Posted by USAgentfan on July 9, 2006, 6:02:18, in reply to "I am not the only one talking about it" The writer wants to tell a good story one would hope, and if Frenchies homosexuality is the most important issue of that comic to you, then the writer has failed or you have completely missed the point. If Hudlin had wanted to drum up interest and controversy about Frenchie then he could have done so all over the internet months prior to the release of the issue and in the weeks after -but hes been silent about it and has preferred to talk about other, more important things. There is NOTHING to suggest that Frenchie's revelation was inserted in order to simply gain attention and start sensationalist conversations. Meanwhile its clear from the events on the page that Frenchies revelation IS intergrel to advancing the plot. Oh, but you havent read it have you? Yet you still want to have your opinions taken seriousely and speculate what the events of that issue mean like some kind of expert when you dont actually have any knowledge or experience of the issue itself. Hudlin wants us to talk about how cool and excellent his comic is - as would any writer. Giggling like schoolboys or arguing about whether there are too many homosexuals in comics does nothing for the writers reputation and is unlikely to sell comics. A writers motivations are ALWAYS to tell a good tale and/or sell comics, and there is nothing to suggest that sticking a gay character in guarentees to increase the chance of doing either. No, whats happened here is that DOUGIE STYLE started a thread in which he mentioned just how cool this issue was and also happened to throw in the fact that Frenchie was gay. Dougie Style DIDNT make any actual comment about Frenchie other than that he was gay, and he seemed to prefer to talk about how much he enjoyed the issue. Then all of a sudden you came tromping and stomping along without having read the issue and immediately jumped on the 'too many homosexuals in comics' argument. Hudlin didnt start this current branch of conversation, neither did Dougie Style or myself. So who did? The answer is you - a person without the slightest inkling of the actual content of the issue - who jumped all over the mere mention of the inclusion of a gay character and instantly assumed that such inclusion was a BAD thing. Why is something Bad simply because its happening more often? Why is the inclusion of a gay character bad by default? You stated that Frenchies coming out was 'not central to the advancment of the plot' - but you havent read it, so how do you know? If you HAD read the issue then you would know that Frenchie coming out to Marc sets rolling a chain of events that is ABSOLUTELY vital to the advancement of the plot. These events, which all start with Frenchie, not only pursuade Marc to once again become Moonknight, but also ensure that he once more ends up on the side of the angels. But again, you havent read it, so how the hell would you know? Hasnt stopped you making assumption after assumption and wanting to be respected like some kind of expert when you havent even read the subject matter on which you base your comments. How much respect do you think you will get when you saunter over to a bunch of people who have actually read the issue and then start making wild, baseless assumptions about it despite having never read it yourself? Perhaps I could convince you how much of an expert on shakespeare I am despite having never read him? No - youve accused Hudlin of jumping on a bandwaggon by including a gay character in his story, despite the fact that he hasnt said a word about it. In reality however the only person to jump on a bandwaggon is yourself, by instantly decrying the inclusion as a BAD thing despite having not read it. Thats a blinkered, narrowminded opinion that reeks of a lack of tolerance and understanding, or at least the will to go out there and educate yourself about the issue at hand. Well I'm finished here, and I'll say no more on the matter. I'm off to go talk to someone who actually READS this comic.
86.141.118.56
:
: If the writer didn't want something to be
: discussed, then he wouldn't have written the
: story the way it was written. That includes
: making an established heterosexual character
: gay.
:
This website, its operator, and any content contained on this site relating to Moon Knight are not authorized by Marvel Comics, Inc.. This site is not sponsored, approved or authorized by Marvel Comics, Inc. The opinions of this site are not necessarily those of Marvel Comics, Inc. and this site is not an authoratative voice of the views of Moon Knight, and characters and situations as written by Marvel Comics, Inc. This site serves as a non-profit scholarly work which reviews, promotes, and documents the elements of Moon Knight in comic books and other media during the 21st century and beyond. All ideas in this site are expressed as a continuation of thought covering the pop culture associated with Moon Knight. These thoughts are not necessarily the ideas of Marvel Comics, Inc.. Some illustrations and words are the creation of others that may or may not have appeared in other publications or websites. Their inclusion in this site is not intended as an infringement of their copyright in any way, but rather is done in the interest of documenting and reviewing pieces of pop culture "comic book" history. Moon Knight and other related properties and images are © by Marvel Comics, Inc.
This Message Board owned and operated by: Mitch Taylor (Irn12)
Create your own free message board!
