WGBGB: Occasionally Super Mistaken?

(Editor's note: this is republished from 2008. I had taken it offline as a draft, but put it live again because I think there's some revisionist history going on with the D'Orazio/Sims thing. I might try to restore the proper date if I can track it down.)

Valerie D'Orazio is at it, again.

She decided to shoot back at the bloggers who took issue with her stance on minority characters, which she only seemed to introduce in order to avoid admitting an error in her JSA #12 review.

What does she do this time? Opens mouth and inserts foot.

She spends a whole blog responding to one of her critics' responses to a completely different blogger. That's right...if she spent the time she saved NOT paying attention in JSA #12 to actually read the blog she was responding to (rather than skimming)...she'd have avoided another embarrassing mistake.

She claims she is willing to have an actual discussion about minority characters in DC and Marvel comics, but so far she has demonstrated an unwillingness to read and digest the arguments being posed to her and an eagerness to hastily snipe at her adversaries without getting her facts straight first.

I think I found out part of her problem: there's only photographic evidence that she reads the solicits in previews. Maybe that's how she manages to get stuff wrong? Anything longer than some ad text triggers her ADD? :)

Update: WGBGB: Val's Decline Into Madness

(Editor's note: this is republished from 2008. I had taken it offline as a draft, but put it live again because I think there's some revisionist history going on with the D'Orazio/Sims thing. I might try to restore the proper date if I can track it down.)

Update: I think Val might be addressing her fluff piece on the Ayre Force comic book due to a friend writing it, even when the company producing it is as diametrically opposed to feminism as you can get. I'm sure her friend did as good as one can expect with a vanity concept, but somehow I doubt her opinion would have been as positive if anyone else did it (like maybe Geoff Johns). Anyway...I wonder if any of the moderated comments she doesn't approve brought to her attention that Calvin Ayre uses scantily clad women, in addition to his gambling site, to make his money? :)
I now return you to the original column, already in progress.

I start off, first, with an explanation of the whole idea of WHEN GOOD BLOGGERS GO BAD.

Before I started this feature, I actually liked and respected Valerie D'Orazio. I indicated as much on several posts to her blog during my infrequent trips to it.

When I started this feature, it was with the thought that she'd be in the barrel just the once or only occasionally, not become the focus of the feature every single time.

But she's become fodder for this column because of the clear bias she exhibits on a regular basis, inability to behave rationally, and habit of completely trying to spin the counter arguments of others into something they are not (all while their actual words are still completely visible in the comments section, with the notable exception of my dust-up with her).

The latest?

Lisa Fortuner provides guidelines for writers of international characters, courtesy of "The Mainstream Comics Industry":

"However, the Mainstream Comics Industry advises against researching another culture and creating a well-rounded original character based on actual facts, because this could result in your readers thinking of foreign nations as places with a rich history and culture populated by a variety of individual thinkers who are worthy of respect as human beings. This leads to the audience raising their standards and refusing to pay for books that don’t adhere to that standard. "

But Lisa, if you just think of those characters as Legacy Heroes, and give them a chance instead of tearing them down because of supposed inaccuracies and "uninspired characterization" (my God, as if there really is such a thing), maybe they can blossom.

(runs)

Which reminds me...

Remember Faith from JLA?

What the hell happened to her?

See, when I worked on JLA, Faith was created to "kill two birds with one stone" by virtue of her Latin-American heritage. So you got a Woman (big W, trademarked) and an International Character.

Ask Morrison if he's going to use Faith in Final Crisis. Maybe she can be in one of those epic George Perez-like crowd scenes that get turned into a poster with a numbered identification index. She could be right behind Fire's shoulder. Boy, that Fire, I'll tell ya -- she's one hot Brazilian. Get it?

She goes on in the comments section (which is now closed) to lambaste Fire as a stereotype, ignoring posters pointing out that she's been rehabilitated over the years. It seems the extent of Val's using Fire as an example is going back to her creation as the Green Flame...which was born out of the Superfriends comic book in, I believe, the late 70s or early 80s. She would seem, despite having worked at DC, to not have any more modern examples of her behavior (missing the work Rucka has done on her, even though you'd think she would pay attention to the work of the guy who created Renee Montoya's persona and Batwoman).

She shamelessly tries to spin this:

"I think the South American/Latin American "spitfire" cliche for women has been pretty prevalent throughout pop culture, but you know none of my Latina/South American female friends or relatives fit that profile."

But Val, she has character development that explains her "spitfire" personality within Checkmate. I believe a character can be reappropriated. Once a sterotype doesn't mean always a sterotype.

And Val, just because your Latina females and relatives are not hot headed doesn't mean that none can be. My sister and a few of the girls I dated were hot-headed. It's a normal human emotion. As long as it's not her only characteristic, why is there anything wrong with that?

Greg Rucka goes forward and adds reasons to turn her into more than her stereotype. The way the character is right now, how is faith a better character for it?
I hate this idea that all minority characters have to be a stand in for their race. No one does this to white characters at all. No one goes and says that the Joker represents all whiteness. It infuriates me to hear this. Is it because whiteness is normal?

Into her response of:

I have to admit, every time I hear these arguments that there are no stereotyped characters in comics and no token characters in comics, I am fascinated.

Mind you...ABSOLUTELY NO ONE SAID ANY SUCH THING.

Many posters call her out on the straw argument, which she just answers with insults and inanity. When people ask her for a serious answer instead of just spitting out unrelated garbage, she goes on some hissy fit rant that sees her rapidly descend into insanity.

Examples:

Matt:

So why is a character that fits a stereotype, even though she has plenty of character development and is well-rounded, disqualified by default?

Val:

"So why is a character that fits a stereotype, even though she has plenty of character development and is well-rounded, disqualified by default?"

Matt, I ask myself this question about Witchblade everyday. I just don't understand why they just won't give Sara Pezzini a chance.Probably the bare ass with the cyber-webbing.

Matt:

Yes we know Witchblade sucks, but considering we're talking about Fire here I don't see your point.

Mind actually answering the question or are you still just throwing out "controversial" comments that you'll never back up in an endless quest for page views?

Val:

"Mind actually answering the question or are you still just throwing out "controversial" comments that you'll never back up in an endless quest for page views?"

You set up articles in Wikipedia for "imminent deletion" in your spare time just for kicks, don't you? Just to feel that rush. It's like your version of being in the jet in Top Gun. You engage in petty little arguments on the internet and smoke a cigarette after.

My God, Matt...it really *is* that important to you.

God, I didn't know...

Well, you're right, Matt: there is no overly-sexualized history of Fire in the JLA. There are no Latin stereotypes in popular culture. And I don't want to be quoted saying the thing about some stereotypes being justified, but if you did feel that way, I wouldn't rain on your parade.

You are right, Matt.

Matt Is Right.

It's going to be okay. You are Somebody. You are The Master Of This Comments Page, the Master of Post ID #2585950957379771360.

Enjoy it.

And it just gets worse from there (or better, if you're simply looking for the mesmerizing entertainment that can be provided by people who have completely lost touch with reality).

Oh...and she seems to have completely sold out her principles for an exclusive about a vanity press piece. Yeah...the proceeds are going to charity. But it is a vanity piece to fluff up Calvin Ayre's ego...you know him, the guy behind BoDog Poker and the BoDog Girls. Yeah...good ol' Calvin makes a portion of his loot parading women around as sex objects. Not that there's anything wrong with that, unless you're a rabid feminist...wait...no...that's an insult to feminists...unless you're an insane person who claims to be a feminist.

Good ol' Valerie is closing down comments sections left and right, going to moderated comments now. Why? Because she can't handle open debate. She wants to throw out controversial, inflammatory accusations without having to back them up. Check the comments section I linked to above and tell me she intelligently or rationally responds to a single commenter. Now there will be no evidence of her unwillingness to back up her off-the-wall assertions with something resembling facts.

WGBGB: LJ Blogger "_alecto_"

OK...including _alecto_ in WHEN GOOD BLOGGERS GO BAD presupposes that this blogger has ever been good. I can't swear that they have, but I'm not creating a whole new feature for this person.

What genius effort over at their blog caused this attention?

Not going so far as to count how many times men and women speak in 1 and 1/2 episodes of Firefly.
Not suggesting that pornography has a heavy influence on Whedon's work.
Not that anyone who pays Inara for her "services" is a rapist.

But this:

Zoe, of course, is meant to be our empowered, ass-kicking sidechick. Like all sidechicks she is objectified from the get go. Her husband, Wash, talking about how he likes to watch her bathe. Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour. I have known a black woman whose white husband would strangle and bash her while her young children watched. My white grandfather liked black women because they were ‘exotic’, and he did not, could not treat women, especially women of colour, like human beings. I grew up watching my great aunts, my aunty and my mother all treated like shit by their white husbands, the men they loved. So you will forgive me for believing that the character, Wash, is a rapist and an abuser, particularly considering that he treats Zoe like an object and possession.

So...because her grandfather was an ass, this fictional character was a rapist and a misogynist without need of any contextual clues regarding such characteristics?

WGBGB: Support for my "Valerie Situation"

(Editor's note: this is republished from 2008. I had taken it offline as a draft, but put it live again because I think there's some revisionist history going on with the D'Orazio/Sims thing. I might try to restore the proper date if I can track it down.)

Originally posted on 2/26/2008.

It started out as just one Occasional Superheroine reader who came to my blog to find out that the way Valerie was spinning things made me look much worse than my actual deeds would merit.

Andy: Well I'm glad I got to read the posts here, thanks for posting them. I did assume they were much worse seeing the deleted posts, so I can validate your argument there.

Then came a completely unexpected correspondence from a comic professional. He didn't want to be named, but allowed me to share his words under a pen name. Let's call him Richard Alpert.

Richard: "The inherent contradiction in Valerie's posting is that she simultaneously wants to be the victim and the champion. She wants your sympathy for her trials at DC, but she also wants you to agree with only her. It's an inherent contradiction that makes it seem like she was less angry about her treatment as a woman, and more angry that she wasn't put on a pedestal for being so obviously right. Then again, she edited books with Black Lightning and can't recognize him. Yeah . . . I'm sure DC is crushed they let her get away."

"I don't hate female creators; I just hate Valerie."

He manages to hit a point that I wanted to draw attention to when she made the Jefferson Pierce/John Henry Irons mistake, but was trying to stay reasonably cordial at the time. She certainly doesn't seem to employ the keen powers of observation in her current work that she'd have obviously needed to perform adequately as an editor.

I'm wondering if she didn't spend more time fretting over "causes" during her work rather than doing what was asked of her. I remember doing the same when I was interning at a music promotion company and incessantly pitched that Half Pint needed to try to work something out to pimp KMD because they had a completed record with no one willing to press it. Even called Bobbito (from the Stretch & Bobbito show on Columbia University radio at the time). Really didn't endear me to my direct supervisor.

Maybe I'll hear from others who have similar opinions they're afraid to express for fear of being unjustly labeled as misogynist?

When Good Bloggers Go Bad...

I've enjoyed OCCASIONAL SUPERHEROINE on many occasions. I admired her bravery in sharing such private info in the past. I lamented her waiting to take a stand on her principles until AFTER she got fired from what she paints to be a "He Man/Women Haters" club. But that's not what this blog is about.

In a review of JSA #12, she makes a mistake:

The sequence with John Irons was also in need of some editing/quality control; John's opening dialog with his wife sounded like pure exposition devoid of any human quality. And Dale Eaglesham's art, while reminiscent of that great Stephen Sadowski work on the previous JSA, has occasional difficulty in getting from point A to point B in the visual storytelling.

As was pointed out in the comments (politely and devoid of snark, I might add), that was Jefferson Pierce (Black Lightning), not John Henry Irons. Her response?

Valerie D'Orazio said...

"That was Jefferson (Black Lightning) Pierce in JSA, not John Irons."

I think the problem is that Johns wants to make the JSA the catch-all group that every other DC team is rolled into/connected with. Actually having Irons & the Infinity Inc cast make an appearance would make sense to me, as the two titles were historically linked to each other. But to bring not only JLA but Batman and the Outsiders...you need to have a realllly skilled hand to work within such a scope. I'm thinking a little past Johns and more like Busiek.

So, she was confused because it made more sense for it to be John Henry Irons? I don't know if I agree, but she's entitled to her opinion. As a reviewer, though, you'd think she might make more of a habit of keeping the book she's reviewing close at hand for reference:

It's all there. Sure...three panels...but the whole appearance lasted about three pages. I don't think asking that you pay attention enough to catch the name mentioned twice and the previous team affiliation mentioned at least once is too much. Everyone has an off day, though...so just acknowledging a mistake with an "oops" or "sorry" would seem appropriate. She responds with the following:

"So instead of oops we get that having Steel in the issue would have been better than Black Lightning?"

--exactly. now you are catching on.

but also, had the book been more engaging and actually made me care it would have been easier. by the introductory boxing scene my mind was glazed over.

It's not a company-specific thing, I had the same problem with the latest Ultimate Spider-Man. Every girl I saw in that book I thought was Mary Jane.

Is that the "it is everyone's fault but mine" refrain? Why, yes...yes it is!

Pedro wanders in to call attention to this with a comment (and, also, a blog):

Ha Ha. I don't even get what you are trying to say in regards to JSA.

You mistake John Irons for Jefferson Pierce and then suggest that John Irons would make a better fit to cover this mistake.This goes against the "subtle" Kingdom Come storyline that Johns is doing and also the 52 storyline when they turned away from the JSA.

It also seems that the legacies they are focusing on right now are inherited powers. It's also would completely go against the themes that Milligan is working at in Infinity Inc.

Do you read the comics you write about?

A touch harsh? Maybe. But it hits relevant points. All points that Ms. D'Orazio brought up in her flurry to avoid admitting a harmless (albeit rookie) mistake. All of which serves to put her foot in it more:

"This goes against the "subtle" Kingdom Come storyline that Johns is doing and also the 52 storyline when they turned away from the JSA."

"Do you read the comics you write about?"

I read comics to enjoy them. When they become this arcane continuity-wise, when a single issue of JSA requires a knowledge of Kingdom Come, Infinity Inc, Batman and the Outsiders, JLA, and, I suppose, some rudimentary Death of New Gods and Pre-Final Crisis knowledge, it stops being enjoyable for me.

You obviously possess more obscure DC continuity knowledge than I. My obscure knowledge stops at the old Infinity Inc series, which was closely tied to the old All-Star Squadron series, which was basically what JSA is now. That's why I thought Infinity Inc was connected with JSA, and that John Irons was a good fit.

I'm so sorry I don't collect Batman and the Outsiders, Infinity Inc, Countdown, Death of the New Gods, and JLA so I can understand a single damn issue of JSA. Next time, I will try to spend about $25 dollars a week just on DC books so I can understand what is going on.

Then I will say: "I understand the continuity! I get those subtle hints Peter Milligan have been throwing at me all those issues in Infinity Inc!"

This is besides the issue that some white comic creators create bland African-American characters.

Where is the African-American Guy Gardner? Where is the African-American Batman? Where is the African-American Joker? Booster Gold/Ted Kord Blue Beetle? Oracle? Wolverine? Spider-Man?

DC's African American characters are either created to be the only person of color on a team (JSA, JLA, Teen Titans, Green Lantern Corps), or by editorial fiat to fill a diversity need (Firestorm).

Ergo, they are usually uninspired and only have life breathed into them by writers who truly understand and see them as a character first and not a "diversity representative" (ie Dwayne McDuffie with Black Lightning).

I would argue that while certainly well-intentioned, Johns is not the most skilled in this regard.

Oh wait, he DOES have Jakeem Thunder who spouts out racist/sexist comments to fellow teammates. Excuse me.

She get snarky about obscure continuity when her reach goes back further, but just isn't valid any longer. She seizes on a character (Black Lightning) created by a white creator (Tony Isabella) to say is only completely understood and well-written by Dwayne McDuffie. Ironic on the current timing, because Tony feels about as passionate about the usurped control of the Black Lightning character as the recently departed Steve Gerber felt about some of his creations at Marvel.

I won't bore you with the additional details that led to more moments of Ms. D'Orazio flailing wildly to try to find some way to avoid admitting a mistake, but Pedro's and David Brothers' blogs handle a lot of that. Their points in the comments section don't actually get addressed by Valerie, as she pulls the last ditch move of someone losing a debate:

Pedro, you don't really care about story integrity or my integrity or about defending Black Lightning or Geoff Johns.

You just want to feel like "somebody" for instigating and winning a "debate" on teh internets.

Sir, it is a dick move.

Go on the Newsarama boards and pick a fight with some comic writer. I grow weary of you. Good day.

She goes on to close the comments on her blog, rather than even get further posts from some agreeing with her. It is really quite a shame. But at least she didn't put it on moderation and just make the comments she didn't like disappear. So, I guess there's that.