Grant Morrison S/D

I don't think he is... As he points out, there's is a long tradition of queer readings of books/movies/comics/etc to highlight queer subtexts in texts that appear heteronormative on the surface level. And (whether or not you agree with his intepretation) that's exactly what he's doing there. The way he interprets those panels, they're not just "kinky" (what does that word even mean?), but definitely queer.

Eh, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with reading against the grain, just that Seneca's "Hmm, that kind of looks like a cock!"-level analysis wasn't very deep, and I sort of expected better from him.

Besides, I think Grant puts the queer/kinky/sexy stuff front-and-centre anyway -- I mean, he's just re-outfitted with a giant codpiece. That's not very subtext-y.

Outside of the fact all the characters portrayed are costume fetishists, I don't think there's any "kink" to be had there, it's all pretty gay.

Besides, I think Grant puts the queer/kinky/sexy stuff front-and-centre anyway

He does - with the characters he himself created, or characters which are minor enough to be (re)made queer without DC objecting to it. But as Seneca points out in his article, Batman and Robin are way too big to be queered on the level of the actual text, DC would never allow it. Hence the subtext.

how is grant morrison's subtextual 'queering' any diff from the subtextual queerness of every other batman comic ever (cf fredric wertham)?

Morrison is know to be pro-queer, unlike many/most other Batman writers. Hence details like those mentioned in the article can more easily be interpreted as intentional, not accidental.

how do you know 'most other' batman writers are not 'pro-queer'?

I'm not saying they're absolutely not, but Morrison is one of the few who's publically known to be one.

Historically, queer readings of subtexts in "straight" texts have often been informed by the knowledge that one or more of the persons behind the text are queer themselves.

dunno, just seems like a contradiction to me - that 'queerness' can be deduced from a 'close reading' that relies so heavily on extratextual knowledge about an author's private life and feelings and intentions (and of course, what's said in public discourse isn't ALWAYS 100% honest, accurate or reliable.)

dunno, just seems like a contradiction to me - that 'queerness' can be deduced from a 'close reading' that relies so heavily on extratextual knowledge about an author's private life and feelings and intentions

Why do you think this is a contradiction? Seems pretty obvious to me that a person's private life affects his art, and authors are known to put all sorts of subtexts into their work.

He does - with the characters he himself created, or characters which are minor enough to be (re)made queer without DC objecting to it. But as Seneca points out in his article, Batman and Robin are way too big to be queered on the level of the actual text, DC would never allow it. Hence the subtext.

no way. Batman and Robin are the most queered characters (and the recipients of queer readings) of any comic book figures. Their entire dynamic (that way precedes Morrison taking them on) is their homoerotic relationship. It's totally silly to say that somehow only Morrison has the courage to queer them.

http://indiana.bilerico.com/2008/07/BatmanRobin.gif

x-post

it's not v subtextual if you're depending on the word of the author to validate the supposition that these 'hidden' meanings are there, or are intentional

i don't think this is good criticism because it automatically confers the status of 'truth' on an author's words, and assumes 'intention' is always clear, knowable, speakable. If another Batman writer doesn't publicly declare their 'pro-queer' values, then it seems to negate the possibility that their work is as 'interesting' or subtextually rich as the author who TELLS us so.

has anyone seen the cartoon adaptation of All Star Superman...?

Yeah, it's good. McDuffie (RIP) did a great job with the adaptation.

He does - with the characters he himself created, or characters which are minor enough to be (re)made queer without DC objecting to it. But as Seneca points out in his article, Batman and Robin are way too big to be queered on the level of the actual text, DC would never allow it. Hence the subtext.

no way. Batman and Robin are the most queered characters (and the recipients of queer readings) of any comic book figures. Their entire dynamic (that way precedes Morrison taking them on) is their homoerotic relationship. It's totally silly to say that somehow only Morrison has the courage to queer them.

I said DC wouldn't allow them to be queer "on the level of the actual text". Sure, there are plenty of queer readings of B&R comics, but they're always about the subtext. Or can you name a single official DC comic where Batman and Robin are explicitly queer? (The panel you posted is not such an example, because back in the day it was not uncommon to portray wholesome male heroes sleeping in the same bed in boys' adventure books and comics.)

Also, I didn't say "only Morrison has the courage to queer" Batman and Robin, I just said that "details like those mentioned in the article can more easily be interpreted as intentional" because of Morrison's previous queer-oriented work. Sure, there might've been other queer Batman writers who've done similar things, but Morrison is the only one I'm aware of.

it's not v subtextual if you're depending on the word of the author to validate the supposition that these 'hidden' meanings are there, or are intentional

i don't think this is good criticism because it automatically confers the status of 'truth' on an author's words, and assumes 'intention' is always clear, knowable, speakable. If another Batman writer doesn't publicly declare their 'pro-queer' values, then it seems to negate the possibility that their work is as 'interesting' or subtextually rich as the author who TELLS us so.

AFAIK know Morrison hasn't told anywhere that his Batman has a queer subtext - Seneca's reading is simply based on the knowledge that Morrison favours queerness in his works, not on any actual admission by Morrison. IMO taking into account the artist's former work and his background is a perfectly valid way of reading texts. If you remove the author and his intentions completely from the equation, you could read any text pretty much any way you want to, which would render any subtext meaningless. Taking the author into account has always been the most popular way of reading texts, and I'm sure most authors are well aware of that. (For example, the various Morrison avatars that appear in his comics are a subtext that would be pointless if we didn't know about Grant Morrison the person outside his comics.) To me it seems perfectly natural to be more attuned to queer subtexts in the works of Oscar Wilde or Tennessee Williams (to use Seneca's two examples) than, say, in the works of Ian Fleming, since you're more likely to find them in the former than in the latter.

Yeah, it's good. McDuffie (RIP) did a great job with the adaptation.

It was okay, but if you've read the comics it doesn't really add anything new to them, as it follows them almost verbatim, except for dropping a few subplots (such as the Bizarro planet one). Also, it doesn't include anything from "Neverending" (issue #10), which is kinda understandable, as that issue doesn't have to do with the main plot, but it's also sad because #10 is perhaps the best single Superman story ever.

That said, I think the movie actually improved upon the ending of the comic by changing Luthor's role in it in a small but significant way. I won't spoil it by saying anything more.

I want the Blu-ray just to hear Grant and Bruce Timm's commentary track.

Tuomas, I think we might (in part) be having a linguistic difference here, because I would never use the word 'subtext' to describe, say, the Morrison 'avatar' in Animal Man (and I think that character functions perfectly well without the reader needing to known anything about the 'real' Grant Morrison.) I still believe you're seriously overestimating the 'daring' or whatever of Morrison's 'queer Batman' - and you picked a very poor example in Ian Fleming, whose work is FULL of queer subtext (and foretext), more than almost any other 20th Century popular writer.

Also, 'reading any text pretty much any way you want to' is to my mind the whole pleasure and point of reading/writing abt other texts. Death to the tyranny of the author, here's to the reader's liberation movement etc etc

IMO those early Morrison issues are so lightweight that if he wasn't playing with some subtextual themes, they're borderline mediocre.

because I would never use the word 'subtext' to describe, say, the Morrison 'avatar' in Animal Man (and I think that character functions perfectly well without the reader needing to known anything about the 'real' Grant Morrison.)

The AM avatar is the only exception, IMO, because in that comic it is flat out spelled that he is Morrison, so he is an author avatar on the level of the text, not subtext. All his other avatar characters certainly function well enough on their own as unique characters (that's the surface level of the text), but the subtext is that they are also Morrison's avatars, and knowing that subtext makes many of those characters, as well as Morrison's whole body of work, more interesting. And my point was that it's hard to see that subtext unless you're at least somewhat familiar with Morrison outside his comics. Sure, you can say "death to the author!", but cases like this one prove that taking the author into account can provide for a deeper reading experience.

Anyway, I guess you're right that picking up Fleming as an counter-example was bad choice, because I've only read one of his books, and that was years ago. But my point still holds: it makes more sense to look for queer subtexts in the works of artists who are known to be queer, since you're more likely to find them there, and said subtexts are often more obvious too. I'm not saying you can't find such subtexts in the works of "straight" artists, my point was just that knowing Morrison's background makes it easier to interpret things like the panels Seneca pointed out as an intentional subtext.

read a galley copy of his new book over the weekend - mostly a very entertaining history/overview of American and British superhero comics. Some choice barbs for Alan Moore and the Image guys. I started to skip some stuff towards the end when it got into more auto-bio territory, but his take on the various periods are generally great, insightful, and really funny.

Didn't know about this. Any idea when it's coming out?

Yeah, I want this as soon as I can get it.

:: checks amazon ::

Supergods? July 19th?

later this summer I think...?

http://technoccult.net/archives/2011/04/30/supergods-grant-morrisons-book-on-super-heroes-gets-a-cover/

Cool. Will anticipate

Amazon has this to say about the upcoming Flex Mentallo

Collected for the first time, an early classic from the ALL-STAR SUPERMAN team of Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely, newly recolored.

What's up with that? IIRC the colours in the original comic are perfectly fine.

different paper stock to blame maybe?

Pretty sure that they're recoloring it for the stock and to update it. I seem to recall that the same person who is recoloring WE3 is doing it, but might be misremembering. I'll be happy to have it all in one place but will treasure the single issues (and I can't say that about many books now.)

I currently treasure my .cbr's so i'll be happy to get a physical copy

That's how I read it first, actually. Also the first files I loaded onto my digital reading device thingy.

So has anyone been able to work out whether Batmoz is going to be completely fucked up by the new DC plans? It seems as though it can't help but be, despite various assurances otherwise.

Apparently Batman Inc will take a hiatus once it gets to the point of the reboot, and will then return in 2012 as a mini-series. It's unclear at the moment if Morrison can set the story in the continuity he established, or if the reboot changes will be in effect.

Apparently Dick is going to be Nightwing again? I don't know, it sounds to me like DC is fucking over Batmoz and he'll leave all the titles soon.

would rather have Inc continue than a new-continuity Superman title tbh

Bruce Wayne will be the only Batmang. I can't say that any of the Bat-teams really inspired confidence, aside from LEVIATHAN eventually happening.

I've liked most of Morrison's Batman run, but I'm still hella excited about his new Superman gig. IMO Supes, much more than Batman, is a character he was born to write. Have they confirmed the artist(s) for his Superman, though? (Obviously it can't be Quitely, since it's a montly title.)

This whole leviathan thing is going to be able to happen before DC fucks with the books, right?

After. DC reboot is September, Leviathan is next year.

:(

I have no problems with a reboot, but (viz. Wildstorm) just that they're wildly inept at them. Just need better creators and editorial direction.

from the intro to Big Perp's section of the chunky, clunky three-part Rolling Stone feature on Morrison:

This is a guide to the highlights of his career, with the exception of his fantastically strange Flex Mentallo series with artist Frank Quitely, which has not yet been collected in paperback due to complicated legal issues.

so he genuinely thinks Joe The Barbarian is better than Big Dave and New Adventures Of Hitler and St Swithins Day and Zenith and A Glass Of Water and The World Shapers and New Toys? pffffffffft.

Plus Flex will be back in print in a few months, right?

it's actually been in print in paperback in Europe for years, so that caveat doesn't even strictly hold. but I wouldn't believe anything about a DC collection until I hold one in my hands.

Is New Adventures of Hitler or Zenith collected in Europe? I've only ever had the chance to read bad scans.

Nope. I think there was a collection of NAOAH at one stage, but it is now out of print. There were several volumes of Zenith (but not the resolution of the long running story about The Plan) brought out by Titan, but they are out of print too.

Around the time he was setting up his FA website, Martin Skidmore mentioned that there was some talk of a new Zenith collection coming into print, but that does not seem to have happened.

Thanks to my local British Isles copyright library, I re-read all the Zenith collections they had last summer (for an article for FA I never got round to writing). I ended up thinking that it starts off well but that the loads of superheroes from alternate worlds get together to fight the Lloigor was not quite all that. It seemed a bit of a mess, plotwise, seeming to be an early case of the Grant Morrison problem (his writing stories that are very hard to follow for people like me of only sub-average intelligence).

I was a bit ambivalent about all the "oh there is that obscure British comic character" cameos in it... on the one hand, this is the kind of thing that annoys me about LOEG, but on the other, it was great to see some of those crazy characters get an outing again.

That said, I really hope that someone does bring out a complete Zenith collection. When it is good, it is amazing, and Steve Yeowell is a great artist on it.

Hitler's never been collected.

The first volume of a new to-be-complete round of Zenith collections was printed around ten years ago, sat in a warehouse for about eight years, then supposedly got pulped*. The Titan ones covered the first three "Phase"s of Zenith in five paperbacks; Phases 1 and 2 were also reprinted in 2000AD Super Specials or suchlike after the paperbacks went OOP; the colour stuff has never been reprinted.

*Morrison pointed out to Rebellion that Fleetway didn't actually own Zenith.

A shame that neither is readily available. I really enjoyed what I read and would gladly pay for nice editions of both.

This new deluxe version of We3 is really nice. I didn't really notice the additions, but the print quality and extras are great.

I do hope that movie gets made.

Reading that RS article--there's no way, on that evidence, that I'll be reading Supergods... and I LOVED Animal Man, Doom Patrol, Flex, Invisibles, AS Superman, etc etc