The Devolution of Harley Quinn. Has her new costume design gone too far?

DarkKnight

Interesting article about how Harley Quinn has changed over the years. What do you think of the new design, too gritty or can you never have enough cleavage?

http://thenerdybomb.com/truly-mad-the-devolution-of-harley-quinn/

jaydee74

I can see the points in the article. I think the argument would be that Harley was created for cartoon and you probably can't push the limits too far but you also have to look at the creative people using the character since her first appearance in the cartoons. I don't mind it too much in the games but overall I never thought anything she's worn was as good as her original outfit.

Brack

It's the problem of having character designers whose job is to reinterpret characters who already have an iconic character design.

If all you do is leave it as originally conceived, then are you really doing your job? But at the same time if you alter the design significantly you risk losing a lot of the character's original appeal.

DC's New 52 is littered with character redesign for redesign's sake, Harley's not even the worst example in her own comic.

jaydee74

Very true. There are characters who have redesigned costumes that just leave you scratching your head and other ones that aren't as bad. Still, I would have liked to have seen an update to Harley without losing the iconic look she had. It could have been done.

hauberk

If this is bad because the character was originally designed for a "children's" cartoon, then isn't the Tiny Titans / Teen Titans Go! version of Starfire equally bad since it takes away her ultra-skimpy costume in order to make it appopriate for a "children's" cartoon?

At the end of the day, I really don't care how she's dressed in Suicide Squad. It's a damned good book and, in all honesty, as a non-batfan, I have no attachement for the character otherwise.

Chuck_Melville

I haven't been able to look at either Harley or the Suicide Squad since the New52 began.

nweathington

I’ll just be over in the corner re-reading Mad Love if you need me.

CaptShazam

It is wrong for the character of Harley Quinn, but if it was new character, I have no issues with the costume.

batlaw

The look of Harley is hardly the most offensive or worst thing about the reboot. shes just collateral damage.

DoctorDoom

I'll drink to that.

hauberk

hauberk said:

If this is bad because the character was originally designed for a "children's" cartoon, then isn't the Tiny Titans / Teen Titans Go! version of Starfire equally bad since it takes away her ultra-skimpy costume in order to make it appopriate for a "children's" cartoon?

At the end of the day, I really don't care how she's dressed in Suicide Squad. It's a damned good book and, in all honesty, as a non-batfan, I have no attachement for the character otherwise.

Love the disagrees instead of any kind of response to the question.

"We" get righteously indignant when an innocent and pure character (that attempts to murder people with a giant mallet and a rocket launcher) gets put in a s3x-pot dominatrix outfit (in a book where characters are being murdered right and left) and "we" get indignant when a character that started in a trampy space bathing suit gets reverted to said trampy space bathing suit after having spent some time in a forced attempt at rehab.

Some thoughts, about which, I would invite a dialog. Isn't it far more troubling that:

1 - Harley is in an abusive relationship with a psychopath?
2 - That Harley is being featured in a book where some 50,000+ people are killed in the first issue?
3 - Harley, while cute and funny is still a psychotic murderer (or at least attempted murder), which should be neither cute, not funny.
4 - That the feature characters are all murdering criminals in the first place?
5 - The first thought given all of the above is a puritanical concern for modesty? "Save the children from being scarred by the Harley's trampy outfit and nearly bare breasts!" all while watching King Shark bite a Basilisk agent in half.

Again: I'm no Bat-fan and I don't care for Teen Titans Go!, Tiny Titans or Red Hood and the Outlaws. I have no horse in the race, with possible exception of a cogent argument.

Brack

hauberk said:

Isn't it far more troubling that:

1 - Harley is in an abusive relationship with a psychopath?
2 - That Harley is being featured in a book where some 50,000+ people are killed in the first issue?
3 - Harley, while cute and funny is still a psychotic murderer (or at least attempted murder), which should be neither cute, not funny.
4 - That the feature characters are all murdering criminals in the first place?
5 - The first thought given all of the above is a puritanical concern for modesty? "Save the children from being scarred by the Harley's trampy outfit and nearly bare breasts!" all while watching King Shark bite a Basilisk agent in half.

Again: I'm no Bat-fan and I don't care for Teen Titans Go!, Tiny Titans or Red Hood and the Outlaws. I have no horse in the race, with possible exception of a cogent argument.

No.

The redesign is a bigger problem than bad writing, because you can't put bad writing on a t-shirt.

It's all bad brand management, though hardly DC's worst, but visuals are naturally more visible. It's why people wondered why the movie Green Lantern was a white guy.

So its natural people will wonder why Harley Quinn is now video game ugly. And no doubt come Man of Steel, people will be wondering where Superman's red trunks are.

nweathington

hauberk said:

hauberk said:

If this is bad because the character was originally designed for a "children's" cartoon, then isn't the Tiny Titans / Teen Titans Go! version of Starfire equally bad since it takes away her ultra-skimpy costume in order to make it appopriate for a "children's" cartoon?

At the end of the day, I really don't care how she's dressed in Suicide Squad. It's a damned good book and, in all honesty, as a non-batfan, I have no attachement for the character otherwise.

Love the disagrees instead of any kind of response to the question.

"We" get righteously indignant when an innocent and pure character (that attempts to murder people with a giant mallet and a rocket launcher) gets put in a s3x-pot dominatrix outfit (in a book where characters are being murdered right and left) and "we" get indignant when a character that started in a trampy space bathing suit gets reverted to said trampy space bathing suit after having spent some time in a forced attempt at rehab.

Some thoughts, about which, I would invite a dialog. Isn't it far more troubling that:

1 - Harley is in an abusive relationship with a psychopath?
2 - That Harley is being featured in a book where some 50,000+ people are killed in the first issue?
3 - Harley, while cute and funny is still a psychotic murderer (or at least attempted murder), which should be neither cute, not funny.
4 - That the feature characters are all murdering criminals in the first place?
5 - The first thought given all of the above is a puritanical concern for modesty? "Save the children from being scarred by the Harley's trampy outfit and nearly bare breasts!" all while watching King Shark bite a Basilisk agent in half.

Again: I'm no Bat-fan and I don't care for Teen Titans Go!, Tiny Titans or Red Hood and the Outlaws. I have no horse in the race, with possible exception of a cogent argument.

I didn’t hit the Disagree, but I'll respond anyway, though I haven’t read Suicide Squad, so I don’t know how Harley is being written in the New 52.

1) That’s the entire point of her character as she was originally portrayed, and what makes her such an interesting character—the contrast between her cute, bubbly exterior and her dark, disturbed interior. It’s exactly what Mad Love (see my above post) is all about. But if her exterior reflects her interior, that contrast is no longer there, and it diminishes her character.
2) I’d like to see the population chart for the DC (and Marvel) universe. It has to be significantly lower than our world.
3) See #1.
4) Without knowing the context, I can’t say one way or the other.
5) Modesty isn’t my concern. The contrast in her character is. (Again, see #1.) The outfit plays heavily into the effectiveness of that contrast, and that is why I hate the new costume. With the new costume, she’s simply another psychopath and far less interesting.

Chuck_Melville

I agree very strongly with both @nweathington and @brack on all points. I find Harley's new look and new character to be offensive and uninteresting -- which is an interesting combination, though not favorably so. As is Suicide Squad in general. I tried the first few issues and found it totally unpalatable, and was especially displeased (and repulsed) by the meaningless reinvention of both Harley and Amanda Waller. Harley's new outfit and character really ignore the whole point of the character. Two thumbs down all around for everything and anything involved in this series and the new Harley Quinn.

CaptShazam

I do not like the costume changes for pretty much all of the new 52. DC did not really care about older comic fans with the relaunch. They knew that some fans would stick around because they always stick around. What they really wanted were new fans.

DC could care less about Harley Quinn's original costume from a cartoon that is 20 years old. Most of the demo that DC is looking for has never seen the cartoon or barely remembers it.

hauberk

nweathington said:

hauberk said:

hauberk said:

If this is bad because the character was originally designed for a "children's" cartoon, then isn't the Tiny Titans / Teen Titans Go! version of Starfire equally bad since it takes away her ultra-skimpy costume in order to make it appopriate for a "children's" cartoon?

At the end of the day, I really don't care how she's dressed in Suicide Squad. It's a damned good book and, in all honesty, as a non-batfan, I have no attachement for the character otherwise.

Love the disagrees instead of any kind of response to the question.

"We" get righteously indignant when an innocent and pure character (that attempts to murder people with a giant mallet and a rocket launcher) gets put in a s3x-pot dominatrix outfit (in a book where characters are being murdered right and left) and "we" get indignant when a character that started in a trampy space bathing suit gets reverted to said trampy space bathing suit after having spent some time in a forced attempt at rehab.

Some thoughts, about which, I would invite a dialog. Isn't it far more troubling that:

1 - Harley is in an abusive relationship with a psychopath?
2 - That Harley is being featured in a book where some 50,000+ people are killed in the first issue?
3 - Harley, while cute and funny is still a psychotic murderer (or at least attempted murder), which should be neither cute, not funny.
4 - That the feature characters are all murdering criminals in the first place?
5 - The first thought given all of the above is a puritanical concern for modesty? "Save the children from being scarred by the Harley's trampy outfit and nearly bare breasts!" all while watching King Shark bite a Basilisk agent in half.

Again: I'm no Bat-fan and I don't care for Teen Titans Go!, Tiny Titans or Red Hood and the Outlaws. I have no horse in the race, with possible exception of a cogent argument.

I didn’t hit the Disagree, but I'll respond anyway, though I haven’t read Suicide Squad, so I don’t know how Harley is being written in the New 52.

1) That’s the entire point of her character as she was originally portrayed, and what makes her such an interesting character—the contrast between her cute, bubbly exterior and her dark, disturbed interior. It’s exactly what Mad Love (see my above post) is all about. But if her exterior reflects her interior, that contrast is no longer there, and it diminishes her character.
2) I’d like to see the population chart for the DC (and Marvel) universe. It has to be significantly lower than our world.
3) See #1
4) Without knowing the context, I can’t say one way or the other.
5) Modesty isn’t my concern. The contrast in her character is. (Again, see #1.) The outfit plays heavily into the effectiveness of that contrast, and that is why I hate the new costume. With the new costume, she’s simply another psychopath and far less interesting.

1) You raise a good point with regard to the dichotomy of character to appearance. It's an interesting justification for keeping the character as originally developed as it does maintain that conflict of internal and external characterization. I, personally don't agree. I think that the interesting element of Harley is all in the internal conflict. She's got the capacity to be a strong character in her own right, but the tendency to get pulled back into the Joker's influence feels like an interesting direction to me.
2) Agreed - in this case, terrorist attack on a stadium full of fans. 50,000 could be a high estimate, but it was a substantial body count.
3) See #1
4) Suicide Squad - inherently villains sent on suicidal missions, that almost always involve the team killing someone (often times including members of their own team). Why use villains? No social value of their own and no compunctions about killing the opposition.
5) Understood. I've conflated this with the indignation offered in another thread with regard to Starfire.

At the end of the day, I read the books that I like (for varying reasons - character, creator, concept). I've survived through a changes (both good and bad) on so many books that I'm just not concerned about much of what is going on in the New 52 at the moment, but I've accepted that it's not the DCU that I know. In a lot of ways that's fun in and of itself. I read a lot of SF and fantasy as well. The books that I like most tend to be the ones that are different enough to leave me not immediately getting the "rules" of the world.

When the books stop being fun (overall - yeah, Waller didn't need to get skinny, Harley doesn't need to dress like Harl[ot], but the overall concept of the Suicide Squad is more interesting than those things are objectionable) I'm done reading them. I've outlasted the leather jacket Avengers, the Jughead Legion and the Three-boot Legion. Odds are pretty good that I'll either outlast the New 52 or they'll manage to prove the value of the experiment.

Chuck_Melville

hauberk said:

When the books stop being fun...

Personally, I found that Suicide Squad ceased being fun right from the very first issue. All of the class associated with the previous series flew right out the window. I dropped that book like a hot potato.

hauberk said:

...the overall concept of the Suicide Squad is more interesting than those things are objectionable

I didn't find it to be so. The basic concept, using super-villains to perform suicide missions for the government in return for a full pardon, was interesting, was built upon a very solid cast and was executed very deftly through a series of interesting stories that swapped between interesting missions and terrific character biographies. The current series is more based on eye-gougingly ugly costumes and kinetics, eschewing story for bad page designs. You may be finding the series to be interesting, but I found it to be a mess. And while it's not yet in danger of cancellation, it's just barely drifting in front of the cancellation line... and a change of creative personnel is not a healthy sign.

Planeis

DarkKnight said:

Interesting article about how Harley Quinn has changed over the years. What do you think of the new design, too gritty or can you never have enough cleavage?

http://thenerdybomb.com/truly-mad-the-devolution-of-harley-quinn/

No, it hasn't gone too far.

nweathington

hauberk said:

4) Suicide Squad - inherently villains sent on suicidal missions, that almost always involve the team killing someone (often times including members of their own team). Why use villains? No social value of their own and no compunctions about killing the opposition.

I just meant I haven’t read this incarnation, so I don’t know how the characters are being portrayed. I read the original Suicide Squad series years ago, and I didn’t have any problem with villains being the focus of the story, as they weren’t portrayed sympathetically for the most part. And neither was Waller and the Squad as an organization really. As long as that is still the case—and I kind of doubt it is—then I still have no problem with it.

DoctorDoom

I'll drink to all that.

hauberk

Chuck_Melville said:

hauberk said:

When the books stop being fun...

Personally, I found that Suicide Squad ceased being fun right from the very first issue. All of the class associated with the previous series flew right out the window. I dropped that book like a hot potato.

hauberk said:

...the overall concept of the Suicide Squad is more interesting than those things are objectionable

I didn't find it to be so. The basic concept, using super-villains to perform suicide missions for the government in return for a full pardon, was interesting, was built upon a very solid cast and was executed very deftly through a series of interesting stories that swapped between interesting missions and terrific character biographies. The current series is more based on eye-gougingly ugly costumes and kinetics, eschewing story for bad page designs. You may be finding the series to be interesting, but I found it to be a mess. And while it's not yet in danger of cancellation, it's just barely drifting in front of the cancellation line... and a change of creative personnel is not a healthy sign.

That's the beauty of comics in general. There's something there for everyone. I don't disagree that the costume redesigns were largely unnecessary and in many cases, just plain bad design. Keeping with Suicide Squad, I really very strongly dislike the redesign for Deadshot, but this is the one book featuring Deadshot and the Suicide Squad, so if I want to read about those characters, this is the only book to give them to me.

As for the second half, there's nothing but disappointment ahead if the path that you're walking is comparing today's books with fond memories from yesteryear. For what it's worth, there were some pretty terrible costumes in the original series as well. Creative changes do not alway bode ill, though that seems to be what you're rooting for here.

nweathington said:

hauberk said:

4) Suicide Squad - inherently villains sent on suicidal missions, that almost always involve the team killing someone (often times including members of their own team). Why use villains? No social value of their own and no compunctions about killing the opposition.

I just meant I haven’t read this incarnation, so I don’t know how the characters are being portrayed. I read the original Suicide Squad series years ago, and I didn’t have any problem with villains being the focus of the story, as they weren’t portrayed sympathetically for the most part. And neither was Waller and the Squad as an organization really. As long as that is still the case—and I kind of doubt it is—then I still have no problem with it.

Apologies, wasn't attempting to be patronizing. Your response to my previous comment referenced to the context of all of the featured characters being murderers seemed to be asking about the context surrounding the current Harley. That being the Suicide Squad, I was a bit surprised that you would ask, but figured better to offer the info.

I don't see Waller or the organization being played sympathetically in the book. The entire concept behind the book really is quite cynical and has been from its original inception.

I will say that while unnecessary, I do think that they've done something with Waller's backstory that begins to justify her new figure. Admittedly, it's the classic Wildstorm agency chief as former operative trope, but the pre-Flashpoint Waller's Cabrini Green origin doesn't really serve any longer.

nweathington

hauberk said:

Apologies, wasn't attempting to be patronizing. Your response to my previous comment referenced to the context of all of the featured characters being murderers seemed to be asking about the context surrounding the current Harley. That being the Suicide Squad, I was a bit surprised that you would ask, but figured better to offer the info.

I don't see Waller or the organization being played sympathetically in the book. The entire concept behind the book really is quite cynical and has been from its original inception.

I will say that while unnecessary, I do think that they've done something with Waller's backstory that begins to justify her new figure. Admittedly, it's the classic Wildstorm agency chief as former operative trope, but the pre-Flashpoint Waller's Cabrini Green origin doesn't really serve any longer.

No apologies necessary. I didn’t take your response as patronizing, and should have made my initial answer clearer.

EarthGBilly

nweathington said:

1) That’s the entire point of her character as she was originally portrayed, and what makes her such an interesting character—the contrast between her cute, bubbly exterior and her dark, disturbed interior. It’s exactly what Mad Love (see my above post) is all about. But if her exterior reflects her interior, that contrast is no longer there, and it diminishes her character.

I really have no skin in this fight, not reading Suicide Squad, only reading one Bat-book right now, and I don't believe that the character has made an appearance there, but this is a fantastic point.

I once taught an art class and one of the assignments I gave was to create a movie poster for a horror film, and one of the ideas that I covered was that some of the best horror films used evil wrapped in a familiar/innocent/"happy" package, which makes the impact even greater. Children (The Omen), clowns (Poltergeist - the clown doll), family pets (Cujo) - great fodder for horror.

Changing Harley Quinn's look into that of a Juggalette does diminish the character. How much depends on the use of the character. At the very least, the initial facade is gone.

Good discussion, though, folks.

SolitaireRose

I look at what DC did to a character that is AMAZINGLY popular in the world outside of comic shops and wonder if they even give a damn about female readers in any way. This is a character so popular she moved from the animated series to the comics and is now an iconic character just as well known as any of the rest of Batman's rogues gallery.

Want to know why DC's sales are in freefall? STUDY THIS AND LEARN.

Chuck_Melville

hauberk said:

That's the beauty of comics in general. There's something there for everyone. I don't disagree that the costume redesigns were largely unnecessary and in many cases, just plain bad design. Keeping with Suicide Squad, I really very strongly dislike the redesign for Deadshot, but this is the one book featuring Deadshot and the Suicide Squad, so if I want to read about those characters, this is the only book to give them to me.

As for the second half, there's nothing but disappointment ahead if the path that you're walking is comparing today's books with fond memories from yesteryear. For what it's worth, there were some pretty terrible costumes in the original series as well. Creative changes do not alway bode ill, though that seems to be what you're rooting for here.

Change simply for change's sake always bodes ill. My complaints about Suicide Squad (and a lot of the rest of DC's New52, to be honest) don't derive from 'nostalgia', but from a side-by-side comparison. The original 80's version -- well, the post-Crisis version, really, since the original Suicide Squad appeared during the Silver Age -- was better written and better conceived. It relied on clean visuals and strong stories, whereas the new version (judged, admittedly, on the few issues I bought at the start of the New52) were a mess of badly executed page designs and a lack of overall coherency. It strikes me as a project headed by somebody who really doesn't know how to tell a story, or even know beyond a vague apprehension what their story is supposed to be.

It puts me in mind of the apocryphal story of the great movie director, Cecil B DeMille, who decided to produce and direct a comedy. Having never before done a comedy, he sat and watched several reels of the most popular comedy films of the time. (This was during the Silent Film era.) When he finished and presented his comedy, most of the early viewers scratched their heads in confusion. One of them approached him and opined that there was no story or obvious point to the comedy, that there were only scenes of people running around. DeMille retorted that it was no different from any comedy he had recently watched, that they all featured the very same thing: scenes of people running around.

That's my view of the current Suicide Squad and DC in general: they want to recreate the best of the best from the past (or else why revive these specific titles?) and are trying to recreate the popularity they once enjoyed, but have no idea (or interest) in what really made them work. They're just producing reams of pages of people running around.

hauberk said:

I don't see Waller or the organization being played sympathetically in the book. The entire concept behind the book really is quite cynical and has been from its original inception.

I will say that while unnecessary, I do think that they've done something with Waller's backstory that begins to justify her new figure. Admittedly, it's the classic Wildstorm agency chief as former operative trope, but the pre-Flashpoint Waller's Cabrini Green origin doesn't really serve any longer.

It's a shame that they think so, because that was the version that had the greater depth of character and thus was far more interesting. She used to be human, her overall indomitable toughness balanced with humanity and an inner vulnerability born of tragedy; now, she's just a gun-toting black caricature who can't rise above being a bitch. Her appearances in Team 7 and Justice League Of America only serve to perpetuate that caricature. Seriously, if this is the image that DC believes best serves, then the company is in even worse straits than I might have imagined.

Torchsong

The skanking of Harley is pretty much a sign of the times. I'll never forgive them for putting Waller on a diet.

[Deleted User]

Torchsong said:

The skanking of Harley is pretty much a sign of the times. I'll never forgive them for putting Waller on a diet.

Succinctly said. 10 years from now, all of the "improvements" of DC's characters will look like the Heroes Reborn designs of the 90's. The thing that makes some of our favorite heroes' designs work, is that they transcend whatever era you view them from. Placing the gloss of 2012 on them will make them forever tied to this era.

Torchsong

Amen (to Tonebone's post). The beauty of Waller was that she was a large black woman with a tragic history who scared the hell out of Batman and wasn't necessarily a nice person. All that is gone now. What we have now is not Amanda Waller.

hauberk

I have to wonder how much of this same conversation was happening in 1987. Admittedly, far less in the way of costume redesign, but certainly, the insistence that "my" incarnation is the best that something can be had to be present.

I know that I'm guilty of it - Jughead Legion, Three-boot Legion, Post Silver Centurion Iron Man armor. Pretty much any Bendis Avengers line-up

In this case, I've just decided to go with the flow. At this point, they've managed to out last Heroes Reborn, but are still well under the counts for the New Universe. So, for the time being, I'm just accepting that this is a giant Elseworlds with some things that I like and others that I don't. No matter what happens, I've still got all of the characters that I like at my fingertips to revisit in back issue form.

Torchsong

hauberk said:

I have to wonder how much of this same conversation was happening in 1987. Admittedly, far less in the way of costume redesign, but certainly, the insistence that "my" incarnation is the best that something can be had to be present.

Everyone's going to have "their favorite" or "their version" of a character. It doesn't mean a better version hasn't come along, but when something clicks with you, it clicks with you.

Batman - to me, Jim Aparo's version of Batman *is* my Batman. There have been better designs on the costume, and better stories he appeared in, but skinny narrow heads and no body armor is the Batman I grew up with.
Starfire - Perez's original version still stands. Knee, not thigh boots, a revealing outfit but more in the idea of a European swimsuit than stripperware.
Huntress - to me she was at her best in the 90s and how she is now. One of those great designs where you don't have to show a bunch of skin to maker the character look dangerous AND alluring at the same time.
Power Girl - boob window. :) Accept no substitutes.
Green Arrow - actually liked Grell's take on him via Longbow Hunters. The hood was a great update.
Supergirl - I'm from the 70s. Kara wore hotpants and a big blousy blouse. I've enjoyed the myriad other costumes she's worn, but I always try and get sketches of her in the 70s garb if the artist remembers it. :)
Batgirl - surprisingly, Stephanie's version was, IMHO one of the best versions of the outfit. I know that's probably blasphemy but it's just my take on it.