Letβs talk Orientalism in Absolute Superman
My argument is not βArab villains are badβ or βRaβs al Ghul canβt be evil.β
My issue is with how the comic constructs him and what representational frameworks it draws from.
Orientalism is not just individual prejudice. It is a system of representation that frames the βEastβ as irrational, excessive, mystical, authoritarian, violent, primitive, and fundamentally different.
These patterns shape interpretation before a character even acts.
As Edward Said argues, representation does not simply reflect reality β it constructs meaning. Comics are especially important here because they rely heavily on visual shorthand and immediate recognition.
Characters are rapidly simplified into recognizable types:
hero, monster, threat, savior, fanatic, victim.
And Absolute Superman very consciously constructs Raβs as spectacle.
Look at how he is framed: hypermuscular, towering, looming over Superman. Heavily shadowed. almost inhumanly massive
Raβs is repeatedly drawn with large exposed areas of skin while Superman remains clothed and visually controlled. The body becomes spectacle.
The proportions push beyond ordinary humanity into something monstrous and mythic: heavy muscles, exaggerated size, animalistic posture, overwhelming physical presence and dominance.
That matters because Orientalist depictions of Arab/Muslim men have historically framed them as barbaric, hyperviolent, sexually excessive, patriarchal and physically threatening. The body itself becomes coded as danger.
This isnβt accidental visual design. Itβs part of a long representational history.
Raβs also isnβt framed as a psychologically grounded person so much as an archetype. He becomes less a psychologically grounded person and more a ritualistic, prophetic archetype; eternal, imposing, almost inhuman. Meanwhile Superman is framed as emotionally readable, illuminated, morally centered, rational and humanized. The contrast is intentional.
Ra's characterization becomes symbolic instead of personal.
Thatβs why the resurrection imagery matters too Lazarus pits, ritual language, dynastic authority and rebirth imagery. He becomes less a political actor and more an immortal Eastern patriarch archetype.
Another issue is how systemic problems become displaced onto Raβs specifically. The comic gestures toward environmental collapse, inequality, global instability and authoritarian systems but these issues become condensed into ONE racialized body.
So instead of engaging structurally with those problems, the narrative transforms them into individualized evil. Raβs becomes a symbolic container for extremism, apocalypse, overpopulation discourse, authoritarianism and irrational violence.
This is especially important because many of the ideas attached to him (population control, eco-authoritarianism, necropolitics) have real historical roots in Western political systems too. But the comic relocates them entirely into an βEasternβ villain figure.
That displacement matters. It obscures structural accountability by making one racialized body carry the weight of multiple global anxieties.
And these portrayals do not exist in isolation.
The American media has a long history of constructing Arabs and Muslims through spectacle, threat, mysticism, and dehumanization, especially post-9/11.
My point is not that the media cannot portray Arab villains. My point is that media can be visually compelling while still reproducing representational patterns worth critically examining.
theartofmadeline
jacobvanloon
izzy806
titsay
discoholicmusic
vaporwave
