It was enough for Superman to change his hairstyle and put on glasses to go unnoticed in the writing of the Daily Planet. This reveals the opinion that Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, parents of the character, had a journalistic nose, but the theme of the week is different: Superman hangs the cape for his son, the young Jon Kent, to inherit it, a character who since his appearance in 2015 attends the evils of his time, like refugee crises or climate change.
But the news is not in the generational change, but in the bisexuality of the new Superman. The ad hit the front pages on October 11, coinciding with National Coming Out Day. When news puzzles me, I always look for statements from a Republican politician to find out. Josh Mandelfrom Ohio wrote: “Bisexual comics for kids. They are literally trying to destroy America. ” Dilemma solved: to death with the Superman bi.
We must celebrate that fictions, especially those aimed at minors, are faithful to diversity, because children develop their notion of normality through them, and because they all deserve to have heroic references. Until the premiere of Tiana and the frog in 2009, no Disney movie had ever had a black female lead, and Tiana turns into a toad in 20 minutes! That fiction naturally reflects that there are different classes, races or sexual orientations, and helps to legitimize them, should not outrage anyone.
But just as I reject outrage, I understand suspicion: the line between bravery and opportunism is very fine. And knowing the degree of implantation that the culture woke has in the show business American, we must ensure that we are not sold ethical posture at the price of virtue.
The additional problem in identity battles is synecdoche, the temptation to take the part for the whole. Jon Kent is much more than his bisexuality (and I do not mean that he flies and has lasers), as Tiana is much more than his race. Yes, it is important that profiles historically discriminated against by a non-chosen condition can occupy a central place in popular culture, as long as the idea that this condition is the only thing that defines them is not transferred.
Today’s creators have the widest palette of identities in history. Does that make you freer? Only when the vocation to create is genuine, when the aspiration is universal. Definitely, when the artistic is not confused with the pamphlet.