Skip to content Light View
There's also a cult theory that it was Bucky's child in Name of the Rose, and that she was born once he was placed into stasis, and that memories of Nikolai were implanted, that the ribbon were just there to sell it While it's a nice fan headcanon , Imo, it takes some of the the impact of the story away. Given how her relationships with both men are retcons, what are your though? I like that she had a life after her time with Ivan, Taras, and Logan yet before she went to Red Room and met Bucky.

username Anonymous

I mean— I’m not sure how that works, timelinewise. Deadly Origin, which is still the “official” version of Natasha’s origin, makes it pretty clear that Natasha accepted the Red Room “chemical” shortly after met Winter Soldier, and that the chemical made her sterile, unable to concieve. So it seems unlikely that she could have had a child with Winter Soldier, much less that her handlers would “cover it up” by giving her an elaborate set of false memories taking place ten years before she joined the Red Room. It also doesn’t explain how other people know this story: is the old woman in the woods a KGB plant, still there decades after the regime has fallen? How did Ivan know about the false memories, considering Imus got his information from his robot brain? That’s kind of the thing with ~everything was a lie~ mindwipe retcons: if you look at them too closely, they don’t make timelines simpler, they make them way more complicated.

I don’t really want to play headcanon police, and I don’t really care if someone wants to write a story where it turns out Nikolai never existed. We all pick and choose the canon we most want to believe, and rework the rest to fit around that.

But from a meta-perspective, Marjorie Liu wrote those flashbacks to give Natasha back those themes of lost love and survival, themes that were essential to her original story that got glossed over when her origin became too much about what really happened. It gave her secrets that didn’t fit into a KGB file, gave her some parts of her past that were truly her own. And it was also, I like to think, a big middle finger to the idea running through her canon that soldiers can’t be mothers, and vice versa, that one kind of femininity is the enemy of another. So I don’t know why this is the part of Natasha’s canon you’d want to deny.

From a shipping perspective, Liu emphasized Natasha’s own World War II coming of age in the context of her relationship with Bucky. Like, to quote her:

Really, it makes perfect sense that she and Bucky are an item, because they’re both from the same generation and were raised in a military setting in WWII. They’ve seen things and speak a common language, that not many others around them will ever understand.

Liu was finding ways that the two of them fit together that didn’t begin with shared trauma. So from a shipping standpoint I’m not sure why you’d try to read past those flashbacks either?

madrefiero:

I have a favor to ask of you artists in tumblrland. I’m having trouble finding coloring pages of the Black Widow that aren’t too sexualized for my 5 year old daughter. She just needs a few, simple pages of her favorite superhero to color. If anyone out there is willing to draw some for me, I would happily make you a hat, scarf, necklace, earrings, or bracelet for the fandom of your choosing in return for your services. It doesn’t have to be super detailed. Just like normal, kid coloring book style. Kind of cartoony is fine. She loves the Black Widow and she loves to color. I’m just having a hard time finding stuff that isn’t full of weird T&A poses and super-cleavage. Please help a mom out! 

Even Black Widow, I mean it’s Scarlett Johansson, so she’s inherently a sexual creature but they don’t actually use any of that as part of the story because it’s the PG -13 universe. It has to be able to sell toys and you don’t want to sexualize toys, I guess.

John August, Scriptnotes 182

Recently, August, Craig Mazin, and Dan Savage had a podcast discussion about sex and the big-screen superhero, finding, rather predictably, that there’s not enough of it. It is true that superhero sexuality has always had this muted quality to it. Action stars are framed so that we can see their bodies, and marvel over them, but this is about our assumed desire, not theirs. Since the genre (and most other things, besides) is generally framed for the male gaze, it is a desire of becoming: of having that power, posessing those muscles, that sexual prowess. Sometimes it is the desire of posessing: of touching those curves, having that woman. But these calls are coming from outside the house. They are not about what the narrative wants, but what we do.

When comic book sex scenes fail, it is usually because they put too much in the showing, and not the telling. They aren’t rooted in the characters themselves but the desire to see the characters naked— but you can’t see the characters naked because this is PG-13 and then I always run up against a suspension-of-disbelief problem right then, because it’s character and continuity that lets me think these are people and not just cartoon drawings. They become cartoon drawings when they are careened wildly out of what the narrative wants us to believe. This is a woman in pain drawn like a woman in orgasm, here is a practical-minded military woman fighting in a bikini and heels. Here is a cartoon drawing showing as much boob with as little nipple as possible.

When John August says that Ms. Johansson is a “sexual creature”, what he means is that she is desired, sexually, by forces outside herself, and not that she is a person with sexual desires. He doesn’t mention Chris Evans or Hemsworth or Downey Jr. as “ineherently sexual” and casually glosses over her personhood with that word, creature. In this version, Black Widow is something contained by Scarlett Johansson the body, not created by Scarlett Johansson the actor.

The thing is, Marvel does tell stories about Natasha Romanoff and desire. She knows men desire her, and smiles flirtatiously before beating the crap out of them. She plays matchmaker because she does not want to see Steve Rogers crushed by the loneliness she thinks she has made her friend. Natasha lives surrounded by predators and secrets and cannot afford intimacy. She will not easily surrender her armor. And this is presented as tragic, but tragic for her, not tragic for the movie goers who won’t see her strip off the catsuit.

Savage asks, “Spider-Man would be like the world’s greatest bondage top. Does he not have sex?” Mazin answers, but doesn’t, because these people have barely watched the films they’re discussing, that the character has “no balls.” Spider-Man is the rare male hero with slender shoulders. He is not, generally, about machismo. But his story is, often about desire, about the lesson that even when your body remakes itself overnight into the world’s greatest bondage top, you will not get everything that you want.

And what characters want is important, when we talk about sexiness in fiction, because sexiness is about wanting and being wanted and not just about film ratings. Marvel and co. actually have no trouble sexualizing toys, and sexuality is not the shape of a woman’s lips. “But we’re inherently sexual creatures” echoes in the anger men tell me when I do not want to sleep with them, talk to them, acknowlege them. As though I am a prude or repressed or even unnatural for not wanting to wear a low-cut dress, for not enjoying the power of their gaze.

Look: I wish superhero stories could be more honest about sex, the kind that happens in wedlock and the kind that happens between strangers. I wish I could read comics and comic book messageboards without seeing “Black Widow is such a slut~” jokes. But real sex positivity requires the space to refuse sex. And I think really sex positive fiction would give characters the space express their varied-and-fictive-but-believable desires, not just our own.

Source: johnaugust.com

[Atwell] says if she had the chance to appear in another Marvel film, she’d like to show up in a Black Widow film. "If there was a Black Widow film I’d love to be part of that." she then continues, "I think that a lot more females on screen together is a very powerful dynamic. I think that would be great fun to see her up against other women."

image
Chris Claremont: All her life, she’s fought to be free, with the fierce passion and tempered steel strength of an eagle. She chose her road long ago, and she’s never regretted it, never looked back. But every choice has its price, and she knows what every eagle knows from birth— to fly free, you must fly alone.

From Marvel Team-Up #85, by Chris Claremont and Sal Buscema.