The Four Color Media Monitor

There are politically correct columnists out there who could declare older comic tales badly dated. But here, we have an example at CBR where one of their crummy writers takes issue with some of the more recent Star Wars comic adaptations, and believes the newer ones haven't aged well. And whether it be old or new in discussion here, the article begins most predictably with PC mentality firmly in place:

The nature of life is change. Over the years, stories that were all right become inappropriate as times change and society progresses to become more inclusive. Sometimes these changes can just make a story uncomfortable, sometimes it can make them downright offensive. Sometimes they get contradicted by other stories in uncomfortable ways.

The modern era of Marvel Star Wars comics is not immune to this effect. In the past decade, society has progressed mighty fast. Some incredibly recent stories have elements that are various levels of awkwardness. Sometimes, these elements tarnish an otherwise good story.

They just couldn't resist that whole whining about lack of inclusivity anywhere, huh? Anyway, the list they give of modern outmoded stories includes a tale called Shattered Empire:

Shattered Empire follows the events that happened immediately after the Battle of Endor. After the celebration in the Ewok village, the morning is broken with news that there's a garrison of Stormtroopers still on the moon of Endor that doesn't know that the Empire lost. Han Solo leads a mission to take them out before the Rebellion leaves.

While this could be a mission of attacking before the Imperials mount their attack, it comes across as a preemptive attack on an enemy that doesn't know that the war is over. They're on the moon's far side and most likely haven't seen the Death Star destroyed. Han's attack is depicted as happening with no chance given to the Imperials for surrender, just killing them.

Now I've noted before that the whole build of SW is, most unfortunately, one of bizarre leftist propaganda and sugarcoating of totalitarianism, but this is rather confusing - are they saying preemptive strikes on enemy cabals are inappropriate, no matter how bloodthirsty the enemies could be to start with? The problem with this pathetic item is that it sounds like a stealth attack on a presumed right-wing policy of preemptively combating enemy entities before they can wrought serious harm. There's more:

It's not uncommon for Jedi to kill their foes. In A New Hope, Obi-Wan does it when Luke is threatened in the Cantina. What really doesn't age well is the way Luke Skywalker dispatches enemies in Shattered Empire #4. Luke and Shara Bey, Poe Dameron's mother, go on a mission to Vetine to retrieve two cuttings from a tree that grew in the Jedi Temple.

In the hanger, he stops The Commandant of the facility orders stormtroopers to throw thermal detonators at the fleeing Luke and Bey. Luke catches them with the force, but instead of throwing them out of the hanger or down the shaft nearby, he puts them right at the Commandant's feet. Shara is taken aback at this very un-Jedi behavior, styled more around revenge.

I don't follow here either. The enemy commander has explosive devices hurled at the heroes, and they're not supposed to defend themselves and punish a murderous villain? My mind is boggled. Now, here's something about a Lando Calrissian story from 6 years ago:

The first Lando series really tried to take a stab at adding diversity. In 2015, it might have been the best that Charles Soule was able to get across. Remember that this is three years before Solo: A Star Wars Story put Lando Calrissian on the path to being canonically recognized as pansexual.

In the first comic series for Lando, he recruits a gang of thieves to steal the Emperor's personal ship. Among them are Aleksin and Pavol, very efficient assassins that happen to be cloned and later revealed to be lovers, trying to afford a clone to raise as a child. All of that would be fine except that they are then made villains, easily corrupted by Sith artifacts.

Ah, I get it. If they're gay males, they can't be depicted as crooks, right? I wonder what the reaction would be if this were a pair of lesbians like Mystique and Destiny, assuming there'd be any reaction at all? So we see, another case where men are selectively placed a degree above status of women for PC reasons. Curious they don't mention Solo was one of the least successful entries in the SW franchise, and the laughable politics applied to Lando were just one of the problems with it. Now, here's a most intriguing part spotlighting employees of Princess Leia who happen to be racist:

Jora Astane was a leader of Alderaaneans on Sullust. Princess Leia encountered her when she was gathering together survivors of her home planet after the Battle of Yavin. The only problem she has is with Alderaaneans interbreeding with other alien species.

On her own, Jura is a socially relevant character to have. She sets up Leia and Evaan as morally heroic. Unfortunately, the story ends with Jura still having a role in Alderaanean leadership. Leia even emphasizes that everyone is important, including the racist people.

Well did it ever occur to them this is the result of ultra-leftism's double-standards? Something tells me they'll never ask whether there's such a thing as being way too liberal. Here's one more item regarding an illustration of Dr. Aphra:

Doctor Aphra became one of the breakout characters in Marvel's modern era of comics. She worked with Darth Vader and employed the most sadistic protocol droid ever. She even manages to escape Darth Vader's wrath by faking her death, going on to become an unconventional protagonist, defined by her dogged pursuit

That makes it so much more baffling to look at the cover for her first appearance. Adi Granov renders her in a sultry pose with a pouty look. It's an unlikely edition for the artist, but knowing the character, it's a very dated and sexist cover.

Is it because she's a lesbian, and that somehow makes it wrong to draw her as a character whom lesbians could fall in love with? I don't know. All I know is that to say a woman, whether heterosexual or homosexual, can't look pretty, is quite sexist indeed. Shame on the phonies who penned this latest example of a puff piece for the long awful CBR.

But if they think these tales from the 2010s are dated, what do they believe would make a better alternative for the prior approach to storytelling? I just don't know the answer to that either. All I know is that for a franchise built on bizarre liberal metaphors, it sure is somewhat ironic the people who'd previously been its apologists would turn against it, precipitating its eventual end as a franchise.

Labels: indie publishers, licensed products, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics