Joker: Another Banned Comic Cover

[Hedji]

So DC has cancelled a variant Joker cover for being offensive.



http://news.entertainmentearth.com/2...variant-cover/

Do you agree or disagree it was the right decision?

How does this compare to the banned Spider-Woman cover a few months ago?



Is one more offensive than the other?

Is there a place for the comics code authority? Is there a rating system for comics these days (I don't even know).

[EmergencyIan]

I don't understand why either one was banned.

- Ian

[Werewolf]

The new Batgirl comic is aimed at girls and a younger demographic than DC usually does. The team that works on the comic was not aware of the cover ahead of time and did not approve of it when they saw it. They made the decision to not use it. Not only does the Joker not even appear in the issue, they've also said the Joker will never appear in the new Batgirl comic. If people think that is an appropriate cover for a light hearted comic aimed at young girls, I just don't know what to say.

[EmergencyIan]

The new Batgirl comic is aimed at girls and a younger demographic than DC usually does. The team that works on the comic was not aware of the cover ahead of time and did not approve of it when they saw it. They made the decision to not use it. Not only does the Joker not even appear in the issue, they've also said the Joker will never appear in the new Batgirl comic. If people think that is an appropriate cover for a light hearted comic aimed at young girls, I just don't know what to say.

See, I don't really keep up with these things, at this point. I figured it was for adults. But, if it's for young girls, I get it.

- Ian

[spacecaps]

I think it's offensive that they canceled the cover. Grow a pair and publish it. Those that don't like it don't have to buy it. It is a VARIANT cover after all.

[WannabeMego]

My understanding is that the Artist of the Cover asked DC not to publish it, DC is honoring his wishes, there is no censorship issue here as far as I can tell.

[justzeg18]

I really wish they would have re-numbered for the creative team switch on Batgirl, as this cover would have been just "fine" for the the first 30ish issues of the new 52 run.

I actually started reading from issue #1 recently because I was hearing such good things about the most recent arch. I found myself MUCH preferring the initial run, and not connecting to the change in the least.

I almost feel like they shouldn't be able to have their cake and eat it too.

A simple re-numbering would get the new creative team out there on their own, not riding the momentum of a very well written and illustrated run, and put them in a spot to develop the character on their own w/o giving The Killling Joke the weight they (and by extension, the new fans) don't want it to have on the character, and it would avoid issues such as this cover (which really isn't out of place in Batgirl canon up until now.)

[PNGwynne]

I think it's offensive that they canceled the cover. Grow a pair and publish it. Those that don't like it don't have to buy it. It is a VARIANT cover after all.

Why the bravado? If DC is publishing a kids/tween-oriented book, and rejects a "Vertigo"-themed cover for it, isn't that its right to make a decision relevant to creative focus, marketing, and audience?

Cover treatments are rejected every day by editors, that is not censorship.

[enyawd72]

I think both are in poor taste...I don't think graphic violence or sexual imagery belong in any superhero comic, but I'm just old fashioned.

[CrimsonGhost]

I think DC is lying when they said they weren't aware of the cover ahead of time. Covers are done months in advance for soliciting, so this was penciled, inked, and colored with a sign off from the editor. It was probably in Previews and that's when a complaint came in. DC was fine with it until then.
I also think the penciler/artists are just taking the blame and DC is lying about them requesting to not print the cover.
I say lying, but I guess it's just spinning. Either way, I don't believe them.

[HardyGirl]

I think both are in poor taste...I don't think graphic violence or sexual imagery belong in any superhero comic, but I'm just old fashioned.

Amen! (And pass the gravy)

[Hector]

If you disapprove of that particular Spider Woman cover...then Im sure you want this one gone too...

[Hector]

I'm sorry...but they are both mimicking spiders...not a big deal in my eyes.

Imagine if they accurately displayed factual abilities of a real spider...an arachnid that deploys webbing though its butt...




Now that would not make a pretty picture in human form...

[Werewolf]

The Spider-Woman one is not comparable to the Spider-Man cover or a real spider. Also, the Spider-Woman cover didn't work because the new Spider-Woman comic is targeted at female readers.

[firestarcomics]

Its pretty disturbing to see both covers. The first one I can understand if that was aimed at little girls and the second one was pretty crazy. What was up with the outfit going up Spider Woman's butt? Was that even necessary? It is very similar to when comic book artists over sexualize Wonder Woman and put her in a THONG and make her look like a prostitute. It pretty much cheapens the idea of the character. I don't see much crazy sexual exploitation with male characters. Im an artist myself and am against censorship but at some point certain things start to just be too much.