DC message board to see what the reaction is to the new style of art on Supergirl. (Special thanks to Occasional Superheroine for her amazing post as well- go check it out.) With issue #20, the girl of steel received a "sexed-down" makeover that included more realistic proportions and cheerleader tog underpants rather then tiny panties under her skirt.
To say that results have been mixed is to make a huge understatement. From the DC message boards:
"I do not care for Chang's style. The wonky waist on Kara looks just as silly as the wasp waist and anorexic proportions of Churchill.
I like the art in #20 however I think his Kara does look a bit thick and the costume is a bit shapeless and unflattering. I can't get behind a Supergirl with cankles.
The way he drew Kara in Action Comics was much better.
A realistic Kara is great but a dumpy Kara is a bit much for me to swallow. "
"honestly the problem is her shirt is way too baggy just so it covers more belly and I find it silly that the artist is acting as if the belly is some kind of private part that needs to be covered up. that and no store sells skirts that long and no teenage girl would pick out and wear a skirt that long at age 17.
the problem is they are changing the costume to fit what they think their teenage daughter should wear, not what an actual 17 year old girl who has no parents to force style changes would wear. "
"I do have to agree that Renato Guedes artwork is horrible, Kara never looked worse, sloppy. uniform hanging on her like it was 2 sizes two big, boots awkward and bulky looking, she looks atrocious. No teenager would dress like that unless forced to. Come on, he could not even get the skirt right, where is the border. Please do not let this artist hang around too long, dispose of him quickly before he ruins Kara altogether. Bernard chang however, perfect artist, draws her like she should have been drawn after Churchill, left. "
Wisdom from aplayfulsoul:
"They are either desperate or don't know about fashion. Seriously. 99% of girls I know have this simple and great rule when it comes to dressing: If you're showing the legs, cover the top and viceversa.
And I'm 19 and in school. I know how girls my age dress. If Supergirl was fashionable she'd be covering her stomach and using short shorts. That's a trend right now.
I can't believe an outfit she wore 20 years ago is more up to date than her current one."
And so it goes. On and on... click here for a link.
My opinion is this: I thought her new portrayal was fine and dandy. I would have liked to see a bit more muscle tone but that is a minor quibble. Supergirl is a teenage girl and I am not. I have no clue what teenage girls wear- do they still dress like Britney Spears? Obviously if I was the artist coming on this book, I would do my research. Did DC do theirs? Or did they just think that making her a bit unattractive would make the fangirls happy? It makes me wonder. Any teenagers out there care to enlighten me?
Part of me deep down wonders if some of the hatred towards the new art is a revenge of the fanboys for all the opinions we as women have given out. Do they feel like it is their shot now? Or is the art just plain unappealing? It seemed like both men and women were dissatisfied on the DC board.
All this divisiveness is why we never get what we want, Folks. First we say that we don't like the art by Churchill and the ilk that make Supergirl too sexy. DC actually does something about it and now it is "ugly" and Supergirl is "heavy" or "dumpy". No one wins on this one. Damn DC and damn the fans. Why didn't it work this issue? Will it work better down the road with a different artist? Did DC not be careful enough with our hearts? What the hell is the deal here???? I guess when the book gets cancelled for poor sales I will have my answer: NEVER. I have to go take two ibuprofen and try desperately not to curse and swear all over my blog at everyone.