I went with it because it's arguably the most high profile example, but whichever way you slice it, it still makes a point of things. Either you're talking about them being overtly rewritten, or you're talking about them being introduced into a universe where Cybertronian xenobiology is incompatible with pair bonding and then suddenly it's a thing. Either you're analogously treating Earth 2 characters as Earth 1 character out of nowhere, or you're putting Earth -2 characters into Earth-1, with insufficient universe building to competently explain it.Originally Posted by Paulbot
You can argue that "lovers" in a heterosexually reproducing series isn't used, but the problem there is the way in which I first became aware of their relationship - where Roberts has treated it as being exactly a case of the "human" version of it.
I stopped reading just after Days of Future Past, which was interesting, when I caught wind of the preview for I think it was Issue 42 of MTMTE, where it became clear we weren't going to get a credible explanation for why a species which is reproduced by their planet would have naturally occurring sexes/genders. I was prepared to give them a chance when Windblade came onto the scene for there to be a credible explanation for how genders could naturally exist in a species where their existence made no biological sense, but after close to 10 issues, it became clear we weren't getting one. At that point, it became clear that the quality of universe building that gave us hotspots, forged vs constructed cold, functionalism and Stage-6ers (which I have to say have been a missed opportunity in terms of exploring their place in Cybertronian society), was going to be a thing of the past, and I reluctantly said goodbye to it.
But I digress. I first became aware of it in a magazine article celebrating Chromedome and Rewind as a same-sex couple, where Roberts went along with things and made no attempt to distinguish this from human homosexual relationships and was more than happy to have it portrayed as such. I've since learned that there are a multitude of heterosexual and homosexual pair-bonding relationships (be it Onslaught and Blast-Off or Nautica and I think it was Blurr). Yet the thing is that pair bonding of any kind, really doesn't make sense for a species which doesn't require pair-bonding to reproduce; after all, the biological function of pair bonding is to maximise the survivability of the offspring by having both progenitors/parents hang around to look after their offspring.
It works in the G1 Cartoon - the Autobots were essentially robot maids and butlers whom the Quintessons no doubt also designed to act as companions and quite possibly sex-bots (apologies if this last one is age inappropriate).
Beast Wars and Beast Machines -again, you have both animal programming and animal DNA influencing a Cybertronian, and in Beast Machines you literally have heterosexually reproducing, technorganic life forms. In fact short of wondering what the heck a plant crossed with a rat looks like and hoping it survives longer than the poor rat in Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm perfectly fine with that relationship in every biological sense.
The idea of the planet producing sparks and either naturally producing bodies for them, or where that failed, a pseudo cult being established around producing artificial bodies for bodyless sparks, isn't a natural fit with pair bonding of any kind.
Yes it's world building, but its world building that is incongruent with the established universe and would have been far better handled from a multiverse perspective.
What is a natural fit with that type of Cybertronian xenobiology though, is the idea of a caste system based around functionalism. In fact what would have been a very interesting way of exploring transgenderism and society's reaction to it, would to have been to explore transfunctionalism. In fact Lightspeed, with his identifying as a flyer but being stuck as a having a ground-based alt-mode, would have made for an intelligent exploration of transgender issues.
As for the agenda side of things, I base that on the comments of Mairghread Scott. The way Simon Furman handled Arcee was intelligent and empathetic. He had Jhiaxus make Arcee happening by kidnapping them and altering their RNA to introduce gender into Cybertronian society. He made Arcee female as a point of difference. That automatically made every single other Cybertronian male by extension. The handling of Arcee's origins did nothing but endear sympathy for her and even more hatred for the vile monster which was Jhiaxus. Yet Mairghread Scott ripped into Furman and accused him of being a misogynist.
Then when she's brought not only Windblade, but other female characters into the fold, we get this "they've always been there" explanation, which makes absolutely no sense in terms of IDW's established Cybertronian xenobiology. Never mind the fact that if they were always there, I have yet to read about the massive genocide of female Cybertronians which would have had to have taken place for Jhiaxus to suddenly be reintroducing gender, as opposed to simply introducing it. Even the G1 Cartoon, as continuity flawed as it was, managed to get that part of things right when bringing female Autobots seemingly out of nowhere.
That absolutely screams out viewing universe building as "pesky" and something to be treated as the obstacle to a political agenda, rather than the very foundation of any good storytelling.
Whether Roberts was directly a party to it himself, or whether he was simply working within what Scott had created, you're still talking about a situation where his work was one where exploring issues was done at the expense of solid universe building - to the point where it could be accused of overtly pushing an agenda to the point of blatant flag waving.
As I said, I'm fine with an exploration of issues, I just expect the universe building to be well-crafted.
And yet, in the latest continuity gaffe, we suddenly have Unicron in a universe that was established as having Unicron right from the getgo by Simon Furman.
Which is precisely why they would have been better taking the multiverse approach.
Not exactly. There's world-building which fits seamlessly with what is already there and there's trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. My problem with IDW is that it's very much become the later.
I don't buy that for one minute. These are teams which existed working in close proximity for millions of years. They did so in high pressure situations which were often life and death. If we've learned anything from human pair bonding as a sentient pair bonding species, it is that those are the very type of conditions which will bring about pair-bonding where it might otherwise not take place. Yet particularly with Stormbringer, where there would have been a prime example to introduce it, there was absolutely no sign of it.
Like I said, it might well be universe-building, but it's the kind which tries to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Reply With Quote
