|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 12, 2009 22:40:46 GMT -5
Good Q&A overall, but I think Scott needs to re-read that letter. It was open-handed homophobia of a particularly nasty sort. "Raki" directly equates homosexuality with perversion on 2 separate occasions.
I know social justice isn't the goal of a comic book lettercol, but writing it off as "not that offensive" is in itself a bit offensive.
I've read and heard more hateful speech than Raki's too, but it was usually being delivered by men in white hoods or shiny black uniforms. The fact that no violence was directly advocated seems a pretty low bar for tolerating hate speech. Is that what we've come to? It's not really hate until someone gets killed?
|
|
trunkstheslayer
Potential Slayer
Bad day. Started bad, stayed that way.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 188
|
Post by trunkstheslayer on Oct 13, 2009 11:30:01 GMT -5
Good Q&A overall, but I think Scott needs to re-read that letter. It was open-handed homophobia of a particularly nasty sort. "Raki" directly equates homosexuality with perversion on 2 separate occasions. I know social justice isn't the goal of a comic book lettercol, but writing it off as "not that offensive" is in itself a bit offensive. I've read and heard more hateful speech than Raki's too, but it was usually being delivered by men in white hoods or shiny black uniforms. The fact that no violence was directly advocated seems a pretty low bar for tolerating hate speech. Is that what we've come to? It's not really hate until someone gets killed? Thank you! I keep seeing people write this off, it's nice to see someone else who sees it for what it really is/was.
|
|
jellymoff
Ensouled Vampire
Claimer of Funn[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,174
|
Post by jellymoff on Oct 13, 2009 12:14:27 GMT -5
Good Q&A overall, but I think Scott needs to re-read that letter. It was open-handed homophobia of a particularly nasty sort. "Raki" directly equates homosexuality with perversion on 2 separate occasions. I know social justice isn't the goal of a comic book lettercol, but writing it off as "not that offensive" is in itself a bit offensive. I've read and heard more hateful speech than Raki's too, but it was usually being delivered by men in white hoods or shiny black uniforms. The fact that no violence was directly advocated seems a pretty low bar for tolerating hate speech. Is that what we've come to? It's not really hate until someone gets killed? So I had to reread this letter because it was causing such a stir. To me, this letter sounds like it is coming from a place of ignorance more than a place of extreme hate. I don't get the impression that she hates all gay people (but I could be wrong), but rather the impression that she doesn't really understand homosexuality or bisexuality at all. I think this person is truly "homophobic" in the sense that they are afraid of anything that is unfamiliar or different from what they are used to. Some of her word choices were strong and harsh as well, she could have gotten her opinion across in a more diplomatic way. I hope that this person is a fan who visits boards and reads internet chatter, because they may be able to learn something from the reactions that have been posted here and on other sites. I'm not trying to defend Raki in any way; she needs some serious learning. Just giving my impression of the letter.
|
|
iloveromy
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
[Mo0:10]
Posts: 684
|
Post by iloveromy on Oct 13, 2009 12:40:40 GMT -5
26. slayerette: I was re-reading the TOYL arc, and I kept going back to Future Dark Willow's comment,"...the most important thing about death isn't who dies. It's who kills them." Was that just a foreshadowing of Buffy having to run her through with the scythe? Does it apply to what is still to come, or both?
Scott Allie: I'd say equally significant for both those things you mention. It's key.
Maybe this is a subtle Dawn reference? hehe.
|
|
slayerette
Innocent Bystander
There aren't a lot of people that I love[Mo0:1]
Posts: 32
|
Post by slayerette on Oct 13, 2009 21:58:48 GMT -5
I wonder if it really is a little hint towards Dawn, not that the name Twilight doesn't already pull us in her direction. Either way, it's interesting that this idea of "its not who dies, its who kills them" is central to the story. I'm even more convinced now that we are going to have a Scoobie-on-Scoobie homicide soon. I makes the most sense to me and definitely lends itself to high drama. Add that the Twilight reveal might not be in #30 like many of us thought...A Scoobie murder certainly qualifies as a "WTF just happened" moment, especially if it's done ala Renee in WATG. I know I would be screaming for January.
|
|
trunkstheslayer
Potential Slayer
Bad day. Started bad, stayed that way.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 188
|
Post by trunkstheslayer on Oct 13, 2009 22:47:20 GMT -5
I wonder if it really is a little hint towards Dawn, not that the name Twilight doesn't already pull us in her direction. Either way, it's interesting that this idea of "its not who dies, its who kills them" is central to the story. I'm even more convinced now that we are going to have a Scoobie-on-Scoobie homicide soon. I makes the most sense to me and definitely lends itself to high drama. Add that the Twilight reveal might not be in #30 like many of us thought...A Scoobie murder certainly qualifies as a "WTF just happened" moment, especially if it's done ala Renee in WATG. I know I would be screaming for January. Well, we sorta had that already with ToYL didn't we? Not in a shocking "Where'd that come from" sense but still with the scoob on scoob kill. I'm was beginning to think the issue 30 big "WTF" moment was what the solicit for 31 revealed but I guess not. I forgot that whole "It'll leave the fandom pissed and such" thing. As long as it isn't Dawn or Xander dying then I'm good really. I can't handle yet another "Kiss of death" moment
|
|
slayerette
Innocent Bystander
There aren't a lot of people that I love[Mo0:1]
Posts: 32
|
Post by slayerette on Oct 13, 2009 23:07:57 GMT -5
We did get a Scoobie death with FDW, which is why I think maybe something like that will happen again. It could just be me, but FDW's death didn't really feel like a true Scoobie on Scoobie crime, in the sense that it wasn't the Willow we know and love. I think seeing it now in the "real" time is going to have a totally different emotional impact.
I agree if it's Xander or Dawn or both it's going to be hard to live down the cliche. Still, if it's one of them, I think it could be mind-blowing depending on "who kills them." There is no way that Buffy killing her sister or Willow killing Xander, or Xander killing Giles etc could be boring.
|
|
|
Post by Rebecca on Oct 16, 2009 10:56:25 GMT -5
I think you have a point, slayerette, that the scoobie death in TOYL wasn't impactful like a present death would be. It is a viable possibility for the happenings of #30, and quite frankly with how oblivious Xander has been walking around hip-to-toe with Dawn, I fear the worse for him especially.
While I disagree that a scoob-on-scoob kill would be boring, I would find any scoobie death shocking and appalling, I believe this "WTF" moment is definitely something that Buffy does, not the action of one of the other Scoobies or Twilight.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 16, 2009 11:44:19 GMT -5
If there's going to be a core character death, I don't think it'll happen in #30... seems like that issue will focus on Buffy and what's happening to her.
If Joss is going to kill off one of these characters he'll probably do it himself, in his own arc.
|
|
Eloise
Innocent Bystander
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 39
|
Post by Eloise on Nov 3, 2009 2:07:21 GMT -5
Sorry if this has been mentioned on the thread already, but I can't see it...
"But Where's Spike, Angel, the Immortal, the Decoy, those things don't matter at all, in the context of this story."
Well, if Angel or Spike were Twilight, surely it WOULD matter were they are! Might this rule out two Twilight candidates...?
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Nov 3, 2009 2:13:48 GMT -5
Well, even if either one was Twilight, to give exposition before the reveal would be telling. Exposition on Twilight's motives, etc will most likely happen AFTER his identity is revealed.
|
|
Eloise
Innocent Bystander
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 39
|
Post by Eloise on Nov 3, 2009 2:30:10 GMT -5
True. I just thought it was odd for him to say it didn't matter about them. You would think IF either were Twilight, he would put it in a different way. I think I am just grasping at straws though. Dx
|
|
neowhobaz
Respected Watcher
"Beyond the Shadow you settle for, there's miracle illuminated"[Mo0:0]
Posts: 594
|
Post by neowhobaz on Nov 5, 2009 17:31:57 GMT -5
I think we can assume he's telling us nicely both with that statement and the confirmation between him and Chris ryall that Angel and Spike arent appearing as twilight or as pivotal roles in the story because theyre on different paths than buffy. I obviously cant say this as a definite statement but when the season ends and Angel and Spike have played little or no role in the story I'll fall back onto this idea.
|
|
|
Post by skippcomet on Nov 5, 2009 18:54:47 GMT -5
I think we can assume he's telling us nicely both with that statement and the confirmation between him and Chris ryall that Angel and Spike arent appearing as twilight or as pivotal roles in the story because theyre on different paths than buffy. I obviously cant say this as a definite statement but when the season ends and Angel and Spike have played little or no role in the story I'll fall back onto this idea. Plus, let's face it, there are those in the audience (or potential audience) who have more than once made it clear that the only story they're interested is a showdown between Buffy and Spike vs. Buffy and Angel, no other potential candidates need apply, and they've doubtlessly been frustrated by the fact that, as happened in Season Four, Joss isn't putting Buffy's love life or sex life on hold just because their preferred partner for Buffy isn't in the main cast anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Nov 5, 2009 20:15:50 GMT -5
Got some exclusive news from this Q&A! 14. Hellbound Hyperion: So now that we've seen Buffy... um, floating, flying, etc., are we allowed to know the titles of #31 and Brad's arc now? Or is it still too spoilery for us?
Scott Allie: We JUST figured out the title with Joss today for #31. That will be Turbulence. You heard it here first, because I heard it here first about two hours ago. And the title for the next issue is Buffy Has F$ing Super Powers. Although I might have the spelling wrong on that middle word. The most important being that we now know the title to #31 - "Turbulence"! And also Buffy Has F$ing Super Powers!
|
|
|
Post by CowboyGuy on Nov 5, 2009 20:35:01 GMT -5
O....M.....BEYONCE!! I love it when Scott spills the beans on issue titles.
So much speculation will come from that haha. Turbulence eh? Sounds like a lot of flying will be happening, with turbulence. Coincidentally, turbulence can also be characterized by ripples!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Nov 5, 2009 20:43:55 GMT -5
Oooooo good call with the ripples! That's a great catch.
|
|
|
Post by CowboyGuy on Nov 5, 2009 20:45:59 GMT -5
Oooooo good call with the ripples! That's a great catch. Sometimes I catch things. Hehe. ;D
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Nov 5, 2009 21:22:50 GMT -5
Oooooo good call with the ripples! That's a great catch. Sometimes I catch things. Hehe. ;D So many places we can go with that. Naturally, I went down that path. "Turbulence" eh? Interesting...
|
|
|
Post by CowboyGuy on Nov 5, 2009 21:25:54 GMT -5
Was that a joke or is Issue 32 really titled "Buffy Has F****** Super Powers!" Kinda reminds me of "After These Messages...We'll Be Right Back"
|
|