My thoughts on DC’s “Gay Green Lantern”

Comic books court controversy. I understand that. Big, spectacular storylines that grab the attention of news outlets have been good for the quick buck in the industry since, well, quite a while ago. The speculator boom of the 1990s saw this become the norm in the business, most notably with the Death of Superman arc. But there were others, such as Marvel’s Alpha Flight member Northstar coming out as homosexual. It’s continued on through the years, from the death of Captain America to the unveiling of a new, gay Batwoman. Anything for a headline and a sales grab. It’s easy to say that most of these were not really well-thought out, either, and most of the time, the books quickly either reverted back to normal (Superman Lives! Captain America Lives!) or push the affected characters back to the fringes again (name one thing Batwoman did during her tenure).

A week ago, when DC announced it was going to reveal a long-standing “major” character as gay in their New 52 continuity reboot, they – of course – managed to grab a few CNN headlines. Already bracing myself for the reveal and the disappointment inherent in it, I was fully reimbursed in those feelings as DC let it be known that it was going to be none other than Green Lantern who was going to come out of the closet. Except it wasn’t the Green Lantern everyone knows, it was 1940s relic Alan Scott.

I have problems with this.

Serious problems.

First and foremost, I am absolutely stunned by the shamelessness in the audacity DC has shown here. They didn’t do this to show support of human rights, or minorities or acceptance of sexual orientations; they did it for headlines and a quick cash grab. Here’s why:

1.They picked a character with a VERY recognizable name. Green Lantern. Now, I know the difference between Alan Scott and Hal Jordan (and John Stewart, Kyle Rayner, Guy Gardner, etc), and YOU know the difference, but what about the majority of people out there? The ones that know nothing or very little about comic books. No matter if the articles explain who Alan Scott is, 90% of people reading about this are going to walk away with only one thing: Green Lantern is Gay. Essentially, they used an arguably obscure character with a very mainstream shared name in hopes of confusing the market, or the potential speculator market.

2.Alan Scott is NOT a major character, and he hasn’t been since the Cold War started. He, like many others from his time, were deemed so irrelevant that they were allowed to grow old. NOBODY grows old in comic books, but Alan Scott did. Sure, he had a role in JSA and such, but he hasn’t been the center of attention since before most of our parents were born. This would be akin to Marvel announcing that Captain America will be revealed to be gay, and then let it be John Walker.

3.Obsidian. The whole “diversity” thing is made into a very unfunny joke when you realize that to make this “reboot” happen, they had to change Alan Scott’s history. He no longer has children (in the pre-New 52 continuity, Scott had two children, Jade and Obsidian. Obsidian was one of DC’s previous “hey, we have gay characters too!” attempts. So, basically, in the effort to diversify and shoehorn a gay character into their stories, they had to eliminate another one. What, were they over quota? I know, I know, they’re saying that the new Scott’s history meant Obsidian never existed and doing this is in honor of him or something, but that’s just stupid.

4.Press release-pleasing announcements of this nature hold no water. Look how many years (almost two decades) went by between Northstar coming out and them doing anything with it. Marvel is just now getting around to making it a truly unique quality to the character (Chuck Austen tried, but Chuck Austen isn’t very good at it and ended up with a few stereotypical cliches). Look at how well DC utilized Batwoman. Or Marvel’s Rawhide Kid reboot. Of any of these stories in the “comic character revealed to be gay” headlines, the only ones that seem to have any thought put behind them are over at Archie Comics, and maybe that’s why it’s working there. They aren’t looking to get a #1 spot on the sales chart for a particular issue. They’re just taking a certain type of character and writing them with the same care they do the rest of the characters.

Now, this doesn’t mean DC and Marvel are all about crass exploitation here. There have been some very good and unique gay storylines that have come out of both companies. The relationship between Wiccan and Hulkling in the Young Avengers books has been one of the strongest, most realistic and natural relationships I’ve seen in years between ANY two characters, gay or not. And despite the thousand other ways I do not like or care for DC’s The Authority, the relationship between Midnighter and Apollo is very well-done. But do you notice something about those two examples? They weren’t quick cash-ins, exclaimed loud and in bold; they were natural parts of the stories, using natural character development and realistic relationships. I’m not saying DC, Marvel or anyone else should remain quiet when they introduce a new gay character, or reveal an old one as such, but if they took a look at the ones that have worked and go from there, I might be a little more forgiving when stuff like this shows up on Yahoo News.

While I should be glad to see more representation in comics, I don’t want it at the expense of being exploited. And this feels like total, crass exploitation, through and through.