Former Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane artist Takeshi Miyazawa, who drew the cover for Heroes for Hire #12, comments on the controversy over the cover to the next issue, and comes to the defense of artist Sana Takeda:
I drew the previous cover to Heroes for Hire and was asked to choose at least two girls out of the cast and draw them as sexy as possible so, naturally, I did. It ended up looking more cute than sexy but herein lies my point, I guess. Cultural attitudes towards sex and nudity are, well, different. Especially between North America and Japan. J-comic readers know that there are many non-porn titles that will probably never see the light of day due to these differing tastes. Showing penises and boobies aren’t that big of a deal in Japan but often get censored or edited backhome. Even if it’s the cute Dragonball style double U for a wee-wee. Y’know what I’m talking about.
There is also the issue of what an “ideal” woman is considered to be between NA and J. Basically, dominant vs submissive. I’m not saying which is better, just that it does indeed exist and that it falls under the umbrella of sexy and attractive. And I’m speculating that what hit the biggest chord with most people had nothing to do with the tentacles or the hairband or the cleavage but the expressions on the faces of the three girls. And, y’know, I understand. Especially since I’m somewhat familiar with the characters and the fact that they are supposed to be strong kick-ass amazon woman-like. It’s rather uncharacteristic of all three of them to be acting so helpless and contrary to the purpose of the property. I’m sure Takeda-san had no idea, though, and since she recieves work through translated e-mails and notes, I’m not surprised. She drew the most attractive cover in a way only she could.
Miyazawa now lives in Japan, and has been blogging fairly regularly about his efforts to break into the comics industry there.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:15 am
“It ended up looking more cute than sexy but herein lies my point, I guess. Cultural attitudes towards sex and nudity are, well, different.”
And here we arrive at the crux of the argument. Which of those two cultural attitudes are better than the other? I know, I know…that’s heresy in today’s nonsensical “no values are any better than any other values” fog of relativism…but here’s what I mean:
Is the scene on the Heroes for Hentai cover a good thing for women, or a bad thing? Is it a good thing in fostering respectful attitudes toward women from young men? Is cleavage hanging out really the best way for young women to feel good about their bodies?
I think this whole controversy, while revolting on one level, has been fascinating on another, as it’s revealed so much of the cavalier sexism, calculated cynicism, and moral incoherence of so much of the comics biz.
Miyazawa’s rationalization of the cover is pathetic, falling back on the tired old excuse that it’s somehow our problem that she and her paymasters are so profoundly out of touch.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:20 am
Correction: My last sentence needs more clarity. It should have read:
“Miyazawa’s rationalization of the cover is pathetic, falling back on the tired old excuse that it’s somehow our problem that Sana Takeda and her paymasters are so profoundly out of touch.”
Sorry for the confusion.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:29 am
I’m curious about the art direction workflow at Marvel. Was there a director or editor who would have seen draft versions of this cover and who could have spoken up earlier in the process?
Maybe there was cultural misconceptions on the creator’s behalf about what was appropriate for the cover, but there were still buyers/editors/creative directors here who apparently thought the cover was acceptable for use in this culture.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:48 am
Sheesh–Talk about a tempest in a teapot. This entire controversy is infantile and more degrading than the allegedly offensive cover of HfH 13. In the words of Shatner, “Get a Life!”
May 31st, 2007 at 11:37 am
If Marvel tells its cover artists, month after month, to draw the HFH ladies “as sexy as possible” then it’s not surprising that, yes, they eventually ended up with hentai.
Compare these covers to the recent covers for Birds of Prey, an all female book that is, erm, successful. Some covers are sexy, but some covers are action-y, or fun, (or on some occasions, out right chick-flicky).
May 31st, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Marvel editor: Miyazawa could you add more goo dripping from the tenticle onto the Black Cat’s breasts?
:sees result:
Marvel Editor: Excellent, now that is sexy.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:39 pm
So, once again, when American comic book artists and writers fail to understand the manga market that they’re trying to cater to, it’s the Americans’ fault, but when manga artists and writers fail to understand the American comic book market that they’re trying to cater to, it’s still the Americans’ fault.
I find this highly ironic because American comic books have been bashed for years for not being more like manga, on the grounds that manga is supposedly more “girl-friendly,” and yet, as much as I hate the Heroes For Hire cover, I can’t really criticize it on those grounds, because it’s produced by a female Japanese manga artist, which means that, in that regard at least, Marvel really is making its comic books more like manga.
Be careful what you wish for, American comic book bashers, lest you get the Marvel version of Legend of the Overfiend next …
May 31st, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Kitty says it best. I have been of the opinion that the cover is more a product of cultural divide than anything else. Yet, having said that, the book’s editor is working on a book aimed for American audiences and should have asked that Takeda-san take a nother crack at the cover, providing some guidelines to make it more appropriate for American audiences. She is obviously a talented artist and a professional, and getting requests for alterations to submitted artwork is just part of the job.
And for anyone saying that the cover isn’t offensive and that people are making too big of a deal about it, all I can suggest is that holding up your own indifference as a defense for the work is hardly the same as saying it’s patently not offensive. There are dozens of examples of women in comics being displayed in similar situations (and worse), but that isn’t a free pass by any means. The fact that over 50% of women are subjected to unwanted sexual advances by the time they’re 15 is not a sign that “I’m OK, You’re OK.” Just because you haven’t been subjected to harassment, or haven’t been objectified yourself doesn’t mean that those who do experience that are ‘blowing things out of proportion.’ The industry needs to be more conscious of the images it puts out there. It’s more than just good business sense - it’s the right thing to do.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:59 pm
It’s not indifference–it is perspective. This cover is no more offensive than many other artworks done through the ages. From works of the Old Masters to more recent Pulp illustrations of the 30’s and 40’s. It is finding offense when there is none to be found–it is nonsense. It remains a tempest in a teapot.
May 31st, 2007 at 2:02 pm
The real struggle with all this is that there is no clearly defined line in comic art that shows what is too far for a cover. There’s even less of a line in Japanese art but in America we at least like to think that there is some sort of standard. Yet the truth is we really can’t have it both ways, either you want a comics code or you don’t. Is the cover offensive and going too far? I believe so. I especially believe so given the book’s rating. Yet I’m not the person who get’s to define that. Marvel isn’t going to take corporate responsibility when the cover is clearly giving them free publicity and will probably sell way more than the comic usually makes. So when they have no reason to change anything what are you prepared to sacrifice to get them to change?
May 31st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I dont remember seeing Old Master painting tentacle rape?
Weak argument - because there are comics with derogatory caricatures of Japanese during WWII, then it is fine to continue the tradition now?!
I proclaim no offense, so none is to be found, type of argument is not perspective, it is myopic
May 31st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
//It remains a tempest in a teapot.//
Saying it over and over again doesn’t make it so.
May 31st, 2007 at 8:06 pm
The problem is the sexist mindset of the editor Mark Paniccia (sp?). “Make them as sexy as possible” is a limited, objectifying perspective (where the equation is, female = must be “sexy”).
Someone who gives that as “art direction” for the cover is too far gone to see the dehumanizing, sexist, demeaning crap that resulted.
The tentacle rape cover isn’t sexy, it’s disgusting.
June 1st, 2007 at 1:26 am
You know, I agree with Miyazawa when she says that the most offensive thing is that the girls are portraied as meek, scared and submissive. Sure the semi-porn aspect is bad, but the caracter reactions to this are the worse.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:41 pm
Does “choose at least two girls out of the cast and draw them as sexy as possible” translate from comics-geek-speak as “show me nekkid boobies”?