The three Kryptonians in the pocket universe had killed the five billion people on that Earth, and had threatened to do the same to "our" Earth. In response, Superman felt the only thing he could do was end the threat, and he used that universe's Kryptonite to execute them.
You would think that would have been an easier call.
I am all for "Superman generally does not kill" because the on-page logic for at least 3 decades has been "Superman knows how dangerous he could be if he ever lost his temper or just lost control in general". But, in some cases....
I read some 70s "Starlord" recently. As is typical, the art is nice (if unfortunately lacking in colour) but the writing is abominable. The character reads like somebody's deliberately over-powered "Star-Munchkin" character played totally straight. I have been meaning to draw up a rule sheet that would reflect this. (On a related note, I am making a semi-serious effort to generate playable Dark Avengers using "Mutants and Masterminds" rules.)
The three Kryptonians in the pocket universe had killed the five billion people on that Earth, and had threatened to do the same to "our" Earth. In response, Superman felt the only thing he could do was end the threat, and he used that universe's Kryptonite to execute them.
You would think that would have been an easier call.
I am all for "Superman generally does not kill" because the on-page logic for at least 3 decades has been "Superman knows how dangerous he could be if he ever lost his temper or just lost control in general". But, in some cases....
I tend to agree with Superman's decision and actions in that story. But I also appreciate that he suffered a crisis of conscience for it long term and that the action had major ramifications for him before he finally came to terms with it. I don't think it should ever be an easy decision for Superman to take a life, however justified the action.
Got some single issues today in the dollar bins at 2nd and Charles. 8-12 and 15 of the Wally West Flash series from 1987 or so.
Sparky Prime wrote:Green Lantern #144 etc...
Sparky, I found the trade collecting GL 142-150, "The Power of Ion" and bought it for about $6.00. Looks like it ends with the explanation for how the Guardians and Oa return that you told me about a few pages back. And the book has Alan Scott and Jade as supporting cast, which is just cool.
Action Comics 775
“What’s so Funny about truth, justice and the American way?”
This is yet another story where I saw the animated adaption first, and was able to read the actual comic later. If you’ve seen “Superman vs. The Elite”, you’ve seen an expanded version of this issue of Action Comics. For the most part, all the things added for the adaption (Manchester Black’s history, Menagerie lusting after Superman, the Superman robots doing cleanup) aren’t really necessary to tell the story, though I do like a line or two added in the end when Superman is getting his verbal jabs in, and I do like Black’s final fate in the movie better.
The basic story: a superpowered group calling themselves “The Elite” start taking on crime and tyrants, and their solution is to kill, and to play judge, jury and executioner. They start to become very popular with a lot of people because of this. This goes against everything that Superman believes in, and there is ultimately a confrontation between Superman and the four members of the Elite, who appear to kill him in a fight, broadcast to the world. However, Superman has planned ahead and fights back, appearing to adopt the Elite's methods and kill them one by one for all to see, before stripping Manchester Black of his powers and slapping him around a bit, verbally and physically, revealing him as the bully he is. Of course he didn’t kill them, just disabled them so they could be taken into custody, and he didn’t really strip Black of his powers (unlike the movie, where he does just that).
I love this story. On a basic level, the Elite are a bunch of arrogant jerks who are every bit as preachy as they accuse Superman of being, so seeing them cut down to size is very satisfying. One could argue that Superman descending to their level proves their point, but in fact he appears to adopt their methods while everyone is watching in order to make his point: that what they are doing is wrong. That the people who cheered the Elite but were scared of him when he seemingly did the same thing as them need to think about what they’re cheering on. I love the line from the movie where he throws Black’s philosophy right back at him.
Black: You crazy son of a bitch! You killed my team!!
Superman: Your team of killers. And guess what? They won't be killing again.
I like seeing Superman hit with a challenge that requires him to put his life on the line to defend his principles. We regularly see him in jeopardy, but in the final few pages of this story his uniform is shredded, one eye is bloodshot, and he’s bloody and has multiple wounds. He looks like he’s been worked over, and he has, emphasizing just how powerful the Elite were. The beating he takes in order to make his point and win the fight makes his actions and beliefs more real than normal. He’s not just taking the harder road because he’s so powerful and it’s easy to do so, because that isn’t the case this time. This group could have killed him. It also makes his more brutal than normal use of force against them entirely appropriate. He did what was necessary to stop the Elite, and then he turned them over to the authorities to let the legal system step in.
I found a nice piece of art from All-Flash #13, Winter 1943, and it just goes to show that just because some of the golden age artists drew cartoon-like characters doesn't mean they weren't capable of more. This is E E Hibbard, regular artist on the Flash for a long time. Compare the cartoony style of the regular characters with the much more realistic "photo" of Jay Garrick. Nice.
Comics didn't used to be stuck in the eternal present day. I've been reading the second volume of Alan Scott's Green Lantern series, and you can see his career advancing in the first few years of the character's series. He's a railroad engineer in his first story, unemployed in his second, and then he moves into radio in his third. A year or two down the road, and he's promoted to on-air personality. In the 60s and 70s, he's the owner of the station.
Another thing you'd never see today: in Jay Garrick's final issue of Flash Comics, his girlfriend thinks about the fact that she found out his secret identity "8 years ago", which happens to be pretty much how long it had been in real life between the publication of Jay's origin story and Flash Comics 104. This idea of a static "present day" reality had to have come about or evolved no sooner than the 50s or 60s as Superman and Batman continued to be popular and published and were still seen to be young, even though decades had passed.
andersonh1 wrote:Comics didn't used to be stuck in the eternal present day. I've been reading the second volume of Alan Scott's Green Lantern series, and you can see his career advancing in the first few years of the character's series. He's a railroad engineer in his first story, unemployed in his second, and then he moves into radio in his third. A year or two down the road, and he's promoted to on-air personality. In the 60s and 70s, he's the owner of the station.
I think that depends somewhat on the character. Bruce Wayne for an example, thanks to his family company, has always been the owner. There's really nothing for him to advance to with his career. But on the flip side, Peter Parker has held several different jobs over the years, which has continued to change even today. I wouldn't exactly say comics are stuck in an eternal present day. There are still events in the stories where they can't avoid indicating time has passed for the characters, although the creators do cheat with stuff like sliding time scales and reboots to give an illusion of an eternal present day.
The combination of sliding timescale and very slow passage of time makes it seem like most characters are always in the "present day" I guess. How long did it take Dick Grayson to go from 8 years old to 21? He was 8 in 1940 and hit 20 in the 1990s, maybe? So time does pass, just at nowhere near the pace of real time. But the Golden Age characters have always aged in real time, even though they were physically younger through either energy from Ian Karkull or other means. The idea of aging characters alongside non-aging has always been tricky, but then comic book time is tricky anyway.
I just find it interesting that in the early days, they didn't try to keep the characters at the same age. But most of them didn't stay in print much more than a decade anyway, so they weren't around long enough for age to be an issue. And when they did come back and were older, they were second tier characters, guest stars only, and they were treated differently than DC's main characters. I just enjoy that we got to see some comic book characters age, and we got to watch their entire lives rather than only ever seeing them stuck somewhere between 15 and 35.
andersonh1 wrote:The combination of sliding timescale and very slow passage of time makes it seem like most characters are always in the "present day" I guess. How long did it take Dick Grayson to go from 8 years old to 21? He was 8 in 1940 and hit 20 in the 1990s, maybe? So time does pass, just at nowhere near the pace of real time. But the Golden Age characters have always aged in real time, even though they were physically younger through either energy from Ian Karkull or other means. The idea of aging characters alongside non-aging has always been tricky, but then comic book time is tricky anyway.
Well also keep in mind DC officially established the concept of the multiverse in 1961. That was used as a way to explain how some characters, like Dick Grayson, could have been around since the Golden Age where those characters had become older, as well as there being another version of those characters still young in the Silver Age. And then Crisis on Infinite Earth's rewrote the history of the DC universe in the 80's. So in a way, the Dick Grayson introduced in the 40's isn't quite the same Dick Grayson of the 90's.
I just enjoy that we got to see some comic book characters age, and we got to watch their entire lives rather than only ever seeing them stuck somewhere between 15 and 35.
Yeah, I have to say I miss that element in a lot of today's comics. I get why they try to keep the characters from aging in real time, but yet, it was also interesting to see the developments and legacies the characters created as they aged.
I just enjoy that we got to see some comic book characters age, and we got to watch their entire lives rather than only ever seeing them stuck somewhere between 15 and 35.
That is one of the few things that was wiped out in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" that was a legitimate loss.
Earth 2 (Golden Age) Grayson and other characters like the Huntress were the sort of thing that mainstream comics needs more of.
Had DC followed through, Huntress would be a grandmother now, and there likely be a whole bat-family lineage. Superman could still be around, but as a great patron. Wonder Woman would be aged, but alive, as a great matron. Lex Luthor would be long dead. But, he could have successors.
