How is Scandal’s costume skimpy? She has her arms and a bit of her midsection exposed.
Most of the characters who have skimpy outfits have them because they were designed by dudes for dude audiences in a different time (Vampirella, however, had her costumed designed by the most famous feminist in comics, Trina Robbins).
It’s a long conversation. For one thing, I think ‘practical’ as used in these conversations is mostly bullshit. People are often okay with ridiculous outfits that are completely impractical or unworkable, if there is no skin showing. What they often mean in these cases is ‘less revealing,’ which is fine, but just say it. I also think some of these outfits are goofy. But some have an iconography of fantasy to them, and I think that’s valid, to some degree.
By which I mean, you can’t just replace something that visually defines a character with something ‘practical’ just because it’s more realistic. If you put Vampirella in armor, sure, you may have made her more ‘realistic (arguably),’ but the question would be then, “Is this still recognizably Vampirella?”
I want these fixes made. “Practicality” is pretty low on my list of priorities. I want a visual pop, and a sensibility that works with today’s audience. I don’t care if barbarian sword fighters in Hyrkania show skin sometimes, as long as it’s not just the girls. Have Sonja wear other outfits (we do) and armor when called for (we do that, too), and then, if we change her costume for good, I want it to be something that screams RED SONJA.
It’s rarely as simple as making something ‘practical.’ Amanda Conner did an OUTSTANDING update of Power Girl’s outfit that kept most of the basic concept, but made it look far less dated, and it looked amazing. That’s a great solution, in some cases.
I say, ‘practical’ only works on characters who are ‘practical.’ Which doesn’t really define Vampirella or Emma Frost, does it?
Imported from Tumblr: http://ift.tt/1dfxOUr
No comments:
Post a Comment