Lit Star Wars #11: It's A Trap (aka no way can Nick not like the cover!)

Well, I was on the verge of not buying another issue, and these allegations and Wood's poor response pretty much cement my decision.

And this is the top selling SW title? That's sad. Legacy V2 is a million times better.

 

re: Wood

beccatoria - Great article, draws together an awful lot of info I hadn't seen.

As to the matter itself - it's a disappointing mess, not that it affects how I see Star Wood, as it was one of the biggest misfires I've seen in ages. It does affect future purchases, just before this came to my notice, I'd decided to grab his Ultimate X-Men run, as online reviews seemed to indicate it concluded well. Then this blows up.

And yes, while it's not always the case that an artist's characters are, to a degree, reflective of the artist's own outlook and traits, it is a big Q as to how Wood could write the stories he has, while engaging in the conduct ascribed to him.

I'll admit my own thinking right now is that now might be the time to sell DMZ! Because, for myself, cheating on your wife is never going to be deemed good. Ah but it was a private matter! Was it? The comics industry does seem to have a particularly bad fuzzing of the lines between personal and professional capacity and whether or not creators at cons are deemed representative of any company.

Could Wood's sales take a big hit from this along with his collaborators? Potentially yes due to the marketing angle, it makes those works far more vulnerable to a rejection by consumers. For myself, while I enjoyed DMZ a great deal, nothing else by him has had the same impact since.

 

The key Q tends to be, in these cases, should said artist be allowed to profit from their works, despite their behavior?

You don't agree with his views but you're still happy to give him money by buying his books and watching the film?

It might be said that people have freedom to do this, that and whatever, but with that comes consequences, especially where other people are concerned.

 

Technically watching the film doesn't give him money- he got all the money he was going to get, up-front.

Buying the books second-hand rather than new might also be a way around the issue.

 

Oho? It was an up-front rather than royalty deal then.

 

Overly simple, cynical answer: people are naturally hypocritical. There have been numerous artists who were great at expressing ideas in their work that they simply weren't capable of carrying out in their lives.

 

Another overly simple way of looking at it: "Do as I write, not as I do." If the work itself does not indicate nor support views I morally disagree with, I won't purchase it. Beyond that, I judge the work by its standalone quality. In Wood's case, I don't much like his Star Wars run, and his Conan work has been something of a disappointment (a shame, as Queen of the Black Coast is an amazing tale).

 

I think if it was just that ID there might not have been as much controversy, but there is the marketing angle of Wood as being feminist in his outlook and work. I think that amplifies it quite a bit.

 

I wouldn't know much about that, as I don't follow him, but if him being a feminist is something that's actively marketed, then yeah, I can see how that feels more like an outright lie than a misconception.

While it's totally unlike me to make two poetry comparisons in two days (I generally dislike poetry, guess it's that collection I read awhile ago), one very prominent example I can think of is Lord Byron. The guy was a total pig when it came to women, treating them as little more than trophies and play things. But for his time, his writing is considered by some to be very proto-feminist. To this day, people still wonder how the two can possibly be reconciled. My answer is that, unlike in stories, people do things "out of character" all the time. They're inconsistent, and especially for writers, they often seem to have completely different voices when they're writing.

I don't want to come off like I'm defending Brian Wood, because I'm not; if the allegations are true, than he sounds like an absolute jackass. I'm also not defending being a hypocrite, because I despise hypocrites. I'm just not surprised when it happens.

 

To me it comes across as arrogant stupidity, the "no one will ever find out about this" outlook, these days? With the amount of social media tech that exists? It's almost the comics version of the politician preaching "traditional morals" and is then revealed as having been shagging a mistress for the last 6 months!

 

Technically he does get money because he's involved in one of the production companies involved with the movie.

 

There's yer problem right there.

 

Not all hardcore punk is angry

 

Isn't it inherently angry?

 

That said, Card has written comics as well. At the time he was writing those comics, I could see there being call to boycott.

 

Of course no...

... kinda.

 

Just how many other Star Wars authors have done things that were so objected to, that the objectors mentioned boycotting in some fashion or another?

Karen Traviss is the first that springs to mind - and lately, Windham, Reiff & Trevas's retcons to the DS1 and DS2 have sparked calls to boycott their next book if there is one - but who else?

 

By whom? Those Two and a half guys left on Stardestroyer.net?

 

Let me stop you right there--you appear to be equating unpopular retcons with sexual harassment. But that couldn't possibly be what you mean to say, because you're not insane.

 

Nope- I'm simply asking which authors have ended up with arguments that their books should be boycotted, so far- having given a couple of possible examples.

EDIT: In Traviss''s case, it's not retcons, but the whole "Talifan" controversy, that I'm thinking of (that, and the FAQ on her website, that also provoked outrage).

Scandals will inevitably run the gamut from serious to very minor- what I want to know, in the case of Star Wars, is what they are, and where they fall on the scale.

 

If I had to guess, more people would be upset and boycott over one author making unpopular retcons / having different opinions than the fanbase than another author committing sexual harassment. In my experience, people are willing to forgive a lot of terrible things done by writers/actors/directors/musicians/artists etc. so long as nothing in their work personally offends or annoys them, but make vicious personal attacks against perfectly fine people because they disliked certain plot or character developments. But then again, I'm a horribly cynical person, so what do I know?

Hypocritical side note: has anyone ever called for boycotting Denning? Because after Crucible, sign me up for that.

 

Interestingly, I've never seen anyone suggest that Denning is anything other than a perfectly nice guy who genuinely cares about Star Wars--just that he's horribly, horribly misguided.

 

Might the same apply to Dave Filoni?

Or even George Lucas, depending on how harshly one assesses his later works?

Lately there's been arguments that Zahn's handling of Mara & Thrawn, ever since the Thrawn trilogy, was misguided.

It would be interesting to see just how many authors could fit into the "nice but misguided" category, depending on the reader's perspective.

 

I've seen a few comments that are pretty nasty directed towards Denning, but they got censored fast. Maybe the Lit board is just more civilized than the rest of the internet?

...nah, that can't be it.

But I agree, he does seem to get fewer derogatory comments directed personally at him than other people who found themselves in similar situations (see for ex: every thread on Karen Traviss). His books on the other hand...

EDIT: Lucas and Zhan might fall into that category, but not Filoni. I have seen plenty of people make extremely nasty comments about him. He seems to have a rather sizable hatebase.