Brandvold Talks Writing “Bat Lash” with Aragonés & Severin
That was the question DC Comics posed when they introduced their newest Western hero in 1968's “Showcase” #76. Bartholomew Aloysius Lash, better known as “Bat Lash,” had more in common with Bret Maverick than John Wayne. Laconic, fond of gourmet cooking, and rarely without a flower in his hat, Bat was nonetheless a first-class gambler, a crack shot, and a rogue equally loathed by outlaws, lawmen, and the many lovely ladies he left in his wake.
Written by comics legend Sergio Aragonés, and illustrated by master artist Nick Cardy, Bat Lash only lasted seven issues in his own book, but despite this brief run, Bat made a memorable impression on readers with the offbeat combination of action, comedy and drama that characterized his stories. Several decades and a guest appearance on the “Justice League Unlimited” cartoon later, Bat Lash is finally back in a new miniseries premiering later this year, co-written by Aragonés and Western novelist Peter Brandvold.
All this takes place in only six pages, and then the Comanches depart.
The Indians aren't particularly memorable, except when you compare them to their contemporaries in JONAH HEX #23 and Comanche Moon. In BAT LASH #1, the Comanches are recognizably human. They speak in normal English, with only a hint of Tonto-ism. They wear a mix of Indian and Western clothes (see illustration), which was the style of the time. No stereotypical buckskins for these Comanches.
So a couple of comic-book writers have done a better job portraying Indians than Larry McMurtry and a million-dollar team at CBS. It just goes to show that money doesn't guarantee quality. Anyone can portray Indians accurately if they want to.
5 comments:
Writerfella here --
Once again, "accurately" means "historically," and COMANCHE MOON alludes neither to be accurate nor to be history. It originally was a novel, not a historical treatise, and the miniseries presents fictional characters and events, not documentary reportage. But of course if someone's comic book presentation ostensibly is more accurate and quality-oriented, then it immediately must qualify for a Pulitzer Prize and thereafter be displayed in the Smithsonian Institution and theNational Museum of the American Indian. In a Pequot's eye!
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
The mini-series not only presents fictional characters and events, it presents a fictional Comanche history and culture. "Fictional" in this case means misleading, stereotypical, and false.
I've already told you dozens of times that people learn about Indians from the media--especially Western movies. But you seem incapable of grasping this simple fact.
You think parents, teachers, and preachers are lecturing children right now on how Comanches were buckskin-wearing savages who excelled as horse thieves. In other words, you live in a fantasy world as unreal as Comanche Moon.
Writerfella here --
writerfella counters that this blogsite only proffers opinions and not facts, leaving little that can or should be grasped by anyone in attendance. "That people learn about Indians from the media" possibly only would be justifiable to say IF IT WAS THE SOLE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF THE MEDIA TO TEACH PEOPLE ABOUT INDIANS, which most assuredly it is not. Should the media be demanded to teach people the exact geographical location of the South Orkney Islands, and then so roundly be criticized when it does not? Should a contestant be allowed to sue various media if he fails to know where are such islands when asked on JEOPARDY? The standpoint, therefore, that the media instead purposefully are teaching stereotypes ranks with the most hysterical and syllogical conspiracy theories yet known!
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
That's funny...I would've said Newspaper Rock was about 95% fact and only 5% opinion. Some days I post several factual news items with no opinions whatsoever. Maybe you've been unlucky and missed those days even though they occur often.
People learn about Indians from the media because they learn about everything from external sources. And because the media is the primary external source of Indian imagery these days. For every child who learned about Comanches from a parent or teacher or preacher this week, several million learned about them from Comanche Moon.
The media doesn't have to "purposefully teach" Native stereotypes for people to learn them. People learn things by exposure to them in their environment. Since kids spend hours immersed in TV, movies, video games, and the Internet these days, the media is one of their primary environments.
If you can't understand this painfully obvious point, consider the case of cigarette smoking in movies. Few movies set out with the "sole express purpose" of teaching people to smoke. All they had to do was show smoking as acceptable and desirable to change viewers' attitudes. People learned that smoking was cool even though the movies didn't "teach" it intentionally.
Since you think someone other than the media is teaching people about Comanches these days. Who exactly are these purveyors of Comanche stereotypes? How have they managed to stay hidden so long?
Oh, wait...you don't have any evidence, do you? You're just making up your notion that people are talking about Comanches. It's a fiction like all the other fictions you've written.
P.S. I believe Art Spiegelman depicted his parents' lives with historical accuracy in MAUS. That may explain why he won a Pulitzer Prize for his graphic novel (a glorified comic book).
Post a Comment