On "Characterization"-- In Superhero Comics, It's The Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, and Everywhere Else

Written by David Fiore
Published July 03, 2004

Characterization

What is it? What does it have to do with ongoing super-hero comic book series? And does it, as it is commonly employed in said works, actually have anything to do with "good" comics writing?

Platitudinous disclaimer: My name is Dave. These are my opinions.

What does Mr. Webster say? To characterize = "To make distinct and recognizable by peculiar marks or traits; to make with distinctive features". That sounds promising. So, "characterization" is a semiotic system. If, as a writer, you make sure that there is something distinctive about each unit within the set of characters you are responsible for, then you are taking care of your business on the "characterization" front. So, one guy stutters all the time, one woman has a lisp, another is a deaf-mute, and door number 4 talks like she swallowed a thesaurus. Congratulations. Your characters will not be confused for one another, even if, for some avant-garde reason, you ask the artist to make every panel a blacked-out square, and only the dialogue bubbles are visible. But does this necessarily mean that you have written a good issue of an ongoing super-hero series? I would argue that it does not. Sure, something like this can add to a good overall effort, and I will say that i prefer it to the average Golden Age or D.C.-Silver Age story (often written by Gardner Fox) where everyone's dialogue and thoughts are inflected in exactly the same way (except for the birds that Hawkman is wont to converse with--they always say ::wheet:: before going on to more substantial matters. Now that's "characterization"!!!)

Characterization--I'll drop the platitudinous quotation marks now, as well as the platitudinous remarks about how all of this is just my opinion (I know most of you understand this without being reminded of it every few seconds...)--became the sin qua non of the "team" comics produced at Marvel in the sixties and seventies: there's the put-upon leader, the wiseguy challenger to the throne (which is often congruent with the "alienated loner"), sometimes there is an aloof mentor, and maybe a culturally "other" fish-out-of-water, and there's always, of course, the female protagonist, who really isn't characterized, and (sadly) doesn't have to be, because she is distinguished by her gender--in Spider-Man, at least, you get the "carefree" MJ vs. the more "repsonsible" Gwen; and in Englehart's Avengers, you get the strength-worshipping Mantis vs. the alienated Scarlet Witch, because, once you get two women in the group, there has to be a way to tell them apart--you see "i hate humans" and you know it's Wanda--you see "this one (followed by something about "her man") and you know it's Mantis, etc; you can tell who Agatha Harkness is by how old and frail she looks. Now, if Agatha and Aunt May ever came together under one roof, I suspect one of them would have to develop a speech impediment, or get very angry and resentful about something, because that's a volatile situation, characterization-wise...

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
On "Characterization"-- In Superhero Comics, It's The Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown, and Everywhere Else
Published: July 03, 2004
Type:
Section: Video
Filed Under: Books: Comics and Graphic Novels, Video: Animation
Writer: David Fiore
David Fiore's BC Writer page
David Fiore's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by David Fiore
Books: Comics and Graphic Novels
Video: Animation
All Video Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — July 3, 2004 @ 18:23PM — Vic [URL]

Seems like you're describing traits of one-dimensional characters, as written in bad movies, books, comics, etc.

When I mention character development in my reviews, I'm referring specifically to the types of things you refer to above in your "good" examples above. So I suppose I'm talking about "complex characterization" as opposed to just plain old characterization. For example: Wolverine dealing with his feelings towards Jean Grey vs. just "Wolverine = Angry Guy".

Exposing the audience to deeper levels of the character in question, making him/her seem more "real" to us. That's the good stuff that can take a superhero movie from just-ok-but-forgettable-roller-coaster-ride to something truly great and memorable.

Vic

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/17074)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments