Superman's End?: Superheroes in the Hip Hop Era [Archive]

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 12:20 PM

So, in hip-hop dominated America, does Superman still connect with kids or is strictly a character for the 20th century?

I find the analysis suffers from a poor assessment of a) the market and b) the underlying premise. Hip-hop is a large factor in American culture--there's no denying that. There is also no denying that from about the 1950s to the early 90s there was a drought of strong heroes of different ethnicities (despite character pushes like Black Panther, Falcon, John Stewart, etc.). Though even in those droughts and before the "hip-hop" culture, the exampled characters headlined comics and asserted positive traits and social relevancy (as much as can be afforded under comic culture constraints of the time). In the early 90s, DC even pushed an imprint for new African-American characters (Milestone) by African-Americans (of which Static is really the only one with longevity). In regards to the market, those books (80s-90s) didn't sell with the expectations of an un-tapped demographic with critic acclaim about their social relevancy. Heck, the main reason for the resurgence of black characters in modern comics has more to do with the responses of their cartoon appearances (John Stewart and Vixen in JLU, and Static Shock). Despite the cross-market (cartoon to comics) draw, those numbers really don't sustain the premise of appeal. DC actually took advantage of headlining John Stewart in the JLA and Green Lantern book for a number of issues with the JLU success. Even Static saw a resurgence of a comic and reprints of his old series, but not enough to sustain it. My point is attempts were made to draw in Hip-hop culture (as identified by the largest of its demographic: AfricanAmericans), but they didn't last.

I attribute the reason for this inability to "tap and sustain" this new demographic largely to the differing dominant values of the hip hop (or "street") culture. Style over substance tends to dominate the street culture. This can be seen in most of the popular promoted hip-hop music (with few exceptions). Additionally, literacy (due to school funding, the prevailing neighborhood culture, etc). is not a big value for most neighborhoods that "hip-hop" targets. Posturing and presentation is more important in those environments. Those factors present two strikes against comic books: a) comics are not read as an evolving literary medium which keeps it perceived as in its traditional view and as such b)reading comics harms street cred. With those "strikes" against it, a hip hop based comic must compete with the trappings of the street culture just as comics have to compete with other factors of nerd/geek culture. The difference is that comics in nerd/geek culture have surpassed (embraced) the social stigmas associated with comics which elevates it in a spending priority. Hip-hop/street culture has to break through the social stigma and elevate it as a competing interest before it could really be tapped as a viable market. In essence, those entrenched in the street culture have to be willing to get a couple of the new comic books that just came out over the latest CD or the latest bling. Nerds/geeks in general are willing to shove out $100 dollars for an absolute edition or a series of graphic novels over getting bling or a silk shirt if the money's available and the opportunity presents itself. Hip hoppers will go for the bling more so. Now that's not to say there are not comic fans who are in the street culture and vice-versa, but they are more the exception than the rule.

In regards to Superman specifically, hip hop culture is not that much of a threat to the comic/ideal of the character's popularity. Superman as an icon is very entrenched within the American mindset for his nobility, power and classicness. As an icon, hip hop/street culture he has been incorporated and adopted ("S' shirts and "S" decals and "S" tatoos). However, his appeal as a market draw to that culture is not as big. Despite that, Superman has lasting power compared to the comics that target hip-hop/street cultures.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 02:39 PM

So, in hip-hop dominated America, does Superman still connect with kids or is strictly a character for the 20th century?Does Superman still connect with kids today? To a certain extent, I'd say yes. As much as, say, 25 or 30 years ago? No, not at all. Not even close, I don't think. And not at all for the simple fact that there's more choices available to kids today, even more than 25 or 30 years ago, and Superman is just one among many.

And I also say not at all because when I look at the most recent movie - and it can be debated whether or not the best choices for director and script and casting; et al were made - the fact still remains, Pirates of the Caribbean more than doubled the box office of Superman Returns. And Cars also topped Superman Returns. Were they simply better movies? Perhaps. But I still don't see Superman in general registering much of a blip on the radar of most young people. And just to throw a name out there, but I would say that something like Avatar: The Last Airbender (http://www.nick.com/all_nick/tv_supersites/avatar2/) registers considerably more on the radar of young people than Superman. I know if I were an 8 year-old kid I'd be into Avatar much more so than Superman.

Superman is still important to some people, to someone, to be sure. I just don't feel you can include kids in that, though. I'm not even sure he's that important to the majority of comic book readers, his title(s) is just a upper-mid level seller at best it seems. (Presumably, perpetually on the cusp of a return to greatness; we're just waiting for it to be "done right.") :D

The Mad Twiinz's Blokhedz and Blak is more relevant or relatable than Superman to young black kids and comic lovers in the hip-hop community without question. Which was the whole point of their comment, if I'm not mistaken.

Moreover on relevancy and reliability, in addition to the hip-hop artists that were name-dropped in the feature (http://formatmag.com/features/blokhedz/), I seem to recall reading somewhere that Lupe Fiasco (http://www.lupefiasco.com/) had some of the Blokhedz vinyl dolls sitting on a shelf in one of his videos.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/158/380799374_435bdb5d8e.jpg

Will Blokhedz be talked about 60 years from now? No, I seriously doubt it will. But that's not the question.

*****

By the way, yes, I am looking forward to the first volume (http://www.amazon.com/Blokhedz-Graphic-Novel-Street-Legends/dp/1416540733/sr=8-1/qid=1170120094/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-3689103-5112857?ie=UTF8&s=books). And a belated congrats to the Mad Twiinz and the Simon & Schuster deal. That's the big leagues. And looking out for anything on the animated side...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/148/380816906_de41ce43ba.jpg

And looking forward to The Black Panel at NYCC.

-Linc

Vic Vega

02-05-2007, 04:09 PM

I recently read this interview about Blokhedz, a fun "hip hop meets superhero" comic that is being revived as a graphic novel series in March. When asked about the series relevance to the comic industry, Blokhedz's co-creator Mike Davis said the following:

On the comic front, it is relevant, because heroes like Superman are outdated. We wanted to introduce a hero that is contemporary, addressing the issues that today’s youth face and a hero that they can relate to, not just in imagery, but in personality and culturally. There are a lot of people who read comics, but not a lot of people of color in comics. We are creating our own mythologies and archetypes for our children and children’s children – something we had very little of growing up, reading comics.

You can read the full interview here: http://formatmag.com/features/blokhedz/

So, in hip-hop dominated America, does Superman still connect with kids or is strictly a character for the 20th century?

zeraze

Superman was created in the 30's by two left of center Jews as a hero of the Counter establishement (In his earliest adventures he attacks a political lobbyist and run from the cops) he then selled into the very fabric of the estabilishment. Superman (along with Mickey Mouse) is one the most recognizable cartoon characters on the planet.

It's going to take some doing to top that.

My question is: What are the values of Hip Hop? Do the Blokhedz promote those valuse in a clear digestable manner? Everyone knows that Superman stands for "truth justice and the American Way" (note that the last bit was ADDED in the 50's). What do the Blokhedzs stand for and how will that message relate to the youth the concept is directed at?

Skyrider

02-05-2007, 04:13 PM

On the comic front, it is relevant, because heroes like Superman are outdated. We wanted to introduce a hero that is contemporary, addressing the issues that today’s youth face and a hero that they can relate to, not just in imagery, but in personality and culturally. There are a lot of people who read comics, but not a lot of people of color in comics. We are creating our own mythologies and archetypes for our children and children’s children – something we had very little of growing up, reading comics.

Comments like these reveal the originators' underlying prejudice and come from small minded individuals that fail to "get" the character.

:rolleyes:

Hiphop's just become another fad that will come and go. In comparison, however, I prefer the boy-bands over the "gangsta" crap we hear on the radio endlessly now. Sure they were sappy as hell, but at least the subject matter wasn't over glorified garbage.

Strict31

02-05-2007, 04:44 PM

Comments like these reveal the originators' underlying prejudice and come from small minded individuals that fail to "get" the character.

:rolleyes:

I don't think it reveals an underlying prejudice. It reveals a reality which is...uncomfortable to broach in polite company. I don't want to suggest that if you're white, you can't understand, but there is a definite disconnect at play: when you're a black kid reading comics, you don't see a lot of heroes who like like you. As a black kid reading comics, I never saw a lot of heroes that looked like me. It's perhaps easy to say a hero represents all men or the virtues all men can attain when the reader and the hero are both white. And hard to understand why readers of other colors feel disenfranchised (once they're old enough to understand that term, of course).

But it does happen. It does disconnect.

There is a further disconnect when white people say (as I have seen here at the rama) that there is no point in marketing books or characters to a black audience because it is not a demographic that typically buys comics anyway. This is either the tail wagging the dog, or the egg and chicken debate. In other words, are black people uninetersted in comics? Or are comics uninterested in black people? Or hispanic people, or what-have-you. Turns into a vicious circle at this point. I know lots of black folks who, as kids, read comics, but drifted away from them. Did they do so because black people have an aversion to comics? or because of the scarcity of fictional role models available to bring those particular readers into the fantasy of the story?

Personally, I'm not feelin' the vibe of this comic, but on the surface, at least, it seems to be giving black kids a number of heroes with whom they can easily identify. Which mainstream comics simply do not.

I still feel it's too trendy to have a lasting impact decades into the future, but then again, I might be wrong about that.

Still, Shaq has a Superman tattoo. And I dig Thor and Captain America and Power Girl and Green lantern. I don't know if it's because they have such a broad appeal as characters or if it's because mainstream white superheroes dominate the industry (if you want superhero comics, then this is what is on the table).

I think they're using Superman as a generic example of the whole, not as a specific indictment of a single character. Because as a specific indictment, it doesn't hold water. As a general statement about the industry as a whole, it does.

But I think the mainstream companies are working to change that, without limiting themselves to a niche. Perhaps in 20 years, if the rama and the characters are still around, we'll see hispanic adults who gained a lifelong love of comics after their first issue of Blue beetle as a kid today. Or Luke Cage.

Maybe. And like I said, I don't know if hip-hop superheroes will have a lasting impact on readers 20, 30 years down the line when say, transhuman spaceship-hop is the trend that drives youth culture. But right now, they are doing something that mainstream comics have either failed to do or were never interested in doing: letting black people see a superhuman fantasy that is as familiar to them as Silver Age heroes were to white people.

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 04:53 PM

Hu5h

02-05-2007, 05:16 PM

Why is it that whenever this sort of argument is made, the hero being promoted is always specifically from a Popular Music-related subculture? The Music industry almost by definition is very fickle and even the music of a certain era fail to hold water; how can derivative characters from that culture last any longer? I'm thinking of the earlier mentioned Dazzler as one of the most prominent examples, and these Blokheadz characters seem to be the same dealie.

It's absolutely not true that afro-american or other minority characters can't have lasting appeal; they just need to be rooted in something other than the unreliable soil of Music.

Nor is it true that iconic characters are unrelatable to minorities. I'm Latino, from a working class background, and yet I still feel like I can relate to a character like Batman because of his depth of character; on the other hand I could care less about the current hispanic Blue Beetle and really, would rather just have the (also Rich and White) Ted Kord back.

It's writing good characters consistently and promoting them properly (which DC failed to do, I think, in it's Milestone relationship) that embeds characters into the cultural consciousness.

Strict31

02-05-2007, 05:30 PM

The problem, however, really isn't the companies catering to the demographics. The real problem is the accessibility to that demographic. I mentioned earlier all the big changes that many companies made to introduce racial dynamics to comics--especially in the 90s. The big problem is where people can get those comics and the prioritization to buy those books. Economics of the time made it so that only people with leisure capitol could afford luxury items (of which comic books are). Increased prices made it unlikely that a minority family would be able to afford to get a comic book vs. milk vs. a loaf of bread. That's changed quite a bit within the last 20 years. Unfortunately, now the only real place to buy comics are hard to get to unless people want to look for them because of direct market.

This is one of the factors that contributes to the "tail wagging the dog" problem I mentioned before. While I had and have no problem affording comics, I'm alsways struck by the fact that the only comic shops near me are not near me. I gotta drive across town to get to them. Suffice to say, I don't live in a predominantly white neighborhood. These shops are close to white neighborhoods, however. One of them is smack dab in the middle of a white neighborhood, not just "close to it."

Of course, lots of readers find that the only available comic shops are out of the way. But my point is that these shops are only out of the way for...well...minorities who don't live in those neighborhoods in any significant number.

The exclusivity of comic shops has long been a problem for the industry, however. But it wasn't always a problem. So I don't think it's the main problem. Comics used to be accessible to anyone who lived within walking distance of a corner drugstore. But still, there was a dearth of black readers. And I think that has more to do with the subject matter than their level of accessibility. Accessibility is a factor, yes, but I don't think it's the telling one.

Now, don't get me wrong, I like racial diversity in comic books. I support it whole-heartedly. Kids need to see positive images that they can identify with. I just think the initial argument about targeting hiphop is too simplified about the issue.

Basing a comic book around a trend that is subject to the dictates of popular interest from moment to moment and movement to movement is perhaps not wise. But like I said, maybe hip hop comics will endure past the next year. Or maybe not. It ain't like comics have never relied on gimmicks before, after all. But it remains to be seen if this one has the ability to adapt and change to suit the flavor of the moment.

Mithel

02-05-2007, 05:38 PM

I'm hoping that a quarter century from now, Frank Miller will be forbidden from writing Superman.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 06:04 PM

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 06:13 PM

A couple of comments:

- I've seen hip-hop called a "fad" a few times so far. I hope I'm not out of line in assuming that those of you using that term to describe it are not fans of hip-hop. Whichever the case, I'm 26, soon to be 27, and hip-hop as a culture, as a lifestyle, as a "thing," is older than I am. So if it's a fad, it's got to be one of the longest fads in history.?

hip hop as a music is older. hip hop as a culture has changed and evolved. hip hop today is very different than hip hop of at least twenty years ago.

- Blokhedz is one comic, two volumes in total, aimed at a market that the big two have virtually ignored. It's very similar to what Tokyopop and Viz have done: aimed a product at a market that the big two have virtually ignored. And fortunately they have a big player in Simon & Schuster and their Pocket Books imprint (http://www.simonsays.com/content/book.cfm?tab=1&pid=525633) to distribute their comic.?[/QUOTE]

I argued that those markets haven't been ignored by the big two as was espoused. I've listed examples with Milestone (published by DC) being specifically aimed at that market and not being sustained by the market.

Now, the question that was asked, does Superman still connect with kids today?

in what way do we mean 'connect' since most of the answers don't seem to be what you're talking about?

Strict31

02-05-2007, 06:21 PM

A couple of comments:

- I've seen hip-hop called a "fad" a few times so far. I hope I'm not out of line in assuming that those of you using that term to describe it are not fans of hip-hop. Whichever the case, I'm 26, soon to be 27, and hip-hop as a culture, as a lifestyle, as a "thing," is older than I am. So if it's a fad, it's got to be one of the longest fads in history.

Hip Hop is a method of voicing ideas and viewpoints in a particular style. Hip Hop is not the culture. It is a tool that has become synonomous with the culture. It has evolved and grown and changed from its earliest roots, but it is still convenient to utilize the same name, because in terms of general nomenclature, it serves the purpose of identifying what a person is talking about when he uses the word.

Now, the question that was asked, does Superman still connect with kids today?

I think the question truly is: do mainstream superheroes still connect with kids today. Superman is merely the character that embodies the superhero in a broad, sweeping generalization.

And in an era where comics have to compete with videogames and cartoons and the internet, I'd say the market share among kids (any kids, not just one ethnic slice) is on the decline.

Strict31

02-05-2007, 06:26 PM

I argued that those markets haven't been ignored by the big two as was espoused. I've listed examples with Milestone (published by DC) being specifically aimed at that market and not being sustained by the market.

But the problem is that it's like asking a highly accurate sniper to take out a general two miles away and then giving him a ballistic spit-wad with a tactical combat straw.

It won't reach the target.

You can aim all you want at a consumer. But if the product is not available to them, you might as well pack it in before the product goes to the assembly line.

New Way

02-05-2007, 06:29 PM

I never bought the "kids don't buy comics because of videogames" argurment.

1. Just as many adults buy videogames as kids do these days are you going to argue that adults don't buy vcomics beacuase of videogames too.

2. "Kids" is a very general term which can mean almost anything. what age range are we talking about.

a. 6 years old and under: I don't really think that their was ever really a large audience for comics amongst kids so young.

b. 9-13 year old kids in my mind have been the traditional target for most kid's comics and to my knowledge kids in this age range still read comics (Manga)

As a black man i can tell you that simply taking an old character and making him black isn't going to make me like the character. In fact I might see it as pandering.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 06:33 PM

hip hop as a music is older. hip hop as a culture has changed and evolved. hip hop today is very different than hip hop of at least twenty years ago.Yes. Hip-hop music, culture, fashion, slang... everything, all of it has changed. Hip-hop is a way of life. It's not just who had the hot song last week, it's more than that. That's why I said to anyone who calls it a "fad," then it must be one of the longest running fads in history.I argued that those markets haven't been ignored by the big two as was espoused. I've listed examples with Milestone (published by DC) being specifically aimed at that market and not being sustained by the market.Milestone was born in the boom market of the early 90s. And DC stopped publishing Milestone comics when the maket crashed in the mid-90s.

And since then no one has made any real effort to market beyond the comic shops, and the dwindling fanbase. Those are the facts, aren't they?in what way do we mean 'connect' since most of the answers don't seem to be what you're talking about?Whatever way you want it to mean.

Kids aren't buying Superman comics in any larger number, that much is clear. Current comic book fans aren't even buying Superman comics in that large a number.

What does connect mean to you?

paulbakerone

02-05-2007, 06:39 PM

Hip *bling bling* Hop

First of all that is just distasteful. Don't categorize all of hip hop into one rapper's interpretation of the art form. Rock'n'Roll has been around since the Beetles, maybe even before hand, and it has adapted to the times. Disco was 70's, and it was definitely a fad, but hip hop has been around since the 80's, that is twenty years and running and no sign of stopping right now. Hip Hop is arguably the Nation's music of choice, atleast adveritsing and marketing standpoint. As a man who likes all music this doesn't make me either happy or sad, but the fact remains that hip hop is a beast. As for comics.

Less and less children are purchasing comic books, and are opting for other mediums i.e. video games, anime, cartoon adaptations of comics, music, etc. And while many of us faithful comic readers/buyers will continue to support our heroes for atleast 40-50 more years, what does the future hold for a character/characters who aren't gaining many new readers?

Strict31

02-05-2007, 06:45 PM

I never bought the "kids don't buy comics because of videogames" argurment.

1. Just as many adults buy videogames as kids do these days are you going to argue that adults don't buy vcomics beacuase of videogames too.

I'd say technically, more adults buy videogames than kids, since, by and large, kids don't have jobs. More adults than kids buy toys because kids, again, don't have jobs. This can be said generally of anything which costs money, but is targeted at kids.

Of course, there was a time when a kid could buy a grip of comics at the corner store for what he made on allowance and/or chores, and still have enough left over for a fistful of candy. That is said with no concern about nostalgia or rose colored glasses aimed at the past. it's simply a fact. Those days are gone.

In the past three years of going to a single comic shop, I've seen fewer and fewer kids there. I saw one kid last year, trying to convince the owner that he was mature enough at age 8 or 9 to handle the Punisher. The owner wasn't having any of that.

Prior to that year, I saw a couple of kids come in with their mom on Free Comics Day and I haven't seen them back since.

Conversely, I see a load of kids getting underfoot in the gaming aisle at Best Buy. They range in age from lanky teenagers to rugrats who still need to be told not to run down the hall; I'd say, a range of 8 to15 years old.

It comes down to what parents, controlling the money usually, deem appropriate for their kids. Some parents, of course will just give their kids the loot and send them off to get whatever. And then, they bring home Identity Crisis, showing Sue Dibny being raped, and put the kibosh on that sh-t quick.

2. "Kids" is a very general term which can mean almost anything. what age range are we talking about.

a. 6 years old and under: I don't really think that their was ever really a large audience for comics amongst kids so young.

b. 9-13 year old kids in my mind have been the traditional target for most kid's comics and to my knowledge kids in this age range still read comics (Manga)

I see a lot more kids hunkered down in the manga section at Walden Books than the comics section. But then again, we're not talking mainstream superhero comics with manga titles.

BatWolverine

02-05-2007, 06:47 PM

First of all that is just distasteful. Don't categorize all of hip hop into one rapper's interpretation of the art form.
Did you just stop at the *bling bling*...or did you bother to read a few words further to the 'bell bottom-ed' 70s?

It was just used as a phrase, a THING that is most common/famous from either time/culture. It was like I made a dedicated effort by going Hip *rapper videos portraying women as b!tches (both figuratively n' ideologically)* Hop...

...something as NeoSamurai stated wasn't in the Hip Hop of yore.

hip hop as a culture has changed and evolved. hip hop today is very different than hip hop of at least twenty years ago.

Also, I hope everyone here realizes that comics, as with music, TV, clothing etc, isn't just limited to the US (or North America) but goes farther than borders of just your country (whichever that might be).

Dav G

02-05-2007, 06:52 PM

Citing the penetration of Hip Hop music in pop culture is a bogus argument. Who is the music selling to? White America, that's who.

Also, the argument presented here is that comics featuring African-American characters will sell to non-white audiences. Under the existing comics distribution, that simply won't work. Even if we assume that a similar percentage of African Americans would want to buy comics as a Caucasian, there simply wouldn't be enough readers to support a title. The math:

Let's also assume that the ratio of folks likely to buy comics, presuming they see their ethnicity represented, is 1 to 1.

Okay. The comic market is something like 500,000 people. It might be a bit more, but that's a fair number. Of that number, we all assume the audience is over 80% Caucasian, right? 80% of the readership = 400,000.

According to the 2005 US Census (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/population/006808.html), the population of Caucasians in the US is 198 million, in comparison to 39 million African Americans. So the 400,000 Caucasian comic readers are only 0.2% of the Caucasian population. 1 out of every 496 Caucasians reads comics.

Now apply that readership percentage to the A.A. population of 39.7 million - you're talking about 80,040 potential African American readers, assuming they are just as interested in comics as Caucasians. That's a very small target market. Especially considering that your average comic sells to only 7.5% of the total audience - 30,000 or so copies.

7.5% of the entire potential A.A. readership is only 6,003 readers. Even if you double it because people will be so hyped to see it...we're talking about 12,006 readers for an African American comic. And that's not enough to support an ongoing title.

Income is also a factor - African Americans have a smaller disposable income than Caucasians do. In fact, going by the original argument presented, Hispanics would be a better target market, because they represent a larger percentage of the US population than African Americans do. But they have even less disposable income.

Which is why most of the comics featuring minority characters are purchased by Caucasian readers. Same as Hip Hop records.

And that explains why Marvel's Black Panther comic sells like every other average comic out there: The readership is pretty much the same - primarily Caucasians.

So the notion that more African American readers would read comics based on more prominent representation is entirely superficial. Plus it's unfounded, unprecedented and unrealistic. Which is sad to say, considering the comics industry needs all the readers it can get - of all backgrounds.

Vic Vega

02-05-2007, 06:53 PM

I'd say technically, more adults buy videogames than kids, since, by and large, kids don't have jobs. More adults than kids buy toys because kids, again, don't have jobs. This can be said generally of anything which costs money, but is targeted at kids.

Of course, there was a time when a kid could buy a grip of comics at the corner store for what he made on allowance and/or chores, and still have enough left over for a fistful of candy. That is said with no concern about nostalgia or rose colored glasses aimed at the past. it's simply a fact. Those days are gone.

In the past three years of going to a single comic shop, I've seen fewer and fewer kids there. I saw one kid last year, trying to convince the owner that he was mature enough at age 8 or 9 to handle the Punisher. The owner wasn't having any of that.

Prior to that year, I saw a couple of kids come in with their mom on Free Comics Day and I haven't seen them back since.

Conversely, I see a load of kids getting underfoot in the gaming aisle at Best Buy. They range in age from lanky teenagers to rugrats who still need to be told not to run down the hall; I'd say, a range of 8 to15 years old.

It comes down to what parents, controlling the money usually, deem appropriate for their kids. Some parents, of course will just give their kids the loot and send them off to get whatever. And then, they bring home Identity Crisis, showing Sue Dibny being raped, and put the kibosh on that sh-t quick.

I see a lot more kids hunkered down in the manga section at Walden Books than the comics section. But then again, we're not talking mainstream superhero comics with manga titles.

I agree. Superhero Comics today are produced and marketed to a ever-shrinking audience. And it doesn't help that the creators indulge in double think like talking about a young audience and producing an Identity Crisis.

There were some issues of Batman produced in the 90's that I wouldn't let my kid read (If I had a kid).

First Superhero comics actually need to TRY to engage the mass market before they can worry about their cultural relavancy.

paulbakerone

02-05-2007, 06:54 PM

In regards to Superman specifically, hip hop culture is not that much of a threat to the comic/ideal of the character's popularity. Superman as an icon is very entrenched within the American mindset for his nobility, power and classicness. As an icon, hip hop/street culture he has been incorporated and adopted ("S' shirts and "S" decals and "S" tatoos). However, his appeal as a market draw to that culture is not as big. Despite that, Superman has lasting power compared to the comics that target hip-hop/street cultures.

Actually, I agree and disagree. Superman has reached within the black culture. Shaq for instance, he has embodied the aspects of Supes that pertain to him, even calling himself "Superman" with the tattoo to boast his claims. Lil Mo's debut single "Superwoman", Purple Ribbon's debut single "Kryptonite", and even giving the alcoholic beverage that mixes Hennessey with Hypnotic the name "Incredible Hulk" shows ties from the hip hop community to the comic industry.

I do agree with your reasoning for the lack of support from the black community to comics. Though, there is also the fact that the lack of Black major players for some 40-50 years has given a negative outlook towards our role in comics.

Dav G

02-05-2007, 07:09 PM

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 07:12 PM

So the notion that more African American readers would read comics based on more prominent representation is entirely superficial. Plus it's unfounded, unprecedented and unrealistic. Which is sad to say, considering the comics industry needs all the readers it can get - of all backgrounds.So in your final analysis Simon & Schuster are wasting their time and money with this?

Of course, I don't think Simon & Schuster are even targeting Blokhedz at the superhero, comic book shop market. That's a dead-end, everyone knows that. Nothing sells in that market but superheroes (white male ones).

No, it seems like they're going the Tokyopop/Viz route.

Oh, and girls don't read comics, either! ;)

*****

And you also mentioned white guys buying hip-hop music. Do you think they would also be inclined to buy a hip-hop comic if one were available?

-Linc

zeraze1

02-05-2007, 07:29 PM

The big problem is where people can get those comics and the prioritization to buy those books. Economics of the time made it so that only people with leisure capitol could afford luxury items (of which comic books are). Increased prices made it unlikely that a minority family would be able to afford to get a comic book vs. milk vs. a loaf of bread. That's changed quite a bit within the last 20 years.

This statement's pretty stereotypical since most Black people like myself are middle class and above. The poverty rate is higher in Black America for a lot of reasons too detailed to go into here. But that doesn't mean all Black people are poor.

Unfortunately, now the only real place to buy comics are hard to get to unless people want to look for them because of direct market.

Now, we're are getting to one of the true reasons for why comics have a time tapping into readers outside the hardcore middle-aged White male fanbase. Comic shops are scarce in Black neighborhoods. On top of that, too many comic shops have a "for Whites only" vibe as explained by Christopher Priest. (Click link and scroll down to Point 4.):

http://phonogram.us/comics/adventures/frames/chips3.htm

Not shockingly, in the interview above, the MadTwiinz note that they're devoting a lot of energy to mass market venues (bookstores, schools, barbershops, etc.) because that's where their target audience is. It's similar to how manga is so wildly successful by also focusing on bookstores where teen girls hang out.

So, availability factors in this issue as much as marketing and storytelling.

zeraze

zeraze1

02-05-2007, 07:33 PM

So in your final analysis Simon & Schuster are wasting their time and money with this?

Of course, I don't think Simon & Schuster are even targeting Blokhedz at the superhero, comic book shop market. That's a dead-end, everyone knows that. Nothing sells in that market but superheroes (white males ones).

No, it seems like they're going the Tokyopop/Viz route.

Oh, and girls don't read comics, either! ;)

*****

Good one.

BTW, here is Publishers Weekly's article on the new Blokhedz GNs:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6411157.html?nid=2789

And you also mentioned white guys buying hip-hop music. Do you think they would also be inclined to buy a hip-hop comic if one were available?

-Linc

It honestly wouldn't shock me.

zeraze

zeraze1

02-05-2007, 07:45 PM

I don't think so, Superman has been around since the 30's

To be fair, Flash Gordon also debuted around the same time and initially seemed that he'd be eternally popular among kids. Then, a little film called Star Wars came along in 1977, and kids asked "Flash who?"

Similarly, the question of Superman's relevance in this century has been raised more frequently after his latest big screen wasn't the Spider-Man sized blockbuster it was hyped to be. That honor went to Pirates of the Caribbean 2.

So, Mike Davis believing Superman is outdated in understandable.

zeraze

zeraze1

02-05-2007, 07:52 PM

Sounds like the same thing people said when they created Dazzler...roller disco will never die!

Unlike disco, hip-hop has lasted 30 years, rakes in billions of dollars annually, and has created legions of coverts on every continent except for Antartica.

Frankly, American comics are in greater danger of being a "passing fad" because they're aimed at such extremely small audience.

zeraze

zeraze1

02-05-2007, 07:58 PM

Also, I hope everyone here realizes that comics, as with music, TV, clothing etc, isn't just limited to the US (or North America) but goes farther than borders of just your country (whichever that might be).

However, unlike manga, American comics simply can't match the global reach of hip hop. American publishers like Marvel and DC have trouble convincing even 1% of the U.S. population to buy their product.

zeraze

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 08:06 PM

But the problem is that it's like asking a highly accurate sniper to take out a general two miles away and then giving him a ballistic spit-wad with a tactical combat straw.

It won't reach the target.

You can aim all you want at a consumer. But if the product is not available to them, you might as well pack it in before the product goes to the assembly line.

Oh, I agree with that for the most part. Milestone was a good product but on the tail end of the comics in newstands era.

The best marketing practice is actually television/movies. That's how John Stewart GL became popular again.

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 08:08 PM

I never bought the "kids don't buy comics because of videogames" argurment.

that's just the simplified argument. kids today have different priorities and comics are still seen largely as juvenile despite evidence to the contrary.

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 08:09 PM

Kids aren't buying Superman comics in any larger number, that much is clear. Current comic book fans aren't even buying Superman comics in that large a number.

What does connect mean to you?

it still resonates with people. they don't buy the hero but follow the icon. they embrace the iconography and imagery.

that counts as a form of connecting.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 08:10 PM

BTW, here is Publishers Weekly's article on the new Blokhedz GNs:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6411157.html?nid=2789Thanks.

I think 2007 might be an exciting year for "black" comics.

- You have the Mad Twiinz and Blokhedz.

- The first shows of BET's animation line-up should be up and running in the fall.

- DC/Vertigo should also have INCOGNEGRO (http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/wizard/001404248.cfm) and SENTENCES: THE LIFE OF MF GRIMM (http://www.wizarduniverse.com/magazine/wizard/001344525.cfm) out in the fall.

- Kayne West has a manga in the works, also at Simon & Schuster.

- New season of Boondocks on Cartoon Network, hopefully.

- And hopefully we'll get some Credence Walker and Chocolate Thunder from Gettosake this year - I read that they have big plans for Chocolate Thunder in '07.

http://www.newsarama.com/Other_Publishers/GettoSake/goodguys.jpg

Now all that's left is a John Stewart ongoing.

(Dammit, DC, get with the program. Black is the new black.) :D

-Linc

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 08:15 PM

Actually, I agree and disagree. Superman has reached within the black culture. Shaq for instance, he has embodied the aspects of Supes that pertain to him, even calling himself "Superman" with the tattoo to boast his claims. Lil Mo's debut single "Superwoman", Purple Ribbon's debut single "Kryptonite", and even giving the alcoholic beverage that mixes Hennessey with Hypnotic the name "Incredible Hulk" shows ties from the hip hop community to the comic industry.

however, is the African-American community and hip hop the same? Shaq is a supes and comic fan--but is he "hip hop". Though, I do agree with what you mean about the iconography, however, that too is different than connecting to the book vs. the character.

which I think is a different issue to the original poster

I do agree with your reasoning for the lack of support from the black community to comics. Though, there is also the fact that the lack of Black major players for some 40-50 years has given a negative outlook towards our role in comics.

Agreed.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 08:31 PM

however, is the African-American community and hip hop the same? Shaq is a supes and comic fan--but is he "hip hop".Yes, Shaq is "hip-hop."

He's recorded hip-hop CDs. Not very good hip-hop CDs (one or two songs I liked, the ones produced by Erick Sermon of EPMD), but hip-hop CDs just the same. So he's "hip-hop," quote, unquote.

And no, the black community and hip-hop are not one in the same. My parents are not "hip-hop," but they are a part of the black community.

I'm a Jazz head, and I'm still "hip-hop." And I'm also a part of the black community.

-Linc

vbartilucci

02-05-2007, 08:42 PM

There's an old story about five blind guys touching different parts of an elephant. One touches the tail and says "An elephant is like a piece of rope" Another touches the side and say "An elephant is like the side of a barn" and other touches the leg and says "An elephant is like the side of a tree". (And in National Lampoon, another declares "An elephant is soft and mushy".)

Trying to "define" hip hop is like trying to define rock and roll. Heavy Metal, Glam, Rockabilly, all of these are rock and roll. The Sugar Hill Gang has as much a place in Hip Hop as NWA.
Everyone that likes Hip Hop has bits of it that they'd sooner sever a body part than admit that it's got anything to do with what they "Know" is true Hip Hop. Same for Rock. No Metallica fan is going to stand for calling Manhattan Transfer "rock".

Just like comics.

The arguments that people are making about the difficulty of reaching the "urban" (one of my favorite marketing euphamisms ever, second only to "pre-owned") market are the exact same problems with reaching ANY market that is not the current comics buyer. All of the claims that Priest makes in his (earlier in the thread linked) article about how the average comics shop is a turn off to black kids are the same problems to ANY person that isn't a comics fan. Or in fact, any type of store that doesn't appeal to you. It's hard to get a 55-year old mother of five to go into Hot Topic, (unless, of course they're picking up their goth daughter from work) or to get a vegetarian to go into McDonalds.

If you create a product specifically to appeal to only one splinter of the market (in this case, the mythical "hip hop" market) you limit your audience. But they're doing the right thing - bring the mountain to Mohammed, so to speak. Put the product where your audience is, don't make them come to the product. If they can do that, they may get an increase in sales. And if they do it VERY well, maybe the big companies will try something new, as opposed to the single pipeline they've been using for going on 25 years now.

Getting back out of the comic shops is the key to expanding the audience for comics across the boards. Create a good book and some people will go to great lengths to get it. But create a good book and make it almost impossible NOT to find it and you will do a lot better.

In short (too late), this isn't a thread about black folks and comics, it's about anybody who isn't a comics fan and comics. Once you realize that, this becomes a very important and universal discussion.

NeoSamurai

02-05-2007, 08:45 PM

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 08:59 PM

In short (too late), this isn't a thread about black folks and comics, it's about anybody who isn't a comics fan and comics. Once you realize that, this becomes a very important and universal discussion.Correct. Well, almost.

It's a thread that asked the question whether of not Superman still connected with kids.

Blokhedz, hip-hop, and "black" comics wasn't the question. It became an issue, but it wasn't the question.

-Linc

vbartilucci

02-05-2007, 08:59 PM

that's just the simplified argument. kids today have different priorities and comics are still seen largely as juvenile despite evidence to the contrary.

Curse you Dr. Wertham!
------------
"When people complain that nobody reads anymore, what they really mean is 'Nobody reads ME anymore, boo hoo'."
-Ian Shoales
-------------
America as a whole has moved past reading as a leisure time activity. Or at least the "traditional" type of reading with paper and ink. a teenager will devour pages and pages of data on web sites, but if asked to read a book (or even a comic) they will demur, saying it's not "fun".

When the Harry Potter books became the juggernaut they are, everybody talked about the need for fantasy, and how successful marketing can make something, but they all ignored the elephant in the room - kids were READING again! The youth book market has exploded thanks to HP, and I only pray that it stays as popular once Book 7 is published.

In Japan the literacy rate is like 98 percent, and they sell millions of comics a month. (And they're comics. Insisting on calling them "manga" is a pretentious as calling coffee with milk a Latte Venti.) It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If more people read, more people will read comics.

Lincoln Cole

02-05-2007, 09:12 PM

In Japan the literacy rate is like 98 percent, and they sell millions of comics a month. (And they're comics. Insisting on calling them "manga" is a pretentious as calling coffee with milk a Latte Venti.) Isn't that what the Japanese call their comics, manga?

And their trade paperback manga, tankoubon.

What's so pretentious about that?

We call them comics and trade paperbacks. And they call them manga and tankoubon.

-Linc

Strict31

02-05-2007, 09:51 PM

Just as an FYI, it's quite the opposite. All the Census reports show that people under the age of 25 have as much as $20,000 per year in disposable income. A quick search (http://www.coppersquare.com/business/infocenter/Disposable_Income_Profile/Copper_Square_Disposable_Income_Profile/) found the figure quoted at $19,000, in comparison to $15,250 for someone between the age of 35-44. (The article is about Phoenix demographics, but uses US Census data.)

The reality is that younger kids have access to their parents' money, as well as after-school jobs. And they spend more money on entertainment than any other age group.

Which is why the music and film industry pretty much ignores everyone over 25 - they don't spend nearly as much on CDs, films, and the like.

It would be interesting to know if this statistic finds most of the under-25consumers grouped largely around 14 to 24. 14 being the minimum legal age for employment (in the USA), that is. It would be interesting to learn how many 14 years olds and high school students are making upwards of $10 an hour. And how many children below the age of 14 are making the equivelent of that rate in allowance.

Not because I'm actually curious, but rather to illustrate that these figures you cite, without taking these factors into account, don't really tell the whole story.

Seriously, how did they figure out that 8 year old Bobby Snotnose is making as much as a college graduate? Somebody better tax that lad's income.

In other words, I would imagine the bulk of the disposable income encompassed in your figures is still coming from adults 18 and up. Which still technically is covered by "under the age of 25."

Strict31

02-05-2007, 10:00 PM

To be fair, Flash Gordon also debuted around the same time and initially seemed that he'd be eternally popular among kids. Then, a little film called Star Wars came along in 1977, and kids asked "Flash who?"

Indeed. I don't know everyone who was a kid at that time, but I know that everyone in my class knew who Flash Gordon was. Every week the teacher would show us the old serials before anyone even knew about Star Wars. So, there are at least 35 thirty-somethings in the world who knew who Flash Gordon was when SW hit theaters.

And on the playground, I recall, well after Star Wars had been released, debates about whether or not the cartoon Flash Gordon was cool. Remember the Filmation cartoon? Where he hung out with that Lion Man dude? And of course, there was the Sam Jones flick, which most would probably like to forget aside from its kick-ass soundtrack by Queen.

Hell, I still have the movie storybook, which I picked up from one of those catalogues teachers used to circulate through their classes to get kids to read more.

Flash had a lot of exposure in those days.

Not that this invalidates your point, necessarily. Just a bad example, perhaps.

Dav G

02-05-2007, 10:12 PM

So in your final analysis Simon & Schuster are wasting their time and money with this?Not at all - the bookstore market is very different from the Direct Market. My point wasn't that this wouldn't succeed - in fact, I'd bet it's going to do well.
Oh, and girls don't read comics, either! ;)Hardy har. Actually, both of my daughters do read Manga, and some US stuff too.

And you also mentioned white guys buying hip-hop music. Do you think they would also be inclined to buy a hip-hop comic if one were available?Absolutely - I plan to. Also, when The Cosby show was on TV, it was watched by 50 million people - almost double the population of African Americans in the US at the time. Like my music analogy....the majority of its audience was Caucasian. Same with Jazz music for most of the last 50 years.

The deal is - Caucasians represent over two thirds of the US population. So if this book is a big success...a hefty percentage of its audience will be Caucasian. Which only highlights the silliness of this statement:

On the comic front, it is relevant, because heroes like Superman are outdated. We wanted to introduce a hero that is contemporary, addressing the issues that today’s youth face and a hero that they can relate to, not just in imagery, but in personality and culturally.

Superman grew up in a lower-middle class rural community with Christian parents. Umm....that's pretty much most of America. "Hip Hop age" or not, Superman does indeed represent most Americans culturally.

Dav G

02-05-2007, 10:23 PM

In other words, I would imagine the bulk of the disposable income encompassed in your figures is still coming from adults 18 and up. Which still technically is covered by "under the age of 25."The majority of money? I'd assume so.

But I read recently that the 16-21 age group spends more money on entertainment than any other age group. And that makes sense:

Whatever money a child under 18 has is not going to groceries, electricity, etc. Their disposable income is a lot more...disposable. If a 15 year old has $100 a month in income...most of that goes to entertainment. Whereas their parents probably spend a great deal of their disposable income on their kids, and their entertainment.

I'm a 36-year-old parent with two girls, 15 and 12. I know whereof I speak =)

Strict31

02-05-2007, 11:33 PM

The majority of money? I'd assume so.

Well, I'm just saying, the statistic you provide far from disproves my premise.

But I read recently that the 16-21 age group spends more money on entertainment than any other age group. And that makes sense:

That makes sense, but it still equates to one bottom line: Comics have a lot of competition with other forms of entertainment. And even in age groups with sufficient disposable income to afford them, comics aren't doing so well.

Whatever money a child under 18 has is not going to groceries, electricity, etc. Their disposable income is a lot more...disposable. If a 15 year old has $100 a month in income...most of that goes to entertainment. Whereas their parents probably spend a great deal of their disposable income on their kids, and their entertainment.

I'm a 36-year-old parent with two girls, 15 and 12. I know whereof I speak =)

How much money a month do your kids spend on comics?

Auburn

02-06-2007, 01:23 AM

- I've seen hip-hop called a "fad" a few times so far. I hope I'm not out of line in assuming that those of you using that term to describe it are not fans of hip-hop. Whichever the case, I'm 26, soon to be 27, and hip-hop as a culture, as a lifestyle, as a "thing," is older than I am. So if it's a fad, it's got to be one of the longest fads in history.

I agree with you to some extent. All the folks saying it's a fad reminds me in some ways of the limo driver in Spinal Tap proclaiming rock n roll to be a fad while awaiting the day Frank Sinatra dominates the charts again. At the same time who'd've heard of hip hop back in the 80s? Admittedly I'm not big into it, but I never heard the term hip hop until the mid to late 90s back before that it was all caled rap, and now you hardly ever hear anyone call it rap anymore. Beyond that just hearing what breaks its way out into popular music it seems that since the late 80s there've been about 3-5 changes in the kind of music that dominates hip hop. But like I said I'm not big into it so maybe I'm completely wrong.

Strict31

02-06-2007, 01:49 AM

I agree with you to some extent. All the folks saying it's a fad reminds me in some ways of the limo driver in Spinal Tap proclaiming rock n roll to be a fad while awaiting the day Frank Sinatra dominates the charts again. At the same time who'd've heard of hip hop back in the 80s? Admittedly I'm not big into it, but I never heard the term hip hop until the mid to late 90s back before that it was all caled rap, and now you hardly ever hear anyone call it rap anymore. Beyond that just hearing what breaks its way out into popular music it seems that since the late 80s there've been about 3-5 changes in the kind of music that dominates hip hop. But like I said I'm not big into it so maybe I'm completely wrong.

No, there's no single voice or style to Hip Hop "culture". It has worn many hats over the years, and it's different now than it was in the its very beginnings. Which is why I think "Hip Hop Culture" is a misnomer. It is a mechanism for expressing a particular point of view or experience within America.

That mechanism changes, but the name does. What it gives voice to may or may not change, but the style does. What is hip hop today was not so ten years ago. Or twenty years ago.

New Way

02-06-2007, 01:59 AM

No, there's no single voice or style to Hip Hop "culture". It has worn many hats over the years, and it's different now than it was in the its very beginnings. Which is why I think "Hip Hop Culture" is a misnomer. It is a mechanism for expressing a particular point of view or experience within America.

That mechanism changes, but the name does. What it gives voice to may or may not change, but the style does. What is hip hop today was not so ten years ago. Or twenty years ago.

can't the same thing be said for Rock

Elvis

The Beetles

and Metalica

all seem pretty different to me. but yet they are all considered Rock.

Impulse2k1

02-06-2007, 02:06 AM

Wow three pages and still on topic....I am impressed. Great discussion to boot....where the hell is my regular rama!

Hu5h

02-06-2007, 05:49 AM

okay, i have to say something about Hip Hop being a Fad.

I think that, yes, Hip Hop, at the moment, is a fad in the mass culture. It is what marketers are using to sell their products because it's cultural signs and language are what a large segment of the population has an interest in. And through this, huge unprecedented numbers of people are being introducted to it, and yes, some one find something deeply personal about it and maybe choose to immerse themselves in the culture on a long term basis. But for the most part, many (I'd say most) won't.

That's not to say that hiphop culture itself doesn't have a background, a rich and detailed history, and probably a just as rich future. I'm just saying it based on what's on the cultural stage AT THE MOMENT. The public will move on to something in a few years, but HIPHOP will still be there doing its thing. And music taste being cyclical, it'll probably come back in a big way a few years after that.

Being someone with a background in the indie rock/punk scene, i've seen it happen. Punk has a history dating back at least to the 60's that developed independently for decades. And it's been the fad-of-the-moment a few times since then (the 70's with the sexpistols, the 80's with black flag and postpunk pioneers like The Cure; the 90's grunge explosion; the mid-90's flirtation with Green Day style poppunk...I could go on!) but the point is, between those times, when it WASN'T the fad of the week, the culture, the lifestyle was still there. The same with hiphop. It's "fadiness" (for lack of a better word) will pass, but it will still be there.

sorry to get off topic, just had to put that out there.

Spade

02-06-2007, 10:58 AM

Spade

02-06-2007, 11:12 AM

Indeed. I don't know everyone who was a kid at that time, but I know that everyone in my class knew who Flash Gordon was. Every week the teacher would show us the old serials before anyone even knew about Star Wars. So, there are at least 35 thirty-somethings in the world who knew who Flash Gordon was when SW hit theaters.

And on the playground, I recall, well after Star Wars had been released, debates about whether or not the cartoon Flash Gordon was cool. Remember the Filmation cartoon? Where he hung out with that Lion Man dude? And of course, there was the Sam Jones flick, which most would probably like to forget aside from its kick-ass soundtrack by Queen.
.

Ah Terminator X on the edge of panic. Thank you Flash Gordon soundtrack for the sample.

Lincoln Cole

02-06-2007, 11:28 AM

...At the same time who'd've heard of hip hop back in the 80s? Admittedly I'm not big into it, but I never heard the term hip hop until the mid to late 90s back before that it was all caled rap, and now you hardly ever hear anyone call it rap anymore. Beyond that just hearing what breaks its way out into popular music it seems that since the late 80s there've been about 3-5 changes in the kind of music that dominates hip hop. But like I said I'm not big into it so maybe I'm completely wrong.Hip-hop, to me, and to most I would asssume, is just an all-encompassing term that categorizes and collects and contains all that is, and all that was before.

Hip-hop is just a catch-all to tie everything from today, to back to the block parties up in the Bronx of mid-to-late-70s, to the B-Boys, also of the south Bronx of the late-70s and early-80s... To the popping and locking and breaking of the early-to-mid-80s that started to spread to the downtown areas of New York, and out into the other burroughs.

And of course rap music, as it was called at the time (and still is to an extent), was just the soundtrack to all of that, and to that way of life. And hip-hop, rap, this "thing" also started to get mainstream attention arround this time. The Sugar Hill Gang obviously in 1979. But the Sugar Hill Gang wasn't the beginning of rap or hip-hop or anything like that. They weren't even a real group, it wasn't even their rhymes on 'Rapper's Delight.'

Go to the hip-hop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hip-hop) Wikipedia entry for a good overview.

And to http://www.b-boys.com/classic/hiphoptimeline.html for an unofficial timeline.

And this may be a bad analogy, but hip-hop has changed like jazz, in a way. The styles of jazz. Going back to the early-40s and Charlie Parker and Dizzy Gillespie and Thelonious Monk; et al. and the birth of be-bop. And then on to the late-40s and early-50s and cool jazz, the "Birth of the Cool" and Miles Davis in New York, and taken further by the jazz musicians on the west coast.

And then back to New York and the mid-to-late 50s and the emergence of hard bop, a more soulful, bluesy jazz. A "blacker" jazz in comparison to the mostly "white" cool jazz. And then to the early-60s and the "New Thing," the free jazz and Ornette Coleman and Don Cherry; et al. And John Coltrane and the rest of the 60s. And then the 70s and Miles Davis again and fusion, a mix of jazz and rock. To the early-to-mid 80s and Wynton Marsalis and a reemergence of hard bop styles. To today and the merging of hip-hop and jazz.

So like jazz has, and has had, many styles, so has hip-hop. "Hip-hop" is just a catch-all, to me.

Now, the question, does Superman still connect with kids today?

-Linc

Vic Vega

02-06-2007, 11:32 AM

Hip-hop is dead.

Ok not dead. But hip-hop as I know it is on respiratory. There are too many people who don't love hip hop that control rap music. Everything has gotten too commerical. And these big corporations have screwed the people who built the culture and music and disgarded them to the side.

Most people that truly rep hip hop aren't kids. They are late 20's and over. They have 9-5 jobs. They have children. They don't listen to the radio.

True hip heads know you can't disregard anything that has gone before.

That being said Superman is still relevant. Superman is an American icon.

I disagree. Hip Hop is more of a lifestyle than Rap is. You tag? Your hip hop. You design gear? Your Hip Hop. You Freestyle? You're Hip Hop.

The active culture of Hip Hop is very much alive. The fact that the Rap music industry took a commercialist turn is irrelevent, I think.

In fact, as more heads burn their own demo and make thier stuff available on downloads as an alternative to commercial airplay, we may see a resurgence of the DIY mentality that Rap was about in the first place.

Skyrider

02-06-2007, 11:43 AM

Why I have no respect for the current iteration of popular "hiphop": http://www.in-q.com/video/poetry/defpoetryjam.html (language NSFW 100%)

The person who made the comparison to punk was spot on. Hip Hop as people knew it is dead.

I don't dislike hiphop. I dislike shallow commercial crap that glorifies the worst parts of humanity and attempts to pass it off as if it is the norm of acceptable behavior.

The fact of the matter is that Hip Hop doesn't know what Hip Hop is anymore. And in that confusion (or perhaps being behind it) the media marketing pop-pushers have taken more and more advantage of this.

At this point "pop-hop" will eventually go the way of the hairbands, while the aspects and pieces of hip hop that it steals from will be remembered.

Banana_Oil

02-06-2007, 12:08 PM

I'm pretty sure that these guys just changed a few words from the press release for Hammerman.

http://www.coucoucircus.org/da/images-da/hammerman.jpg

2 Legit, 2 Legit 2 Quit, unh unnnnh.

Spade

02-06-2007, 12:16 PM

I disagree. Hip Hop is more of a lifestyle than Rap is. You tag? Your hip hop. You design gear? Your Hip Hop. You Freestyle? You're Hip Hop.

The active culture of Hip Hop is very much alive. The fact that the Rap music industry took a commercialist turn is irrelevent, I think.

In fact, as more heads burn their own demo and make thier stuff available on downloads as an alternative to commercial airplay, we may see a resurgence of the DIY mentality that Rap was about in the first place.

First i didn't say rap was a lifestyle. I said rap is music. Hip hop is a lifestyle.

The fact that the music took a commerical turn is very relevant. Hip Hop is four elements.
The elements in this so called new era only exist in small pockets. The fact that the yonger genreation can't respect what came before it or know it's history. Very rare do newer emcees talk about social issue or anything political. And I don't count consider rapping about how much weight you move and how much money you have. For god sake you got Young Jeezy on the radio talking about Nas, born and raised in the Queensbridge, has no street cred. Damn ignorance.

How many emcees do you know with recording contracts. Producers with credits? How many studios (not home studios) have you been in? I can tell you I know plenty of emcess with recording contracts. Major labels to idy labels with distribution. I been up in Larry Gold studio where platinum and gold records from Marriah Carrey, Lil' Kim, The Roots, Dru Hill, Brandy,etc are on the way. I know Mr. Khaliyl (from the Da Bushbabies and producer for Res and Nas), Wordsworth, Punchline, Raheem Devaughn, Reef the Lost Cauze, The Roots, James Poyser, Jazzy Jeff, etc. I seen or met every emcee from 78-current.

Do not confuse oversaturated wannabe emcees with the access to common technology as a sign that hip hop culture lives. Hell I would argue that's another part of the problem.

and for the record, I did do it myself out of love and I seen first hand that hip hop is dying while rap still lives.

http://www.newartistsonline.com/artistpage.php?artistid=816

You have to understand I grew up in an era of hip hop where the underground meant you were unsigned or had no record. The dj was actually important to actual product on the record and the songs actually had scratching. Producer sampled and didn't play two to three keys on a kybord and call it a beat and make a "hit"song. When it was advertise hip-hop wasn't played on black radio stations during the day. When you had to listen to college radio or regular radio after 11 pm to hear hip hop. When wearing hip hop gear didn't mean you brought brand name clothes. You took anything and you made it hip hop.

Lincoln Cole

02-06-2007, 12:33 PM

A few thoughts on hip-hop being dead.

I agree that there's a great deal of sub-par hip-hop songs at the moment, but I'm confident the trend will reverse itself. And there are people out there doing good hip-hop, or "real" hip-hop. Kayne West. Common. Lupe Fiasco. The Roots. Nas. Mos Def. Jay-Z. Pharrell Williams is hip-hop.

And looking at what's out there, I've found that you can almost see the divide between what's good in hip-hop and what's "crap" by looking at two different video channels. Watch MTV Jams for an afternoon to see a lot of what's wrong with hip-hop, with a few glimpses of what's good. And watch VH1 Soul for an afternoon to see some of what's good in hip-hop. It's almost like night and day.

And that's how it's always been. See Common, when he was callled Common Sense, and his video "I Used to Love H.E.R." (http://video.music.yahoo.com/player/music-2-0/?rn=1301797&vid=2152331&stationId=&curl=http%3A%2F%2Fmusic.yahoo.com%2Far-271325-videos--Common). And there it all is right there. In "four minutes and some seconds." :D

Right now though we just have a lot of songs that should just be in the club and nowhere else, with a lot of sayings and a lot of hooks and bullsh*t, and the record companies are putting them out as real records. The saving grace is, as soon as people get tired of this, it'll be on to the next thing. That's how it's always been. At least that's how it's worked for the last 20 or 30 years.

We have Jay-Z now, and now we're just waiting for the next Biggie. And all will be as it was again.

(I hope.)

*****

So, about Superman and connecting with kids today?

-Linc

BatWolverine

02-06-2007, 12:41 PM

Wow three pages and still on topic....I am impressed. Great discussion to boot....where the hell is my regular rama!
And here goes DIMpulse2k1 with his PIMPulsy *contribution*. :o :p

Vic Vega

02-06-2007, 12:52 PM

First i didn't say rap was a lifestyle. I said rap is music. Hip hop is a lifestyle.

The fact that the music took a commerical turn is very relevant. Hip Hop is four elements.
The elements in this so called new era only exist in small pockets. The fact that the yonger genreation can't respect what came before it or know it's history. Very rare do newer emcees talk about social issue or anything political. And I don't count consider rapping about how much weight you move and how much money you have. For god sake you got Young Jeezy on the radio talking about Nas, born and raised in the Queensbridge, has no street cred. Damn ignorance..

My point was that with the tech out now you as a artist can be heard without being signed or going the ig'nant route to get signed.

How many emcees do you know with recording contracts. Producers with credits? How many studios (not home studios) have you been in? I can tell you I know plenty of emcess with recording contracts. Major labels to idy labels with distribution. I been up in Larry Gold studio where platinum and gold records from Marriah Carrey, Lil' Kim, The Roots, Dru Hill, Brandy,etc are on the way. I know Mr. Khaliyl (from the Da Bushbabies and producer for Res and Nas), Wordsworth, Punchline, Raheem Devaughn, Reef the Lost Cauze, The Roots, James Poyser, Jazzy Jeff, etc. I seen or met every emcee from 78-current..

None. I can comment because I've been listening to rap since the late seventies. I claim no personal expertise other than liking the genre. I hope that's okay with you.

Do not confuse oversaturated wannabe emcees with the access to common technology as a sign that hip hop culture lives. Hell I would argue that's another part of the problem.

and for the record, I did do it myself out of love and I seen first hand that hip hop is dying while rap still lives.

http://www.newartistsonline.com/artistpage.php?artistid=816

You have to understand I grew up in an era of hip hop where the underground meant you were unsigned or had no record. The dj was actually important to actual product on the record and the songs actually had scratching. Producer sampled and didn't play two to three keys on a kybord and call it a beat and make a "hit"song. When it was advertise hip-hop wasn't played on black radio stations during the day. When you had to listen to college radio or regular radio after 11 pm to hear hip hop. When wearing hip hop gear didn't mean you brought brand name clothes. You took anything and you made it hip hop.

I agree with much of the above, I'm just more optimistic than you are.

But to get back on topic, Supes' core values are "Truth, Justice and the American Way". He's simple like that. What would be the credo for a Hip Hop character (not necessarily a superhero)?

Dav G

02-06-2007, 01:12 PM

Comics have a lot of competition with other forms of entertainment. And even in age groups with sufficient disposable income to afford them, comics aren't doing so well.Oh - I'm 100% agreed with this. At the end of the day...I'd rather play Halo than read Justice League of America, myself.

How much money a month do your kids spend on comics?Not a lot. They mostly read Manga, although they younger one still likes the Archie Digests. If I had to average it...maybe $20 a month each? It all depends on what's out there they want. If there's a series they get into...we tend to buy 4-5 volumes pretty quick.

But both of our daughters volunteer at the local library here in San Francisco, so they check out lots of Manga books to read. That keeps the number we purchase down quite a bit.

Dav G

02-06-2007, 01:18 PM

I agree that there's a great deal of sub-par hip-hop songs at the moment, but I'm confident the trend will reverse itself. And there are people out there doing good hip-hop, or "real" hip-hop. Kayne West. Common. Lupe Fiasco. The Roots. Nas. Mos Def. Jay-Z. Pharrell Williams is hip-hop.

And looking at what's out there, I've found that you can almost see the divide between what's good in hip-hop and what's "crap" by looking at two different video channels. Watch MTV Jams for an afternoon to see a lot of what's wrong with hip-hop, with a few glimpses of what's good. And watch VH1 Soul for an afternoon to see some of what's good in hip-hop. It's almost like night and day.

And that's how it's always been.
Agreed.

On top of that...Hip Hop is not unique in that there's a lot of junk out there. That applies to all forms of music, art, films, etc. I agree with what critics and music historians often say - that 95% of what's out there is junk.

We tend to focus on the crap, and compare it to the best from yesteryear, but that's an unfair comparison, and it misses the point: There's always going to be junk, bad trends, and commercialization.

The trick is to find that other 5% and celebrate it.

Strict31

02-06-2007, 02:11 PM

can't the same thing be said for Rock

Elvis

The Beetles

and Metalica

all seem pretty different to me. but yet they are all considered Rock.

Yeah. In fact, I was gonna use rock as an example, but had to rush off and take a sh-t. Rock culture has changed as much as the music of rock has changed. But Hu5h used a better example with Punk, which had a more specifically identifiable cultural component than Rock and Roll, and which has changed so much since its inception as to almost be unidentifiable. But it's still trying, ostensibly, to communicate the same experiences and the same basic point of views.

In other words, yes, it is a generic catch-all term that encompasses a wide variety of constantly shifting conventions and standards. But it is still used as a tool to be the voice of a subset of the parent culture.

Auburn

02-06-2007, 04:11 PM

Now, the question, does Superman still connect with kids today?

Probably not, but at the same time I don't think there's anything that really stops him from doing so. Mostly I think people today are incredibly cynical, and find it hard to believe anyone would want to help someone out just because it is the right thing to do especially if they do it repeatedly. To me this says more bad stuff about the culture as a whole instead of about Superman as a character.

Also as an alien he's an outsider even if this hasn't been played up a lot. This is a great angle for the character. Living and trying to fit in in a society that isn't his own. The X-Men have always had the theme of being outsiders so why not Superman? Since someone earlier mentioned Priest's website I know at one point in one of his essays he talks about how a lot of folks look at Superman and see "SuperWhiteMan," but the guy's an alien. I think you'd have less fokls viewing him as "SuperWhiteMan" if more was made of the fact that he's an alien.

Hu5h

02-06-2007, 04:38 PM

Also as an alien he's an outsider even if this hasn't been played up a lot. This is a great angle for the character. Living and trying to fit in in a society that isn't his own. The X-Men have always had the theme of being outsiders so why not Superman? Since someone earlier mentioned Priest's website I know at one point in one of his essays he talks about how a lot of folks look at Superman and see "SuperWhiteMan," but the guy's an alien. I think you'd have less fokls viewing him as "SuperWhiteMan" if more was made of the fact that he's an alien.

I didn't read it, but didn't the last issue or two of SUPERMAN/BATMAN address this? I just remember the cover had a view of a VERY alien Kal-El's hand reaching out towards a disgusted Ma and Pa Kent. I flipped through it a bit and the gist of it that i got was that Kal arrived as a weird looking monster type baby who i guess morphed into a more human form?

did anyone read this?

Lincoln Cole

02-06-2007, 05:20 PM

Since someone earlier mentioned Priest's website I know at one point in one of his essays he talks about how a lot of folks look at Superman and see "SuperWhiteMan," but the guy's an alien.That's not quite what he meant. ;)

Here's what you're talking about (bold mine).50 Cent and Nasir Jones are not going into your local comic shop. Many comics shop retail displays are unknowingly hostile to blacks and black culture, something I certainly could have told the industry if they'd asked me. Everything about most local comic shops fairly screams Middle Class Whites Only. There is precious little that would, at first blush, interest most urban blacks, many of whom see Superman and his ilk as icons of repression and tools for eliminating their cultural distinction. In that view, many comics shop store windows have an inadvertent effect on many black youths. It is a kind of violence, much the same way loud music from gangsta jeeps is. Putting your minority-focused retail product inside these stores— many of which present the appearance of bunkers, their windows papered over with white iconic characters leaping and jumping and zapping and Magik The Gathering— is an utter waste of time. Publishing one or two black titles amid your line of 60+ white-themed monthlies is not enough to overcome the stigma many black youths feel walking into places like that.

Places where blacks are whispered about and followed not so much because they are black but because they are new, because they are not regulars, so there is this awkward tribal introduction where the retail staff tries to bridge that gap. But, to many blacks, surveillance is surveillance, and this awkwardness feels one step away from a police call, handcuffs and Rodney King. The hair on the neck going up because the comic shop, by inadvertent design, often represents white culture in an intensely megalomaniacal way. To many blacks, he is not Superman so much as he is SuperWhiteMan. There's no sign on the window that reads WHITE POWER, but the sensibility is implied: these are power fantasies for whites. white power fantasies. And, whatever the reason for the polarizing discomfort in many comic shops, the fact is the black kid looking for copies of Icon tends to stand out because he is outside of that shop's regular customer stream, outside of their tribe. And they instantly know this kid is outside of their tribe because he's black. The retailer is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't reach out to the newbies because ignoring these kids is just as bad if not worse. The tension continues to build as the retailer chats up his regulars while giving the new black kid room to browse, an action the new black kid could take as racist as, surely the retailer knows he's a new customer. But if the retailer reaches out, that could be taken the wrong way, as a lot of retail sales help have been traditionally instructed to shadow blacks in stores (as recently as last year I was followed around a trendy department store here while I was looking at, ghah, ties. This moronic sales guy, ignoring everyone else in the department, was never more than three feet from me, pretending to fold things and constantly asking me what I was looking for. I said, "This is... the tie department, yes? I'd like a toaster." Then I handed him my business card, REVEREND CHRISTOPHER J. PRIEST, and encouraged him to run a background check while I wrestled with the eternal struggle of paisley or not paisley). However well meaning the comics retailer, the truth is most comics stores are ill-equipped to service the very community Marvel and DC are trying to lure in.

You have to go to them. You have to find out where Q-Tip and Dirty Ol' Bastard buys their kicks (shoes) and get the product in there and make it appealing to and non offensive to that audience. The black community spends an AWFUL LOT OF MONEY. Not all of it on malt liqueur and chicken wings. But, right now, they are not spending it on comic books. Comic books have traditionally had a limited appeal to minorities because we see so little truth in them, so very little of who we are. Inaccurate and transparently indifferent approaches, exploitative rip-offs and, at best, well-meaning cluelessness.

Maybe the companies are trying to penetrate the minority market. Lord knows I hope so. I'm just not aware of what's going on because nobody talks to me about it. I've been told, in the past, by comics industry staffers, that I "wasn't black enough," ostensibly because I don't talk in broken sentences or use Ebonics. I explained to these clueless wonders, who were making polite sport of me, that I don't talk like that around them. because if I did talk like that around them, I'd still be the key operator for the Xerox machine. But, yes, I am quite versed in the language and culture of urban blacks. And I deeply resent the vivid concept, still apparently alive and entrenched in this business, that black = street, that black = poor, that black = J.J. from Good Times.He's putting forth that Superman can be (and is) viewed as SuperWhiteMan to a lot of black kids. In that, they see nothing of themselves in him. And I agree with that.

Superman is cool to me, I like him a lot. But I can fully understand what Christopher Priest is saying. Priest's run on STEEL (http://www.digital-priest.com/comics/steel.htm), by the way, was some of the most fun I've ever had reading comics.

Basically, though, what Christopher Priest is saying, and what Mark and Mike Davis are saying are the same thing. Basically. You see that, yes?

-Linc

Novaya Havoc

02-06-2007, 05:31 PM

Sounds like the same thing people said when they created Dazzler...roller disco will never die!

Not quite. The creators purposefully left out disco references to the character because they knew it would be dated. They just kept the costume. :p

Strict31

02-06-2007, 06:18 PM

That's not quite what he meant. ;)

Here's what you're talking about (bold mine).He's putting forth that Superman can be (and is) viewed as SuperWhiteMan to a lot of black kids. In that, they see nothing of themselves in him. And I agree with that.

While I agree that black kids see very little of themselves in Superman and in superheroes in general, I think there's still a big difference in "Power fantasies for whites" and "White Power fantasies." One holds a specific implication. The other does not. One suggests a fantasy written for an audience generally presumed to be composed mostly or entirely of white people. Like Lord of the Rings. The other suggests a fantasy that promotes a racist agenda. Like The Turner Diaries.

One is an apt comparison; the other is not.

Now admittedly, there are some Silver Age treatments of Superman which hearken back to the sort of nature vs. nurture white-man's burden we see in Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan. Namely, the idea that Superman would have still been the greatest and best of men regardless of the upbringing by noble humans who taught him to be the best man he could be. That idea is something of a betrayal of Superman's overall legacy.

And it's also why Tarantino's Bill was wholly mistaken in his view on Superman. Clark Kent isn't the mask. Superman is the mask that allows Clark Kent to do what he needs to do for the betterment of mankind.

The problem with this is that oftentimes, the white parent culture of America is often exclusive even when it doesn't set out intentionally to be. Disenfranchisement need not be caused by anything as blatant as power hoses and attack dogs. It can be caused by a white supermodel on a commercial telling women how easy it is to have beautiful hair. In this example, it doesn't occur to the people behind the commercial that anyone other than white people will be in the audience.

It can be intentional, of course, or it can be an unintentional byproduct of generations-old prejudice.

It breaks down like this: the average white artist tends to draw pictures of folks that are white. The average white writer tends to create stories in which white people are the heroes. Pierce, the author of the Turner Diaries did this on purpose because he pretty much hated black and jewish people. Siegal and Shuster did it because that was familiar to them.

It may have the same effect on a black audience, presumably...It didn't for me, but I'm just one black person, not all of them, so opinions vary.

This is the difference between a "power fantasy for whites" and a "white power fantasy."

One is: "Dude, totally rad!!!!"

And the other is: "The white man is superior to the mud races.!"

Both messages can be found in the subject matter. But one, you have to look really really hard to find, and fully expect it when you see it.

Lincoln Cole

02-06-2007, 07:00 PM

This first.And it's also why Tarantino's Bill was wholly mistaken in his view on Superman. Clark Kent isn't the mask. Superman is the mask that allows Clark Kent to do what he needs to do for the betterment of mankind.Well, that's all in which Superman you like best. If you like John Byrne's Superman, then Clark Kent is who he is, and Superman is the mask.

If you like the version of Superman from the 50 years pre-MOS, which is also virtually every take on him in popular culture (radio, tv, movies, etc.), then Superman is who he is, and Clark Kent is the mask.

What was said in Kill Bill is how the whole world views Superman. What you're talking about is how people who read (and liked, I might add) MAN OF STEEL. That's the difference.

I'm in the Kill Bill camp, too, by the way. Superman is who he is, Clark Kent is the mask. That's not even a question. Any other way and you're just wrong. :D While I agree that black kids see very little of themselves in Superman and in superheroes in general, I think there's still a big difference in "Power fantasies for whites" and "White Power fantasies."Well, whichever. The first part, which you agree with, is what's pertinent to the original comment made by the Mad Twiinz.

And I think Christopher Priest was using "power fantasies for whites" and "white power fantasies" interchangeably. He meant the former of what you said, the one that "suggests a fantasy written for an audience generally presumed to be composed mostly or entirely of white people." Which is what Superman is. Because I'm willing to bet that little black kids weren't on the mind of Siegel and Schuster when they created Superman.

Also, I'm sure Priest wasn't suggesting any type of racist agenda in Superman either. And the same for the Mad Twiinz.It breaks down like this: the average white artist tends to draw pictures of folks that are white. The average white writer tends to create stories in which white people are the heroes.Right. And the Mad Twiinz are doing Blokhedz and Blak primarily for black kids. And if white kids like it too, all the better.

-Linc

Strict31

02-06-2007, 07:39 PM

This first.Well, that's all in which Superman you like best. If you like John Byrne's Superman, then Clark Kent is who he is, and Superman is the mask.

If you like the version of Superman from the 50 years pre-MOS, which is also virtually every take on him in popular culture (radio, tv, movies, etc.), then Superman is who he is, and Clark Kent is the mask.

What was said in Kill Bill is how the whole world views Superman. What you're talking about is how people who read (and liked, I might add) MAN OF STEEL. That's the difference.

I'm in the Kill Bill camp, too, by the way. Superman is who he is, Clark Kent is the mask. That's not even a question. Any other way and you're just wrong.:D

The whole world was wrong about the Emperor's new clothes; it just wasn't cool to admit to it :cool:

The earliest Superman stories do not have any of the silver age stuff about destiny and that sort of thing. It was just about a dude Siegal and Shuster thought would be cool, doing stuff they thought looked and sounded cool. The idea of the Man of Steel being noble by birth rather than development is a Silver Age concept. I'm not saying it's any less a valid part of Superman history, but it hasn't been canon for decades.

But think about it like this: the Kents serve no other purpose in the Superman mythology if they've raised a man who would be a Christ-like scion regardless of where his ship dropped. They are the people who teach him how to be a man. Sure, he's born a man, and moreover, born a man with super powers. But like any parent, they help the child find his footing.

We don't have to accept Byrne's rendition to accept this. We can just look at life and wonder if we'd be the same people we are without the hand of development. I'd like to think I was born to be as cool as I apparently am without witnessing my father's mastery of his cool. But I doubt it.

The material will never be relevant if we refuse to seek relevance in it. It's rather like a person who sees no redeeming value in Rap/Hip-hop, missing out on the exquisitely crafted massages Mos Def creates as easily as we fart.

In other words, if it's a preconceived notion about the subject matter keeping the audience from appreciating or connecting with the subject matter, that's not really a fault of the subject matter.

Of course, as a kid, my mind wasn't on any of that. It was on a dude being able to toss a tank at some mutha-fu-kas. That was cool. But I reckon it doesn't impress kids anymore. Perhaps we have real life superbeings who routinely defy gravity and wear flashy costumes while defeating their foes. And so the exploits of an imaginary super-alien don't match up. After all, Superman didn't hook up with some J lo cosmic booty.

And reading a book about a superhero isn't as immersive as running and gunning Master Chief through the bowels of a Covenant star cruiser.

Superheroes in comics have a lot of competition.

Well, whichever. The first part, which you agree with, is what's pertinent to the original comment made by the Mad Twiinz.

And I think Christopher Priest was using "power fantasies for whites" and "white power fantasies" interchangeably. He meant the former of what you said, the one that "suggests a fantasy written for an audience generally presumed to be composed mostly or entirely of white people." Which is what Superman is.

Yes. But he's using something interchangeably which is not interchangeable. That's all I'm saying. You can interchange "2 +2 =4" with "the cubed root of 64." because they both mean the same thing. You cannot interchange it with "2 + 2 = Chair."

Priest may not have intended to make such an unfortunate comparison, but this is why it's important to say what we mean as exactly as possible. If he didn't mean "white power fantasy", I'm saying it was a mistake to have said it. Nothing more.

Because I'm willing to bet that little black kids weren't on the mind of Siegel and Schuster when they created Superman.

I'm willing to bet I agree with you....because they are examples of the point I was trying to make about writing what is familiar. Since they were not likely to be familiar with anything beyond the experience of white (and/or jewish people), that's what they wrote. It's a natural reflex.

Also, I'm sure Priest wasn't suggesting any type of racist agenda in Superman either. And the same for the Mad Twiinz.Right. And the Mad Twiinz are doing Blokhedz and Blak primarily for black kids. And if white kids like it too, all the better.

-Linc

I don't think Biden was trying to say anything racist or prejudiced about Obama either. But at the same time, dude should have been more careful about what was stumbling past his teeth. That's all I'm saying.

Lincoln Cole

02-06-2007, 08:44 PM

The earliest Superman stories do not have any of the silver age stuff about destiny and that sort of thing. It was just about a dude Siegal and Shuster thought would be cool, doing stuff they thought looked and sounded cool. The idea of the Man of Steel being noble by birth rather than development is a Silver Age concept. I'm not saying it's any less a valid part of Superman history, but it hasn't been canon for decades.That's true. I've been reading the SUPERMAN CHRONICLES (new one out tomorrow (http://www.dccomics.com/comics/?cm=6604); I'll pick that up along with THE AMERICAN WAY and DMZ), so I see what you're saying.

Decades old, though: the average Joe on the street doesn't know anything about Superman other than what they saw at the movies, and may have watched on TV. So the decades old stuff is still intact.

I guess in Smallville Superman is Clark Kent first, for obvious reasons. But in the movie it felt like Superman is who he is, and Clark is the mask. So six of one, half a dozen of the other.But think about it like this: the Kents serve no other purpose in the Superman mythology if they've raised a man who would be a Christ-like scion regardless of where his ship dropped.And that's why they should be dead now. But nooooo.... :D They are the people who teach him how to be a man. Sure, he's born a man, and moreover, born a man with super powers. But like any parent, they help the child find his footing.And they did that, I guess, for the most part. And now they should be dead. Maybe Ma Kent alive, but that's it. Superheroes in comics have a lot of competition.And that's the bottom line. And like I said in my first post on page one, if I were an 8 year-old kid, I'd be into something like Avatar: The Last Airbender before I would be into something like Superman.

Yes, everyone knows who he is, but that's just like everyone knowing that the Pope is Catholic. And what I mean, the Pope doesn't mean that much to non-Catholics, and to Catholics who he doesn't mean a lot to, other than knowing that he exists. And the same with Superman. Everyone knows about him, but he only resonates to a certain group. The widespread knowledge of his existence I don't think translates into a similar widespread level of resonance or relevance.Yes. But he's using something interchangeably which is not interchangeable. That's all I'm saying. You can interchange "2 +2 =4" with "the cubed root of 64." because they both mean the same thing. You cannot interchange it with "2 + 2 = Chair."Well, yeah, that's fair enough. Priest may not have intended to make such an unfortunate comparison, but this is why it's important to say what we mean as exactly as possible. If he didn't mean "white power fantasy", I'm saying it was a mistake to have said it. Nothing more.Well, it's all in how we read it. When I read it I didn't read it the way you did. So it's all in how we interpret things, and whatever experiences and viewpoints that we have coming in. I'm willing to bet I agree with you....because they are examples of the point I was trying to make about writing what is familiar. Since they were not likely to be familiar with anything beyond the experience of white (and/or jewish people), that's what they wrote. It's a natural reflex.Right.
I don't think Biden was trying to say anything racist or prejudiced about Obama either. But at the same time, dude should have been more careful about what was stumbling past his teeth. That's all I'm saying.Yeah, Biden is cool, I like him. And I understood what he was saying, and agree with it, but right, it was just the way he said it.

-Linc

Auburn

02-06-2007, 08:54 PM

Basically, though, what Christopher Priest is saying, and what Mark and Mike Davis are saying are the same thing. Basically. You see that, yes?

Yeah I see

PatrioticKid

02-07-2007, 12:05 AM

I personally didn't like Superman at first. Smallville converted me to understanding the person before he was Superman.

In all these conversations, we all forget that there's some kind of unknown factor that will propel comics back to the mainstream. Where the hell did Harry Potter come from? It's not like children books weren't being published before it.

I'd love to know what exactly black comic readers read. It's not just putting a black face into something. Black comedies fail just like any other comidies. How do shows like Chappelle show, Cosby, or The Boondocks do well. They capture all races. Don't put minorities into their own universe. Let them be in the regular universe.

Were I live kids don't sit on the floor reading manga. People I know watch anime but don't run out to the video store when the new animes are released. It's certainly cool, but whether manga continues to grow is up to debate. Manga has very few minorites.

Skyrider

02-07-2007, 01:20 AM

In all these conversations, we all forget that there's some kind of unknown factor that will propel comics back to the mainstream. Where the hell did Harry Potter come from? It's not like children books weren't being published before it.

I'd love to know what exactly black comic readers read. It's not just putting a black face into something. Black comedies fail just like any other comidies. How do shows like Chappelle show, Cosby, or The Boondocks do well. They capture all races. Don't put minorities into their own universe. Let them be in the regular universe.

It's not much of an unknown. Quality knows no race, sees no minority, and sticks to no one culture.

Quality is simply quality. The only time things get separated at all is when people choose to separate things.

Cosby's one of my favorite comedians.

Lincoln Cole

02-07-2007, 12:51 PM

I'd love to know what exactly black comic readers read. It's not just putting a black face into something. Black comedies fail just like any other comidies. How do shows like Chappelle show, Cosby, or The Boondocks do well. They capture all races. Don't put minorities into their own universe. Let them be in the regular universe.What do black comic readers read? Obviously very little of what's being offered now, and Christopher Priest tells us why.Comic books have traditionally had a limited appeal to minorities because we see so little truth in them, so very little of who we are. Inaccurate and transparently indifferent approaches, exploitative rip-offs and, at best, well-meaning cluelessness.So start changing that first, do the opposite of that, and we can go from there. And like Skyrider said, do quality work too.

And Priest also mentioned. Publishing one or two black titles amid your line of 60+ white-themed monthlies is not enough...And so do more than that too, and lets see where we are then, as well.

So basically everything that I have quoted at the top of this page is what needs to done. And it was linked to earlier in this thread, but what Christopher Priest said in "The Last Time Priest Discussed The Viability of Black Characters" (http://www.digital-priest.com/comics/adventures/frames/chips3.htm) is what needs to be done. And once this is done, and no one said any of it's going to be easy, but once this is done, the answer to what black comic readers read will be answered.

In short, do real, believable, three-dimensional black characters.

And I want to add, what I imagine Blokhedz is going to do is offer one of those truths that Christopher Priest was talking about. And show some of "who we are," one particular aspect of that, that being from a hip-hop perspective, of which is rarely if ever seen in mainstream comics. And be accurate about it, and not be any kind of exploitative rip-off, or be well-meaning but clueless. What Priest said, in other words.

And that's basically what the Mad Twiinz said in the feature (http://formatmag.com/features/blokhedz/).Format: The storyline of Blokhedz closely resembles the one the hip-hop generation has been exposed to, was it a conscious decision to make it general and relatable?

Mark: Yes, because there wasn’t anything like that out at the time. We wanted to bring that type of storytelling to the hip-hop community and what better way to get them pulled in by telling stories that directly reflect our experience.

Mike: It’s a natural Madtwiinz approach to storytelling. I like to use Nas’s album Illmatic as a metaphor. It sounds like Blokhedz looks; it was an influence; it had the balance of dropping jewels with a street feel; relatable, not preachy; the perfect blend. It helped define our style of storytelling.

*****
Format: Why is Blokhedz relevant?

Mike: Blokhedz is relevant for various reasons on various fronts. Blokhedz is relevant to hip-hop, because it serves as a vehicle to express our views and opinions to what we feel is going on with hip-hop past, present and future. We wanted to make a statement that it is important to use the power of one’s words in a responsible manner. Hip-hop is very powerful and influential. Words have manifestation and attraction powers. What you think is communicated by what you say and what you say shapes your reality. With the current values that are presently reigning in mainstream hip-hop, the message the youth are receiving is one of materialism. The essence of the struggle and its creativity is being over shadowed by industry. We wanted to do our part to maintain the voice of struggle, its creativity and express the strength and influence of this magical art form called hip-hop.

On the comic front, it is relevant, because heroes like Superman are outdated. We wanted to introduce a hero that is contemporary, addressing the issues that today’s youth face and a hero that they can relate to, not just in imagery, but in personality and culturally. There are a lot of people who read comics, but not a lot of people of color in comics. We are creating our own mythologies and archetypes for our children and children’s children – something we had very little of growing up, reading comics.

Lastly, on the social front, Blokhedz has become a tool to encourage literacy for the generation that was born in the information age and might not want to read a book. With the imagery, and hip-hop undertones, we attract them to the look and then drop jewels or lessons to them in a non preachy way.All that aside, Blokhedz is just one comic. And what's unfortunate, and not to imply that anyone's saying this (but just to address it), but it often seems that when a "black" comic appears, it has this unspoken burden of having to speak for everything "black." And that's wrong and it's unfair. It can't just be a comic, it seems that it has to represen