So, June is Joker month in the DCU, with variant covers for all the books featuring the lovable scamp once portrayed by Cesar Romero.
And last Friday, the variant cover for Batgirl #41 was revealed, by artist Rafael Albuquerque.
The image is a call-out to The Killing Joke, the story by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland where the Joker kidnaps Barbara Gordon, strips her, shoots her through the spine, paralyzing her, and send pictures to Batman and Jim Gordon to make them feel bad.
It’s a powerful story, but also very much of its time in that superhero comics were just proving how dark, grim, gritty and painful they could be. And Barbara Gordon paid the price.
Now, however, she’s the chipper star of a cheerful superhero book, written by Cameron Stewart and Brendan Fletcher and dawn by Babs Tarr, and the book has become the flagship title for a new kind of DC. A new, more inclusive DC.
And on those ground alone, the cover was rather inappropriate. As an image of the star of the book being physically and psychologically assaulted, it was even more disturbing. It’s a tribute to Albuquerque’s talent that the image clearly captures Batgirl’s fear and terror at the hands of the Joker.
Over the weekend, there was great objection. I had already started a round-up post with this storify and DC Women Kicking Ass teeing off.
And things got even more out of hand today with the #changethecover hashtag going up against the #dontchangethecover and all manner of really inane insults, threats and misunderstandings going out. It was less amusing and more heated than the Spider-Woman cover, even, because at the end of the day, a woman being brutalized (possibly sexually) is way more disturbing than a sexy ass.
But in the evening, East Coast time, Albuquerque stepped up and said he had requested the cover be pulled in a statement to CBR:
My Batgirl variant cover artwork was designed to pay homage to a comic that I really admire, and I know is a favorite of many readers. ‘The Killing Joke’ is part of Batgirl’s canon and artistically, I couldn’t avoid portraying the traumatic relationship between Barbara Gordon and the Joker.
For me, it was just a creepy cover that brought up something from the character’s past that I was able to interpret artistically. But it has become clear, that for others, it touched a very important nerve. I respect these opinions and, despite whether the discussion is right or wrong, no opinion should be discredited.
My intention was never to hurt or upset anyone through my art. For that reason, I have recommended to DC that the variant cover be pulled. I’m incredibly pleased that DC Comics is listening to my concerns and will not be publishing the cover art in June as previously announced.
With all due respect,
Rafa
DC Entertainment also released a statement
We publish comic books about the greatest heroes in the world, and the most evil villains imaginable. The Joker variant covers for June are in recognition of the 75th anniversary of the Joker.
Regardless if fans like Rafael Albuquerque’s homage to Alan Moore’s THE KILLING JOKE graphic novel from 25 years ago, or find it inconsistent with the current tonality of the Batgirl books – threats of violence and harassment are wrong and have no place in comics or society.
We stand by our creative talent, and per Rafael’s request, DC Comics will not publish the Batgirl variant. – DC Entertainment
NOW, a few things about that. As laid out by Jude Terror, DC’s statement was incredibly badly worded and made it sound like Albuquerque had been threatened, when in fact PEOPLE OPPOSING THE COVER HAD BEEN THREATENED.
Series writer Cameron Stewart and Albuquerque made it clear on Twitter that Albuquerque had not received any threats.
Something to clarify, because DCs statement was a little unclear. @rafaalbuquerque did not get threats. People OBJECTING to the cover did.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
Ill talk more about it tomorrow but I was never threatened. just to make it clear.
— Rafael Abuquerque (@rafaalbuquerque) March 17, 2015
However, it also became VERY CLEAR, that the Batgirl creative team themselves had raised objections to the cover from the start. (Variant covers are produced outside the editorial department.) And Stewart was very clear about this on Twitter. There were a gazilliion tweets about this, the below is just a selection.
If you’re concerned about artistic integrity and creative vision – that’s what we’re doing. Keeping the integrity of our book intact.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart So you're basically saying that the cover being removed keeps your book's integrity more than if it was available?
— Macattack (@macattack50) March 17, 2015
@macattack50 given that it wasn’t approved by us and contradicts the work we’re doing, yes.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart I don't agree, but to each his own. I thought it was an evocative cover that depicted Joker at his most terrifying.
— Macattack (@macattack50) March 17, 2015
@macattack50 I’m the writer of the comic. I don’t want it on my book. Defend my vision and integrity, please.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@Akylle it’s not censorship. We the creative team never wanted it.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@GamingAndPandas no, I didn’t. I objected to that cover before there was any backlash.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
I stand behind Rafael as an artist and a friend, and think he made the right decision.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart Nothing can disturb anyone anymore ever.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally we don’t want our book to be “disturbing.”
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart That's the thing though. One variant cover doesn't make your book disturbing. No more than one Lego cover makes it silly.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally @cameronMstewart A cover, variant or no, represents the book to someone who picks it up (that's what they're for!).
— Matthew Southworth (@mattsouthworth) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart So you think every variant cover reflects the book? This would be awfully hard to reconcile with variants already existing.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally @cameronMstewart A cover, variant or no, represents the book to someone who picks it up (that's what they're for!).
— Matthew Southworth (@mattsouthworth) March 17, 2015
@mattsouthworth @cameronMstewart You do realize how many variants areout there that don't represent the book in the least though, right?
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally @mattsouthworth @cameronMstewart This is representing their book in a way they do not want. It offends fans. Respect that.
— Kates (@KatieScarlett94) March 17, 2015
@KatieScarlett94 @JoshCrewsReally @mattsouthworth @cameronMstewart 2 cents: I didn't agree with pulling it but the 'defenders' were monsters
— random-shane (@mprshane) March 17, 2015
@mprshane @KatieScarlett94 @mattsouthworth @cameronMstewart Agreed. I was never out there defending it myself. Just asking questions now.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart I don't blame you. I just wish the process could've allowed for it to be stopped sooner? Idk if that makes any sense.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally oh, believe me, so do we
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
@JoshCrewsReally @mprshane @KatieScarlett94 @mattsouthworth It is so important to understand that we didn’t want this cover though.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
Draw whatever the hell you want, but when they're not your characters expect the owners to protect their brand from losing $$.
— Pia Guerra (@PiaGuerra) March 17, 2015
@PiaGuerra Anybody who hopes to work for DC and doesn’t think people will be telling ‘em what they can and can’t draw are in for a shock.
— Kurt Busiek (@KurtBusiek) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart No, but he lost his JOB, and earnings.
— David O'Neill (@davejone) March 17, 2015
@davejone I can assure you he didn’t.
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
um killing joke is a classic story of a clown who paralyzes a woman and takes all her clothes off to take pictures of her to show her father
— Chip Zdarsky, ok. (@zdarsky) March 17, 2015
Props to @cameronMstewart @babsdraws @brendenfletcher for sticking to their guns in the face of much outcry and twitter rage!
— Fiona Staples (@fionastaples) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart Nothing can disturb anyone anymore ever.
— Josh Crews (@JoshCrewsReally) March 17, 2015
@cameronMstewart You are correct about that. Everyone saw it. But now no one will get to own it.
— Macattack (@macattack50) March 17, 2015
I suggest all of you "Killing Joke" fans enjoy it like you enjoy Hall & Oates. Alone in your car.
— Henry Barajas (@HenryBarajas) March 17, 2015
Don't get put off by arguments over depictions/tone in comics lately. This means our industry is getting HEALTHY. GROWING!
— Jeff Parker (@jeffparker) March 17, 2015
https://twitter.com/andykhouri/status/577694801417498624
https://twitter.com/andykhouri/status/577695578009706496
I have a few observations about this:
• This isn’t censorship; it’s reversing a bad marketing decision that should never have been made. Why was it a bad marketing decision? Because Batgirl is the standard bearer for a new view of DC and its characters. I wasn’t kidding about Cesar Romero. Before there was all this psycho sadism, face removal, fear of a homosexual relationship between Batman and the Joker, Heath Ledger in a dress and so on, The Joker was a character who used joy buzzers and exploding cigars as weapons, and tried to take over Gotham with a flying saucer.
• The point is, when character run as long as Batman and the Joker and Batgirl have, their portrayal changes to reflect the times. The Killing Joke is a good old story from another era. I know we all like all backs and tributes and homages, but this one was not the right image for a new initiative at a publishing company.
• To the people saying they aren’t going to read DC Comics any more…pandering to the base hasn’t worked for comics for a long time.
• If you really love that cover, download a high res jpeg and make yourself a handy little print of it for you own use in your own home. No one will tell on you.
• The abusive nature of the internet is a blight on our society.
Meanwhile, this may be the truest thing that was said about the whole thing:
Batgirl is the most challenging thing I’ve ever worked on, and not because of the art or story
— Cameron Stewart (@cameronMstewart) March 17, 2015
Don’t we already have the wheel invented for a writer who disagrees with a publisher’s manipulation of their written story: Release it, but credit Stewart as “The Original Writer.”
Better: if DC wanted to shine on the drama (which it won’t do of course), it ought to instead release the print in a line of Batgirl-related fan girl clothing, like a babydoll tee. Or a much much larger poster.
Silly but True
It’s also not censorship because I’m LOOKING AT THE COVER RIGHT NOW, and it will be around, basically forever. A company has the right to not sell you a product. I get why they don’t want this variant. Put it on an issue where she’s actually fighting the Joker, maybe? Somewhere where it makes more sense?
So both the artist of the variant and the creative team for the book asked to not have the cover released, and some folks are still calling it censorship? Oy vey.
I’d like to see the pull lists of the people up in arms about censorship.
I should clarify, I don’t think the gamergater types were pulling Batgirl anyway, or else they’d see how inappropriate the cover would’ve been on the book. It’s OK to not be the target market for a comic book. It really is!
Maybe the industry should do away with variant covers and actually have a cover that represents the story inside.
I don’t see what the big deal is. I liked the cover, but I wasn’t going to buy it because I don’t read the comic. I just downloaded the cover and use it as a wallpaper for my phone. Now I get to see it all the time.
Is it just from what I’m seeing, or is the level of freak-out that this cover is not being used, far greater than the freak-out that this cover was going to be used? Do we need to start putting “trigger warnings” on the internet, to the effect that the empathy-impaired are at risk of being sent into a violent rage by ideas that are not focused on their personal satisfaction?
Seems like it’s something every other week with this book. I predict the comics companies will eventually cut loose attempts to appeal to the tumblr audience much like Hollywood did the hardcore comic fanbase when it came to the films.
Yeah, where did pandering to the comic book fans ever get Hollywood?
Hey, so any news on those next 12 Avengers movies?
This is all Alan Moore’s fault!
Is depicting Batgirl as a teenage airhead taking a selfie a more “positive” image than a shot of her as a victim?
Maybe the selfie shot is a homage to covers of old:
http://www.comics.org/issue/21604/cover/4/
If the idea behind objecting to the cover is that Batgirl is a light-hearted, “girl power” book, that makes sense. If Batgirl is supposed to be like the main Bat-books, I’m not sure I understand the objection.
Mike
One thing, though. If there ever going to be an apology for all the mockery and derision directed at fanboys who wailed over things being done to THEIR favorite characters? ‘Cause the only difference here is in whose ox is being gored.
Mike
“Is depicting Batgirl as a teenage airhead taking a selfie a more “positive” image than a shot of her as a victim?”
Is taking a selfie the mark of an airhead?