Comics are Awesome III

[andersonh1]

Some thoughts on what Morrison might be saying with Multiversity:
http://rikdad.blogspot.com/2014/11/mult ... ssage.html

So, Morrison is a huge fan of the DC Silver Age, so they're the real heroes and other comics can't compare – is that the whole message? It's deeper and more specific than that, and Morrison's overarching message is why Earths based on the Marvel universes had to be the first ones to fall.

Morrison has increasingly used his comics to outline a real world threat to the genre. The Superdoom threat in Morrison's Action #9, a comic book shown in Multiversity, is described by one world's Lois Lane: "We sold out! They had 500 experts lined up, thinking in harmony to streamline the Superman brand for maximum cross-spectrum, wide platform appeal. They built a violent, troubled, faceless anti-hero, concealing a tragic secret life, a global marketing icon." In Action #17, Superdoom describes itself to Superman as, "An unstoppable killer franchise from a parallel reality. A thought that gets bigger the more you think of it. The thought of a Superman better than you! The thought of a bigger Superman. A stronger, more ruthless Superman. … powered by a simple corporate directive: Annihilate the competition! … Your replacement." The idea is also articulated by Mandraak in Superman Beyond and Final Crisis but not as clearly as in Action. And in Superman Beyond, it is explained that this threat can be beaten by a better idea, the story of a child rocketed to Earth from a doomed planet.

These Action issues are a direct prequel to Multiversity. We see Calvin Ellis, the Superman of Earth-23 in both Action and Multiversity, and we see four different Earths (including two or three Luthors and Earth 20's Doc Fate) build the Transmatter Symphonic Array, a multicolored device that acts as an interdimensional portal through which this threat attacks. In three cases, we're told that the Transmatter Symphonic Array is built by someone using instructions that came to them in a dream. Another one suddenly appears in front of Chris Kent in Alexis Luthor's apartment and was perhaps built by her. That is the science fiction explanation of the interdimensional threat, but Morrison's metatextual message is laid out in the nature of Superdoom: Replacing the pure, noble heroes with violent, troubled anti-heroes, stronger and more ruthless, designed to appeal to a broader audience.

Apocalypse as a Metaphor

"Violent, troubled, anti-hero" describes almost perfectly the qualities that brought on the downfall of Earth-20, Earth-16, and Earths 7 and 8, in that order.

Violent: The Society of Super-Heroes represents the pre-Silver Age, pre-Justice League DC, with two Justice Society heroes and the Blackhawks. The issue begins with very specific articulation of vows not to kill by the Atom and the Immortal Man. Soon, their universe is beset by threats which throw the far future of comics at it: The Green Lantern storyline accelerates into the future with the Alan Scott role and uniform (1940) on Abin Sur (1959) fighting Sinestro (1960s) and Parallax (2000s). Vandal Savage from Earth-40 arrives and knows that to attack this world, he must make them kill. This is a fate that already befell Earth-40 itself, as the meteorite that gave Vandal Savage his immortality was used as a murder weapon, whereas on Earth-20 this did not occur and the rock became a holy relic. As threats from later eras of fiction arrive (Lady Shiva, zombies), the pulp heroes from the past abandon their principles. First the Atom kills Blockbuster with the Deadly Atom Punch, which fells his enemy but makes him stagger at how he abandoned his principles. The Blackhawks kill Lady Shiva, and then the Immortal Man kills Vandal Savage. This directly attracts the threat of the infected Nix Uotan, the sign that their universe has become tainted by the things that Superdoom proclaimed itself to be. The Society of Super-Heroes (and by extension, the Golden Age Justice Society that it was based upon) has no place in a world where heroes are killers. And which Golden Age / Justice Society characters are absent from this Earth? There is no Superman, no Batman, no Wonder Woman, and no Flash. Those are the characters that might have saved them, but are absent until the Multiversal Justice League arrives.

Troubled: The Just, the supeheroes of Earth-16, represent the post-Justice League DC characters, as they arose from about 1983 onward. The goodness of these superheroes dies not with a bang but a whimper. There are analogues of the Silver Age Justice League, but they are all replacements who are incapable of action. Their Superman, Chris Kent, is an ineffectual successor to Superman, not his equivalent like Calvin Ellis, the Superman of Earth-23. The best of them, Damian Wayne, is trying to rise to the occasion, but he admits that he's not the world's greatest detective, but the son of the world's greatest detective. Their Superman is ineffectual and their Justice League only play-acts battles. Like the Lois Lane who spawned Superdoom, they sold out. They come under a form of psychic attack via comic books and movies. Their Megamorpho commits suicide. Kyle Rayner is suddenly paralyzed by memories of the murder of his girlfriend. They lack a real Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, or Flash to save them. Like Earth-20, they have a version of Green Lantern, but not the real thing, whether that be Alan Scott or Hal Jordan.

The process of ruination, Morrison is saying, starts with Marvel, then spreads to DC's pre-Silver Age and post-Silver Age. In successive one-shots, Morrison will likely show how the much smaller universes of Charlton (already pretty well wrecked by Alan Moore's Watchmen), Fawcett (recall the ruined and depraved Mary Marvel from Final Crisis and Tawky Tawny in Final Crisis suddenly and savagely killing Kalibak), and Quality (the Freedom Fighters as crushed by a Nazi Superman) had no hope of surviving in the face of such an onslaught.

Morrison's overall message seems to be: Comics are on a downward slide. Superheroes have gained great new popularity in other media (when five members of the JLA visited Earth Prime to meet Ultraa in JLA #153, almost nobody recognized them; in 2014, those JLA characters are all the subjects of current or recent TV shows and movies; everybody would recognize them). And this larger world of new readers, players, and viewers is The Gentry (note that its signature character is essentially a big eyeball). They will spend big money on movies and video games and this money will bring the whole genre down. Echoing the Gentry's comment that Nix Uotan can give himself up instead of Thunderer, Marvel will be destroyed by pandering to these forces unless DC wins the competition by pandering to it more.

[andersonh1]

And then there's this event for next year:

http://www.newsarama.com/22619-converge ... pions.html

DC Comics has finally announced their April 2015 event, being used to cover the process of their move from New York to Los Angeles, and also to help them celebrate the 30th anniversary of the mother of all events, Crisis on Infinite Earths.

The story is called Convergence, and will run for two months (nine weeks) beginning April 1, 2015 (no fooling). 40 two-part miniseries will run in April and May spotlighting worlds, storylines, and characters from throughout the entire history of the DC Universe alongside a weekly 8-issue (plus a zero) main mini-series. They will take the place of the currently published ongoing comic books from DC Comics for the duration of April and May. Brainiac starts off as the big bad, but a new one named Telos will also be introduced, as debuted on USAToday.com.The story begins with Convergence #0 on April 1 written by Jeff King and Dan Jurgens, and drawn by Ethan Van Sciver, the same day that Earth 2: World’s End and Futures End, two of DC Comics current world and timeline eschewing weekly series both end.

”There is a story and a character for every generation of DC Comics fan,” co-publisher Dan DiDio said of the story, “We’re picking up at points of their lives where we left them and finding out what’s gone on with them since then.”

Indeed, characters like Donna Troy, Ted Kord the Blue Beetle, and the old pre-dating the Justice League version of the Justice Society of America will all appear in the series, and fellow co-publisher Jim Lee said that all the stories that have come before “exist and have existed and exist within the framework of the New 52,” calling Convergence “in many ways the most meta epic event we’ve done.”

Guiding the event is Jeff King, head writer of USA’s White Collar, entering its final season this fall. It will be his first comic book writing, as he handles the script and base story for the Convergence plot. He'll be joined on art by Carlo Pagulayan and Stephen Segovia. Dan Jurgens, a longtime DC Comics veteran who has handled events in the past such as The Death of Superman is co-writing the debut zero issue with King, and Scott Lobdell, a veteran of events like Marvel Comics’ Age of Apocalypse and 2014’s own Superman: Doomed, which introduced the new Brainiac, is co-plotting the outline of the full Convergence event. A variety of other writers and artists will handle the other 2-part stories. King also has a science fiction pedigree, with work on Continuum and Stargate SG-1.

King’s hiring was to “have someone come in with a fresh set of eyes,” DiDio said, and is focused on making it “open and accessible to all fans” including new ones and “the people who have been reading DC throughout the years.”

I should be able to find some characters to interest me. I obviously won't buy everything, and even the characters I'm interested in will probably depend on how the writing turns out. But I'm looking forward to finding out more details.

[Dominic]

Actually, it's a lot more common for a villain to target someone connected to a hero out of coincidence than anything actually relating to the hero themselves. Uncle Ben just so happened to be killed by the same burglar that Peter had let escape earlier that night. Doc Ock once tried to marry Aunt May because she was about to inherit a nuclear power plant that he wanted to get his hands on and for some reason actually tried to get a stake in the ownership legally. Nothing to do with Peter or Spider-Man.

Those wacky coincidences are another problem with comics.

40 two-part miniseries will run in April and May spotlighting worlds, storylines, and characters from throughout the entire history of the DC Universe alongside a weekly 8-issue (plus a zero) main mini-series.

Oh my.... Even I am saying that is too many comics.

What is the plan for the other side though?

Some thoughts on what Morrison might be saying with Multiversity:
http://rikdad.blogspot.com/2014/11/mult ... ssage.html

This is why I like Morrison. It is possible to talk in detail about his comics without degenerating in to "I like the part where the character I like did the thing I like to the other character and it is really really really cool."


The article has a few flaws, specifically ignoring "Final Crisis" and trying to call things about "Multiversity" when the series is not yet over. But, Rikdad has definitely put some thought in to this.

"Final Crisis" has a few scenes that support Rikdad's thesis, including one where Superman casually kills (for the sake of expedience) on Earth 7 or 8. (Not sure which one it was supposed to be. But, following from Rikdad's thesis, it arguably shows a Superman being influenced by a flawed world and being less Superman-ish.)

Rikdad also overlooks the idea that information is viral, changing and being changed by those who make/use it. Note the Monitors being changed (corrupted in some cases) by the worlds they observed in "Final Crisis". (This supports the idea that the Monitors are proxies for the readers. Of course, the line between fan and creator has been breaking down and blurring for 4 or so years now. So, one could still argue that the Monitors are proxies for editorial.) I tend to think that the Gentry are more the readers (and may be revealed as corrupted Monitors). But, that is getting ahead of where the series is.

and Dino-Cop is a wildcard,

Maybe Dino-Cop represents a foundational character for a later generation? "Savage Dragon" was a product of the 90s. I also recall it being one of the "respectable" Image books, lacking the controversy surrounding guys like McFarlane and the talent deficits associated with Liefeld.

Morrison's metatextual message is laid out in the nature of Superdoom: Replacing the pure, noble heroes with violent, troubled anti-heroes, stronger and more ruthless, designed to appeal to a broader audience.

Conversely, could one argue that the Silver Age characters need the Monitors (or the Gentry) to survive, and thus they need to evolve to be more appealing?

As movies and video games supplant comic books as the dominant media conveying the superhero genre, they take the superhero genre into places that Morrison is warning us about. He is voicing in this story the reservations he has made explicitly in interviews.

I wonder how "Multiversity" (or, more accurately, Morrison) would tackle this question had "Multiversity" started a few years later.

Marvel's movies are generally pretty straight-forward in moral terms. Even the "darker" good guys (Black Widow in "the Avengers") are still pretty bright and light. Movies lend themselves to shallowness (particularly action movies), which lends itself to simpler morality.


If Morrison is in fact warning about other mediums tainting comics and the dangers of moral complexity, it is tempting to take a cynical view of his under-lying reasons. Morrison is not the only comic writer with ideas, be it ideas about the industry or bigger questions. But, he has essentially cornered the market on ideas for the last 25+ years. Maybe his warning about the dangers of a trend he helped to accelerate are rooted in concern about *his* market being glutted?

I’m not sure about the killing thing. I don’t want to sound like some fuddy-duddy Silver Age apologist but I’ve noticed a lot recently of people saying Batman should kill the Joker and, yeah, Superman should kill… unless you’re in one of the Armed Forces, killing is illegal and immoral. Why would we want our superheroes to do that?

Killing is not always illegal and immoral though, nor do legality and morality always match up.

The argument for heroes killing is that the hero is generally taking extra-legal actions by putting on a mask, and thus has accepted greater responsibility (proportionate to the liberty that they have claimed) for their actions and the consequences. In that sense, Batman accepts responsibility for stopping the Joker (and the consequences for when the Joker is not stopped), and killing makes sense. Superman takes responsibility for humanity every time he intervenes (lethally or otherwise). Where to the draw the limits of that responsibility? (The responsibility of intervention idea also shows up in "Superman: Beyond" and in "All Star Superman".)

In successive one-shots, Morrison will likely show how the much smaller universes of Charlton (already pretty well wrecked by Alan Moore's Watchmen), Fawcett (recall the ruined and depraved Mary Marvel from Final Crisis and Tawky Tawny in Final Crisis suddenly and savagely killing Kalibak), and Quality (the Freedom Fighters as crushed by a Nazi Superman) had no hope of surviving in the face of such an onslaught.

And, this is where it falls apart.

Earth 4 was not ruined by "Watchmen", it (and comics) were ruined by clumsy attempts to follow "Watchmen". Tawny killing Kalibak was not "savage". It was a necessity during war. (And, Tawny immediately restrained himself after killing Kalibak, returning to more civilized manner and speech.) I think that Earth 10 is more likely going to address the intervention question from another side. (The situation is intolerable, but there are no solutions that a moral interventionist would be comfortable taking responsibility for.)

Echoing the Gentry's comment that Nix Uotan can give himself up instead of Thunderer, Marvel will be destroyed by pandering to these forces unless DC wins the competition by pandering to it more.

That depends if Morrison intends the Monitor (or Uotan) to be specific to DC or generally representative of writers/fans.

[BWprowl]

Uotan, to me, seems to be representative of comic reviewers, especially since he starts the story literally as one. His handle is SuperJUDGE for chrissakes, and look at how he's presented: Going through and literally dissecting comics, looking for the 'meaning' and concepts that might be there, while handily missing the actual story and what's being presented (in this case, the comic being 'haunted' and trying to show a 'warning' to the readers in other universes). The whole first issue of 'Multiversity' is rife with this sort of thing, hammering us with the point that, as the ones reading the comic, HOW we read it and interpret it is ultimately up to us. The writer can stuff as many ideas as they want into a comic, but if the reader doesn't pick up on them or chooses to ignore them, they fail to take hold. Given that 'Final Crisis' was entirely an attempt to strip comics of their vehicularity for ideas and return autonomy to the characters within via precedent, 'Multiversity' seems to be going for bringing the reader into the equation. "At the end of the day, who really has the most say in how a comic is read?" Morrison seems to be asking. Not the characters, not the writer, but US. This naturally fits in perfectly with Morrison's particular style, where he has plenty of other-versal superhero-punching craziness going on on the page, but also has plenty of symbolic and metatextual idea-based content backing it up, and we're free to read it however we like (supported by the point that the 'individual' issues of Multiversity will supposedly be able to be read in any order, aside from the bookend issues). I need to re-read the Society of Super-Heroes issue, but I seem to recall a point of the end of it basically being "You read about this story, so it happened".

Note the Monitors being changed (corrupted in some cases) by the worlds they observed in "Final Crisis". (This supports the idea that the Monitors are proxies for the readers. Of course, the line between fan and creator has been breaking down and blurring for 4 or so years now. So, one could still argue that the Monitors are proxies for editorial.)

I re-read 'Final Crisis" not too long ago, and the Monitors there are definitely a proxy for DC writers and editorial. They all but say "The problem is that the stories have become more about us and what we want to do and say, rather than the characters in the worlds themselves". This was the big point of FC: Attempting to return the autonomy of the stories back to the characters.

Earth 4 was not ruined by "Watchmen", it (and comics) were ruined by clumsy attempts to follow "Watchmen".

I tend to think that Morrison takes issue not so much with "Watchmen" ushering in the dark, violent, anti-heroic age of comics that persists even now, and more with it being the first big success of what Morrison's railing against with FC and Multiversity: Comics and the characters within used purely as a vehicle for pushing ideas and commentary rather than pure storytelling. In that case he very well would lay the blame on "Watchmen" itself: It 'sucked the life' out of the characters (vampire Monitors) leaving them as empty shells of their former selves to be used by higher beings as they saw fit (The New Gods possessing characters in "Final Crisis"). Morrison still wants to set it up so that characters can't be 'turned' by writers and can 'write themselves' via established precedent, and since this didn't seem to work by metatextually going around DC editorial, now he's inviting the reader to get in on the action. "Don't worry about what the writer is trying to say, don't pay attention to what reviewers think it's about, read the comics you want the way YOU want to read them!"

The story is called Convergence, and will run for two months (nine weeks) beginning April 1, 2015 (no fooling). 40 two-part miniseries will run in April and May spotlighting worlds, storylines, and characters from throughout the entire history of the DC Universe alongside a weekly 8-issue (plus a zero) main mini-series. They will take the place of the currently published ongoing comic books from DC Comics for the duration of April and May.

Whelp. If it doesn't end with a clear switchback to the old universe, it'll at least be a New New universe incorporating more elements from it in place of all the radical resets of the New 52. The whole thing smacks of DC going "Whoops! Go back, go back!". Hopefully they'll at least have a more concrete plan this time. They're clearly giving themselves more time, anyway, as opposed to how 'New 52' just kinda dropped out of nowhere from 'Flashpoint'.

[Dominic]

I re-read 'Final Crisis" not too long ago, and the Monitors there are definitely a proxy for DC writers and editorial. They all but say "The problem is that the stories have become more about us and what we want to do and say, rather than the characters in the worlds themselves". This was the big point of FC: Attempting to return the autonomy of the stories back to the characters.

Now sure how characters can have autonomy.

But, how about the idea of the Monitors (not just Uotan) being reviewers? Said reviewers (myself included, erm) are arguably parasitic in nature.


Morrison calling out the industry for wanting to use comics to say/do things would be mind-blowingly hypocritical for reasons that are obvious if one just looks at commentary on Morrison's work, never mind what he is writing now.

Some of this is likely to be clarified in how Morrison defines Ultraa in upcoming issues.

[BWprowl]

Now sure how characters can have autonomy.

Precedent.

It works like this: You read "Batman: R.I.P."? The whole point of that book was DC hit Morrison up like "We want you to kill Batman" and Morrison was like "But he's BATMAN. Based on everything that's ever happened to him throughout continuity, you CAN'T kill him" and proceeds to show this, as a writer, by progressively throwing crazy shit at Batman throughout the story and having him survive each one because 'based on all the stories that have come before, this is how Batman would deal with this and why he would survive it'. A character with sufficiently-defined precedent can be put in any situation conjured up by a writer, and 'automatically' react in-universe in a way that is appropriate, so long as the writer is abiding by the character's autonomy and not 'possessing' them or re-appropriating them for their own ideas.

Another example: Brian Clevenger, creator of 'Atomic Robo' and irregular contributor to Marvel, got his start with the seminal webcomic '8-Bit Theater' (I'm in the middle of re-reading it right now). Clevenger once said of the comic that, after a time, the characters were so well-defined in his mind that he didn't actually have to expend to much effort really writing them, he just dropped them into situations and let them react accordingly based on the personalities and behaviors that had been developed for them.

This is what Morrison's trying to set up for the DC heroes, especially in 'Final Crisis': Making it so writers are unable to go "What can I use Superman for?" and more "If this situation occurs, how would Superman react?"

But, how about the idea of the Monitors (not just Uotan) being reviewers? Said reviewers (myself included, erm) are arguably parasitic in nature.

The Monitors, as Morrison has them, explicitly started out as an unseen force, guiding the stories of the universes but never actually taking part in them. They were eventually tainted by the 'ideas' of the fictional universes, and gained named, personalities, and backstories. It's less that they're reviewers, and more that the reviewers and fans started focusing more on the people behind the characters and universes (writers and editorial IE the Monitors) and less on the characters themselves).

Morrison calling out the industry for wanting to use comics to say/do things would be mind-blowingly hypocritical for reasons that are obvious if one just looks at commentary on Morrison's work, never mind what he is writing now.

What he's writing now is less a pure diatribe on what he thinks of comics and more a grand metatextual fiction experiment on what you can 'do' with the medium when you directly involve the writer, readers, and characters in the reading PROCESS of the comic itself. What's the big driving gimmick of 'Multiversity'? That every comic book is actually a window into another world that actually exists, a message that we are given that we can choose to take as real or ignore as fictional. The comics published as part of 'Multiversity' basically break the fourth wall just by existing; by reading them and seeing their stories/messages the same way the characters within do, we are PART of that overarching, multiversal story. We'll likely have to wait for the 'haunted' issue of Ultra Comics to see the full extent of this concept in action (for this reason, that's the issue I really can't wait for).

At any rate, Morrison might be exempting himself from his crusade against comics as vehicles for ideas in that he's not simply using his comics to communicate a concept or an idea, but is instead trying to execute a physical, mechanical action using the comics as a device. Per his famous 'Animal Man' run, comics (and fiction in general) exist literally as such, and can interact with those behind them (writers) given the right precedent. What Morrison's doing here is similar to when he wrote himself into 'Animal Man' to interact with the character as HIS character, only now he's doing it on an even more meta level, with our (and his) universe being an actual, functioning component of the 'Multiverse' he's defining the functions of here.

And as usually needs to be done when he does these sorts of things, it must be pointed out that Morrison is fucking insane.

[andersonh1]

I'm still trying to work out what I think Morrison is saying with Multiversity. He's thrown a lot of ideas out there, but I'm not sure there is a conclusive theme that we can see from just three issues. I tend to agree with Dom that it's too early to make any sort of definitive call. But if nothing else, the corruption of characters is blatantly and explicitly right there on the page. That at least is not open to interpretation. It's accomplished by a weird process by the Gentry in issue 1, and the SOS characters are put in a position where they are forced to compromise their morals by killing in issue 2. Nix Uotan is a happy, comic reading character with a silly animal sidekick at the beginning of the issue, but has turned into a monster by the end. But I don't know what the connection is between the different Earths and different methods of corruption just yet. and I"m content to sit back and see what happens next.

I haven't read Final Crisis, so I'm probably behind the curve in that regard. I might have a better idea what Morrison is trying to say if I had read it.

[Dominic]

The method of corruption is the same, viral information delivered through the comic. (Information as a virus that perpetuates is one of several concepts in "Final Crisis".) Much of this is likely to become more clear after Ultraa is defined.

[Sparky Prime]

Marvel's final teaser for next summers event is simply: Everything Ends.

Really are suggesting that they're going to to a full blown reboot next year aren't they?

[BWprowl]

Marvel's final teaser for next summers event is simply: Everything Ends.

Really are suggesting that they're going to to a full blown reboot next year aren't they?

And I was really skeptical of Dom when he started predicting this would happen, but it's been pretty obvious for a couple months now (wouldn't be surprised if 'Spider-Verse' ends up strongly contributing to it overall by the end).

I tend to steer clear of Marvel events, but I might have to go in for this, simply because of the scale and importance: Marvel has NEVER done something on this level before.

Damn, we got a serious war of reboots and retcons brewing between the Big Two for next summer, don't we?