Joss Extravaganza – The problem with the comics

I’ve really enjoyed the Buffy comics, even though I stopped reviewing them. After a while there are so many ways you can say “It’s great that Buffy had sex with someone that I don’t hate so much I would like to pickle them in brine, but do they have to draw all the women looking the same?”

What draws me back to talking about the Buffy comics isn’t the series itself (although it’s getting really interesting and exciting), but the letters column at the back of last month’s issue (the Harmony issue for those who subscribe). The last letter in the column said:

I’m not loving the way the characters are drawn. I know they’re comics and that’s how men typically draw women in comics, but why does Buffy have such a tiny waist and such large breasts? Seeing the way she was drawn in #10 was a real let down; Buffy looked more like Heidi Montag of Jenna Jameson than Buffy. I don’t have anything against a tiny Waist (I have one myself!) or large breasts (okay, those I don’t have, as most women with tiny waists don’t have naturally. But it was disappointing to see Buffy have an unrealistic, unattainable, Barbie-esque body type. I don’t understand why Buffy’s looks are clearly modeled after Sarah Michelle Gellar, but someone decided to inflate her chest.

I wish I had a scanner so I could show you the image she was talking about, but I’m sure you can imagine it. [I’m guessing this is the panel you would have inserted –Amp.]

I want to draw attention to how specific the author’s point is. You could write, but all she is saying that in the comics female character’s waists have got smaller and their breasts have got larger.

You can tell the reply is going to be full of weaseling because Scott Allie immediately turns over the reply to one of the few women who work on the comics.1 Sierra Huhn an assistant editor spends the first few sentences blathering on about how Buffy is much better than other comics, because the women don’t have big breasts and itty-bitty waists (she clearly didn’t look at the first frame of #10 before she wrote that).

She ends with the mealy mouthed “The last thing we want is for anyone who reads this comic, or works on this comic, to feel like we’re in the business of exploiting women” (actually the last thing she says is ‘yay Buffy means more women read comics,’ which is so irrelevant that I’m ignoring it). Which is nice side-stepping what was actually brought up (the original letter didn’t mention exploitative). It’s also an interesting rhetorical technique when the facts are against you (the way women look in the comics is limited and emphasizes extreme hour glass figures) you say “I don’t mean to make people feel that way” – shifting the topic from what exists to other people’s feelings.

But it’s in the middle that she gets really offensive:

It’s true most of the characters are attractive (have you seen the show?), and thin (Slayers have to follow a pretty strenuous exercise program…just sayin’…), and sometimes Buffy may be more buxom from one issue to the next. It happens. But not unrealistically so, and not all the time.

Because we all know training regimes give women large breasts and small waists (you think slayers spend hours doing the “I must, I must, I must, increase my bust arm thrusts?). It’s a ridiculous and insulting answer to a serious question.

That’s not even what I object most to what she says. It’s that she’s stepping on the greatest moment of the history of TV.

Those of you who watched the show will remember Buffy’s last speech. For those who don’t Buffy is talking about doing a spell to share her slayer power, with all the potentials all around the world (it’s way cooler than I can make it sound in a sentence). And as she was doing this there is a series of images of girls becoming slayers, at school, at home, and on a baseball diamond. It means a lot more if you’ve watched the show, but you get the idea.

One of the slayers is fat. She isn’t not-skinny, she isn’t Hollywood fat, she isn’t a size twelve, she takes up space. And she stands up and uses her body and her strength to stop stops the man who is trying to hurt her. Meanwhile we hear Buffy’s voice saying “Everyone who can stand up; will stand up.”2

Why haven’t we seen her in the Season 8 comics yet? Don’t tell me that she started a strenuous exercise programme and now she’s got a tiny waist (her boobs would presumably be the same size) and is one of the many identical looking slayers you see in the background, because I will hurt you.


[Image curtsy: Screencap Paradise.]

  1. There have been eleven men and one women involved in producing the art of the comics (that’s pencils inks colours and letters) and five men and one woman have written scripts. Jo Chen does most of the covers, and the designer has always been female. Listed in the front is three editorial staff and a publisher. The Publisher and Editor are both male, but usually one of the editorial staff is female. I say this not because I necessarily think the comics would look any different if they had more women involved in their creation, but to point out that given how few women are involved in producing the comics to put one forward to justify the way women’s bodies are drawn is tokenism of the worst sort. []
  2. Random piece of Buffy trivia – that was the last shot of Buffy Joss ever shot. []
This entry posted in Buffy, Whedon, etc., Cartooning & comics, Fat, fat and more fat, Feminism, sexism, etc, Gender and the Body, Syndicated feeds. Bookmark the permalink. 

10 Responses to Joss Extravaganza – The problem with the comics

  1. 1
    Angiportus says:

    I have thought for a long time that comic artists use a template or something, because the women all have the exact same shape. The heroines anyway–there is also a standard little girl, a standard older/fat lady, and a standard skinny old lady, but no real variation. Also, the waist is too high on the torso. Nowadays you see the suggestion of muscles on the limbs, but they still otherwise look like Barbies, as you said. (I read that the real reason Barbie had such a tiny waist was that stitches in her clothes did not scale and would not look right otherwise.)
    I like animated/cartoon movies, but with animals or robots not people–and the reason I didn’t see Pocahontas was I was not about to trust someone whose waist is the same size as one of their legs. You see a real person in a cartoon or animated show, you really get startled…
    And don’t get me started on the facial features. I can’t stand those huge, puffy lips. That’s just me, but still, faces differ too.

  2. 2
    Silenced is Foo says:

    To be fair, there’s not a whole helluvalot of variance in the way the artist draws male characters either. Hard to notice because the only major male character who isn’t visibly missing major organs is Giles.

    But yeah, the “everybody is a barbie doll” art is a little sad.

  3. Pingback: links for 2009-02-19 « Embololalia

  4. 3
    Ampersand says:

    Maia, once again I’ve added images to one of your posts! Let me know if you’d like either or both removed.

  5. 4
    Elkins says:

    Wow. When did Buffy get breast implants?

  6. 5
    Maia says:

    Amp – They’re both awesome (well the first image isn’t awesome, but that’s
    why I want it)

    Angiporus – I wouldn’t be surprised if part of the problem is that Georges Jeanty actually doesn’t know how to draw women any other way. In issue five there’s a background slayer who is, when you look closely, supposed to be slightly larger (she’s got corn-rows). But in fact it looks like she’s just wearing a baggy shirt. Fabio Moon, who drew Sugar Shack, clearly knew how to draw flesh that moves, but I don’t think Georges Jeanty does.

    Silence is Foo – but as you say there are very few male characters, there are lots and lots of both new and established female characters and they all look hte same.

    Elkins – about the time she transferred from TV to comic book. I was flicking through that issue (which I really like) and there are equally ‘tiny waist big breasts’ images of Willow and Kennedy and it’s ridiculous. Because they had a body shape, and it wasn’t that.

    The latest issue isn’t too bad though – all the slayers look the same, but no one is taking a bath for no reason and there are no posed close ups which manage to get tiny waist and large breasts in the same shot. Incidentally I really think Satsu is the Japanese slayerin the montage (her hair s very similar)

  7. 6
    Denise says:

    Also, the waist is too high on the torso.

    So true! Isn’t Buffy supposed to have ribs there? Does she work out or does she tightlace?

  8. 7
    Titanis walleri says:

    “I have thought for a long time that comic artists use a template or something, because the women all have the exact same shape. ”
    Though to be fair, that’s pretty true of the men, too…

  9. 8
    grendelkhan says:

    angiporus: I have thought for a long time that comic artists use a template or something, because the women all have the exact same shape.

    I, uh, don’t suppose you’ve ever heard of Greg Land?

    But not all comics artists are horrible. Gene Ha is a damned wizard; see Top Ten for well-drawn folks of various shapes and sizes. I’d like to mention J. H. Williams III and Paul Chadwick for being extraordinarily talented as well, because I can.

    And while I can’t remember him drawing anything other than ridiculously idealized figures, both male and female, I still crave anything drawn by P. Craig Russell. I think it’s my inner fascist talking, there.

  10. 9
    Airlock says:

    But as much as I love Joss and Buffy, that has always been a big criticism of mine. He always seems to insist that his heroines be gorgeous, sometimes scantily clad, and more than just slightly sexual. Its the Madonna effect, and I still don’t know what it means if women must still wield their sexuality as a weapon in their arsenal. Yet, we also know how effective their use of sexuality can be. I mean its perhaps the only thing that stops a bunch of powerful men lose focus. So I don’t know where I stand on this, tbh.