Why might the queering of Tintin offer new life to the series?
It can hardly be contested that the Tintin comic series has had a tumultuous past in regards to appropriate and respectful representation. Between historical issues with overt racist messaging and a consistent scarcity of positively presented, independent female characters (Mountfort, 2020), controversy and criticism have been persistent fixtures within the series’ lifespan. While Herge was for the most part able to remedy the most egregious of the racist themes present within his earlier works from The Blue Lotus onwards, his representation of gender and sexuality have progressed at a relative snail’s pace in comparison. This lack of progression has led many academics to search for sublimated representation in response. Tintin, having been designed to be intentionally lacking in both sexuality and traditional masculine features, has been the target of the vast majority of this speculation. It has been suggested repeatedly, that although never explicitly stated, Tintin was coded to operate outside of traditional sexual and/or gender norms. The claims vary significantly in nature, from suggestions that Tintin was bisexual with near incestuous attraction to his parental figures, to claims he is a homosexual man in a relationship with Captain Haddock (McCarthy, 2006), a tomboy, a transgendered man or a genderqueer individual (Mountfort, 2012). If any of these prior readings turned out to be true, even the stranger claims, they would undoubtedly act to provide new life to the comic series by retroactively addressing Herge’s lack of progressive commentary revolving around sexuality and gender norms.
Tragically, considering Herge’s conservative roots, I would contend none of these potential readings were intended by the author. Additionally, since Herge never made any explicit claim to confirm such notions, we cannot reasonably consider any of these readings as representation, since queer-coding is no substitute for open and clear representation. If those who currently control the creative direction of the Tintin franchise were to inexplicably decide to retroactively queer Tintin, the question remains how such a retcon would best be performed in order to breathe new life into the series. Many of the potential options posited by academics would likely be read as disingenuous, problematic and more harmful than helpful in many cases. The stereotype that a gay couple requires a traditionally masculine and feminine pairing that many earlier academics derived their queer claims from, are reductive and shouldn’t be used as a basis for this queering. On a similar note, a homoerotic relationship between the Captain and Tintin is open to problematic readings regards the power dynamic between the two, especially considering Haddock is often read as a father figure and guardian to Tintin, who in turn is implied to potentially be much younger than him. Characterising Tintin as having a gender identity outside cis male also has a number of troubling implications, even when ignoring the fact that queering which undermines pre-existing canon is often seen as patronising and disingenuous to queer audiences (see the many criticisms of J.K. Rowling’s retroactive world building). This change would enforce the toxic stereotype that cis men cannot be seen as feminine or androgynous without being secretly queer in some regard. This implication would be doubly troublesome if Tintin were to be reinvented as a trans man, with the suggestion that trans men are inherently less masculine than biological males. With these considerations in mind, I would suggest the most respectful and genuine means to queer Tintin would be to present him as Asexual. This avoids many of the pitfalls that other options present.
Making Tintin Asexual fits somewhat neatly within pre-established cannon considering Tintin has never overtly expressed sexual attraction to any gender, therefore perfectly meshing with Tintin’s existing identity. Such a change would also communicate to readers that one does not require a romantic or sexual partner in order to live a complete and exciting life, while avoiding any harmful stereotypes often associated with this given sexuality. Although this change would do very little to address Herge’s lack of meaningful gender discussion, I would argue introducing a new character who could address these issues would enable the creators to avoid the problems associated with queering Tintin in this manner. This potential representation would also encourage the exploration of Tintin’s platonic love through his enduring relationships with characters such as Haddock and Chang, while providing desperately needed representation to a thoroughly underrepresented queer demographic. Representation is incredibly important, providing vulnerable demographics with messaging which confirms their validity and allows them to enhance their understanding of self and self-worth (Cogo, 2017). Queering Tintin would undeniably assist in the admirable pursuit of respectful and fair representation, in a series which has been historically lacking, however we must ensure such changes are made respectfully to both the identity of the text and those that require representation.
Mountfort, P. (2020). Tintin, gender and desire. Journal of Graphic Novels and Comics. https://doi.org/10.1080/21504857.2020.1729829
Mountfort, P. (2011). ‘Yellow skin, Black hair … careful, Tintin’: Hergé and orientalism. Australasian Journal of Popular Culture, 1(1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1386/ajpc.1.1.33_1
McCarthy, T. 2006. Tintin and the Secret of Literature. London: Granta
Cogo, F. Why Queer Representation Matters. New America. https://www.newamerica.org/weekly/why-queer-representation-matters/
Pop Genres 2020 