#mistle warfare

[bughead-in-the-comics]

From Mistle Warfare, Archie Giant Series #4 (1957).

[dirtyriver]

"Mistle Warfare", Archie Giant Series #4-Archie's Christmas Stocking, 1957

[vesemirsexual]

@hunterarden

Not the person you replied to in the notes, but I can try and break down my thoughts on it at least!

The issue is that the relationship between Mistle and Ciri is the books is deeply problematic, and it’s really meant to be that way. The Rats are “Children of Contempt” - it’s the loss of innocence and the trauma they’ve gained as a result of warfare and everything else across the continent, that in turn has made them into fairly horrific people. They kill, steal, maim, ransack - Ciri literally threatens a 12 year old girl with rape. Their relationship quite literally starts with an attempted rape by another Rat, which then turns into one by Mistle, and while a lot of people still argue that it’s not sexual assault, the language around it used by Ciri shows that it’s a pretty horrific moment that’s humiliating and dehumanising. Even during their relationship when you can argue that Ciri and Mistle are in love, there’s still a lot of manipulation, violence and Ciri is a pretty heavy drug user during this time.

So people say - well it’s okay if they change that because I don’t want to see that. I don’t want my gay representation to be ugly/nasty/horrible. Which I think does a discredit to queer stories. If every queer story is happy, soft, healthy…it’s really just babying queer people and the implication is there that we can’t handle more nuanced or darker themes. This storyline is also pretty important to Ciri - her time with the Rats is the catalyst for a lot of bad things that happen to her after, is another significant point of trauma for Ciri, and ultimately leads her into learning that enforcing her anger and hurt on other people is turning the cycle of abuse again.

I think people misunderstand why a lot of book fans express discomfort with the casting of Mistle. It’s not that casting a black woman/nb (apologies, I’m not sure how Mistles actor identifies so I will have to check) as someone who’s main storyline is 1) being a gang rape victim who belongs a violent criminal 2) sexually assaults the small white girl who is the main character of the story and 3) is violently killed and beheaded - isn’t actually progressive. A lot of people seem to mistake that hiring a diverse cast = instantly progressive, however if you’re hiring a diverse cast into roles, you should also be responsibly thinking about the optics, the implications that can be drawn and also how this will play back on the actual actor (I’ve already seen gamer fans making jokes that it makes sense that Mistle would be casted as black, and we all know why they’re saying that).

Of course, people then say: well why can’t we have black Mistle and Ciri in a relationship, and all the terrible things don’t happen. And the answer is because at that point, you might as well just create an original work, because it’s so derived from the canon works and already in a very tight spot to pull off ethically as is.

It’s definitely a complicated scenario. I fully support the casting of POC in the Witcher series, and they’ve already added many, many amazing cast members. However, Mistle was definitely a choice that should’ve been handled with a lot more thought and care - regardless how much they change the storyline as I assume they will, there’s always also going to be ties to the original text, and the casting reads as lip service at best and tone deaf at worst.

(Of course, this is just my take, and I would also be happy to hear from black fans who would have a lot more of value to say on the specifics of the casting!)

i am gonna be so sad when Netflix!Rats takes over their tags because like. The originals are so fucked up and that’s why they’re so interesting to unpack. And now I’m going to be given the sanitised version, cleaned up for the general audience, lip service shippable girls. Boo. BOO.