An Aside, and Some Throat-clearing
[Probably not to be published.]
Aside
My other reason for picking up Transmetropolitan is to take a closer look at "the beast", so to speak. For some time now I've wanted to write something that engages directly with masculinity, but unable to find a subject. Or to be more accurate: unable to locate a subject I wanted to engage with.
I'm wondering if perhaps I'm so threatened and repelled by masculine narratives, which I can't define at the moment but if you think of Norman Mailer you're on the right track, that the only way I can expose myself to them is through a non-threatening cartoon. A series of blog posts on, say, An American Dream, would certainly be worthwhile. I suppose. But it means sitting down to a meal which I know will leave me feeling sick. I keep thinking to myself, "Brilliant writing, but can you stomach the misogyny?" It's not my idea of fun, but isn't that part of the point of fiction: to read and empathise with those who are not like yourself, who don't look or sound or act like you?
I also wonder how much I'm limiting my reading pool by abandoning the literary "greats". Am I poorer having jettisoned the Mailers, the Updikes? Last month I was in a bookstore and looked at a David Sedaris book; I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I read a scene that I thought was pretty hateful towards women. The tone, I mean. It was merely a glimpse but gave me enough to get the general vibe. I put the book back and moved on.
I don't know if I'm close-minded, I don't know if I'm cheating myself and limiting my understanding; I only know, the mood I'm in, I'm willing to let a "Sedaris" go unread. And while I'm not willing to write a series of posts examining masculine themes in An American Dream, I am willing to write about Transmetropolitan, even though it's drawing upon some similar themes.
Afterall, Transmetropolitan has something An American Dream doesn't.
Pictures.
5 comments:
I'm embarrassed to say I haven't read much Sedaris, but what I have read has been okay with me, as far as women are concerned. Certain things are just plain funny and there is no other way to describe them, other than just as they are. I don't have a problem with that, if the context is okay.
Thanks for the Sedaris feedback Diane.
I think you're right about context. Sometimes I just get turned off really easily though, especially when you're in a bookstore and can easily find something else. ;)
I've heard a lot of Sedaris commentary. Note he's a gay man who has written quite a bit about masculinity from his perspective of finding many of the social norms abusive. He's hardly Mailer or Updike.
By the way, the comics world has progressed way, way beyond _Superman_. Even _Superman_ has progressed.
_Transmetropolitan_ is not "the beast". I don't know if I should point you to this - but if you really want to engage "the beast" in all its complexity, the words are "Cerebus" and "Dave Sim".
Seth - Thanks for the tip-off about Superman progressing but that was my point: to let readers know that I wasn't a comic book reader and therefore my point of reference was somewhat dated. In fact, I'm kind of joking about it at my expense here and in a previous post, but I can see how that might not be evident to readers.
My other point is more general and not aimed at Sedaris: being a gay man does not automatically exempt you from sexism in your work.
My comment about "engaging with the beast" was tongue-in-cheek, which I realize doesn't always work on-screen. However, there is some pretty nasty stuff in "Transmetropolitan" wrapped up with masculinity and a romatic view of it, and that's what I wanted to explore.
I seemed to have stalled, at any rate.
Post a Comment