Click for larger image (1442x720)
Click for larger image (1442x720)

Alex Segura over at The Source, has been releasing sneak peeks on the upcoming Blackest Night series.  Today the site has the three joined covers to Blackest Night: Tales of the Corps #1-3 by artist Ed Benes’.  Very cool, and sure to be the wallpaper for more than a few people.  I’m digging it, and can’t wait for the action to crank into high gear in what could be the biggest series DC has released since Sinestro Corps War.

via The Source

The Author

Stephen Schleicher

Stephen Schleicher

Stephen Schleicher began his career writing for the Digital Media Online community of sites, including Digital Producer and Creative Mac covering all aspects of the digital content creation industry. He then moved on to consumer technology, and began the Coolness Roundup podcast. A writing fool, Stephen has freelanced for Sci-Fi Channel's Technology Blog, and Gizmodo. Still longing for the good ol' days, Stephen launched Major Spoilers in July 2006, because he is a glutton for punishment.

You can follow him on Twitter @MajorSpoilers and tell him your darkest secrets...

Previous post

Invincible #60 Sells Out Back to Press

Next post

Friday Sing-a-Long: Star Trekkin'

40 Comments

  1. April 3, 2009 at 10:34 am — Reply

    Youre damn right about this being wallpaper’d. Wish companies would release high resolution art like without the annoying watermarks /trade dresses like this more often.

  2. April 3, 2009 at 11:24 am — Reply

    I was tempted to save the pic but the prominence of Star Sapphire’s boobs and the fact this character was the only scantily clad Corps representative turned me off big time…

  3. April 3, 2009 at 11:39 am — Reply

    I don’t know if it’s because I’m getting older, but the way that some of the guys are drawing women is ridiculous. I mean, I guess it always has been ridiculous, but I’m starting to get a little offended by it.

  4. Salieri
    April 3, 2009 at 11:59 am — Reply

    Steve, you are correct-sir. Those Star Sapphire costumes are hideously annoying, and I wish Carol’s would be more akin to that blue-skinned alien woman from a few issues of GLC ago. Or that the illustrators would at least incorporate a little black into the uniform to cover the skin, like all the other members of all the other Corps have.

  5. Salieri
    April 3, 2009 at 12:01 pm — Reply

    Also, the crotch-star…I have no idea how any editor would approve that sort of thing. Oh, wait, I do – the attraction of young virgin men to a comic book.

  6. DMC
    April 3, 2009 at 12:31 pm — Reply

    WOW Salieri…I didn’t notice the crotch-star…….well maybe I did but I didn’t think anything of it, this one’s a bit too low. Now that I look back at some of her old pics as Star Sapphire, there’s always been one in that area, least this one isn’t glowing. Though SS has looked like this for a while it would be interesting to find out who originally designed this costume.

  7. Mike Keller
    April 3, 2009 at 12:31 pm — Reply

    I can’t tell you how offensive this is to me – because it isn’t.

    I don’t read comics for their correct depiction of women, or MEN. Since when have you ever met a dood that looks/dresses like that!?!? I’m so offended that Green lantern’s – lantern draws your eyes to his pectoralis muscles. Such blatant objectification of men!! …come on.

    I read comics for their entertaining stories. I suspend disbelief and roll with it, because I know darn well life isn’t like that. If it were, we wouldn’t have comics like these. And I don’t give a rat’s tail if it caters to young ‘virgin’ males. They don’t market tampons to guys, or romance novels (mom calls then bodice-rippers). Get a grip. Your market is what your market is.

    Thanks for posting an entertaining and dynamic piece of art.

  8. April 3, 2009 at 1:06 pm — Reply

    @ Mike Keller

    You’re right that comic book artists draw stylized, “perfect” figures for both the male and female characters. But there’s a difference between drawing an idealized woman and drawing an idealized woman with her boobs hanging out, all over the place.

    And I’m not saying this to be all, “Oh my God, boobs! Look away!” It’s not about that at all. It’s about the fact that it looks #^$&ing retarded. Not to mention the fact that it’s insulting as hell that DC thinks that I’m going to prefer a stupid ass design, so long as there’s boobs, over an awesome design that might not show some skin.

    Then again, there’s a reason for that. Most comic book fans WOULD prefer cartoon flesh over a good design. It’s pathetic.

  9. You guys are hilarious
    April 3, 2009 at 2:26 pm — Reply

    I really what comics josh reads. Because this kind of thing has been going on forever. Do you balk at Power Girl’s outfit? Fathom and Witchblade must have you on your corner and your soap box.

    You are upset at the design because you think it’s not physically possible? really? have you never heard of tape and spirit gum? did you watch Mystique in any of the X-movies? cause guess what? she was naked save for some tape and paint and yellow eyes…

    You’re right. The star sapphires do have a uniform that stands out from all of the other corps–and it should considering what their corps stands for and represents…

    Mike is right to point out that absolutely nothing about comics represents any kind of reality and I constantly scoff at people that get all up in arms on details… so, you don’t think the costume is realistic but you’re okay with a ring that allows a wearer to conjur matter from pure thought and allows them to fly through space? right…

    if you don’t like it because it offends you, I’m okay with that. It makes sense to me. but to get up in arms with the costume because it’s not like the others and because it uses tape creatively? really? I didn’t read the part of the book of Oa where it says “and all the corps shall have similar uniforms that do not offend people with their willingness to show skin.” But I was reading late at night and I may have missed it.

    And if you really think this costume is impossible in real life, you should watch more fashion television–you’d be surprised at what they can pull off.

    Before you go an speak for “most comic book fans” look to your own flaws. You’re hung up on an outfit. You think that DC is really worried about what you think of their costume design. and most of all, you really think “most comic book fans” prefer cartoon flesh over good design. Comic fans want to be entertained. and I was very entertained–not by the outfit. I’ve seen it before. I was very entertained by your clever critique that began with the oh so verbose “it looks #^$&ing retarded.” You deemed scores of people pathetic when you have an argument based on pretty much air.

  10. Eye-Roller Lass
    April 3, 2009 at 2:46 pm — Reply

    Mr. Keller: Please note that the guys are usually fully clothed, and their nether regions are hardly glowing. None of the male costumes I’ve ever seen would’ve taken a whole new phisics law to make us believe that their balls are kept within the fabric all the time. And even Hal’s fantastic ass hardly gets the same displays as his pecs in the same anatomically impossible pose as his poor lady.

    Also, a woman’s money is as good as a man’s, so if the comicbook industry wants to survive the economy, they better start giving some thought to our slice of the market. Not to make separate books “for her”, mind you, but at the very least level the plane on how genders are depicted.

  11. Eye-Roller Lass
    April 3, 2009 at 3:27 pm — Reply
  12. April 3, 2009 at 3:45 pm — Reply

    @You guys are hilarious

    “I really what comics josh reads. Because this kind of thing has been going on forever. Do you balk at Power Girl’s outfit? Fathom and Witchblade must have you on your corner and your soap box.”

    Yes, Fathom and Witchblade’s costume are ridiculous. Power Girl is an exception since most the time, she’s presented as making fun of the fact that women in superhero comics are drawn ubsurdly.

    “You are upset at the design because you think it’s not physically possible? really? have you never heard of tape and spirit gum? did you watch Mystique in any of the X-movies? cause guess what? she was naked save for some tape and paint and yellow eyes…”

    Who said I didn’t like the design because it’s physically not possible? Because I certainly didn’t. I thought I made it pretty clear that I didn’t like the design because it’s a horrible ^%$#ing design.

    As for Mystique being basically naked all over the X-Men movies…I liked it. It makes sense that a shapeshifter wouldn’t actually wear physical clothes.

    “You’re right. The star sapphires do have a uniform that stands out from all of the other corps–and it should considering what their corps stands for and represents…”

    But does that uniform have to look like a 90’s travesty?

    “Mike is right to point out that absolutely nothing about comics represents any kind of reality and I constantly scoff at people that get all up in arms on details… so, you don’t think the costume is realistic but you’re okay with a ring that allows a wearer to conjur matter from pure thought and allows them to fly through space? right…”

    Again, you’ve put words in my mouth and are basically arguing against yourself, because I never said these things. I don’t have a problem with anything being unrealistic. Go back and read my post again.

    “if you don’t like it because it offends you, I’m okay with that. It makes sense to me. but to get up in arms with the costume because it’s not like the others and because it uses tape creatively? really? I didn’t read the part of the book of Oa where it says “and all the corps shall have similar uniforms that do not offend people with their willingness to show skin.” But I was reading late at night and I may have missed it.”

    HAHA! So before, you were talking about scoffing at people getting up in arms about details, and here you are trying to realistically explain Star Sapphire’s costume by saying there’s double sided tape holding it together. HA!

    I bet what you CAN’T explain is what the point of a costume like that would be, other than to sell more comics to horny fanboys.

    “And if you really think this costume is impossible in real life, you should watch more fashion television–you’d be surprised at what they can pull off.”

    And here’s where you almost manage to have a point. It’s true that a lot of high fashion is not practicle and is pieced together ever so gently for the sole purpose of looking good on the runway. Which is silly when you really think about it, but at the same time, those models are considered canvases with which the artist (designer) expresses their art.

    The difference between that and comics, is that in comics, all you have is various combinations of the same skin tight material, just in different patterns and colors. In fashion, you’ve got texture and weight and…ah, I won’t get into it, but there’s definitely a difference, and I can respect a fashion designer, even if I may think some of the work is goofy.

    “Before you go an speak for “most comic book fans” look to your own flaws. You’re hung up on an outfit. You think that DC is really worried about what you think of their costume design. and most of all, you really think “most comic book fans” prefer cartoon flesh over good design. Comic fans want to be entertained. and I was very entertained–not by the outfit. I’ve seen it before. I was very entertained by your clever critique that began with the oh so verbose “it looks #^$&ing retarded.” You deemed scores of people pathetic when you have an argument based on pretty much air.”

    No, I DON’T think that DC cares what I think, and I never said anything to the contrary. There you go, putting words in my mouth again. And buddy, you’ve got NO room to talk about someone else’s argument. You’ve yet to make a decent point.

    But in the end, I want to be entertained too. The difference between you and me seems to be that I don’t need to be entertained by scantily clad women for the sake of scantily clad women.

  13. Salieri
    April 3, 2009 at 3:58 pm — Reply

    Even functionally, that outfit is plain ridiculous – it doesn’t represent “Love”, but physical attraction. Love is usually defined as wanting to be with someone DESPITE physical attraction to them; logically, there should be a significantly higher number of Star Sapphires who aren’t at all attractive based on physical appearance, but are intelligent and have wonderful personalities.

    And, again – in the heat-less depths of space, notice the gender of the two characters who aren’t fully clothed.

  14. Salieri
    April 3, 2009 at 4:11 pm — Reply

    Oh, wait, it’s Ed Benes – the same guy who drew those hilarious ‘Titans’ covers with Flash yelling at Donna over his broken wrist and her cleavage, and Nightwing began mutating into a giraffe. Other criticisms, aside from the misogyny, would be –

    * What exactly are any of the characters except Hal & Sinestro doing, other than posing? Obviously, Atrocitus can’t do anything without vomiting and blotting out his figure, but shouldn’t the others at least make some sort of energy projection?

    * For that matter, why is the Indigo Lantern in this at all? The Indigos are all about compassion, useless for fighting people; she looks as if she’s just making a light-show until something interesting should happen. A more intelligent choice for the shot would, perhaps, be examples of each Lantern displaying their unique individual duties – but, of course, have to appeal to the lowest fanboy denominators so HUEG FIGHT SCENE LOL.

    * Even the poses are ridiculous. Giant hips! Claw-hands! MikeTurneritis (the appearance of one or less recognisable feet in a large spread)! Indigo Lantern is standing on Atrocitus’ arse! Continue the line of Star Sapphire’s leg, and you see her foot is fondling Sinestro’s fear-sausage! A three-way feel up is occurring with Saint Walker groping Agent Orange’s chest as he gropes Hal Jordan’s back!

    * This apparently takes place in an area bereft of any other Lanterns, as well as a sector of space with hundreds of surrounding stars but no space junk, meteors, planets, nebulas. Odd.

    * WHAT IS STAR SAPPHIRE STANDING ON (apart from Sinestro’s penis)?

  15. April 3, 2009 at 4:19 pm — Reply

    While I appreciate a good argument, remember the rules of the comment section. There’s nothing wrong with having a disagreement with someone, but please keep personal attacks to a minimum and keep everything on topic, or I will close the comments.

  16. KidZoom
    April 3, 2009 at 4:32 pm — Reply

    I think this is awesome. Ed Benes is known for this kind of art so get over it. If your insulted get over your self. As for the practicality, since when have well known superhero customs been practical. Witchblade’s custom is worse. Oh, and I’m offended by Hal Jordan’s rippling muscles that I will never have….please.

  17. Brent
    April 3, 2009 at 4:54 pm — Reply

    This image of Star Sapphire and this conversation remind me of watching ‘Watchmen’. Being confronted with a glowing blue dong presented so frequently yet so casually made me realize how immature I am concerning the human anatomy. I digest impossibly sexualized images of females without thinking twice, and I believe our culture has accepted grossly exaggerated female images as a new standard of beauty. It wasn’t until ‘Watchmen’ that I realized how sheltered I am from understanding what women must feel like all the time. And I realized how far I am from having a healthy nonchalance about the human anatomy, as other cultures do.

    What does that have to do with Ed Bene’s super unrealistic, crotch emphasizing, breast-heaving art? Ideally, there would be nothing wrong his gratuitous T&A, if there were no pathologies driving it. I don’t wanna actually see an equal amount of male objectification, but for the sake of intellectual honesty, I gotta admit that if the way Benes and others draw women were only driven by innocent escapism, then male bodies would be objectified in the same manner…and no one would care. If this truly was only about escapism, then likewise we would not mind if male heroes flopped about like Dr. Manhattan.

    But we all know there would be riots in the streets if next week’s comics arrived with barely contained bulges shown from angles emphasizing unrealistic endowments, completely out of context with whatever is going on in the comic. Although men are already drawn unrealistically fit, they are usually clothed and not contorted in a manner to show off their man bits. Therein is the difference in how men and women are sexualized in mainstream comics.

    For the record, I’m not gay, I’m not advocating for gratuitous male nudity, and it is with no pride that I take visual advantage of the abundance of semi-naked women in all media. I question whether I could withstand what women are confronted by all the time. I don’t even think about how women who buy comics have to look past the misogyny to enjoy this medium. But if I do think about it, I can’t rationalize that what’s going on is RIGHT.

    A more sophisticated man than I wouldn’t care about male objectification so long as the ladies are half-nekkid too. I’m just being honest when I admit that having never been confronted with this disparity before seeing ‘Watchmen”, I am not yet ready for the Benes’ treatment on male characters, but I believe as a functioning semi-literate adult, I SHOULD be.

    Side note: Dr. Manhattan should be the new Viagra spokesman: “I’m blue all over, but I don’t want my atomic missile is feeling blue. When that happens, I pop these little blue pills!”.

  18. Salieri
    April 3, 2009 at 5:00 pm — Reply

    KZ, I would appreciate it if you expressed your argument with grammar which doesn’t, you know, make you seem to resemble the very kind of sex-obsessed 15-year-old I referred to in my earlier argument. A comma or an apostrophe doesn’t go amiss, as well as the proper spelling of “You’re” or “Costume”…unless you’re implying that Witchblade is now used to check passports…

  19. April 3, 2009 at 5:03 pm — Reply

    @ KidZoom

    If your post wasn’t directed at me, then disregard the following.

    Did you even read my post? Because I never said ONE WORD about the lack of practicality among female superhero costumes being a problem. Not a SINGLE WORD.

    I also never said ONE WORD about being offended by the fact that artists depict females with stylized forms. I even mentioned that they do the same for male characters. It’s the nature of comics. It’s an ideal. What I did say–and this is important, so read carefully–is that there’s a BIG difference between drawing a stylized woman and drawing a stylized woman with next to zero clothing for no other reason than to look attractive or appeal to a male readership.

    If it helps you to comprehend this, think of Hal Jordan in a skimpy speedo with his nutsack busting out for no reason. See the difference?

  20. KidZoom
    April 3, 2009 at 5:43 pm — Reply

    I mean no disrespect to anyone nor am I attacking anyone or their opinion. I find it rather silly for someone to attack a comment on the merits of grammar, considering that this is a comment section not a discussion board. I was simply trying to get a comment out in a timely manner in order to enjoy other Major Spoilers awesomeness. That said this will be my last comment.

    @Josh

    I didn’t fully read your comment, but if it sounded like I was attacking it, sorry. I was speaking in general. Also, I don’t know many women who find nut sacks or hanging dongs attractive so your point is flawed, although images like that do make me uncomfortable. I do get what your saying, but most women enjoy the male form not a specific feature. They may have a favorite feature like the butt or chest, but like men, they enjoy the whole package. These whole packages are the stylized male forms you were talking about. Color characters like Flash or Green Lantern pink and they’re magically naked. woo hoo

    ps Salieri, i hope my grammar is terrible and it drives you crazy. lol

  21. April 3, 2009 at 5:57 pm — Reply

    @ Kidzoom

    So, based on your comments, I’m assuming that you think that women in comics are drawn with their boobs hanging out because it appeals to guys. And I can assume this because you made the analogy that it wouldn’t work in reverse (guys with their nuts hanging out) because women wouldn’t find that attractive. And I’m not even going to go into your generalizations of what women find or don’t find attractive.

    Two things:

    1. There’s no point in drawing a female superhero nearly naked, other than to appeal to horny boys (or girls, I suppose). It’s selling sex. Not good stories, not good art. Sex. That’s cheap and it insults my intelligence.

    2. “Coloring characters like the Flash pink” isn’t the same as actually drawing them naked or semi-naked, is it? No, it’s not. And not having a problem with naked chicks running around in superhero comics, but raising an issue if it’s a male figure is indicitive of a double standard.

    • April 4, 2009 at 1:33 pm — Reply

      I wonder why no one has put PowerGirl’s perspective into all of this – it distracts the bad guys… of course that particular moment was probably written by a man :D

  22. Ricco
    April 3, 2009 at 6:29 pm — Reply

    As it’s been pointed out in the podcast, girls’ uniforms/armors hardly ever cover the mid section and show cleavage even if multiple vital organ are located in those areas. While Powerbreast and Superskirt can get away with it, being invulnerable and all, it’s not a logical move for what is basically and Army Corporation. Both female Lanterns have partial uniforms, that’s just a dumb military choice.

    The fact female comic book characters are treated as sexual objects disagned to boost sales is nothing new, but it’s getting old…

    Just release a swimmsuit issue once a month or something.

  23. KidZoom
    April 3, 2009 at 6:30 pm — Reply

    I throw in the towel. You win. That’s what you want to hear, right. If you feel this strongly about it–what with your misuse of a comment section–maybe you should find a better place for your argument. I’m serious, you have awesome argumentative skills. Oh and if you want the last word, by all means, take it. As for me, I’m gonna log off and eat a banana.

    and again, I hope my bad grammar drives Salieri crazy.

  24. Chill
    April 3, 2009 at 6:42 pm — Reply

    Can we maybe just agree to disagree? I mean, none of these costumes are all that feasible…

    sex sells (big boobs and big pecs work for everyone) and that’s just a fact. Some of us don’t like the costume. some of us do. some of us are mac… some pc… can’t we all just love the comic anyway? (or hate it… whatever…)

  25. mosdef
    April 3, 2009 at 8:39 pm — Reply

    Time to throw in my 2 cents.
    Well the hypersexuality of female comic book characters is super duper old, its nothing new so most people should be used to it. Myself as a man, i dont have a problem with it, i could care less. It wont stop me from buying an issue of a comic i want at all. IMO the cleavage, butt shots, and overall lack of clothing on women in comics is for men, who are a majority reader of comic books. I KNOW their are women out their but base percentage goes to men, and im pretty sure it does help boost sales to the younger crowd.

    But people comics do the same thing to men. Every super male character has a friggin rock hard body,chiseled abs, the little v at the crotch, and a tight ass.(I AM NOT GAY). If you wanna be a realest in the situation(you shouldnt, its a comic book) men shouldnt look like that at all. Most men dont. I dont hear or read a single comment about how men are shown in comics. (DOUBLE STANDARD)The reason they dont show ball or C$%% man cleavage is because no one wants to see it. (NO ONE-ESPECIALLY ME) The reason they do show these features on men is BECAUSE they are superheroes, their SUPPOSED to be stronger,smarter,faster than the average man and why shouldnt the same go for women? We got rock hard bodies in skin tights, they got rock hard bodies in skintights. case in point…..I DONT KNOW. I LIKE BOOBIES-JK(BUT I REALLY DO)

    IM RICKY BOBBY?

  26. April 4, 2009 at 1:05 am — Reply

    But the women aren’t in skin tights. They’re pretty much in just skin. But what they hey. Benes is the artist that draws women often with both their asses and boobs pointing in the same direction so what’s the point in expecting anything different from him? Cho might come off as a frat boy pig in interviews about this topic but he at least draws real women sexualized…

  27. Steven
    April 4, 2009 at 1:12 am — Reply

    Were those who were reading comics at the time offended by George Perez’s rendition of Starfire in New Teen Titans back circa ’81-82? Or was the just my mom?

  28. April 4, 2009 at 1:18 am — Reply

    I would also like to request a moritorium on the use of the phrase “Get over it.”

    It conveys nothing so much as contempt, and really undermines most (if not all) points you might be wanting to make. :)

  29. duckface
    April 4, 2009 at 4:36 am — Reply

    I can’t believe that some people will just disregard this as being a “staple” of comics. Racism used to be a staple too, you know.

    mosdef – you say men are also sexualized, and they are, but why is it not possible to have women at least where skintight clothing, as opposed to being practically naked? Heroes will always be portrayed as having the perfect body, but depicting women like this is like depicting male heroes as scantily clad male strippers.

  30. Mike Keller
    April 4, 2009 at 9:34 am — Reply

    Wow! What a firestorm! Thank you EyeRollerLass for posting that other site, which I hadn’t seen. For the record, one of my favorite comics at the moment is Echo, notable for its storyline and lack of exploitation. Women are an important part of not only the comic market, but comic production.

    Here is why I LIKE this piece: It is dynamic, with sweeping lines of action which draw your eye back and forth. The focus of the piece is the energy being thrown off from Green Lantern’s attack, based on light, color, and position on the page. This followed by Star Sapphire preparing to strike, also for those reasons. Your eye is swept right, then up in a circle, and then back.

    As far as the outfit: years ago I was watching an awards show, and one actress had a VERY revealing outfit. When asked by a female reporter what she wore under it, she responded “confidence”.

    Is it exploitation? Probably. But the figure has also grown to reflect growing acceptance of the strength and importance of women. As Mary Poppins said, “..a spoon full of sugar…”

  31. Salieri
    April 4, 2009 at 12:19 pm — Reply

    Er…what? Star Sapphire is in no way a strong feminist figure – not in previous years, certainly not after one or two issues where the Sapphires and Zamarons are actually focused on Love as opposed to physical attraction and mating.

    SS – at least, Carol Ferris – basically became the same as Spoiler, Wonder Girl, or Harley Quinn; a character basically invented to be, or became, nothing more than a male superhero’s girlfriend, dressed up as a strong, interesting character despite lacking any real depth beyond a vaguely tumultous past and continuing angst over her boyfriend, and eventually a cult favourite among slobbering fanboys.

    The instant SS becomes fully clothed and her Corps begin attracting aliens which aren’t remotely humanoid or even completely ‘female’ – why would all aliens have the same male and female genders? – then the writers will have taken one step towards a more acceptable, near-feminist reinterpretation.

  32. April 4, 2009 at 12:58 pm — Reply

    Well all opinions aside… I was going to put this on my computer at work until I really took a look at Star Sapphire. Nobody can argue with the fact that this is pushing the envelope for a professional environment.

    Has anyone seen the new Hal Jordan banana hammock variant cover? …Until then, I think those of you arguing that men and women are treated the same in comics are going to have a hard time proving your point.

    Also… Cheers to Stephen and Matthew for trying to keep this civil.

  33. Salieri
    April 4, 2009 at 3:19 pm — Reply

    Ah, yes, but by pure coincidence, Stephen, I’m working on an essay comparing this sort of thing in a theatrical environment – and I note that while it’s possible to use distinctly non-feminist characters as feminist icons, you have to spread a huge dollop of irony all over them. Power Girl’s modern use as compared to her older one is as the portrayal of Fagin in the book of Oliver Twist and in the musical “Oliver!”.

    While the original source material is a horrible stereotype (one which, incidentally, Dickens was known for deeply regretting and trying to make up for in later works), the conversion uses humour and wit to get over the distinct anti-semite bias – and, of course, the musical softens the blow by having Fagin & the Dodger dance merrily off into the sunset.

    Similarly, Power Girl still sports that distinct ‘boob window’ – but a succession of capable writers & illustrators have used that sexual element of hers in a way that makes you laugh at its absurdity while also thinking about the issues at hand; and, of course, kitted her out with a winning personality and intelligence, much like John Byrne’s She-Hulk. (My God, what a crossover THAT could be).

    Which means that, obviously, Johns & Tomasi & co. have a window (though not a boob window) out of the sexism situation. Ed Benes is, obviously, not drawing the whole series; Johns happens to be one of the very writers I mentioned, above, to help with the Power Girl development; who knows, perhaps in an issue or two Carol or another Sapphire will look at themselves, feel sheepishly silly, and make a quick uniform change – the same way that Kyle Rayner did following his debut as Green Lantern.

    We can only hope.

  34. Ricco
    April 4, 2009 at 4:30 pm — Reply

    I liked how the author managed to make Powerbreast, I mean Powergirl’s boob window a semi-serious emotional thing in the JSA Classifieds.
    She says something to the effect that people think that she’s just showing off but she doesn’t have the “S” symbol there because she just doesn’t fit in this world and that the hole represents a hole in her life she can never fill.

    They could fill the skin parts of the Star Sapphire’s uniform with black, they’ll still be hot and no longer would be mistaken for strippers.

  35. ~wyntermute~
    April 5, 2009 at 5:05 pm — Reply

    I’m not even going to choose a side or voice an opinion…. I just want to point something out (which most perceptive folks have probably already noticed), and then I will walk away politely. Man, when you mention “sex appeal” or anything related to it, a whole world of discussion suddenly unfolds — sometimes rather explosively.

  36. Debate not Hate
    April 5, 2009 at 10:29 pm — Reply

    This has been the best discussion I have EVER. READ. IN MY LIFE!

    Wow. I’ve never seen such fantastic dropping of “dong”, “nutsack” and “banana hammock”… and it’s utterly wonderful.

    For what it’s worth–and here I’m going to make sweeping generalizations that piss you and you and you off–I think everyone who gets super-defensive (yes, you’re being defensive, not “clarifying a point”) about other people pointing out that Star Sapphire’s costume is a ridiculously hypersexualized exploitation of the female body are, quite simply, afraid to make any judgments about sexuality for fear of having to evaluate their own actions, thoughts, behaviors and motivations (concerning sex)… and please don’t angrily “clarify your point” in response to this. I’m jus’ sayin…

    Brent made some really interesting comments about sex in comics and American culture (re: Dr. Manhattan’s blue dong). The issue of cultures that are comfortable with nudity is a very thoughtful point to raise. Nevertheless, I (in honesty here, not sarcasm) wonder how sex appeal is communicated in those cultures who walk around without shirts or pants (maybe just a penis sheath, for special occasions). If a boob or wang is as equally acceptable in society as a nose or a foot, then these physical features could not be used effectively for sex appeal could they? Perhaps for comedic effect (like someone with a big nose sneezing a lot)? Or to communicate some other culturally specific generalization about physical appearance and character (like a gap in the teeth for Chaucer representing sexuality, or a bald head representing intelligence in Chinese culture)?

    In the end, I doubt Blackest Night will be overcome by it’s appeals to sex, so to speak. But if it is, and that offends your convictions, then just don’t buy it. And, please do not misunderstand my tone, I mean that very sincerely. I think that today, outside of representative government, the dollar is one of the most effect ways to make our voices heard. I’m a fan of Bendis’s Mighty Avengers, but I just didn’t buy the first “Lady Ultron” arc, nor the trade (never), because I simply don’t care to read a book full of metallic boob and butt (though, admittedly Frank Cho can draw the female form magnificently).

    Whew… my apologies for the Dr. Manhattan length post. Great discussion.

  37. Bob
    April 9, 2009 at 8:52 pm — Reply

    Wow – I hate to think what would have happened to this chat if they would have represented the Yellow Lanterns with Lyssa Drak!

  38. Mike Keller
    May 9, 2009 at 4:18 pm — Reply

    A few more thoughts…

    I have given this some thought, since our discussion. I still like the illustration. While there ARE some things in the picture (monsters, people flying, people giving off energy bolts) that are unbelievable, the things in the image everyone is complaining about are ALL based in reality.

    “same anatomically impossible pose as his poor lady” – I see this a lot in such arguments, and feel it is based more in personal issues than reality. The pose, while difficult for some people, is not “impossible”. Please take careful note of these illustrations:
    http://www.yogalifestyle.com/DVSTSRYogaShakti.htm
    http://www.valdezlink.com/pages/media/Slutskaya.widec.jpg

    “Also, the crotch-star…I have no idea how any editor would approve that sort of thing”
    Last I looked it is a “Belly Star” Please refer to these images:
    http://www.joeacevedo.com/images/figurezone/dcdfigures/dcdgl3_sapphire.jpg
    http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/977/678/59/ZY6aAOL8lwjmjax.jpg
    Te fact that it is on her uniform suggests she is more conservative than ladies who wear it in a piercing.

    “Or that the illustrators would at least incorporate a little black into the uniform to cover the skin”, and “the guys are usually fully clothed…”
    While there is a lot more “Flesh-colored area” in her case, it may be just that – flesh COLORED. I see here a character with Orange skin, and an orange outfit (left), a character with Red skin, and a red outfit (right), a character with Blue skin and a blue outfit (left).
    If one compares Carol’s outfit to that of a figure skater, there are distinct similarities. Some areas that look like flesh are actually ‘sheer’. Please refer to this image:
    http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/topstory/slutskaya1126.jpg
    Irina Slutskaya is actually 90 – 95% covered.

    In point of fact, Star Sapphire is just one female character, in a sea of diversity. I am no more offended by Ed Benes’ depiction of her than I am offended by Michelangelo’s David, which depicts an ‘over-muscled’ and naked man. There are more important things in the world to get upset over.

    Thanks again, for posting such a dynamic, interesting piece of art.

You know you have something to say, say it in the comment section