Heroes for Hire wasn’t the only controversial cover in the August solicits last month, though it did seem to overshadow any of the discussions. The solicited cover of Captain America #29 was also a point of fan discourse.
Point:
Dorian, in his solicit overview last month, was one of the first to point out the questionable nature of the cover.
I sometimes wonder how some of Marvel’s covers get approved. I’m sure nothing was intended with this image, other than to create a dynamic cover that makes you say “what the hell? I have to own that!” But, I don’t know…an African-American man, on fire, in front of an American flag…did it not occur to anyone that an image like that could be easily misconstrued?
Counterpoint:
Recently, Pedro Tejeda from Funnybook Babylon examined his own feelings about the issue:
Excerpt:
There seems to be some outrage here but the problem for me is that I just don’t get the questioning on this topic. I don’t understand what makes the Falcon cover offensive. I asked blogger and respected black man David Brothers if he saw anything wrong with this cover and he saw nothing to be offended about either. This is where the disconnect is. These well meaning white guys saw this cover and saw a black man on fire, we instead saw that the main focus of the book was now shifting towards Snap. This period of time following the death of his friend would be painful and possibly question his feelings about America. At no time did either of us just see him as a brother on fire. Why did we miss it? Are we just insensitive? Are we quislings to our respective races? Do we need our ghetto passes revoked?
So what do you think?
June 20th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
I think that if you see this as racist or inciting racism then those notions were already in your head. I for one never thought this when I first saw it because racism/slavery is not something I ever think about.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Well, I’m sure we’re all glad that we’ve been blessed with the comments of the most enlightened man on the planet. yay.
To be clear about the actual post, though, wasn’t Dorian’s point that the cover was less an indication of racism, per se, and more an indication that at Marvel, there’s less of the vetting of material that takes place at other media companies. In essence, that you don’t accidentally end up with Mickey Mouse in a design that suggests he’s burning a cross on someone’s lawn – and the lack of concern is indicative of a kind of cultural disconnect either at Marvel or at DC?
Basically, as I recall his original comment, it was less an accusation and more of an observation.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
Sorry – either at Marvel, or in superhero comics generally.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Much ado about nothing. I mean, at this point I can go get a cover of Teen Titans Go! and find something offensive about it.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
This is the type of stuff that gets Huck Finn banned at schools. It’s not racist. It’s not meant to be racist. It isn’t even within ten shades of racist and calling attention to it only makes real cries of racism and discrimination (and sexism for the usual set) look worse in comparison.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
Yeah, pile on fanboys.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Call me crazy–but I don’t see RACE before I see the SUPERHERO.
Falcon is African American…fantastic. It’s also the 21st Century…grand.
Yes, he’s on fire–because he’s doing superhero stuff–and SUPERHEROES regardless of their RACE are oftentimes put into perilous situations that might involve fire.
Is the fire racist for attacking the Falcon?
This cover is not offensive…these folks who are questioning just don’t have anything better to talk about…
It’s called ‘reaching’.
June 21st, 2007 at 12:59 am
i brought this up elsewhere, but… this is not “an African-American man, on fire, in front of an American flag,” this is a black man and the american flag on fire. the intention is clearly antiracist: the burning of the character is being equated to burning of the flag, ie, destroying america. i’m not sure how people could not get that.
June 21st, 2007 at 1:10 am
“Respected black man”?
June 21st, 2007 at 2:49 am
Well, I am. I’ve got my club card and everything.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:28 am
great .
June 21st, 2007 at 4:43 am
“Basically, as I recall his original comment, it was less an accusation and more of an observation.”
It can’t be one without being the other. As far as the author knows there’s an extensive vetting process at Marvel. If he’s looking at something in particular and wondering about Marvel’s decisions, then he’s saying that thing was a bad decision. Otherwise he wouldn’t have pointed to that particular cover at all.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:44 am
You guys see the cover to The Flash #13??
Yeah, the Black Flash is carrying Bart. The black man carrying the white man. How much more racist can you get!?
June 21st, 2007 at 10:37 am
Unless you know what the artist’s actual intent of an illustrated image is, every comment about it by the observer is his/her opinion.
Nothing more.
June 21st, 2007 at 11:40 am
You don’t have to have offensive intent to do something offensive. You haven’t ever said something that accidentally hurt someone’s feelings?
Plus, something being an opinion doesn’t make it somehow less valid or worthy of comment. Stating an opinion isn’t a “Ignore Me Now” card.
Dorian has an opinion that contradicts mine. I don’t go, “Oh, that’s just his opinion,” because that would be rude.
Yeah, the Black Flash is carrying Bart. The black man carrying the white man. How much more racist can you get!?
The Black Flash isn’t actually black, he’s a skeleton. The Black Racer would’ve been a much better candidate for trying to mock the argument, because he’s both black, an angel of death (a killer), and confined to a hospital bed (enslaved).
June 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pm
You can accidently offend people. That doesn’t excuse people looking for reasons to be offended. Marvel shouldn’t have to explain or apologize or try to avoid connections people make in their minds that are unintended and unsupported.
June 21st, 2007 at 2:42 pm
The Black Flash isn’t actually black, he’s a skeleton. The Black Racer would’ve been a much better candidate for trying to mock the argument, because he’s both black, an angel of death (a killer), and confined to a hospital bed (enslaved).
True, but the Black Racer’s not on a current comic book cover that could be used to mock the argument.
My comment stands as a pretty valid way to mock the argument and commotion, because it’s nonsense and that’s what I was intending.
June 21st, 2007 at 8:43 pm
I guess I wouldn’t think anything much of it if Luke Cage wasn’t set on fire recently as well.
Well, I guess I’m not really thinking of it anyways come to think of it.