The Black Lash. I came up with him back when I discovered the “Urban ranger” was a thing. Everyone likes Aragorn, son of Arathorn, right? All sexy and strong and cool and bowy and swordy. Rangers are supposed to be sneaky and foresty, too, so the idea of an “urban ranger” totally gave me that all-powerful creative spark. Isn’t that what we all pine for?
The core of the idea is the dual identity. He’s pulpy as hell, so much of that should be familiar territory. He has a whip and domino mask, cloak and cowl and lashing along rooftops, swashbuckling enemies. Definitely someone I could develop into a serial hero.
But I think it might be cool if he wasn’t the protagonist. Or maybe I could focus on him in a single one shot. Kinda like that Abnett & Lanning issue of Guardians where they just focus on Drax. Get inside his head.
But Batman comics are about Batman, right? Everyone likes Batman. And he’s the coolest thing in Gotham.
But is he though? I’ve always said that a good superhero has the best villains. Batman easily has one of the greatest rogue galleries in comics history. That’s one of the exciting parts of mysterious rogue galleries. The reader guessing “Whodunit this time?” Sort of the Carmen Sandiago style of storytelling.
Like the opposite, for example, in Iron Man. Until RDJ made him funny, Tony Stark was boring as hell. And Iron Man villains? Even worse. “The Unicorn.” “The Melter”, who’s got a gun. That melts. Mostly he just fought communists. Even his so-called arch-nemesis is basically the Fu Manchu. I shouldn’t be so hard on Iron Man.
Everyone gets a second chance. I mean Daredevil was basically a low rent Spider-man. And DD fought Stilt-Man for God’s sake. But then Frank Miller got a hold of him, and basically turned him into a red ninja Batman.
Losing my train of thought here.
The idea is what other characters could I have. Especially female ones that A. aren’t sexualized B. don’t necessarily use violence as their main method of problem solving.
First to (A). Particularly in fantasy fiction, there really seem to be two kinds of female characters: those that are hyper-sexed and those that have zero sex about them. The zero characters are either mommy Madonnas, ingenue innocents or sexless crones. The hyper-sexed are anything from seductive demons, enchantresses, or the painful Strong Female Character, whose thirst for masculine violence is usually only matched by their the size of their wobbling tits and g-stringed buttchecks.
The Strong Female Character is basically just a Male Power Fantasy combined with a sexual image intended for the male gaze. Violence is typically the main problem solving method of men, so the goal would been then to create a female character with power and agency that exists independently of the patriarchy.
So, I’m currently thinking about a conning, vaguely-feral little thief girl.
Conning, Vaguely-Feral Little Thief Girl
Not “cunning” might you. Though that too. But I really mean like “taking part in con artistry.” I want a smart, morally-grey young girl who doesn’t specifically use violence to solve her problems. Not specifically because she’s a pacifist. But I’m looking for someone who’s more creative in deliberating obstacles.
You have no idea how long it took to try and find a picture that didn’t just made me sad. TnA is as big a part of pulp as Swords meeting Sandals. It’s been its legacy since the very beginning:
Ah, yes. The Leg Cling. Don’t take my word for it. (WARNING: CONTAINS TVTROPES LINK. IT COULD POSSIBLY TAKE HOURS FROM YOU IN FASCINATING READING.) It worries me that some of my favorite styles of media (noir, superhero, pulp etc) employ some of the regressive social depictions around, particularly those of women. But like poor DD being reinvented, I just need to remind myself that these forms of media aren’t inherently misogynist, even in vastly more dangerous implicit ways. I’ll be aware and just do it the right way.
Scary Invincible Knight Hunter Guy
Another archetype I’ve always enjoyed is the righteous villain. He sure as shit does what he believes to be right. And that’s scary. You can make them heroes, even as their actions become more and more evil. Where can you draw a moral line? What can and cannot be justified? An effective villain simply opposes the goals of the protagonist. But the story could just as easily be theirs.
I’ve already discussed a big spooky theocracy that runs Baslika. I came up with some cool names for things too, I thought. “The Glorious Hierarchy of Martyrs” sounds lofty and titanic enough. I’m looking for naming conventions that invoke the age, authority, and stuffiness of a cathedral. Theocracies also fascinate me since it is seemingly so easy for nationalism to resemble religion. Citizens and propaganda so often cement the righteousness of their existence through mythologizing its founding and the historical figures that did so. Legitimizing the authority of the state is done through a hierarchy of divine logic: laws of humanity are, in fact, the laws of God. Theocracies just cut right to the chase and say they’re doing the Word of the divine.
Then you gotta have a BIg Bad Boss, or at least the figure of one, so I have “the enigmatic Hierarch”, and then just as much as I like bad guys, I like elite groups of bad guys. “The Godhead” seems like an excellent name for some creepy league of powerful cardinals. I want to be flexible for what these guys will want/mean.
The Black Sect
Who doesn’t like leagues of assassins! Seriously though. What is sexier than that. Not sure what part they’d have. Largely, you’d think they’d be mercenary in nature. Hired to do the bidding of dark plots. But what I don’t want is for them to be too visible, too expendable, or too cool and sympathetic.