into the "character." There was no character comes first and blackness comes second.



62459

I agree with a lot of what you write here, though I do have some pushback. Let's note that there are Continental as well as other Diasporic brothers and sisters who seek integration and acceptance as well. And also don't see the attempts of humble T'Challa as "humanizing" him, but more so playing out some kind of psychological/emotional anxiety or turmoil in said writer's mind. It's not humanizing him, it's just another way of dehumanizing him perhaps because they can't see or accept fully their own humanity, and therefore can't write T'Challa that way. And that's not even bringing into it how Marvel might wish for T'Challa, and other Black characters, to be depicted.

[Ture]

I think this is false bind we put black characters (and black creators into). Why I say that is that we are supposed to only have two alternatives, a raceless "black" Black Panther that puts "character" first (stripped of racial context, as well as largely real history, and culture/influences) or a black Black Panther that is a neutered black male, a therapy session for anxious black writers (often male) to work out their racial and gender anxieties through.

I don't see it as having to be one or the other, or either. Black Panther's race can be used to make him stand out in fiction and in the real world. He can tap into a legacy that almost no other major black character can and I don't think it's something Marvel should run from or downplay. We often are given these raceless characters that are black on the outside but have little black interiority, that are basically no different than white characters. To me I see that as a dodge on the part of (often) white creators who can't, or won't, put themselves into their black characters' heads, and instead just go with the easy, warm platitude that "we are all the same" therefore there is little need to investigate the quirks and cleavages of history that do make us different, and therefore we get false diversity and not a real diversity of experience and opinion that could make for richer stories and characters overall.

I also don't see this as solely an issue of just black writers on Black Panther. Mind of Shadow mentions white writers who also input their thoughts, experiences, and issues onto Black Panther like black ones. If anything, many of the black writers successfully or not, do attempt to impart some kind of racial consciousness and not just make T'Challa raceless. Making T'Challa raceless undermines the powerful inspirational and aspirational appeal of the character as much as neutering him does.

The idea of Americans imparting or imposing their views on an African character, well, Black Panther was created by two white American men and owned by a white American corporation. 

Just about every other African character we know of, definitely in mainstream comics, share that same origin. T'Challa is as native African as Luke Cage, Falcon, John Stewart, etc., etc., came from the soil of the black American imagination. Basically, he isn't really African, as conceived by Africans. Black Panther isn't about the real Africa or an African nation or monarch, so much as a (white) American examination of those subjects. So, I can't fault them for imparting some of their views on the character. My hope is that many do enough research, as well as reflection, and approach Black Panther, as well as all black characters, with respect and care.

Further, Marvel has or is moving to put continental African, or other Diasporic black writers, in the Black Panther orbit, like Nnedi Okorafor, Roxane Gay, Evan Narcisse, and now Tochi Onyebuchi, and thus far, I've only heard this forum give Narcisse the most praise.

Let me add...I went back and reread what Ezyo said, and I hadn't noted before that Ezyo was talking about the current black writers, and not necessarily about black writers for Black Panther in general. I am more accepting that there is an issue with the current crop of Black Panther writers' takes on T'Challa, but I blame Marvel for that more than them. Marvel is hiring those writers. And while it appears some here have given up on Ridley, I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I do think he's a good writer and I'm hoping he'll come through. Though I do think his I Am Batman series is holding together better at this point, which perhaps does reinforce what Ezyo and others feel because Ridley perhaps is more a natural at writing a conflicted Black American character than a conflicted African one.

Well said Emperorjones. Would you consider Stan Lee and Jack Kirby being influenced by Afrakans and the events surrounding those Afrakans? Do you think Hudlin delivered an Afrakan centered, contextually cultured examination on said subjects?

Marvel employing Afrakans whether from the continent or out of the diaspora is a respectable move. However the Black Panther represents a unique fictional character and as such requires a writer historically astute in the many victorious Afrakan engagements for maintaining autonomy. It goes without saying the writer should be imaginative and innovative.

[Ture]

Here's the thing, here's the PROBLEM with the black writers they are hiring currently. They are trying to input AFRICAN AMERICAN throughts, experience, and issues. Mind of shadow says it best.

It is just lazy to be honest.

You hire within a race or ethnic group or whatever because then the writer can share ideas, motivations, thoughts, and feelings someone outside of that ethnic group wouldnt' know first hand.

But... T'challa isn't American Black. He's African. And African king of a nation untouched by colonialism. An african king of a super power.

What person on earth can "relate" to that really lol?

Professional comic writers can work with that because it is PURE FANTASY. There is nothing to connect to really... it is like writing Thor for Bast sake. So, you get these professionals like Priest, Aaron, Ewing, Hickman and company and they just role with it because they are used to writing comic book fiction.

These novelists and journalists and newbs try to impart some african-american issues on an AFRICAN KING.  And it just doesn't work. There is nothing to connect to here.

This is the difference. And what MoS is getting at is these professionals write T'Challa as a badass character who happens to be Black. They take out the black out of Black Panther and just write him as a character and not a 'Black' character. When you start to focus on the 'black' part, you start to run into the issues wee saw with Coates and what we are seeing with Ridley. A constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them.

Rarely does focusing on the characters blackness works. Hudlin managed to pull it off (unfortunately he had some hiccups being a noob to comics and we are unfortunately suffering from those mistakes today as they had MASSIVE drawbacks that are heavily derailing the franchise) but writers like Priest and Redjack wrote T'Challa THE CHARACTER first and his blackness second. They added to his World and gave it the African feel, but their focus wasn't to make it 'all black' but to make it GOOD.

I don't need only a black writer to write Tchalla. I need GOOD writers who want to write the character writing him, and it just so happens that Redjack who is black, would be the best writer for the job, followed by Ewing abd JA. The CHARACTER comes first, his personality, morals, beliefs, and traits. His race, sexual orientation, and political thoughts on IRL American politics comes second.

The challenge with so called black writers post Hudlin is their insistence on importing the thoughts, experience, and issues of so called African Americans who sought to be integrated and accepted (or as it is said today represented and included) as opposed to choosing the thoughts, experience, and issues of self liberating and autonomous Afrakans of the Americas both north and south. It is the equivalent of choosing the narrative of the tv series Roots instead the narrative espoused in the film Quilombo to express a point of view that the Wakandans would have.
 
An Afrakan centered writer, literate in traditional Afrakan culture prior to Asian, Arab or European influence, would scribe T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness not as happenstance but as a purposeful and hereditary necessity. When Afrakan cultural centeredness is ignored or removed the Black Panther winds up a disenfranchised unflattering self effacing caricature of himself.

There is no such thing as writing just a character. Superman is not just a character, he is a white character. Superman is a white character based on his phenotypical expression; his midwestern cultural values, civilian style of dress; primary language; and most telling, his parents being white.

If focusing on T'Challa the Black Panther's Afrakaness (so called blackness) creates issues, then these issues are reflections of the writers personal ideologies and internal conflicts not T'Challa's. When a "black" writer expresses a constant need to humble, humiliate, and chastise Black characters (especially Black men) in some twisted beliefs of humanizing them, this is a manifestation self, male and people degradation in a desparate attempt to appease a certain demographic they so believe is superior.

At their best Priest and Hudlin's comicbooks and Redjack's cartoon seamlessly integrated "blackness" into the "character." There was no character comes first and blackness comes second.



62459

I agree with a lot of what you write here, though I do have some pushback. Let's note that there are Continental as well as other Diasporic brothers and sisters who seek integration and acceptance as well. And also don't see the attempts of humble T'Challa as "humanizing" him, but more so playing out some kind of psychological/emotional anxiety or turmoil in said writer's mind. It's not humanizing him, it's just another way of dehumanizing him perhaps because they can't see or accept fully their own humanity, and therefore can't write T'Challa that way. And that's not even bringing into it how Marvel might wish for T'Challa, and other Black characters, to be depicted.

Let's note that there are Continental as well as other Diasporic brothers and sisters who seek integration and acceptance as well.

No argument.

And also don't see the attempts of humble T'Challa as "humanizing" him, but more so playing out some kind of psychological/emotional anxiety or turmoil in said writer's mind.

I think we're saying the same thing.

It's not humanizing him, it's just another way of dehumanizing him perhaps because they can't see or accept fully their own humanity, and therefore can't write T'Challa that way.

More like they can't see or accept their own Afrakanity and as such write a very deficient T'Challa the Black Panther and impotent Wakanda.

[Emperorjones]

I think this is false bind we put black characters (and black creators into). Why I say that is that we are supposed to only have two alternatives, a raceless "black" Black Panther that puts "character" first (stripped of racial context, as well as largely real history, and culture/influences) or a black Black Panther that is a neutered black male, a therapy session for anxious black writers (often male) to work out their racial and gender anxieties through.

I don't see it as having to be one or the other, or either. Black Panther's race can be used to make him stand out in fiction and in the real world. He can tap into a legacy that almost no other major black character can and I don't think it's something Marvel should run from or downplay. We often are given these raceless characters that are black on the outside but have little black interiority, that are basically no different than white characters. To me I see that as a dodge on the part of (often) white creators who can't, or won't, put themselves into their black characters' heads, and instead just go with the easy, warm platitude that "we are all the same" therefore there is little need to investigate the quirks and cleavages of history that do make us different, and therefore we get false diversity and not a real diversity of experience and opinion that could make for richer stories and characters overall.

I also don't see this as solely an issue of just black writers on Black Panther. Mind of Shadow mentions white writers who also input their thoughts, experiences, and issues onto Black Panther like black ones. If anything, many of the black writers successfully or not, do attempt to impart some kind of racial consciousness and not just make T'Challa raceless. Making T'Challa raceless undermines the powerful inspirational and aspirational appeal of the character as much as neutering him does.

The idea of Americans imparting or imposing their views on an African character, well, Black Panther was created by two white American men and owned by a white American corporation. 

Just about every other African character we know of, definitely in mainstream comics, share that same origin. T'Challa is as native African as Luke Cage, Falcon, John Stewart, etc., etc., came from the soil of the black American imagination. Basically, he isn't really African, as conceived by Africans. Black Panther isn't about the real Africa or an African nation or monarch, so much as a (white) American examination of those subjects. So, I can't fault them for imparting some of their views on the character. My hope is that many do enough research, as well as reflection, and approach Black Panther, as well as all black characters, with respect and care.

Further, Marvel has or is moving to put continental African, or other Diasporic black writers, in the Black Panther orbit, like Nnedi Okorafor, Roxane Gay, Evan Narcisse, and now Tochi Onyebuchi, and thus far, I've only heard this forum give Narcisse the most praise.

Let me add...I went back and reread what Ezyo said, and I hadn't noted before that Ezyo was talking about the current black writers, and not necessarily about black writers for Black Panther in general. I am more accepting that there is an issue with the current crop of Black Panther writers' takes on T'Challa, but I blame Marvel for that more than them. Marvel is hiring those writers. And while it appears some here have given up on Ridley, I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I do think he's a good writer and I'm hoping he'll come through. Though I do think his I Am Batman series is holding together better at this point, which perhaps does reinforce what Ezyo and others feel because Ridley perhaps is more a natural at writing a conflicted Black American character than a conflicted African one.

Well said Emperorjones. Would you consider Stan Lee and Jack Kirby being influenced by Afrakans and the events surrounding those Afrakans? Do you think Hudlin delivered an Afrakan centered, contextually cultured examination on said subjects?

Marvel employing Afrakans whether from the continent or out of the diaspora is a respectable move. However the Black Panther represents a unique fictional character and as such requires a writer historically astute in the many victorious Afrakan engagements for maintaining autonomy. It goes without saying the writer should be imaginative and innovative.

From what little I know of Black Panther's origins I do think Lee and Kirby looked to the new (at the time) independent African nations for inspiration for T'Challa. I can't really say if Hudlin delivered on what you ask, but I do think he had/has a great reverence for Black Panther and that shone through in his work. Further he had no problem infusing his books with a Black sensibility in ways that no one else did, including Priest (who I feel at times was self-conscious about race in his Black Panther run, definitely more so than Hudlin). 

It would be great if Marvel hired writers-no matter their race/ethnicity-that approached T'Challa with the care that you speak of, but I see it as a grab bag sometimes. I don't think the character is revered in the halls of Marvel Comics as much as he is on this forum and that's reflected in his treatment in comics pages. I think Marvel is stuck. They are used to undercutting Black characters, but because the Black Panther movie was such a hit and cultural milestone, they can't just ignore him or treat him as shabbily as they did Blade after Wesley's movies put that character over. So, he is on a lot of covers now, he pops up in lots of books, and plays some noticeable role (not always notable) in major events to check the BP/diversity appearance box, but I still sense that reluctance to really put him over. There should've been a major event that revolved around Wakanda by now for example.

[Ture]

Quote from: Supreme Illuminati on May 29, 2022 at 07:21:20 pm

Alkebulan miscalled "Africa" or "Afrika" [ the term "Afrika" is a ROMAN term, meaning: "land of the Afri {people}", etc

Ahhh, the ole Alkebu-lan is the original name play made popular in our circles by Dr Yosef Ben-Jochannan. With all due respect Supreme, Alkebu-lan is an Arabic translation of the Afrakan term Ur Kheb Hu Ta. It was used by Arab influenced Afrakans aka Moors who had been indoctrinated into Arabic culture through the practice of the Islam.

Technically speaking the Arabs took the term Al from ancient Kanana (Canaan; ancient Afrakan civilization now called Palestine). In Kanana, Al is a title of the Creator. In Arabic Al is a definite article which passed into Spanish and was translated as El after the Moorish (Arab influenced Afrakans) invasion.

The root of this term is found in ancient Kamit as Ur which translates in English as great; the great. There was very little to no use of "L" sound in ancient Kamit as there would be in the centuries to follow in Kanana. The rolling ‘R’ sound is translated as an ‘L’ sound particularly in Arabic and Spanish which either incorporated or co-opted the Kamau (indigenous and original inhabitants of Kamit) terms into their own language.

The root word Khebu used in the Arabic term Alkebu-lan is the name of the Neteru (Kamiti term for a male deity) whose divine providence governs in the north of Kamit. This region of Northern Afraka was heavily invaded by the Romans and Arabs and as a result both would incorporate or translate Afrakan terms and names into their languages.

The terms Afer (singular) and Afri (plural) were in fact used by the Romans but did not originate from them. The Romans were introduced to the term after they encountered the Abibiri-fo. That is the name of the ethnic group of Afrakans inhabiting Khart Hadast (later to be mispronounced and renamed as Carthage). Predating this, the terms Afer and Afri were in use in the ancient language of the Kamau of Kamit wherein it defined that which is to be hot; to burn; hot vapor and smoke.

These truths form the foundation of the nomenclature, Alkebu-lan, being used by Afrakans indoctrinated into Arab culture a couple of centuries pass to reference the northern part of the continent of Afraka. Arabized Afrakans were mimicking a corruption transmitted by the Romans and Arabs who invaded the northern part of the mother/father continent known by its indigenous inhabitants as the land of the Al (great) north wind deity Khebu.

The full package is Afuraka/Afuraitkait (Afrakan male/Afratkat female) comes from the languages and Medu (writings) of the indigenous and original peoples of Keneset, Khanit, Kamit, Kush and Punt (Ethiopia, Nubia, Egypt, Sudan and Somalia/Eritrea). These terms and their variants can be found on the Hunefer Sheft (Papyrus of Hunefer) - some 3,300 years old as well as in the Temple of Auset in Paaraka (Pilak, Philae) dating some 2,400 years ago. Africa and Afrika are just misspellings of Afraka which is derived from Afuraka. Afrikaans and Afrikaner are wholesale corruptions that do not require addressing. 

Afuraka/Afuraitkait is the origin of the term Africa. All of the purposefully erroneous etymological origins of this sacred name have been developed deliberately to rob Afurakanu/Afuraitkaitnut of the awareness of our spiritual, mental, biological, geological, cosmological and culturally identity.

Other purposefully defined misnomers lend themselves to the peoples, nations and territories of the Afrakani/Afratkatnit (Afrakan male/ Afrakan female) continent. Cammeroon which comes from the Portuguese term Rio dos Camaroe translates as River of Prawns. Its the equivalent of calling one’s self shrimp. Cote d’Ivoire is a French term that translates in English as Ivory Coast. The Afrakanu/Afratkatnut there call themselves Ivorians.

Ethiopia is a misnomer that comes from the Greek’s words ethios which translates as burnt and ops which translates as faces. Here Afrakanu/Afratkatnut (Afrakan men/Afrakan women) are calling themselves burnt faces. Egypt follows in the same manner. The Greeks create the term Aigyptos based in their sensibilities, which evolved into the name Egypt. It is a misunderstanding, mistranslated and mispronunciation of Het Ka Ptah.

The Central Afrakani/Afratkatnit state, now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo was once called Zaire which was in fact a Portuguese corruption of the Afrakani/Afratkatnit (Afrakan male/ Afrakan female) word Nzere. The name Nigeria comes by way of British journalist Flora Shaw, an advocate of colonial imperialist Cecil Rhodes.  It is curious to note that the word Niger is pronounced Nee-shear which belies its spelling. This begs the concern of not only using Afrakani/Afratkatnit names but also using Afrakani/Afratkatnit symbols to comprise the script. The Afrakani/Afratkatnit names of the so-called Niger river, Joliba and Oya seem to be relegated to use only by the culturally centered Afrakanu/Afratkatnut .

Afrakanu/Afratkatnut (Afrakan men/Afrakan women) using European, Arab or any other non Afrakani/Afratkatnit terminology to define themselves, territories or consuetudes credits the cultural dominance of others. Note the inherent confusion of these names; George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King Jr., Khalid Muhammad or Shaquile O'Neil. Without pictures one might conclude these Afrakanu/Afratkatnut were European, Arab or even some combination there of.

[Ture]

I think this is false bind we put black characters (and black creators into). Why I say that is that we are supposed to only have two alternatives, a raceless "black" Black Panther that puts "character" first (stripped of racial context, as well as largely real history, and culture/influences) or a black Black Panther that is a neutered black male, a therapy session for anxious black writers (often male) to work out their racial and gender anxieties through.

I don't see it as having to be one or the other, or either. Black Panther's race can be used to make him stand out in fiction and in the real world. He can tap into a legacy that almost no other major black character can and I don't think it's something Marvel should run from or downplay. We often are given these raceless characters that are black on the outside but have little black interiority, that are basically no different than white characters. To me I see that as a dodge on the part of (often) white creators who can't, or won't, put themselves into their black characters' heads, and instead just go with the easy, warm platitude that "we are all the same" therefore there is little need to investigate the quirks and cleavages of history that do make us different, and therefore we get false diversity and not a real diversity of experience and opinion that could make for richer stories and characters overall.

I also don't see this as solely an issue of just black writers on Black Panther. Mind of Shadow mentions white writers who also input their thoughts, experiences, and issues onto Black Panther like black ones. If anything, many of the black writers successfully or not, do attempt to impart some kind of racial consciousness and not just make T'Challa raceless. Making T'Challa raceless undermines the powerful inspirational and aspirational appeal of the character as much as neutering him does.

The idea of Americans imparting or imposing their views on an African character, well, Black Panther was created by two white American men and owned by a white American corporation. 

Just about every other African character we know of, definitely in mainstream comics, share that same origin. T'Challa is as native African as Luke Cage, Falcon, John Stewart, etc., etc., came from the soil of the black American imagination. Basically, he isn't really African, as conceived by Africans. Black Panther isn't about the real Africa or an African nation or monarch, so much as a (white) American examination of those subjects. So, I can't fault them for imparting some of their views on the character. My hope is that many do enough research, as well as reflection, and approach Black Panther, as well as all black characters, with respect and care.

Further, Marvel has or is moving to put continental African, or other Diasporic black writers, in the Black Panther orbit, like Nnedi Okorafor, Roxane Gay, Evan Narcisse, and now Tochi Onyebuchi, and thus far, I've only heard this forum give Narcisse the most praise.

Let me add...I went back and reread what Ezyo said, and I hadn't noted before that Ezyo was talking about the current black writers, and not necessarily about black writers for Black Panther in general. I am more accepting that there is an issue with the current crop of Black Panther writers' takes on T'Challa, but I blame Marvel for that more than them. Marvel is hiring those writers. And while it appears some here have given up on Ridley, I'm not ready to give up on him yet. I do think he's a good writer and I'm hoping he'll come through. Though I do think his I Am Batman series is holding together better at this point, which perhaps does reinforce what Ezyo and others feel because Ridley perhaps is more a natural at writing a conflicted Black American character than a conflicted African one.

Well said Emperorjones. Would you consider Stan Lee and Jack Kirby being influenced by Afrakans and the events surrounding those Afrakans? Do you think Hudlin delivered an Afrakan centered, contextually cultured examination on said subjects?

Marvel employing Afrakans whether from the continent or out of the diaspora is a respectable move. However the Black Panther represents a unique fictional character and as such requires a writer historically astute in the many victorious Afrakan engagements for maintaining autonomy. It goes without saying the writer should be imaginative and innovative.

From what little I know of Black Panther's origins I do think Lee and Kirby looked to the new (at the time) independent African nations for inspiration for T'Challa. I can't really say if Hudlin delivered on what you ask, but I do think he had/has a great reverence for Black Panther and that shone through in his work. Further he had no problem infusing his books with a Black sensibility in ways that no one else did, including Priest (who I feel at times was self-conscious about race in his Black Panther run, definitely more so than Hudlin). 

It would be great if Marvel hired writers-no matter their race/ethnicity-that approached T'Challa with the care that you speak of, but I see it as a grab bag sometimes. I don't think the character is revered in the halls of Marvel Comics as much as he is on this forum and that's reflected in his treatment in comics pages. I think Marvel is stuck. They are used to undercutting Black characters, but because the Black Panther movie was such a hit and cultural milestone, they can't just ignore him or treat him as shabbily as they did Blade after Wesley's movies put that character over. So, he is on a lot of covers now, he pops up in lots of books, and plays some noticeable role (not always notable) in major events to check the BP/diversity appearance box, but I still sense that reluctance to really put him over. There should've been a major event that revolved around Wakanda by now for example.

It couldn't have been written any better Emperorjones. Much respect for your insight and cultural sensibilities.



62595

[Ezyo]

I understand that you don't want to erase blackness from a character. But I'll give an example of what I mean by character first.

Take the show 24, in the original, we have Jack Bauer, a counter terrorist agent and the lead. He is allowed to just be that. Jack Bauer x the badass, the man who gets stuff done, his past haunts him but it's due to an affair with one of his agents, and on a later season he struggles with addiction for when he went undercover. Then take 24 legacy and with Eric Carter, he is a former army ranger which is fine. But then In typical fashion, they have his brother, whom he interacts with quite a bit in the show, as a gang leader. Granted his gang does some good in the show. It still falls back on whenever black characters are involved, their past either has gangbanging, Drug dealing, or incarnation tier to it. All . The. Time. They can't just be a character who was a former army ranger with a family of successful people like White characters. They have to have atleast 1 of the 3 mentioned above.

T'Challa can and should deal with some social issues. I don't mind him having a heart to heart with Luke or Miles about racial issues and how they deal with it in their lives, but I don't want that to be THE defining trait. Like how McGregor had crack show up in Wakanda or Coates rape treehouse nonsense.

Black characters are more than the stereotypes they get forced on them. It's okay if they are like John Wick, Jason Bourne, Master Chief, Neo, and the countless other heroes out there like white characters who aren't defined STRICTLY by their race. They have more depth than that. Show me a Black character that maybe goes back home and sees his community as a familial place, because they exist, where it at gang wars and drug slinging. Show them having a BBQ and everyone getting along, because there is unity in black communities despite what Media wants people to think 

[Emperorjones]

I understand that you don't want to erase blackness from a character. But I'll give an example of what I mean by character first.

Take the show 24, in the original, we have Jack Bauer, a counter terrorist agent and the lead. He is allowed to just be that. Jack Bauer x the badass, the man who gets stuff done, his past haunts him but it's due to an affair with one of his agents, and on a later season he struggles with addiction for when he went undercover. Then take 24 legacy and with Eric Carter, he is a former army ranger which is fine. But then In typical fashion, they have his brother, whom he interacts with quite a bit in the show, as a gang leader. Granted his gang does some good in the show. It still falls back on whenever black characters are involved, their past either has gangbanging, Drug dealing, or incarnation tier to it. All . The. Time. They can't just be a character who was a former army ranger with a family of successful people like White characters. They have to have atleast 1 of the 3 mentioned above.

T'Challa can and should deal with some social issues. I don't mind him having a heart to heart with Luke or Miles about racial issues and how they deal with it in their lives, but I don't want that to be THE defining trait. Like how McGregor had crack show up in Wakanda or Coates rape treehouse nonsense.

Black characters are more than the stereotypes they get forced on them. It's okay if they are like John Wick, Jason Bourne, Master Chief, Neo, and the countless other heroes out there like white characters who aren't defined STRICTLY by their race. They have more depth than that. Show me a Black character that maybe goes back home and sees his community as a familial place, because they exist, where it at gang wars and drug slinging. Show them having a BBQ and everyone getting along, because there is unity in black communities despite what Media wants people to think 

I don't think were are seeing things all that differently, however I still believe you ascribe to the thinking/conditioning of race (i.e. Blackness) as being limiting, which is something Generation X was definitely taught when it came to entertainment. My generation got that message all the time. Even the great King of Pop once declared, "I'm not going to live or spend my life being a color" (paraphrasing) in the unsubtly titled song Black or White. I think Blackness can be a way to shape a character and the choices they make, that make them organic and stand out, and not be stereotypical. Stereotyping is a bad, poor, lazy, writing choice that people make because they don't do the work, don't know they need to, or at the end of the day don't really care about these characters; they are just checking a box.

I also keep in mind the context that these characters are created in. For 24, Jack Bauer was created by white people, and far as I know, so was Eric Carter, and so in the white imagination (IMO), they far, far too often can't conceive of a "Black" character without placing them in familiar to them (often stereotypical) trappings. Note as well how many Black characters are athletes or have some Church background or are pastors, if they don't go with criminals. There are also a lot of Black soldiers and police officers too. The one thing, beyond race, that often binds all these characters, is how little character development and promotion they often get compared to white characters.

24 also had the powerful Black Palmer family too, which produced two presidents (albeit neither were that successful, but both were depicted heroically. As was their sister, portrayed by Regina King). And Sherry Palmer was on of the best Lady MacBeth characters I've seen on television, a great villain. And Jack's longtime partner Curtis Manning was a pretty solid Black Best Friend character until he was killed off in a bit of awful, sensationalist writing. If I recall, that was in Season 6, the season which also exposed Bauer's father to be a criminal too; it's just he was not stereotypical, though his crimes were perhaps typical for the kind of series 24 was.

I never watched all of 24: Legacy, and one of the things that rankled was the gang leader brother. I didn't mind the corruption angle. They just could've made him a corrupt politician instead of the gang route. 

Black creatives are not above using racial stereotyping either. Though what I think is happening with Black Panther is more of an internal, psychological torment for some struggling over their masculinity, while others might want to impose their feminist beliefs about who black men really are onto the character. Black Panther just becomes the latest, and one of the highest profile, soapboxes to spread their new (old) religion that N's ain't s**t, even fictional African royal ones.