So true.

Hey, print language is a whole toolset. Why wouldn't I want to use it toward the ends of greater enunciation? We give certain words and phrases emphasis when we speak, and that's what italicization performs for us in print.

I guess a generation reared on texting and emoticons might be a bit bamboozled by the possibilities of the ancient art of typesetting...  

Exactly.

And when someone cites Blaster or Jazz, remember that those two characters are both historically portrayed specifically as Earth media junkies. Considering that TFs do speak English on Earth, then I assume that there could be some explanation as to how they decide upon which vernacular to express themselves with... though so far, no writer has ever really touched on this, sadly.

  Good point.

Ha! I somehow knew you would get hung up on that. It's certainly not your intelligence I doubt, but your motivation. I just don't understand why someone would want to flatly simplify the question into such broad and unrepresentative strokes, and then plant a flag there.

"Transformers should be totally humanized because they've always been totally humanized." is a tautology, one that completely disregards all the various nuances in the way the sci-fi elements of Transformers have been handled over the years (with varying degrees of success and failure).

As I pointed out at the head of this discussion, the question is too vague, and doesn't really allow for an interrogation of what "humanized" or "too humanized" really is. It treats it as an absolute, devoid of degree or variance.

This is not really true (though Man of Iron is certainly an extreme case of removing the subjectivity of the Cybertronian characters). Instead, what you often find in Transformers is a frisson of the Unheimliche; small, abrupt reminders of difference, that add a dimension of strangeness to these characters that seem to have familiar faces. And this novelty is enticing.

Obviously, metaphor has always been rampant in Transformers. The whole point was never strict realism. However, the effect of the metaphor and analogy always served the purposes of the uncanny... creating a disjuncture in the familiar relationship between the readers and the characters... reminding us how, in some ways, these beings were as much "cars that turn into people" as "people who turn into cars". It made the whole exercise... interesting.

Sometimes these little reminders are jarring... like in Marvel #3 when the Autobots don't seem to have quite the same notion of "death" as Spider-Man does. In that case, it could be simplified as "he was dead, but he got better" (something that any superhero really should be familiar with by now  ), but explored further it plays on the notion of death being absolute but still temporary... broken until fixed... which is a bit different than how humans experience it. Some of this is semantic, but then, that's where a lot of philosophy starts.  

Other times these are light in tone, and serve the needs of the mechanical metaphor, finding breezy corollaries between human and Cybertronian concepts and biology, but seen through the lense of technology... but even these often require us to shunt our expectations slightly sideways.

Lately, the big issue mostly seems to be culture... though through the gender discourse, biology is still very much on the table.

I dunno... maybe it's because you weren't there, and came to it all later. Or maybe I was just old enough in the mid 80s to appreciate the implications of weirdness in those old bios... but I never considered the narrative shortcuts of the cartoon to be the absolute representation of what the fiction could or should be. I guess I've always been one of those "wonks" from the very beginning. But I blame Budiansky for being the first wonk of all, to plant those seeds in the fiction.  

I feel that what your points ultimately seem to be alluding to is this sense that "because Transformers was typically handled as a second-rate kiddie fiction, there's no reason to ever develop it beyond that" or "Because it wasn't done consistently in the past, we should only expect it to fulfill the same old expectations."

Which I think is kind of a non-starter argument in the era of TF comics aimed at the increasingly aged TF fandom.

And this is where my comment about "I think you know this" comes in... I really don't understand why you would be making that argument. Or rather, why you seem to be arguing against the impulse toward nuance and clever (rather than literal) analogy in the fiction, as if that would somehow pervert or destroy the experience of Transformers.

Uh, you mean like how IDW is a new, more involved and grown-up variation on G1? Or how most new TF series are reboots?

At least we agree there.

Except I think that's a gross simplification of what kinds of metaphors and experiences consumers are capable of accommodating... and even being enriched by. It seems to suppose that Transformers is only capable of engaging on the most basic level of the G1 cartoon, and must hold fast to those limitations into perpetuity. It also again falls into a false binary of "humanized" vs "not-humanized" as if there isn't a wide gulf full of possibilities in between to be negotiated.

zmog

 

This is the early example I always think of. Kind of an unfulfilled promise of a sophistication Transformers could have had. The Autobots don't even understand why Spider-Man is upset.

 

Exactly that.

I mean, it relies on a bit of contrivance... they could have just said "but we can fix him and he'll be okay", but the point of the interaction is more to demonstrate the total gulf in understanding between these non-organic alien machine-people, and a human being.

Which is interesting, because conventionally, a human outlook would be to treat a machine as something that can be fixed, but by the end of the story, Spidey had instead come to see Gears as a "person"... and therefore "death" signaled a more permanent departure for him.

The idea that a person/soul was not ephemeral (reinforcing the traditional divide between the vulgar body and the divine spirit) but simply contained in a pile of circuits waiting for a fresh battery, is something that is intrinsically transgressive to our human cosmology.

Which is not to say that all of that introspection was necessarily at the core of the writing of the comic, but it still makes it more interesting than the obvious alternative.  

zmog

 

By the very nature of the Ark crash, it sets up exactly how inhuman they are physically. With Gears' "death" we set up how different emotionally and culturally. The issue where they are giving G. B. Blackrock the tour of the Ark and Sunstreaker is on the table, and where Jazz is getting a replacement arm. I think the disconnect came from the cartoon dialogue leaving everyone expecting them to be more human. Like the crash and revival of the Ark, Skyfire's resurrection, or Triple Takeover, or... Well, I guess they weren't quite that human. Not until the Movie necessitated death in the human sense.

 

I'm not saying "don't do new cool sophisticated things," I'm saying that Transformers has a lot of baggage and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Aside from the "puzzle play" element, the most standout part of the franchise is the fact that very mechanical looking beings are strongly anthropomorphized. This is why Transformers is not a super robot franchise like Gundam (despite its design roots) and why it is not a superhero franchise like Marvel (despite its story roots). It's also why parodies such as Incredible Change Bots and various episodes of MEGAS XLR and Robot Chicken read so strongly despite often lacking any of the trademark designs. "Metal world of squabbling transistor-based people" is A Thing.

So to put this in perspective--Superman is a franchise that makes no intrinsic sense to me. I wouldn't imagine an alien falling to our world looking like that or acting like that. I enjoy many Superman stories as good stories, and I even am specifically in the mood for one sometimes.

If I were told to design my ideal Superman reboot, to satisfy myself and only myself, I'd raze it down to the foundations and the core science fiction of the idea...and it would be a total non-starter. It wouldn't even be a story about "a super man." No one would want to see it.

Does that clarify my position at all? I want to see Transformers push every boundary there is, but to me the basic framework of the franchise includes a level of humanization that I would consider extreme (if rather typical).

The IDW timeline is almost as old as the kids I'm teaching now.

It's established.

I would love to name you chief creative consultant on reboot #87 of The Transformers, but IDW is just not doing that thing. I mean, it's been awhile since Infiltration #0.

 

I've been with transformers from almost the beginning, and they have always felt like aliens to me. To humanize them too much limits the cool stories that can be told about them.

I still maintain that by making Transformers gender binary we're limiting them to a really specific narrative. It's part of the reason I'm not feeling IDW. It took a pretty terrible idea with a decent implication and just ran it into the ground with absurd explanations of solus prime and colony planets.

I have to agree with my slightly older peeps. I have been collecting since the later 80s when the masters were becoming popular, and they just seemed like aliens. In my head, the transformers were aliens, they never felt like humans to me. Especially since I read the comic as a kid.
The transformers definitely felt more human in the cartoon, but that made sense, they wanted to sell more toys.

Similar but different. Close enough that we can relate, but not so close that it feels like I could replace random transformer with weird neighbor that has odd cooking smells coming from his apartment. Unfortunately it's gotten to that point in my opinion.

Good point.

What's even annoying about the movie is that Magnus was blown to hell and still somehow survived. While Prime got a slash on his side and died. That still irks me a bit to this day. I remember watching that as a kid and getting really annoyed that Magnus survived while Prime didn't

Anguirus- You came into the fiction as an adult? Did you go back and read everything? You must have a unique perspective on the fiction as a whole. Most of us have rose colored lenses when it comes to this nonsense. I would have never guessed you weren't with it from the beginning as your knowledge of the fiction borders of encyclopedic. I guess anyone can be that way with the wiki these days, though.

 

I'm a weird hybrid.

Born 1987, collected the first year of G2 toys and at the same time watched the movie and Five Faces of Darkness on home video. It spoke to me, but I largely set the franchise aside till my college friends got me back into it.

Transformers is therapy/escapism for me. It was one of the first pieces of media I didn't analyze/deconstruct into atom-sized pieces. I was a man who, it could be said in all fairness, over-analyzed the Godzilla franchise, and I was probably like three different kinds of awful Star Wars fanboy.

I don't approach Transformers from a 100% "suspension of disbelief" perspective. It's interesting to me because it taps right into my emotional centers while simultaneously hocking toys with mercenary ruthlessness.

While I know that SMOG et al will always look on me with a sort of wistful pity for not "getting" the early franchise, I think of it as a form of impartiality.  

And yes I've read all of the US comics, all the UK comics up till Time War, half of G2, seen all the televised episodes up through RiD 1.0 plus Animated and Prime, and read an absolutely ludicrous amount of Wiki. I'm an information vacuum, it's how I fan.

 

  I think that the key difference between those who find them too human and those who don't is going to be our knowledge of the original comics. Those of us who recall (or even enjoyed) the original series are going to remember them being a lot more alien.

It even ties into the whole gender debate, as the way that they were portrayed in the comics really was like a single gender species, which helped sell the alien aspect of them. Shockwave even hijacks Optimus' head so that he can give life to the Constructicons.

 

I've always had a hard time accepting gender with transformers because I was comic first kid. To me, the transformers haven't always been gendered. But it's hard to argue that point without coming across like a misogynist. At least that's what I was told when I ventured onto reddit once. *shudders*

And thanks for sharing, Anguirus.

 

You and I are relatively close in age and have similar history with the franchise but I must say I disagree with your stance. I never went back and properly read the old comics and grew up on G2 and Beast Wars (they were extremely humanized in that era) but I still viewed them as alien and distinctly different from humans. Even if I felt their exaggerated personalities and quirks would transfer hilariously on actual people.

The direction IDW, or more specifically, MTMTE has been going lately has caused me to lose total interest in the comic. It has gone way too far and feels like the characters serve no greater purpose at times than to rattle off the author's taste in tv and movies. When shows like Transformers Animated did this it was mostly as a source of humor and a grounding point for younger viewers to relate to the characters. While at the same time offering up pieces of lore and background info to remind the audience that they are still aliens.

To me MTMTE doesn't need to rely on these things to make characters relatable, not to say that I don't mind them but the comic has become far too indulgent with them and it is distracting at times. The whole gender debacle and the way some of the writers go about it is off putting as well and turned from an opportunity to write something unique to lazy pandering to shallowly attract female readers. A lot of it being written where something is a "Cybertronian version of X", no further explanation needed except it usually leads to a lot more questions than answers.

Season 1 did a better job of maintaining the alien nature of the crew while expanding on the world building. Now? I may not know why certain details about sparks determine a gender for a non sexually reproducing mechanical species, but at least I know which character prefers to drink out of martini glasses while watching their favorite season of community.

Sorry to digress a bit but ita mostly relavent.

 

Until John Scalzi got his hands on TF and told to "just go wild", TF will still be humanized metallic thing

 

Yes, but comparing relative levels of "humanization" with something like Gundam or Robotech, which were both extremely human war stories that just happened to feature walking space tanks and jets with arms and legs, seems like an awkward point of departure.

After all, "metal world of squabbling transistor-based people" also contains the essence of the OTHER important aspect of Transformers... the fact that they were "transistor-based people" from another planet... and everything that goes along with that (alien culture and biology, etc).

For me, the most important aspect of Superman stories is the iconography... and the conceit that, if a god fell to Earth, and was raised by heartland, salt-of-the-earth Americans, would he become the ultimate force for good in the world? The whole premise is an exploration of the idea of ostensiblly "human" decency (of which Superman is a personification). As well, Kryptonians are already conceived along the well-worn notion of the "organic human standard". Superman's superficial "sameness" is essential to his story. The recurrent concept that he truly IS an earth human because he was raised here... even as his grand powers serve as a marker of difference.

I suppose that if his "alien-ness" were handled differently, he'd be Martian Manhunter.  

Transformers on the other hand, from their very inception, were a "fish out of water" story. They were alien robots, with a radically different biology and way of life, who were conducting a secret war on Earth. The entire concept hinges on their difference (while still acknowledging some of the most basic tropes of alien races in science-fantasy... humanoid, individualized creatures with an identifiable notion of society, however different).

It doesn't clarify it for me. Yes, there is a basic (and typical) level of humanization inherent in Transformers (which depending on the writer and the format, has always been inconsistent)... but I think it's rather clear that this question, and discussion, is much more oriented to the ways in which that human-alien distinctions have been dissolving in a lot of the recent fiction (often in service to the most tedious or frivolous narrative contrivances) and the ways how that seems to render the larger universe of Transformers smaller, shallower, and less conceptually interesting... paradoxically at a moment when adult interest in the franchise is at an all-time high.

So contextually, I still totally don't understand why you would argue FOR making Transformers more "humanized", especially when it still comes back to the logic of "well this is how it always was (debatable), so this is all it can ever be". You're arguing that the framework is not mutable enough, when I think that's been amply demonstrated to be completely false.

Except that the IDW timeline has not always been consistent... and it has accomodated different portrayals and concepts regarding Cybertronians. One thing we can say overall though... IDW Transformers has certainly pushed for a harder, more adult, more sophisticated view of Transformers than we've seen in the past (at least since the G1 bios)... and what people (like me) are contesting now is not the biblical foundations of TF anthropomorphization, but the ongoing overstatement of such. I'd like to see them continue to go forward, rather than backsliding into the most simplistic cartoon states.

Again, this is wholly, hilariously tautological. We've already established that IDW is a more complex Transformers reboot, aimed predominantly at adult fans. Its age has nothing to do with it. Your argument against maintaining or promoting a sense of an alien culture and biology in TFs seems to be that "IDW can't do that, because that is not what IDW is doing."  

I fail to see how that shuts down discussion in any way. That's like saying "don't criticize this thing for being flawed, because this thing is flawed and can only be flawed."

Hardly, you johnny-come-lately!

I was just turning 10 when G1 hit... and I was a reasonably introspective kid, so my engagement with Transformers was likely anchored more in the possibilities it suggested, and what was hinted at in the unusually sophisticated bios, rather than the broad entertainment value of the cartoon. Truth be known, I didn't actually like the cartoon at the time. Sure, it gave me some memorable voices and sound effects, but the stories almost always seemed shallow, facile, simplified... a lame cousin to the old bios and the majority of the comic stuff. To me, it's always been about the interesting premises underlying the bold, cartoonish advertising gimmicks. Any kid could watch the cartoon and think they knew about Transformers... but it took real rigour to dig into the comic and toy fictions... which, I suppose is me copping to being an original "true fan" I guess.  

And the toys, of course. Love the toys. Material culture, tactile experience, blah blah blah  

So it's not about just being there at the beginning... it's about how one engaged with it at the time. People younger than me tend (generally) to relate exclusively to the cartoon, because that's where they were at intellectually when Transformers occurred. I think that tends to colour their perspective even more than mine... or rather, in terms of the dictates of nostalgia, the line seems to be drawn between people who want Transformers to be better, and live up to its potential (like me), or those who want it to stay mediocre forever (cartoon purists, mostly).

I make no bones about being a "Geewunner". I'm largely indifferent to almost any of the other reboots or fictions, and even with the toys, I tend to gravitate to figures that are obvious homages to G1 (or just really damn cool toys in their own right). My emotional connection to most versions of the various fictions is pretty much nil. My main interest is in an "ideal G1" fiction... and while the road has been rocky, IDW is pretty much the closest thing to realizing that. Being a serial comic medium, with various creative teams involved, there's always a mercurial aspect to the comics universe... it shifts with the times and with the creators. When possible, I try to nudge things in the direction I'd like to see it go, rather than being an "unconditional fan" (which I think is pretty lame).

Maybe that's why I'm such an insufferable pedant when it comes to this stuff... but Godzilla, man? How can you take that shit seriously? They threw out any claim to intellectual sophistication with Godzilla Raids Again, and in a way, the most socially relevant movie since Gojira '54 was the lyrical, subversive vision of Gozilla vs Hedorah.  

In complete agreement here.  

zmog

 

Honestly I think we shouldn't try too hard to explore the alien side of TFs that much. I get not wanting too much human elements but I don't think trying to go the other way around would be the way to go either. In the end we're still talking about a fantastical concept of robots from another world that a company make toys out of to sell kids and collectors so we shouldn't try to think about it that seriously otherwise it's going to end up looking contrived and pretentious and it would only drive away people who may not accept that level of alien aspects in the TFs.

 

But what about the people who are driven away by the lack of sophistication? It still sort of comes down to arguing in favour of a dumber fiction, rather than a smarter one, doesn't it?

In terms of "alien" qualities though, why not try to set some guide-posts here...

What is "too alien" according to you? When someone argues that Transformers are getting "too humanized" and wants to preserve some of their otherworldly, science-fictional traits, what do you think of?

What are the "humanized" characteristics that you want to see promoted? Dance parties? Direct north-american cultural analogs? From past discussions we've had, can I assume that "fembots should look like curvy human women with robo-boobs and poutier lips" is somewhere on your list?  

zmog

 

Sometimes one's idea of what is "sophisticated " or not is completely different from another's idea of "sophistication" so in other words there are times where it can be subjective so in this case what you may consider to be sophisticated ideas for the TFs may appear to someone else as bogus.

Also I wasn't saying that the TFs were too alien before nor that I'm promoting that they should be even more humanized either. You seem to be highly exaggerating some of my points and others too.

 

Personally, I find the concept of very human-like Transformers, at least in terms of their psychology, to be extremely fascinating, as it's a gateway for all sorts of unique and interesting characters, both new ones and new takes on our favourites.

As for the physical appearance; we've always had humanized Transformers; hell, Arcee's got womanly hips and portrusions analogous to boobs, for Primus' sake!  

While it's fine to have your Jazzes and Blasters, the Cybertronians who quickly acclimate to Earth's culture, I think that the franchise is really hamstringed by the idea of making them essentially robot people with machine or animal bits on them and some alien attributes. Let them be utterly alien to us but still relatable. Prime stuck out the most to me in this regard; it went so far as to give them camera-like eyes, which was nice...but then it made those eyes act exactly like human eyes, to the point where they even had them looking around when idle. What was even the point of making the eyes more alien in design if you just use it to make them MORE HUMAN?!

Animated did very well in that it made them alien but still relatable, which Prime flubbed on (among other flaws). I actually kind of like NuRiD going back to the Animated style for it's characters' eye designs; it's more alien than what Prime did; Prime almost sort of fell into a sort of Uncanny Valley effect where it tried too hard to make them really human-like, but kept saying "But they differ from us in many ways, too!" to convince us they were, in fact, alien in origin.

I think the way Animated handled it's characters is actually really impressive; they're relatable, but not so human-like.

 

I answered this originally with "they've always been metal humans", only thinking about how they're characterised more than anything else, but reading through this thread again, I realise that's kind of a cop out answer when I actually love learning about how and what makes the Transformers different to us despite the similarities.
Basically, I think that humanisation does have it's place, but they should always feel like the massive alien robots they are.

The stuff in MTMTE with all the Earth culture references doesn't bother me as much as it does some, but if we're gonna have pop culture junkies why's it all gotta be Earth TV shows, music etc.? Where are the references to how much Bluestreak's digging Chonky Tonk's new song 'Full Mingmong Empty Glorpdork' or how terrible Parplesnarpian TV is?

 

Sounds sort of anti-intellectual to me.  

I'm not exaggerating any points... in fact, I asked you for examples so we can actually clarify the discussion, and identify where people draw the line for various things. I'm asking specifics instead of vague, easily-exaggerated generalizations.

My aside about the fembots reflects a very involved discussion that you and I had some time ago, and I don't know if your stance on that has changed or not. Your point back then was that "fembots should look like women"... based on traits that are stereotypically associated with attractive young women, so I'm not putting any words in your mouth.

That's kind of making a good case against overly "humanizing" Transformers, really.  

Yeah, I agree. Anthropomorphizing these characters is a tricky balancing act. I wouldn't want to imply that it's easy... but it's good to aim for balance, than to throw all caution to the wind. I think we should try to maintain a certain distance from them as beings, in order to preserve a bit of the novelty of what they are.

Animated also operated in a very distinctly cartoonish setting, establishing a more stylized (and humorous) kind of reality... which helped a lot. I liked Animated too.

Yeah, that too. The naked preoccupation with Earth reference points has started to feel just a bit too lazy and a bit too cavalier about immersion into the universe of the Transformers. If you're going to build a bigger universe, then don't cop out for the sake of a few lame (and soon-to-be incredibly dated) gags.

zmog

 

How is that anti-intellectual exactly? That's actually true.

Fair enough.

My stance was that I'm ok with some fembots looking like women and others not so just to add diversity among them,not having all of them looking like women.

 

I said it sounded sort of anti-intellectual... and, it just reminds me of the all-too-common truism of popular culture these days that seems to favour an "I don't want to think too hard" mentality, and promotes the idea that sophisticated or intellectually engaging stuff is somehow pretentious, elitist, or "less genuine" or whatever. It's a thing.

Fair enough.

My feeling is that if you can arrange vehicle mode kibble in a way that it incidentally recalls feminine traits, without being totally direct and literal about it (ie: boob protrusions are boob protrusions, high heels are just there to be sexy, lipstick is lipstick, etc...), then that works fine.

My complaint is that a lot of fembot designs... MOST in fact... are not so clever, and instead begin from the starting point of looking like a stereotypical attractive female body (which is already a diversion from 'standard' TFs) and then just paper over it with some robot stuff.

zmog