She's SATAN'S DAUGHTER --
She's Supposed To Be Bad
She's Supposed To Be Bad
Is this cover to "Satana" #1 too sexy?
You know what, screw it, it's a really nice cover. Screw it.
Yeah, her waist is too narrow and her breasts are too big. But the cover isn't ugly. It works. And it's not like a book for little kids. It's frickin' Satana. Satana. If she can't be "bad," who can?
Yeah, I mean if nothing outrageous comes up this week, we might as well save our outrage for later.ReplyDelete
...Cuz let's face it, we'll probably be needing it soon enough.ReplyDelete
Have we forgotten that the more connected to the occult a comic book character is, the bigger her boobs and the smaller her waist? It's simply the nature of evil.ReplyDelete
Oh, and this enforces my theory that the slew of Micheal Turner covers lately are part of a "normal characters have been playing with the Ouija board" gimmick. Like those zombie covers.
Um, I think you have the wrong idea.ReplyDelete
No one's "tail feathers are riled up" about the cover. You have to understand the nature of the feature, which is to take something people might be offended at and guage them to see if they think it goes too far.
If you notice, she doesn't make any of the types of procliamtions that such covers should be stopped, or that the publisher or creators are evil things for making it. You know, all the things many other bloggers have been doing when they see a cover like this lately. It's just a fun little game, of sorts, where people get to make a call for themselves, without anyone having to feel afraid to say what they feel about the image.
Never once, since she has been doing this feature, has there ever been a flame war over it. Everyone remains calm and civil. Everyone gets to have their say, without anyone else laying a personal judgement on them.
Please, don't lump her in with the rest of the schmucks who've been making the rounds through advanced solicitations to find something to offend them. What she's doing isn't anywhere near the same. She's inviting discussion and having a little fun. Something most of the others who've since copied this type of feature recently have failed to do.
Supposedly, Greg Land used this picture of Pamela Anderson for "inspiration". Seen in that light, the big knockers actually seem realistic.ReplyDelete
However, there are a few things wrong with the drawn picture (comib book art conventions aside):
1. Satana has no heels on her shoes. She should be sporting at least 6 inches (which sounds like it should be dirty, but isn't).
2. She's violating the laws of physics (again, not a big deal if you're the daughter of Satan) in her pose. In the original, Pam is leaning back against a wall. Since Satana is just balancing on her toes while sitting on her heels, her center of gravity (regardless of boob and/or waist size) is way too far back. She should not physically be able to pose in that position without a wall at her back.
"Please, don't lump her in with the rest of the schmucks who've been making the rounds through advanced solicitations to find something to offend them."ReplyDelete
Dude, take it easy, I'm not saying she did anything wrong by posting about this cover. Her posts are usually non-judgemental and are used to spark debate. This post was not meant as a criticism on her, so I'm sorry if you took it that way.
Don't worry about it, OS. James was replying to a post on my blog (The Fandamentalist), which happens to link to this post.ReplyDelete
I guess he just really wanted to make sure his opinion on my opinion on the original poster's opinion was heard. Of course, it's my opinion that his opinion of my opinion of the original blogger's opinion is a moot point. You know, since my opinion is correct.
"Dude, take it easy, I'm not saying she did anything wrong by posting about this cover. Her posts are usually non-judgemental and are used to spark debate. This post was not meant as a criticism on her, so I'm sorry if you took it that way."ReplyDelete
Um, I AM taking it easy. Why, just because I provided clarification to the motives of the feature you linked, does it have to be assumed there is anger or malice in what I said?
I was just clearing up what I thought might have been a misunderstanding on your part. You've indicated that isn't the case, but I wouldn't have been upset if was. There are a lot of folks who've taken to doing stuff very similar, yet nowhere as near "non-judgemental and used to spark debate" like she does, which one might think of this just being more of the same. I could understand thinking that and wanted to assure you that isn't the case. She's been doing this feature for several months and is not one of these "johnny-come-lately" types.
There was no malice or anger in what I wrote before and I'M sorry if you thought there was. It was just an honest clarification to the feature's intent. Nothing more.
My wife would like to extned a "thank you" to Michael, for providing a link to the cover's "inspiration." She was bugged not being able to remember where she'd see that pose before.
No problem, though I did get the link to the original photo via the first trackback link here to the Comics Fairplay site (in the "Random Thoughts and A Sense of Wonderment" article). Don't want to take credit for finding it.ReplyDelete
I'm gonna have to disagree.ReplyDelete
It's not that I think the cover is sexist. It's that the position she's in *isn't physically possible* unless one has physics-warping powers, and it breaks my brain to look at it for too long.
Her boobs must be full of helium or another equivalently buoyant gas. It's the only explanation!
Actually, Rachel, her boobs must be filled with something incredibly heavy and dense, not light. Her arms and legs, too.ReplyDelete
Shes balancing on her toes, which means that in order to be stable, she has to have the same amount of weight in front of her feet (towards her knees) as behind (towards her back). Draw a vertical line from the balls of her feet upwards to see what I mean. Her center of gravity must lie on that line.
Her entire torso is to the right of that line, while her arms and legs are to the left. Her head is on the line, as are her boobs. So to be balanced in a non-Liefeldian way, her arms and legs must weigh the same as her torso from her but to her neck.
If she was leaning against a wall (or the right side of the cover) like Pam Anderson was in the original photo, there would be no problem.
Of course, as the daughter of Satan, she probably weighs the same as a duck, and is therefore a witch.
Oh, and this enforces my theory that the slew of Micheal Turner covers lately are part of a "normal characters have been playing with the Ouija board" gimmick.ReplyDelete
They are SKRULLS!
Damn! Jean Grey would look hotter in that outfit though (and if not she would mentaly mess with us to actualy believe she does!!) :pReplyDelete