Alan Scott has been straight and married since his introduction in what, the 30's and 40's. And now they make him Gay! If DC wants a gay character introduce someone new and dont fool with someone with that much History.
All they are trying to do any way is keep up with Marvel and their gay characters getting married.
The Green Lantern Is Gay: Cute or Controversial?
SodaHead Living
2012/06/01 22:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
594 votes
|
|
43% | |||
|
779 votes
|
|
57% | |||
DC Comics has been promising to reveal that one of its more popular superheroes is gay, and they finally made the announcement: It's the Green Lantern. Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern, is being reintroduced as a homosexual character in the second issue of the "Earth 2" series, part of a recent project designed to revive classic characters called "New 52."
Writer James Robinson explained, "[Scott's] still the same dynamic, heroic guy he was. He's still the head of a media empire like he was in his prior version, but of course with the form of media changing and evolving with the times. And in many ways, his origin mirrors the original one also. Alan’s sexuality is just one facet of him, along with his innate goodness, valor, charisma and skill at leadership that makes him the perfect man to wield the power of the green light in the world of Earth 2." So what do you think? Is the Green Lantern being gay a cute idea, or too controversial?
Writer James Robinson explained, "[Scott's] still the same dynamic, heroic guy he was. He's still the head of a media empire like he was in his prior version, but of course with the form of media changing and evolving with the times. And in many ways, his origin mirrors the original one also. Alan’s sexuality is just one facet of him, along with his innate goodness, valor, charisma and skill at leadership that makes him the perfect man to wield the power of the green light in the world of Earth 2." So what do you think? Is the Green Lantern being gay a cute idea, or too controversial?
Top Opinion
-
carlton999 2012/06/02 04:40:40
Alan Scot was the Green Lantern back before the 1960's and when DC reinvented itself with Hal Jordan becoming the Green Lantern, everyone forgot about Alan Scott. It was a gutless move and DC Comics basically spit in the face of gays choosing this character.
Why can't they just develop a character that is gay? Who cares, make it a good character and people will still accept it.
Like I say above about Storm, Spawn and other black characters... what makes them popular is they aren't stereotyped and are depicted as human beings rather than focusing on their race. When they do that, the characters fail and even black people who read comics stop buying and reading them because they want to see black heroes who are first and foremost human in regard to their every day lives.
Whether you agree with Janice or not, this was a gutless and meaningless gesture on DC's part as Alan Scott will just fade back into the dustbin of comic book history and be forgotten again. In reality, he will now be cursed as this "major" hero revealed as gay and decades from now that's all anyone will remember if they even remember that. they'll remember DC Comics made this character gay because THEY ARE THE BIGOTS as they refused to make o...
Alan Scot was the Green Lantern back before the 1960's and when DC reinvented itself with Hal Jordan becoming the Green Lantern, everyone forgot about Alan Scott. It was a gutless move and DC Comics basically spit in the face of gays choosing this character.
Why can't they just develop a character that is gay? Who cares, make it a good character and people will still accept it.
Like I say above about Storm, Spawn and other black characters... what makes them popular is they aren't stereotyped and are depicted as human beings rather than focusing on their race. When they do that, the characters fail and even black people who read comics stop buying and reading them because they want to see black heroes who are first and foremost human in regard to their every day lives.
Whether you agree with Janice or not, this was a gutless and meaningless gesture on DC's part as Alan Scott will just fade back into the dustbin of comic book history and be forgotten again. In reality, he will now be cursed as this "major" hero revealed as gay and decades from now that's all anyone will remember if they even remember that. they'll remember DC Comics made this character gay because THEY ARE THE BIGOTS as they refused to make one of their frontline characters gay which is what everyone believed they were going to do when it was announced a major character would be revealed as gay.
Chuck... who's the real bigot here? In truth, Janice is correct and the reason she is correct isn't because the character is gay... she's correct because this meaningless gesture takes a character already collecting dust and literally cursing him because all anyone will rmeember is he was reintroduced as gay because DC was afraid to introduce a lead character as gay or better yet, introduce a totally new character that's gay and put their money where their mouths are by portraying him as human first and making him being gay a sidenote of the characters nature as other than being gay, aren't gay people like anybody else? Or are you willing to be the one to say that gays truly are completely different from everybody else and aren't human because nothing about them is the same as straights.
Come on... you want to attack people for stating a blatant truth? Look at the situation first and understand just what a meaningless bigoted decision this was that DC couldn't make one of it's premiere characters gay.
Like every other hero in existence...if they really wanted to create an Iconic gay superhero that was a flagship character...they should have created a new one and let them "rise or fall on their own merits." -GLaDOS. Every current day iconic character had to go through it...why shouldn't a gay one? If they were really smart though, they'd have simply brought Obsidian back. Who, in my mind, has already earned the status of "Iconic." or at least well on his way.
Although I do agree with you on the whole "publicity stunt" aspect. I'm not really happy with the fact that DC comics did this to draw attention. That's what's not right.
You are referring to the Green Lantern of the "Silver Age" started in 1959. I remember actually buying that 10 cent comic when I was a kid.
But you are right about re-writing the canon. Back before the 70's any sexual reference or romantic entanglement was ever shown in ANY superhero comic book.
Here is a scene from Action #306 in printed in 63.
I left out the word "hardly" in my last sentence as in "hardly ever". lol
Shoot, the whole reason for the Comic Code Authority was because of gore and sex (even implied) that was happening in the comics, and that was in 1954. Prior to that there was the "Ten Cent Plague," with the Pulp comics of the time.
There's a kiss from 1959.
I don't think it's really cute or controversial - unless it contradicts previously established canon about the Green Lantern's sexuality.