James Robinson Talks Alan Scott, DC's Gay Green Lantern

[Mulett]

I think it is simply an attempt to reflect modern society. Does anyone remember the Justice Alliance of America from Earth-D? It was a one-off comic pubished in 1999, although it was a story based during the 1985 crisis.

I've heard that it reflected what some of the DC writers hoped would happen after the 1985 crisis - that the Justice League would be more ethnically diverse. It didn't happen ofcourse and the League remained pretty much 100% white apart from Martian Manhunter, who's green.

I think the DC writers are trying to hit thr ground running, this time, and make sure they expand the DC universe in a more human way. So not all the characters will be white and heterosexual. Good on them for that!

[ArsenalX]

Who cares this DC, if you really had the balls and the guts, you wouldn't have taken this easy way out.

You cant have you cake and eat it too, fine you avoided some serious backlash, guess what, yo]u lost that "fame and fortune" too you wanted for this gimmick.

[Sterling]

Who cares this DC, if you really had the balls and the guts, you wouldn't have taken this easy way out.

You cant have you cake and eat it too, fine you avoided some serious backlash, guess what, yo]u lost that "fame and fortune" too you wanted for this gimmick.

Lost that "fame and fortune"? What does that even mean?

[Mat001]

John Stewart had his own book in Green Lantern: Mosaic. But that was a very different kind of book.

Guy had his own book, as did Kyle. Hal's a co-star in his own book.

I think his role in Green Lantern Corps is pretty much a strong one, even if he's sharing it with Guy.

And now for my next impression, Chris Rock as Nat X.

Nat X: "They give the brother a co-starring role in a book with a white guy! Why, because the man is afraid to give him a solo book."

They do get a lot of publicity for it

Yeah, what a shame hyping a character and book to get people to read it. I guess we should get rid of all advertising and pray to God/Buddha/Allah/Ra's/Galactus/The Presence/The Force that people will spend their money on something that they have no idea about and no interest in.

Of course they did! They repeatedly mentioned the JSA, they teased us with references that were clearly intended to make us think they were talking about Jay, Alan and Ted (the originals), and they used the name "Earth 2"! What else were longtime fans going to think? They knew what they were doing...

And the three of them are all there. That's not bait-n-switch. They never said that they were going to be as they were Pre-"Flashpoint" and Pre-Crisis.

JSA had an ongoing taking place in present day since 1999. In the brief instance that DC showed a post-Infinite Crisis Earth 2, it had an 80's look.

Yeah and that was four years ago. Before Paul Levitz stepped down and the decision to do a big reboot came about. It's interesting how time changes.

Lost that "fame and fortune"? What does that even mean?

I think he means that DC didn't make it Superman or Batman. Or even Hal Jordan, since he's Green Lantern.

[witchboy]

I was expecting Earth-2 to be the old vets as the elder statesmen and the younger generation following in their footsteps, basicly what was going on in the JSA comic before the last Crisis reboot. What we're getting isn't that, but I think it looks good and I'm excited about it.

[PretenderNX01]

Yeah, what a shame hyping a character and book to get people to read it. I guess we should get rid of all advertising and pray to God/Buddha/Allah/Ra's/Galactus/The Presence/The Force that people will spend their money on something that they have no idea about and no interest in.

But you want your advertising to be about how it's a great story not "they changed ____ to be ____ now"
And when DC themselves posts on Facebook "everybody is talking about Alan Scott", that's them just selling his gayness to get attention. If it's not a big deal, why does DC make such a big deal of it?

Why not insist on just talking about the story in general? As it stands I don't have much of an idea what it's about or an interest.

[Sacred Knight]

When it was made a big deal by the media, they capitalized. So if one wants to accuse them of grasping on to the cheap attention, that I get. But they weren't the ones who made it a big deal in the first place, outside media outlets did that. That's why complaints of them not having the guts to go bigger or whatever falls flat. There's no evidence they even wanted to make that kind of splash. All that's going on here is a writer proposed a change that was green-lighted, one I'm sure everyone knew would earn some sort of reaction and that they were prepared to capitalize off that reaction if and when it came.

[Crisis]

I'm still laughing that anyone uses the term forced down our throats in references to homosexuality because its akin to me like you're being mouth raped...and i don't think you mean that literally. Cause if you do why are you thinking about that ??? Psych 101...

[Mat001]

When it was made a big deal by the media, they capitalized. So if one wants to accuse them of grasping on to the cheap attention, that I get. But they weren't the ones who made it a big deal in the first place, outside media outlets did that. That's why complaints of them not having the guts to go bigger or whatever falls flat. There's no evidence they even wanted to make that kind of splash. All that's going on here is a writer proposed a change that was green-lighted, one I'm sure everyone knew would earn some sort of reaction and that they were prepared to capitalize off that reaction if and when it came.

Exactly. There was free publicity. You take what you can get in order to entice more readers. Whether it's like "The Death Of Superman" or the outing of Alan Scott, any hype is good hype. So long as it translates into sales.

[gwangung]

But you want your advertising to be about how it's a great story not "they changed ____ to be ____ now"
And when DC themselves posts on Facebook "everybody is talking about Alan Scott", that's them just selling his gayness to get attention. If it's not a big deal, why does DC make such a big deal of it?

Why not insist on just talking about the story in general? As it stands I don't have much of an idea what it's about or an interest.

If you look at the genesis of the "story", it's clear that it was a story driven decision. It's clear that this caught DC off guard and it's totally NOT DC using "his gayness to get attention." It's all about fans losing their cool and getting all excited and DC scrambling to keep up.

[gwangung]

When it was made a big deal by the media, they capitalized. So if one wants to accuse them of grasping on to the cheap attention, that I get. But they weren't the ones who made it a big deal in the first place, outside media outlets did that. That's why complaints of them not having the guts to go bigger or whatever falls flat. There's no evidence they even wanted to make that kind of splash. All that's going on here is a writer proposed a change that was green-lighted, one I'm sure everyone knew would earn some sort of reaction and that they were prepared to capitalize off that reaction if and when it came.

I'm pretty sure this is exactly like Batwoman. Diddio and DC thought it was no big deal; it's all pretty clear that DC's behavior is all reaction and no action--they've been scrambling to keep ahead of the story.