sometimes the status quo bites back
31 Mar 2010 12:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kaigouFirst, if you've not already heard, go see the lovely (yes, that's major sarcasm) news that bossymarmalade posted on the upcoming Avatar comic. Go ahead and see; I'll wait here. Feel free to take a few minutes (or more) to get your blood pressure back down to a reasonable level. Deep breaths. I'll wait.
Did you get a good look at the cover? Notice anything unusual about it? Well, other than the extreme case of whitewashing so phenomenally and bluntly in-your-face that it's almost breathtaking in its absolute chutzpah, that is. Like, say, the names.
See "Michael Dante DiMartino" or "Bryan Konietzko" anywhere on that cover?
Nope?
Me neither.
Just to be certain, let's double-check what few books Amazon will let you "look inside" on. We've got a wide choice, including a variety of novelizations, some prequels, and what looks like several retelling comic books, along with the ubiquitous ready-to-read versions. Names on the various covers include: Patrick Spaziante, Michael Teitelbaum, Tom Mason, Dan Danko, Shane L. Johnson, Sherry Gerstein, David Bergantino, Molly Reisner... and then there's the Golden Books series, which doesn't even list an author at all.
But lo, there is something with the names DiMartino and Konietzko. The series-to-comic chapters, printed in book form, and oddly, the only ones of all of them not printed by Simon/Nickelodeon, but by Tokyopop. Except the inside cover says the same thing as all the books and comics done with someone else's name on them:
Basically, DiMartino and Konietzko don't own the series. They don't own the characters, they don't own the storyline, they don't own the character designs, they don't own jack. It was work for hire, and the proof is in the fact that Nickelodeon has the copyright (and the trademark) all over the place.
Furthermore, on the Tokyopop version, it at least lists DiMartino and Konietzko as creators. None of the rest even mention them at all -- and now we're onto the comicified version of the movie, which has whots-his-face's name plastered there at the top... and again, no mention of DiMartino and Konietzko.
Of course, by this point, it's possible that this is fine by them, because it no longer looks anything like the Avatar they spent six years creating.
Thing is, I betcha pizza money there's not a damn thing they can do about it, anyway. Even if they wanted to -- and given the reports I've been reading from fans of Q&A sessions at some of the big cons, it seems fairly safe to say that where the story is going is not where DiMartino and Konietzko would've taken it, or would've wanted to see it taken. They've implied executive meddling with the Ursa storyline (nixing its resolution, whatever that might've been), displeasure from "some people" about the number of strong female characters, and some kind of intrusion into Toph's storyline. And the timing of some of their comments is rather pointed, with distinctly emphasized Asian features for Aang on artwork released right around the time the movie version announced its casting of some white kid in the lead role.
And now, sure looks to me (and more than a few others, given the comments on the post linked, above) that Nickelodeon is doing its utmost to erase the original series entirely, and replace it with an updated whitewashed version.
And I'd be willing to bet, as well, that the terms of the work-for-hire in creating the series also limit just how much DiMartino and Konietzko can criticize, publicly. I'd certainly be willing to bet several pizzas that they're required to promote to some degree, and that usually means not actually de-moting it. Even if this means watching their baby devolve into a complete parody of its original self, right down to getting all the respectfully accurate details in Katara absolutely wrong -- her hairstyle, the fold and overlap of her gown, the position of her hands. Because now the series is in the hands of a corporate giant who could really care less.
In other words, the status quo is striking back.
I don't see a damn thing to be done about it, either. Not in this case, at least, because Nickelodeon does own the copyright, and that's just the terms of service if DiMartino and Konietzko wanted that so-important financial backing to be able to make the series in the first place.
But it also seems to me to be a really precarious situation: if the remakes (movie, re-done comics) fail, then I'd be unsurprised if the blame is somehow shifted onto the non-American basis for the stories: that kids wouldn't really want to watch, or support long-term, a series about kids from somewhere else. And if the movie and its spin-offs succeed to any degree, then this'll become the basis for reinforcing the whitewashing, on the grounds that either "it doesn't matter" what color the characters are, or it'll be (at least implied) that see, here's proof that kids "like it better" when the characters are white, that no one would financially support a non-white cast.
In other words, either way, the status quo is going to find a way to shift blame elsewhere, take the credit for itself, and keep on keeping on.
Maybe, for those who loved Avatar (or at least admired it for striking out and being different in so many good ways), the best -- and maybe only -- thing to do is to find out what DiMartino and Konietzko have in store for their next project. Then bring all that fandom support that went ballistic over the movie casting, and throw it into convincing some other studio to back them for their next series, a studio that won't trample on their product and -- if we could be so lucky -- will split the copyright with them. Though that part, given the state of US copyright and trademark habits when it comes to animation and television (much like music), that part... I'm not holding my breath. But I can hope, all the same.
Incidentally, the biggest name in American animation is probably Matt Groening, right? Here's the copyright on his spin-off books. All are written by him, notably, and not someone else, but still:
That's got to suck. Your own creation, and you have to ask permission to use it.
[ETA: the title of this post is actually a riff on an older post.]
bossymarmalade posted on the upcoming Avatar comic. Go ahead and see; I'll wait here. Feel free to take a few minutes (or more) to get your blood pressure back down to a reasonable level. Deep breaths. I'll wait. Did you get a good look at the cover? Notice anything unusual about it? Well, other than the extreme case of whitewashing so phenomenally and bluntly in-your-face that it's almost breathtaking in its absolute chutzpah, that is. Like, say, the names.
See "Michael Dante DiMartino" or "Bryan Konietzko" anywhere on that cover?
Nope?
Me neither.
Just to be certain, let's double-check what few books Amazon will let you "look inside" on. We've got a wide choice, including a variety of novelizations, some prequels, and what looks like several retelling comic books, along with the ubiquitous ready-to-read versions. Names on the various covers include: Patrick Spaziante, Michael Teitelbaum, Tom Mason, Dan Danko, Shane L. Johnson, Sherry Gerstein, David Bergantino, Molly Reisner... and then there's the Golden Books series, which doesn't even list an author at all.
But lo, there is something with the names DiMartino and Konietzko. The series-to-comic chapters, printed in book form, and oddly, the only ones of all of them not printed by Simon/Nickelodeon, but by Tokyopop. Except the inside cover says the same thing as all the books and comics done with someone else's name on them:
© 2008 Viacom International Inc. All rights reserved. NICKELODEON, Nickelodeon Avatar: the Last Airbender, and all related titles, logos, and characters are trademarks of Viacom International Inc. All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any form.
Basically, DiMartino and Konietzko don't own the series. They don't own the characters, they don't own the storyline, they don't own the character designs, they don't own jack. It was work for hire, and the proof is in the fact that Nickelodeon has the copyright (and the trademark) all over the place.
Furthermore, on the Tokyopop version, it at least lists DiMartino and Konietzko as creators. None of the rest even mention them at all -- and now we're onto the comicified version of the movie, which has whots-his-face's name plastered there at the top... and again, no mention of DiMartino and Konietzko.
Of course, by this point, it's possible that this is fine by them, because it no longer looks anything like the Avatar they spent six years creating.
Thing is, I betcha pizza money there's not a damn thing they can do about it, anyway. Even if they wanted to -- and given the reports I've been reading from fans of Q&A sessions at some of the big cons, it seems fairly safe to say that where the story is going is not where DiMartino and Konietzko would've taken it, or would've wanted to see it taken. They've implied executive meddling with the Ursa storyline (nixing its resolution, whatever that might've been), displeasure from "some people" about the number of strong female characters, and some kind of intrusion into Toph's storyline. And the timing of some of their comments is rather pointed, with distinctly emphasized Asian features for Aang on artwork released right around the time the movie version announced its casting of some white kid in the lead role.
And now, sure looks to me (and more than a few others, given the comments on the post linked, above) that Nickelodeon is doing its utmost to erase the original series entirely, and replace it with an updated whitewashed version.
And I'd be willing to bet, as well, that the terms of the work-for-hire in creating the series also limit just how much DiMartino and Konietzko can criticize, publicly. I'd certainly be willing to bet several pizzas that they're required to promote to some degree, and that usually means not actually de-moting it. Even if this means watching their baby devolve into a complete parody of its original self, right down to getting all the respectfully accurate details in Katara absolutely wrong -- her hairstyle, the fold and overlap of her gown, the position of her hands. Because now the series is in the hands of a corporate giant who could really care less.
In other words, the status quo is striking back.
I don't see a damn thing to be done about it, either. Not in this case, at least, because Nickelodeon does own the copyright, and that's just the terms of service if DiMartino and Konietzko wanted that so-important financial backing to be able to make the series in the first place.
But it also seems to me to be a really precarious situation: if the remakes (movie, re-done comics) fail, then I'd be unsurprised if the blame is somehow shifted onto the non-American basis for the stories: that kids wouldn't really want to watch, or support long-term, a series about kids from somewhere else. And if the movie and its spin-offs succeed to any degree, then this'll become the basis for reinforcing the whitewashing, on the grounds that either "it doesn't matter" what color the characters are, or it'll be (at least implied) that see, here's proof that kids "like it better" when the characters are white, that no one would financially support a non-white cast.
In other words, either way, the status quo is going to find a way to shift blame elsewhere, take the credit for itself, and keep on keeping on.
Maybe, for those who loved Avatar (or at least admired it for striking out and being different in so many good ways), the best -- and maybe only -- thing to do is to find out what DiMartino and Konietzko have in store for their next project. Then bring all that fandom support that went ballistic over the movie casting, and throw it into convincing some other studio to back them for their next series, a studio that won't trample on their product and -- if we could be so lucky -- will split the copyright with them. Though that part, given the state of US copyright and trademark habits when it comes to animation and television (much like music), that part... I'm not holding my breath. But I can hope, all the same.
Incidentally, the biggest name in American animation is probably Matt Groening, right? Here's the copyright on his spin-off books. All are written by him, notably, and not someone else, but still:
The Simpsons(TM), created by Matt Groening, are the copyrighted and trademarked property of Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. Used with permission. All rights reserved.
That's got to suck. Your own creation, and you have to ask permission to use it.
[ETA: the title of this post is actually a riff on an older post.]
no subject
Date: 31 Mar 2010 04:33 pm (UTC)One can only hope that, having made a mark, they can hold out for better terms on the next thing.
no subject
Date: 31 Mar 2010 06:01 pm (UTC)And seeing how that's the major frame of reference for most people on my flist, I figured I should bring attention to the fact that this ain't how it is for a lot of the rest of the creative world.
no subject
Date: 1 Apr 2010 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 1 Apr 2010 06:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 7 Apr 2010 05:09 pm (UTC)And possibly better-casted, although I know part of the problem with casting is money.
no subject
Date: 7 Apr 2010 05:50 pm (UTC)That depends. It's not like the names on a movie necessarily have to be Big Names -- that's just Hollywood hedging its bets on the notion that people will default to seeing Actor X or Y (and I'm using 'actor' as a sex-neutral term here) no matter what they're in (which empirically isn't always the case, but it is enough to make such an assumption reasonable). In this case Star Wars is really an excellent example: the primary characters were all played by relative unknowns, with only one or two anchor characters (like Obi Wan) who were Big Names, and those Big Names were not the story's foci characters.
So it can be done. And even more, there are instances of actors agreeing to be paid less in return for a percentage of the final intake. It's like the actor's version of sweat equity, and when it's a movie that an actor personally believes in, that can be of additional importance to the actor. It's not like we non-actors are the only ones allowed to take a job for reasons that have more to do with principles than with the actual paycheck; it's something plenty of people would do, given the opportunity, I think. That, too, can become a way to reduce a movie's immediate outlay, and IIRC is a way that some of the smaller art-house films have not only gotten made, but managed to do so with Big Names in the cast list.
Plus, there's also movies like Sita Sings the Blues to prove that the public will finance directly, before and after the movie's production. I do think as that kind of power grows into its own -- that is, we as the public get used to being able to support directly, much like a latter-day public broadcasting system (in that public broadcasting is really just publicly-funded broadcasting -- we may see more and more of Sita's ilk.