“If it’s not active sexism, it’s certainly active stupidity.”

Or active press-grabbing.

To be honest, I hadn’t even seen the cover until Heidi posted it. I thought the cover they were going with was the debut cover from Detective which, obviously, would have been the wiser move.

I agree it is a completely bone-headed move to use this image as the cover, even considering the idea that it’s “representative” of the interior stories (which it really isn’t.)

I’m just kind of bewildered there’s not one editor at DC that thought perhaps the cover might ruffle a few feathers.

Or perhaps cared enough to not use the cover.

Either way.”

That’s what gets me, really. They have, what, a good 20-30 covers to choose from, and this is the one they pick? If it’s not active sexism, it’s certainly active stupidity.

Rich, as I said before, “Please, don’t take that as a jab. It’s not meant as one.” I really meant that, but I’m sorry if I offended you. Also, I’m not saying anything bad about old school. I love the Animated Series. I know that it’s really good, but I also know that it’s a throwback to old school and that is what made it good. When I fallowed your link, I likewise saw the kind of art and comics you are into. I wasn’t talking down to you, any more then “Argh. Prepare the bamboo shoots, tie his wrists” was talking down to me, or at least I didn’t take it that way. All I was saying is that (I strongly feel) it’s wrong to dismiss young people.

“Nor do many “old school” types. I consider it a prejudice that comes from people being set in a lifetime of ways. Please, don’t take that as a jab. It’s not meant as one …”

No, I don’t need to interact with young people to “open my eyes.” And I don’t need to be talked down to. Although you might go back and reread your comments and apply them to that stereotypical “old school” line.

And the Batman: Animated Series version is better.

You win all my internets!

That there is still SOME sanity left in the world.

Oh, I’m sorry, that’s just what I make of your story.

The whole thing makes me think that DC views riling the female fandom as a marketing tactic, really.

And really, that cover offends me more aesthetically than it does philosophically. DC puts out some sharp-looking product generally, so why do the Showcase covers all look like they were slapped together by an intern on their lunch hour?

No, the cover is a product of art of the same time period as the stories. It is, in fact, taken for one of the stories within the volume. The art was not something NEW, which is why all this “outrage” is misplaced and ridiculous.

No, people are simply using their overly politicial correct mentality of today’s current popular political opinions, to cast a judgment on a piece of pop culture art from four decades ago, and using it to put forth their own dogmatic agenda. And that isn’t any better.

You mentioned before about seeing the patterns in this. But if one can’t tell the difference between this Batgirl image and the recent H4H cover, then, like Scott Rowland suggests, I would have to recommend emotional counseling for a good number of people. If someone refuses to accept the context and intent of the image and simply wants to go with a knee-jerk reaction based on how things are today, over how they were 40 years ago, that is no one’s problem but their own. It’s not the fault of the comic publisher or anyone else. Period.

I suggest a collection be made to buy Beau Smith a clue that this is not only a new century, it is also a new millenium.
=====

I agree with Heidi that these stories are a product of their times, 40-ish years ago, and should not be changed. But this cover is a product of today.

As an after-the-fact suggestion, I think one solution to being bugged by this cover in the future is to tear the cover off. Then stuff it in an envelope and mail it to Dan DiDio with a letter expressing your disdain for the decision to use it.

This reprint will never be a collectible, so condition is not important.

I don’t object to these stories being republished. I don’t object to McCay’s racially charged work being reprinted, or even Tintin in the Congo. But covers more in keeping with the current times and mores are a better sales tool.

And I can see if tis cover had been presented in some kind of ironic “retro” style. But it wasn’t.

It’s just a bad marketing decision.

That said, I’ll probably skip this volume because it stops short of my favorite Batgirl stories - the ones drawn by Mike Grell in Batman Family!

These covers face several gatekeepers along the way for approval. Each gatekeeper has to initial it on the little cover approvals sheet. Who approves these covers? Why is there not somebody of authority somewhere in this process who is in a position to receive this cover on his or her desk and say; “hey, I’m not signing off of this, this sucks”?

Jenette Kahn used to be that person. She was very aware of the image DC was sending out into “the world.”

I’m wondering about that more and more m’self. I wonder if the current DC chain of command is a “thou shalt rubber stamp any thing that crosses thy desk” culture.

It certainly does explain:

1) The constant eyesporkworthy pandering.
2) Black Mask with Power Tools action figure.
3) JLA #11
4) ASBAR
5) Endless “events”
6) Covers like this

The best Lois Lane Showcase cover would be embedded with a computer chip so that every time you passed by your bookcase it would fall off the shelf, forcing you to catch it.

Here’s a question to those who are upset by the cover from a moral standpoint. Do you object to these stories, many of which exhibit chauvinistic ideas, being reprinted at all? If not, why not?

However, anyone getting “furious” about it should consider talking to a counselor about anger issues.

Then again, if they had used an image of Batgirl in peril, the WiR card might have been played.