TF Views

I grew up in the 90s. This means that the only Green Lantern I ever knew was John Stewart, and the only Flash I ever knew was Wally West. The only Robin I ever knew was Tim Drake. (Alright, to be fair, I was aware that Nightwing was Robin once and he was Dick Grayson.) So it's like...When things get reset back to "the way they were," they were never that way to begin with to me.

Onslaught Six wrote:I grew up in the 90s. This means that the only Green Lantern I ever knew was John Stewart, and the only Flash I ever knew was Wally West. The only Robin I ever knew was Tim Drake. (Alright, to be fair, I was aware that Nightwing was Robin once and he was Dick Grayson.) So it's like...When things get reset back to "the way they were," they were never that way to begin with to me.

I started reading comics in 89, just about the time that the "Death in the Family" storyline was running in the Batman comics, the one where they killed off Jason Todd. So while Tim was replacing Jason, it wasn't a big deal since I barely read any comics with Jason before he was removed from the scene. And I was aware that Barry Allen had been the Flash, but Wally West was the current version for me. Conversely I got into Green Lantern with Emerald Dawn, so when Kyle replaced Hal, I wasn't too happy.

To me it's not just all about who was the character when I began reading, but also how any given character is replaced. Even though I thought Jason went out in a stupid way, the introduction of Tim Drake was well done, and he turned out to be a great character. When Wally took over as the Flash, it was a great example of the student stepping up to fill the shoes of his mentor. And Wally was well-written with some great character growth. He started out as somewhat self-serving and had to grow into being a selfless hero.

I disagree about Tim Drake, (who's origin struck me as a bit of "Mary Sue", even if I did not know the term back then), but I see your point.

Execution does count.

But, even beyond execution, I want the events to stick.

Wally and Kyle are good examples. I would not want to see Kyle as Green Lantern forever. Putting aside the motivation for replacing Hal, (and it was flawed), Kyle was too much a product of his time.

Barry Allen died to symbolize the end of an age of comics, innocence. (His return arguably symbolizes another ending, the end of meaning in comics.) Kyle was intentionally written as a symbol of the 90s. While Hal Jordan was given a ring for being in the right place, (spitting distance of the dying Abin Sur), he also got the ring for having meritorious qualities. (Sur would not have given the ring to an unprincipled man, even if said unprincipled guy were a nice guy.) Kyle steps out to get some air, (I always read it as he was drunk and/or had to wee on the side of the building), and the little blue midget just hands him the ring.

Kyle had a weak bladder and was awarded with cosmic power. He just got the ring....because... And, in the 90s, that worked. It was the decade of the Adam Sandler movie. It was the decade of lucky oafs and unearned wealth/fame being considered reason to admire someone.

It may have been time for Kyle to go. But, did we need to bring back Hal, (baggage or not), to be rid of Kyle? If nothing else, each changing of the guard(ians) implies time passing....yet the story is essentially cyclical with no meaninful changes sticking. (Every time the Guardians go away forever...they come back after a short while in real time, never mind telescoped comic time.)

I grew up with the Silver Centurion and the John Byrne armours in "Iron Man". But, I still recognize the return to the pre-Centurion armour as a "back to the way it was" move.

If the change back is based on something other than just resetting things, (Steve Rogers v/s John Walker comes to mind here), that is one thing. But, most resets are simply "oh my god, it is just like it was...only kewler".


Dom
-still sees "Civil War" as unintentional hilarity as we (re-)enter the "Heroic Age".

And...I think I am through the worst of it. I am not sure where I am in the pile, but I am pretty sure I am through the bleakest stretch. (I am putting the books I have already read at the bottom, so judging the height is iffy at best.)

The Tick #1 (NEC): I am not sure, but this might be one of the most reprinted indy books of all time. I am sure hard numbers to prove/disprove this theory exist somewhere. And, I live close enough to NEC that I could probably do a fair amount of the research in a day. But, whatever. "The Tick" is an old favorite of mine. While I have outgrown the series and its brand of humour, it still holds a special place in my heart. This is a straight reprint of the first issue, with ads for a new series of compilations. Even putting aside this title's local roots and my sentimental fondness for it, "The Tick" has a proven place in the market, (carving out a very nice spot for itself in the early 90s), and has been fallow for too long.
Grade: B It is not for everybody. But, there is an audience for this book, some of it just waiting to be discovered.


Worlds of Aspen (Aspen): I will say one thing for preview books, they are quick reads. I did not do a page count, but it looks like a bit less than half the pages of this "comic", are the story, with the rest being ads. Of course, the plot flows into splash pages that look like ads for various Aspen titles, so my counts are debatable regardless.
Grade: F


Yow! (Drawn and Quarterly): Some subject matter lends itself more to samplers and preview books than others. Old kiddie books and strips, such as those reprinted here, work well enough in this format as it is possible to tell a complete story in a few pages. Granted, the content is insipid kiddie fodder, but properties like "Nancy" have a tenacious hold on the market. And, this *is* an actual comic intended to sell other comics by showing how good it is.
Grade: B/C


The Sixth Gun (Oni): Oni is the sort of publisher that I always promise myself I will support, though I never seem to get around to it. This is a solid indy publisher, even if their distribution is a bit sparse. "The Sixth Gun" is an RPG style McGuffin hunt set in the old west. This, (apparently first issue), is a solidly told, though not brilliant, story.
Grade: B


Weathercraft (Fantagraphics): Oh, dear god. It had been said that we must all go through the jaws of the dragon. In this case, I feel like I was shoved up the dragon's ass, and the dragon is a coprophagous anorexic. A wordless story told with really blurry art that just meanders along unitl it gets to a series of pictures with itty-bitty type that is damned near impossible to read and then an ad that says the inevitable compilation will be a defining comic for this decade, (despite the fact that there is real talent working in comics), and......of goddamn. I am not sure there is a letter in the alphabet to describe how bad this book is. I try to save the "F"s for when they are really needed. I need something more now....so much more.
Grade: So impossibly bad it defies description. "Flaming fecal dragon vomit" is about the nicest thing I can say about this....whatever the hell it is.



Dom
-no, really. I really put off reading this latest batch because I knew "Weathercraft" was in there. And, it was so much worse than I feared.

Dominic wrote:, even beyond execution, I want the events to stick.

To me, it depends on whether the events in question are worth keeping. Take the 90s version of Fate for example. Doctor Fate gets vaporized by Extant, so we get the kewl 90s version, Jared Stevens, with his more violent world view, Ankh eye tattoo and various melee weapons and armor made from Doctor Fate's old helmet. It was very much of the time, and in my view, very bad. That change did not need to stick. Bad ideas don't need to be retained simply because change should be permanent in order to assign meaning to it.

Wally and Kyle are good examples. I would not want to see Kyle as Green Lantern forever. Putting aside the motivation for replacing Hal, (and it was flawed), Kyle was too much a product of his time.

Barry Allen died to symbolize the end of an age of comics, innocence. (His return arguably symbolizes another ending, the end of meaning in comics.) Kyle was intentionally written as a symbol of the 90s. While Hal Jordan was given a ring for being in the right place, (spitting distance of the dying Abin Sur), he also got the ring for having meritorious qualities. (Sur would not have given the ring to an unprincipled man, even if said unprincipled guy were a nice guy.) Kyle steps out to get some air, (I always read it as he was drunk and/or had to wee on the side of the building), and the little blue midget just hands him the ring.

Kyle had a week bladder and was awarded with cosmic power. He just got the ring....because... And, in the 90s, that worked. It was the decade of the Adam Sandler movie. It was the decade of lucky oafs and unearned wealth/fame being considered reason to admire someone.

It may have been time for Kyle to go. But, did we need to bring back Hal, (baggage or not), to be rid of Kyle? If nothing else, each changing of the guard(ians) implies time passing....yet the story is essentially cyclical with no meaninful changes sticking. (Every time the Guardians go away forever...they come back after a short while in real time, never mind telescoped comic time.)

That's certainly a good point. That's twice now in the last two decades the the Guardians have either abandoned the universe or been killed off, and the Green Lantern Corps destroyed, only to have it reformed in short order. The first time was reasonable, but to repeat that was certainly bad writing. Clearly the editors intended that change to be permanent, given how thoroughly they destroyed everything. But I would argue that Green Lantern offers a much broader scope for storytelling with the Guardians alive and a thousands-strong Corps roaming the universe than it did with Kyle as the lone GL, so this is yet another case where undoing a change has resulted in better storytelling. It's a case where the original change was the mistake, while undoing it rectified that mistake.

With Wally West, he came in with a lot of good will since he had been Barry Allen's sidekick. What the change of character did there was allow the writers to approach things differently and do some different things with the character in a way that they couldn't have done with Barry Allen. Those early Flash issues had Wally trying to make money off of his abilities and unable to run nearly as fast as Allen and generally feeling unworthy and unable to live up to the reputation of his mentor. None of that could have been done with Allen without some serious character derailment. As far as bringing Barry Allen back goes, it depends on what they do with the character. There's a very good case to be made that the character could be written as a man who has lost years of his life and is out of touch with the modern world, and put some kind of interesting new spin on him. The fastest man alive, and the world has left him behind.

And In many ways, Barry Allen is a new character to any number of readers. I've never read the old Flash series, so I have no real preconceptions about the character. As much as I'd prefer to see Wally remain the Flash, he's only been sidelined, not killed off.

If the change back is based on something other than just resetting things, (Steve Rogers v/s John Walker comes to mind here), that is one thing.

If the change back offers a chance for good drama without seriously derailing the whole concept behind the character (as the 90s Fate and arguably Green Lantern did), then that change could well be a good thing.

Look at it this way: how long can a series go on before it begins to repeat itself? Change keeps things interesting, always assuming that the change is well-done.

But, most resets are simply "oh my god, it is just like it was...only kewler".

Often true.

Dominic wrote:The Tick #1 (NEC): I am not sure, but this might be one of the most reprinted indy books of all time. I am sure hard numbers to prove/disprove this theory exist somewhere. And, I live close enough to NEC that I could probably do a fair amount of the research in a day. But, whatever. "The Tick" is an old favorite of mine. While I have outgrown the series and its brand of humour, it still holds a special place in my heart. This is a straight reprint of the first issue, with ads for a new series of compilations. Even putting aside this title's local roots and my sentimental fondness for it, "The Tick" has a proven place in the market, (carving out a very nice spot for itself in the early 90s), and has been fallow for too long.
Grade: B It is not for everybody. But, there is an audience for this book, some of it just waiting to be discovered.

I remember reading The Tick when it was first published and enjoying it immensely. I think it was either 89 or 90 when some of us were in the back row of design class reading the second issue instead of working. Good times.

Didn't Ben Edlund grow to hate the character, because he wanted to do other things and all anyone wanted was more Tick?

Dominic wrote:It was the decade of lucky oafs and unearned wealth/fame being considered reason to admire someone.

Quit talking about Nirvana and get back to talking about comics, Dom.

*ba-dum-chss!*

It may have been time for Kyle to go. But, did we need to bring back Hal, (baggage or not), to be rid of Kyle? If nothing else, each changing of the guard(ians) implies time passing....yet the story is essentially cyclical with no meaninful changes sticking. (Every time the Guardians go away forever...they come back after a short while in real time, never mind telescoped comic time.)

I would've liked to see John Stewart become the main GL again. I don't care, that guy is awesome.

Dominic wrote:The Tick #1 (NEC): I am not sure, but this might be one of the most reprinted indy books of all time.

It probably rivals TMNT #1.

andersonh1 wrote:And In many ways, Barry Allen is a new character to any number of readers. I've never read the old Flash series, so I have no real preconceptions about the character. As much as I'd prefer to see Wally remain the Flash, he's only been sidelined, not killed off.

Why not form a Flash Corps? And then in a few years, we'll get multicoloured Flashes running around, symbolizing different ranges of the, uh...Speed Spectrum! Yeah, that's it. The Black Flashes, obviously, sit around and make everything go reeeealllly sloooow. Also they all go around a different section of Hypertime, which is back now.

I could totally write DC.

Onslaught Six wrote:Why not form a Flash Corps?

There are four Flashes running around now... not to mention Professor Zoom, Baroness Blitzkrieg and Jesse Quick. They're well on the way there already.

And then in a few years, we'll get multicoloured Flashes running around, symbolizing different ranges of the, uh...Speed Spectrum! Yeah, that's it. The Black Flashes, obviously, sit around and make everything go reeeealllly sloooow. Also they all go around a different section of Hypertime, which is back now.

I could totally write DC.

Move over Geoff Johns! Your replacement has arrived!

Johns? I'm gunning to replace Morrison.

Yeah. O6 could definitely pull off Morrison. He has the same self-aware contempts for the industry, while Johns just seems to write like a fan. (O6 *knows* how awful the ideas he just pitched. Johns actually seems to think his awful ideas are good.)

It probably rivals TMNT #1.

I used to work under the table at NEC, and recall seeing 4th editions of "The Tick" in single issue form, along with various deluxe and compiled editions, both in color and black and white. TMNT and "Flaming Carrot" are about the only things I can think of that would rival it.

At this point, we would also need to get the numbers for the print runs per each printing if we really wanted to figure this out.

Didn't Ben Edlund grow to hate the character, because he wanted to do other things and all anyone wanted was more Tick?

I recall there being some drama in the 90s, (around when I worked at NEC), but the exact nature of it eludes me. It may also have been an ownership thing, possibly relating to the cartoon.

I am 90% sure I met Edlund once or twice, (store signings). I know I met Chris Claremont, (guy is total dingus), and one of the "Lady Death"/"Evil Ernie" guys. (Really nice guy if I recall.)

But I would argue that Green Lantern offers a much broader scope for storytelling with the Guardians alive and a thousands-strong Corps roaming the universe than it did with Kyle as the lone GL, so this is yet another case where undoing a change has resulted in better storytelling. It's a case where the original change was the mistake, while undoing it rectified that mistake.

I agree that not every change needs to stick by virtue of being a new status quo.

But, there is a huge difference between moving on and improving things and "fixing" the original status quo.

The GLC is a good example. Would it have killed DC to leave the original GLC members dead? Did Kilowog really need to come back? Did Arisa really need to come back? Did the GLC really need to have the core 80s members come back and be more or less like it was during John's childhood? Would it have been that bad if DC had come up with new GLC members? If nothing else, linear story-telling offers more possiblities because it gives writers history to play with. (And, that history need not be convoluted...unless it is loaded with "here is what really happened" type fixes.)

Consider the early Tim Drale appearances. When Drake first confronts the Joker, he is fully aware what happened to the last kid who wore a variation of that costume. And, the Joker's reaction to seeing Robin is also notable. (Apparently, the Joker forgot that Batman got a new Robin, and completely discounted the idea that somebody else could put on the costume.)


Here is another example:

In the 1980s, John Byrne revealed that the Vision was in fact not the original Human Torch, despite years of precedent that said otherwise. I was never a fan of this, and became less of a fan the more I read the pre-Byrne stories. But, as bad as that was, Busiek's "fix" in "Avengers Forever" reads like the worst kind of fanfic...and it only serves to confuse things more.

There are plenty of examples of this sort of thing. Pick one you are familiar with, and summarize it to yourself objectively. Notice how utterly retarded it most likely sounds.


Dom
-hard reboots are another story however.

Dominic wrote:

But I would argue that Green Lantern offers a much broader scope for storytelling with the Guardians alive and a thousands-strong Corps roaming the universe than it did with Kyle as the lone GL, so this is yet another case where undoing a change has resulted in better storytelling. It's a case where the original change was the mistake, while undoing it rectified that mistake.

I agree that not every change needs to stick by virtue of being a new status quo.

But, there is a huge difference between moving on and improving things and "fixing" the original status quo.

The GLC is a good example. Would it have killed DC to leave the original GLC members dead? Did Kilowog really need to come back? Did Arisa really need to come back? Did the GLC really need to have the core 80s members come back and be more or less like it was during John's childhood? Would it have been that bad if DC had come up with new GLC members? If nothing else, linear story-telling offers more possiblities because it gives writers history to play with. (And, that history need not be convoluted...unless it is loaded with "here is what really happened" type fixes.)

Agreed. Some of the best characters in the GLC are the new creations, like Soranik Natu. Not that I mind Kilowog being back, since I'm not quite sure how the old non-lethal force ring Hal was wearing could kill him anyway. But in general, I think you're right.