So the latest internet outrage is about Milo Manara’s cover for Spider-woman issue one due out in November (written by Dennis Hopless with art by Greg Land). I’ve seen blogs and websites criticising (and critiquing) the artist’s work and I think they are largely missing the point and laying the blame at the feet of the wrong person. I'm not a fan of the cover but that is largely due to the fact that it is one of those pin-up cover that I dislike. I like a cover to give me some information about the story inside. My point is that when you hire Milo Manara, you shouldn’t be surprised when you get Milo Manara. So when the person or persons at Marvel hired him to do the cover, they largely knew what to expect. The question is whether or not you think Marvel should have hired him for this particular gig and then signed off on the finished product. Considering the book is about a female character, you’d imagine (or hope at least) that Marvel would want to portray a strong female character and would want to garner some positive reactions from female fans in particular. Take a look at the positive reaction caused by the preview art for the new Batgirl costume and you really have to say that Marvel have scored an own goal with this one. Of course they’re not the only ones to make such an error and I think comic book companies need to remember that we’re no longer living in the past and the "it has always been this way" defence is no defence at all. Women and girls are a part of consumer base and it is long past the time when they should start marketing to them. Meanwhile, I can think of a few quick and easy ways that Marvel can fix this issue starting with hiring some female creators for future variant covers and maybe admitting that they might not have thought this one through or maybe they think there's no such thing as bad publicity.
