REVIEW: DC (GirlFrenzy) Capsules: Pen-Elayne For Your Thoughts
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput
Reviewed herein:
Batman: BATGIRL
Wonder Woman: DONNA TROY
Superman: LOIS LANE
Starman: THE MIST
Birds of Prey: THE RAVENS
Young Justice: THE SECRET
JLA: TOMORROW WOMAN
Cover Penciller: Leonard Kirk <hron...@vaxxine.com>
Cover Inker: Karl Story
Here's what I thought: The best DC book with a lead female character this
week was NEVADA. Yes, I bought all seven of these, even as I'd promised
myself I didn't want to support Chuck Dixon's writing of women, even as
I'd already read THE SECRET in preview. I didn't expect much all around,
but my reasoning was simple-- I interpret DC's intention for "GirlFrenzy!"
to be testing the waters regarding readers' interest in lead female
characters, and by buying these books I wanted to help prove that
interest.
But I must say, I now know how a lot of comics fans feel when a book comes
out that purports to give them what they've asked for, but not quite in
the way they'd have preferred to see it. In my case, I suppose I expected
to be treated more like these books' target audience, but the teasers at
the end invite me to "take your relationship with <whichever women> to the
next level!", and being a hetero female I don't foresee being That Way
about any of these characters. And "Watch This Space," which finally
touts the fact that-- for the first time ever, I believe-- DC has three
solid female editors on the sixth floor, two of whom helped produce a
couple of these books, also suggests readers use the books to "introduce
your female friends to how cool [superhero] comics are." Pretty much
sounds to me like they're still talking to the guys.
Which is understandable-- guys are often most comfortable talking with
other guys, and out of seven teams, totalling 47 creative people not
including color separation houses, there are only six female names here,
including two associate editors and two colorists. Only one female writer
and one female penciller (both, coincidentally, on the same book). Now, I
don't pretend to know what went on behind the scenes on this project
(well, besides the covers-- which I would have liked better without the
color holds pretty much dropping out Leonard's and Karl Story's lines),
nor the schedules of everyone from Devin Grayson to Louise Simonson to Jan
Duursema to Phyllis Novin to Pat Prentice to Marie Severin (just to name a
small percentage of available female talent), nor even the timing of when
everything had to be put together. But it seems to me that the best way
to interest girls and women in superhero comics-- besides actually
featuring female supers, which only four out of the seven books do (and
one of them is dead and another no longer operates under her former name
so even this is misleading to a brand-new female reader)-- is to show that
women can create those comics. This would have been a perfect showcase
for (three-dimensional, not fictional) women in comics, and I can only
hope DC decides to take that next step someday.
Of course, as much as this is presented as a package deal, in the end I
tend to judge each book by its own merits, so let's take a look at the
individual efforts.
Batman: BATGIRL
"Scars"
Writer: Kelley Puckett <7211...@compuserve.com>
Penciller: Jim Balent <JimB...@aol.com>
Inker: Rick Burchett
Colorist: Trish Mulvihill <tris...@aol.com>
Color Seps.: Bleyaert Ro Hannin
Letterer: Clem Robins
Assoc. Ed.: Darren Vincenzo <Grays...@aol.com>
Head Honcho: Scott Peterson
WHAT GOES ON: Batgirl goes after Zsasz. [DW's Index Grade: 2.6]
While I don't still don't care for Balent's objectifying pencils (I can no
more buy a Batgirl costume with no creases than I can buy a painted-on
Catwoman outfit), and this book contains rather graphic scenes of violence
in places, it's fairly well done, although I have trouble buying that
Barbara would be obsessed enough about catching anyone to neglect a
friend's funeral. And she wouldn't have put two and two together, that
Jessica was killed by Zsasz, before this? Puckett paints a chilling
portrait of the villain, but it served to make this more a book about
Zsasz than about Barbara. She may have caught the villain before Batman
did, but she still seemed reactive throughout. Not the best showcase for
Batgirl's talents, especially her intellect.
Wonder Woman: DONNA TROY
"Why?"
Writer/Penciller: Phil Jimenez <PJ...@aol.com>
Inker: John Stokes
Letterer: Todd Klein <10324...@compuserve.com>
Colorist: Jason Scott Jones
Asst. Ed.: L.A. Williams
Head Honcho: Paul Kupperberg
WHAT GOES ON: Donna takes stock of her life and tries to find a reason
behind what's happened to her. [DW's Index Grade: 3.9]
Definitely my favorite of the group. Phil paces this very nicely, not
only going over enough of Donna's history to clue in newer readers but
delving into how she thinks, everything from her practical nature to her
spirituality to her sense of justice, all while managing to relate an
action-oriented flasback featuring logical-to-the-plot guest cameos by a
couple other DC heroic heavy-hitters. In lesser hands, the point about
hatred might have been far more didactic, but here it's used to truly make
the political personal, as Donna tries to fit the effects of public events
into her private sphere. Poignant and quite well done. Highly
recommended.
Superman: LOIS LANE
Writer: Barbara Kesel <BRK...@aol.com>
Penciller: Amanda Conner
Inker: Jimmy Palmiotti
Letterer: Gaspar Saladino
Colorist: John Kalisz
Color Sep. House: Digital Chameleon
Asst. Ed.: Maureen McTigue <DCOMa...@aol.com>
Head Honcho: Joey Cavalieri <Jcava...@aol.com>
WHAT GOES ON: Lois investigates some strange disappearances in Manitoba.
[DW's Index Grade: 3.2]
Kesel takes what would have been nothing more than a series of events in
other hands (see THE RAVENS) and invests the plot with Lois' solid
personality and even a bit of whimsy. I adored the check-in scene and the
Superman appearance at the story's beginning, and the easy repartee
between these two characters (often the only thing worth reading in the
regular Supes books). I also loved Lois' determination not to have
Superman as her safety net (even though, at the time, she has no notion of
the danger that awaits), and Ed and Lilybeth are nicely fleshed out for
one-time supporting characters. It's always a joy seeing Amanda's work,
she has a great feel for facial expressions-- and does "grotesque"
nicely-- although she could work a bit more on the illusion of movement,
and I thought her significant other inked her a bit heavily in places. A
worthy effort, although I didn't care for the it's-not-really-over bit in
the last two panels. Recommended.
Starman: THE MIST
"Good Girls and Bad"
Writer: James Robinson
Layouts: John Lucas
Finishes: Richard Case
Colorist: Pat Garrahy
Letterer: Bill Oakley
Asst. Ed.: Chuck Kim <read...@aol.com>
Head Honcho: Archie Goodwin (RIP)
WHAT GOES ON: The Mist's (and Jack Knight's) son is kidnapped by another
villain who wants her to do his bidding. [DW's Index Grade: 2.8]
While I agree with Mary Marvel's assessment that the Mist is "a complex
person," she's still fairly unambiguously a villain (and hyper-aware of
her role as such, given her explicatory conversation with Mary) and I tend
not to enjoy the idea of giving villains the starring role in a book.
Yes, it can be done successfully, as some of the "New Year's Evil" books
showed, but you lose the sense of rooting for the protagonist that you
usually have with more cut-and-dried heroic fare. Yes, I wanted the Mist
to get her kid back, but at the same time I wouldn't have minded if the
kid would have somehow wound up with Jack instead. Robinson also never
explained to my satisfaction why the Black Hand needed the Mist to acquire
the technology for him. I didn't buy that "I'm a bad guy but I won't
commit treason" bit for a second. Weak premise, so-so execution. Lucas'
and Case's art did the job, but nothing spectacular. It was an okay read,
but I can't see it whetting people's appetites for more Mist adventures.
Birds of Prey: THE RAVENS
"S.I.M.O.N. Says Armageddon"
Writer: Chuck Dixon
Penciller: Nelson DeCastro
Inker: Drew Geraci
Colorist: Gloria Vasquez
Letterer: Tim Harkins
Color Sep. House: Android Images
Head Honcho: Jordan Gorfinkel <GoodG...@aol.com>
WHAT GOES ON: The villainous Cheshire leads her hand-picked all-woman
troupe against the world crime organization SIMON, currently operating in
the Rheelasian atoll. [DW's Index Grade: 2.0]
Wherever that is. The worst thing about Dixon's attempt to write women is
that they often seem to demand more characterization from a writer in
order not to slip into shorthand stereotyping (it's assumed men, as the
visible norm, have full personalities, but women often must be presented
more deliberately in order to achieve the same). Since characterization
hasn't been Dixon's strong suit in any of his books that I've read, his
stories tend to tumble for me like a house of cards. Aside from Termina,
none of the women really seems to have a motivation to do anything here--
we must take it as a given that Cheshire has banded them together to do
something or other involving stopping S.I.M.O.N. We suspect Cheshire
doesn't like the idea of a super-neutron bomb because of a similar
incident in Qurac, but this is nebulous. Pistolera and Vicious seem to
exist only to banter-fight, Female Furies style. At no time did I find
myself caring about any of these people or what happened to them. The art
was fine, for a John Byrne swipe, but I found Vasquez' shading way too
dark. Also no incentive here to read BIRDS OF PREY. Skip it.
Young Justice: THE SECRET
Writer: Todd DeZago
Penciller: Todd Nauck
Inker: Lary Stucker
Colorist: Jason Wright
Color Sep. House: Digital Chameleon
Letterer: Ken Lopez
Assoc. Ed.: Dana Kurtin
Head Honcho: Eddie Berganza
WHAT GOES ON: Robin, Superboy and Impulse are asked to capture a
"subject" which has escaped from a military convoy. [DW's Index Grade:
3.2]
I reviewed this one in preview form, wherein I noted how surprised I was
to actually like something from the two Todds, neither of whose work I've
particularly enjoyed in the past. So I'll just take this moment to look
at it as a part of the overall "focus on the female" package-- which
didn't really work here. The Secret, who doesn't even know her own name,
is purely the object here, the reason for the three youngsters to concoct
their pact. No room is given for her to develop any sort of personality
or define her powers; her origin amounts to little more than her being the
genie freed from the bottle, with the story focusing on her rescuers. I
liked the structure, but if you're looking for anything resembling a
strong female character, this isn't the place to find it.
JLA: TOMORROW WOMAN
"Tomorrow Never Knows"
Writer: Tom Peyer <TPe...@aol.com>
Penciller: Yanick Paquette <ya...@dsuper.net>
Inker: Mark Lipka
Letterer: Kurt Hathaway
Colorist: Pat Garrahy
Color Sep. House: Heroic Age
Assoc. Ed.: Tony Bedard
Head Honcho: Dan Raspler <DCORa...@aol.com>
WHAT GOES ON: While helping the JLA against "If" (during JLA #5), TW
fights against alien control of "miracle baby" 10-year-olds. [DW's Index
Grade: 2.9]
While I like the fancy of this story taking place between the panels of
another book, Morrison really didn't leave room there for this type of
plot. The story still held my interest, but it probably could have been
told with any number of heroes; why TW was the only one able to register
and snuff out the evil was never explained. Paquette is a bit too fond of
butt shots, so much so that TW's skirt becomes translucent in some shots
just so you can view her from behind. Her face has none of the flapper
cuteness established in JLA #5, and her breasts change cup size and
sometimes shape from panel to panel. I don't know that Lipka is the best
inker for him either; the angularity tends to be emphasized rather than
softened. Not that bad a story, especially the pages featuring Morrow and
Ivo, but it didn't grab me enough to give it more than a mild
recommendation.
So, what did y'all think?
- Elayne
--
This review is copyright 1998 by Elayne Wechsler-Chaput, Notary Public-To-
Be; be very afraid. Once I get the stamp and seal, I can charge $2 for
notarizing certain papers. Man, who knew this gig would pay more than
comic book writing?
Dale Hicks
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput <fire...@panix.com> wrote in article <6ijcf3$g...@panix3.panix.com>...
> JLA: TOMORROW WOMAN
> "Tomorrow Never Knows"
>
>
> WHAT GOES ON: While helping the JLA against "If" (during JLA #5), TW
> fights against alien control of "miracle baby" 10-year-olds. [DW's Index
> Grade: 2.9]
What is a DW Index Grade? Is it related to your "recommended" ratings?
What is the maximum scale?
--
Roman Numeral One icono...@mail.clis.com
Jennifer Matthews
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput wrote:
<snip>
> Yes, I bought all seven of these, even as I'd promised myself I didn't
> want to support Chuck Dixon's writing of women, even as
> I'd already read THE SECRET in preview. I didn't expect much all
> around, but my reasoning was simple-- I interpret DC's intention for
> "GirlFrenzy!" to be testing the waters regarding readers' interest in
> lead female characters, and by buying these books I wanted to help
> prove that interest.
I picked up six of the seven for pretty much the same reasons. I didn't
feel any overwhelming interest in the Mist, the Secret, or even, Donna
Troy; but I've been asking for DC to feature women and so I decided I
had to pick these up. The only one I passed on was Tomorrow Woman. I
just couldn't bring myself to buy something that tries to retro-actively
make me care about a character that is dead. Personal peeve, I guess.
>
<snip>
>
> Only one female writer and one female penciller (both, coincidentally,
> on the same book).
That did seem to be a missed opportunity to me, as well. I always
thought that these "special events" type things were chances for the
newer writers/artists/etc. to try their wings.
<snip>
>
> Batman: BATGIRL
> "Scars"
<snip>
> in places, it's fairly well done, although I have trouble buying that
> Barbara would be obsessed enough about catching anyone to neglect a
> friend's funeral. And she wouldn't have put two and two together,
> that Jessica was killed by Zsasz, before this?
This confuses me. I thought that Barbara's obsession came about because
she did know that Jessica had been killed Zsasz . . . but the comment
that she makes to herself early on (I want to get him before Batman)
seems to imply that she's "obsessed" initially so that she can beat
Batman; not because she's got a personal stake in the matter. But,
there's the events at the funeral that seem to indicate that she's not
aware of how Jessica died.
<snip>
> Not the best showcase for Batgirl's talents, especially her intellect.
Well, not even the best showcase for why Barbara was Batgirl to begin
with. IMO, it never was a competition with Batman -- it was cooperation
with him. In "Scars" I was unhappy with Barbara's reaction to finding
out that she was too late to save the one murder victim. She seems to
just shrug that off and use the clues that she finds to move on. I
didn't want her to go into hysterics, but I did expect something a bit
less cold.
And, the ending once again highlights how Barbara really "can't handle"
the crime-fighting gig. It's just too much for her and she needs "time
off." Bleck.
>
<snip>
>
> Starman: THE MIST
>
<snip>
> and I tend not to enjoy the idea of giving villains the starring role
> in a book.
The thing is, let's not do this "villain with a heart of gold" rif.
What was unique about this plot? Somebody steals her kid and uses that
to blackmail the Mist into doing something "bad." Umm, been there; done
that. If you're going to go down that road, couldn't Mist have been
more peeved over the arrogance over the Black Hand daring to mess with
her?
And, I really would have preferred this story from Mary's point of view.
She makes some rather odd decisions and comes to some odd conclusions
and I would have liked to actually been in her POV while she did that.
<snip>
> It was an okay read, but I can't see it whetting people's appetites
> for more Mist adventures.
I can live happily without seeing a Mist series hit the stands. ;)
>
> Birds of Prey: THE RAVENS
<snip>
>
> Since characterization hasn't been Dixon's strong suit in any of his
> books that I've read, his stories tend to tumble for me like a house
> of cards.
It ultimately just got to be silly. The story works so hard to only
HINT at why Cheshire is doing what she's doing . . . and to this moment,
I have NO idea whether she's supposed to be a hero gone bad; a hero who
doesn't mind killing; a villian; or just an adventuristic pragmatist.
At the moment, I really don't care one way or the other.
> Aside from Termina,none of the women really seems to have a motivation
> to do anything here--
Well, it's nice to know that there are some adventurous women in the DC
universe who are, essentially, guns for hire. I didn't think they
necessarily needed a motivation other than the money and excitement.
Cheshire, as the leader, needed the motivation -- and I don't know why
I, as the reader, couldn't be told more clearly and succinctly what her
motivation was.
On the topic of the "gang" in general, I have only one thing to say:
Pistolera. <gak> Geez, I would have thought she'd *thank* Vicious for
calling her anything but that! :)
> At no time did I find myself caring about any of these people or what
> happened to them.
Nope. I was vaguely curious to watch the "henchwomens'" faces when
Cheshire ditched them (but she didn't get the chance). It didn't help
my reading that I kept flipping to the cover to note to myself that,
yep, this says "Birds of Prey" on it. Which only led to the rather sad
thought that I'd have to see this group again once Black Canary and
Oracle either caught up with them or teamed (yuck) up with them.
<snip>
> Young Justice: THE SECRET
<snip>
> So I'll just take this moment to look at it as a part of the overall
> "focus on the female" package-- which didn't really work here. The
> Secret, who doesn't even know her own name, is purely the object here,
> the reason for the three youngsters to concoct their pact.
Yeah, it was a bit misleading for this book to be part of "Girl Frenzy,"
although I gotta say I still enjoyed it.
> No room is given for her to develop any sort of personality or define
> her powers; her origin amounts to little more than her being the
> genie freed from the bottle, with the story focusing on her rescuers.
Yes, but once they decide to help her, The Secret pretty much tells them
what she's going to do next. This book did the one thing I believe it
should have: I may actually take a look at "Young Justice," AND I will
pick up another book featuring "The Secret," if only to find out how
she's doing.
Overall, I would recommend Donna Troy, Young Justice and Lois Lane.
There's no reason to bother with the Mist or Birds of Prey; and as much
as I hate to say it, pass on Batgirl, too.
-Jen
Shawn Hill
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput (fire...@panix.com) wrote:
: Starman: THE MIST
: "Good Girls and Bad"
: While I agree with Mary Marvel's assessment that the Mist is "a complex
: person," she's still fairly unambiguously a villain (and hyper-aware of
: her role as such, given her explicatory conversation with Mary) and I tend
: not to enjoy the idea of giving villains the starring role in a book.
I love it. The anti-hero tradition goes back to when? Moll Flanders? The
Romantics?
: Yes, it can be done successfully, as some of the "New Year's Evil" books
: showed, but you lose the sense of rooting for the protagonist that you
: usually have with more cut-and-dried heroic fare. Yes, I wanted the Mist
: to get her kid back, but at the same time I wouldn't have minded if the
: kid would have somehow wound up with Jack instead. Robinson also never
Jack is hardly together enough to be a daddy at this point. His girflfriend's a
psycho, for one thing.
: explained to my satisfaction why the Black Hand needed the Mist to acquire
: the technology for him. I didn't buy that "I'm a bad guy but I won't
: commit treason" bit for a second. Weak premise, so-so execution. Lucas'
So the Black Hand's an idiot. Big surprise there. He needed the Mist because her
powers were ideally suited to the activity he had planned.
: and Case's art did the job, but nothing spectacular. It was an okay read,
: but I can't see it whetting people's appetites for more Mist adventures.
It did mine, but then I've loved her since I saw her. I don't see her getting a
solo series; her story will be played out in the pages of Starman.
: JLA: TOMORROW WOMAN
: "Tomorrow Never Knows"
: While I like the fancy of this story taking place between the panels of
: another book, Morrison really didn't leave room there for this type of
: plot. The story still held my interest, but it probably could have been
didn't he leave room? JLA #5 was a seriously condensed synopsis of several months
of time, the time it took for TW to be accepted as true hero by her colleagues and
the public alike.
: told with any number of heroes; why TW was the only one able to register
: and snuff out the evil was never explained. Paquette is a bit too fond of
because she empathized with both the nature of the evil and the need to drive it
out, moreso than anyone else.
: butt shots, so much so that TW's skirt becomes translucent in some shots
: just so you can view her from behind. Her face has none of the flapper
TW's skirt has always been transluscent, Elayne, check out her debut more closely.
You're really grasping at straws here. I did miss the flapper/pixie suaveness,
however, and thought Paquette to be quite uninventive and trite in most scenes. I
hated the ridiculous bulky armor of the demon/alien on the mountain. His WW was
okay, though. Which I guess is lucky for me, as I plan to continue buying the more
super-less mytho WW even after Byrne leaves. Unless Deodato comes back, that is.
Talk about gratuitous butt-shots.
Shawn
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"I found a way to use my head/
I go over and over every word he said"
--j. hatfield,
"lost and saved"
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
sh...@husc.harvard.edu Shawn Hill
Michael Welsh Duggan
"Dale Hicks" <icono...@mail.clis.comXXX> writes:
> Elayne Wechsler-Chaput <fire...@panix.com> writes:
>> WHAT GOES ON: While helping the JLA against "If" (during JLA #5), TW
>> fights against alien control of "miracle baby" 10-year-olds. [DW's Index
>> Grade: 2.9]
>
> What is the maximum scale?
There's this thing that gets posted to rac.reviews and rac.misc every
week called the "Hivemind Report," which is basically a chart showing
what various reviewers thought of books, the average of all the
grades, and the standard deviation. The report uses a grading scale
that runs from zero to four, with four being "go buy this book or I'll
kill you."
The reason she calls it the "DW Index Grade" is that the report is
compiled by me, Dave White. And DW is a lot shorter to type than
"Hivemind."
DAVE "The Knave" WHITE, talentless hack
"Those who induce these stressors on you, were individually not your friends
in the first place, for they wish through these stressors to either brainwash
you, transvalue your sex, or even kill you with alphabet soup."
--Owen W. Gustafson
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput
Dale Hicks (icono...@mail.clis.comXXX) wrote:
: Elayne Wechsler-Chaput <fire...@panix.com> wrote in article <6ijcf3$g...@panix3.panix.com>...
: > JLA: TOMORROW WOMAN
: > "Tomorrow Never Knows"
: >
: > WHAT GOES ON: While helping the JLA against "If" (during JLA #5), TW
: > fights against alien control of "miracle baby" 10-year-olds. [DW's Index
: > Grade: 2.9]
: What is a DW Index Grade? Is it related to your "recommended" ratings?
: What is the maximum scale?
"DW" is Dave White, who does a "Hivemind Report" weekly on the
rec.arts.comics.misc newsgroup. He grades on a GPA-type curve, with 4.0
being the best.
- Elayne
--
"The kiss originated when the first male reptile licked the first female
reptile, implying in a subtle, complimentary way that she was as succulent
as the small reptile he had for dinner the night before."
- F. Scott Fitzgerald
Cole Odell
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput wrote:
> While I agree with Mary Marvel's assessment that the Mist is "a complex
> person," she's still fairly unambiguously a villain (and hyper-aware of
> her role as such, given her explicatory conversation with Mary)
This bugged me during the Sins of the Child arc in Starman, and it bugs
me here. It's probably my number-one comic-book-implausibility-pet
peeve. Villains who are, as you say, hyper-aware of their own
"villainy," just don't ring true for me, and Robinson's writing in these
situations always falls very flat. "You are a hero. I am a bad person.
We each have a role to play." Gag, gag, gag. I can swallow
mind-controlling worms from Venus way before I can buy this kind of
inhuman characterization. Robinson hasn't explored the obvious mental
illness that would be neccesary for the Mist to act like this, and as
such she's not presented as a very complex person at all, just as
annoying, if pitiable. What the character needs is for another writer to
do to her what Robinson did to Batman last year幼onfront her with the
fact that she's an irritating joke whose pretentious attitude is
entirely unjustified. Instead, I get the idea that Robinson thinks the
Mist's stilted posturing is pretty cool, which it is not.
If the Mist honestly believes she's justified in seeking revenge for the
cops and heroes who have wrecked her family, why would she see herself
as a "villain"? Rather, I'd think she would characterize herself as the
(anti) hero, defending her senile father and dead brother against the
arrogant and self-righteous system that destroyed them. It would make
sense if only she were consciously employing the language of the heroes
to mock them, but instead she seems to embrace the conventions.
Robinson could do worse than look at Elliot Maggin's Luthor for a sense
of what might draw people to become arch-nemeses. His story "The Luthor
Nobody Knows," in Superman #292, wrote the book on the subject. Luthor
worships Superboy, Superboy robs Luthor of his masculinity (as
represented by his hair,) and so Luthor becomes an increasingly
embittered, alienated person convinced that everyone, especially
Superboy, has betrayed him. (In a perfect example of over-the-top
Freudianism, the cover of #292 shows young Luthor in an inset, his hair
falling out, vowing revenge on Superboy, as in the main panel, the adult
Luthor attacks Superman with a raygun, an obvious absent referent for
his penis.) In this context his adversarial partnership with Superman
takes on the form of a stormy romantic relationship, and the basis for
the hate of a comic book madman toward his enemy becomes (relatively
speaking) realistic.
In contrast, The Mist is apparently only playing a detached, post-modern
game, superheroics as decontextualized sex ritual, but without any
consciouness of the absurdity of the situation's formalities. For
someone so aware of what she's doing she takes it *far* too seriously. I
just don't buy it, and every time she's on stage, I cringe. There *is*
potential for a villain who wakes up one day and decides to actually
play to win, unlike the similarly self-aware crooks in Barry Allen's
Rouge's Gallery, who loved the game too much to ever put an end to it.
So far, Nash hasn't been that character. The (also, so far) fairly
incompetent Jack Knight, who regularly has to be saved by a Golden Age
Villain, a ghost, etc., could also use an ego-deflating. But then again,
Jack's ego is tied up in two of Robinson's core themes on Starman:
glorifying the twin evils of hipsterism and object fetishism, which I
think are pretty near and dear to his heart, so it'll probably be a
while before Jack or Nash have their bubbles burst.
Cole Odell
Ranma Al'Thor
Elayne Wechsler-Chaput (fire...@panix.com) wrote:
: everything had to be put together. But it seems to me that the best way
: to interest girls and women in superhero comics-- besides actually
: featuring female supers, which only four out of the seven books do (and
: one of them is dead and another no longer operates under her former name
: so even this is misleading to a brand-new female reader)-- is to show that
: women can create those comics. This would have been a perfect showcase
: for (three-dimensional, not fictional) women in comics, and I can only
: hope DC decides to take that next step someday.
I'll disagree with you here. My own experience as a comic book reader is
that for the first 20 years of my life as a comic fan, I paid no attention
whatsoever to the writing credits. None. Until 1993 or so, I could not
have told you the name of a single comic book writer, artist, or anything.
Except Chris Claremont, and that was only because I had a friend who
ranted maniacally all the time about how cool he was. (And I knew vaguely
about Stan Lee and Stan Kirby) My awareness of writers, artists, etc, only
really developed because I was exposed to Usenet where people actually
bandied these names about, and then I started actually looking at the
credits, which I'd always ignored.
I think that a large chunk of comic book readers pay no attention to who
the artist, writer, etc, are, nor is whether a man or a woman writes,
draws, inks, letters, edits, or whatever going to have any meaningful
impact on what they buy. The important things are how good is the art,
and is the story a kind of story they want to read.
(This is not to say there should not be women in the comic industry. This
is to say that whether or not women buy comics isn't going to be impacted
much by whether men or women write/draw/etc. The richest comics artist in
the world is female (Rumiko Takahashi in Japan), but primarily draws
Shonen manga(comics for boys)).
Now, if women create actually different stories, then that would have an
impact, but my own limited perception doesn't show me much difference
between comic stories done by women and stories done by men in the United
States. (Shonen vs. Shojo in Japan is another story) Some of this
is likely attributable to the impact of male editors, but I doubt it all
is. (Differences between individual male writers and individual female
writers, yes, but nothing I could attribute to any sort of broad female
writing/drawing/whatever tendencies)
--
John Walter Biles : MA-History, Ph.D Wannabe at U. Kansas
ra...@falcon.cc.ukans.edu
rh...@tass.org http://www.tass.org/~rhea/falcon.html
rh...@maison-otaku.net http://www.maison-otaku.net/~rhea/
Rei: I'm sorry, Artemis, we're too busy to take care of you.
Artemis: If I stay here any longer, I'll go mad!
Luna: [in the background] As if we'd notice.
--Symphony of the Planets: Mars
bsvit...@mln.lib.ma.us
In article <354DFF...@biggs-gilmore.com>#1/1,
Cole Odell <co...@biggs-gilmore.com> wrote:
>
> This bugged me during the Sins of the Child arc in Starman, and it bugs
> me here. It's probably my number-one comic-book-implausibility-pet
> peeve. Villains who are, as you say, hyper-aware of their own
> "villainy," just don't ring true for me, and Robinson's writing in these
> situations always falls very flat. "You are a hero. I am a bad person.
> We each have a role to play." Gag, gag, gag. I can swallow
> mind-controlling worms from Venus way before I can buy this kind of
> inhuman characterization. Robinson hasn't explored the obvious mental
> illness that would be neccesary for the Mist to act like this, and as
> such she's not presented as a very complex person at all, just as
> annoying, if pitiable.
I disagree on several counts - though I agree that the standard self-conscious
villainy in comics is pretty absurd.
The Mist's mental illness has been apparent from the time she was plain old
Nash; she hasn't overcome that pathological insecurity, she's just changed
symptoms. One way or another, she thinks she's a bad person. That's actually a
pretty plausible reason for doing bad things. Poor self-image can lead to a
lot of destructive behavior - newsgroup trolls are a clear example of that.
Of course, in the real world someone who considers him or herself a bad person
isn't all that likely to take up the label "villain" - it's a bit
melodramatic. Somebody with a self-image problem is more likely to see
themself as a loser, an idiot, a bitch, even a criminal. But in the DCU, where
significant numbers of people are commonly labelled "hero" and "villain", it
seems a bit more reasonable to see oneself in those terms.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Mikel Midnight
In article <354DFF...@biggs-gilmore.com>, Cole Odell
<co...@biggs-gilmore.com> wrote:
> Instead, I get the idea that Robinson thinks the Mist's stilted posturing
> is pretty cool, which it is not.
He obviously thinks the Shade's stilted posturing is pretty cool, and he's
even more annoying than Mist is.
Nice post, 'Tick-Tock'.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
"She always had a terrific sense of humor" Mikel Midnight
(Valerie Solonas, as described by her mother)
blak...@best.com
__________________________________________________http://www.best.com/~blaklion
Shawn Hill
bsvit...@mln.lib.ma.us wrote:
: The Mist's mental illness has been apparent from the time she was plain old
: Nash; she hasn't overcome that pathological insecurity, she's just changed
: symptoms. One way or another, she thinks she's a bad person. That's actually a
: pretty plausible reason for doing bad things. Poor self-image can lead to a
: lot of destructive behavior - newsgroup trolls are a clear example of that.
And it was the reason she left Black Hand alive and the weapon in Cpt. Marvel's
hands in this one-shot; Mary's youth reminded her of herself as a vulnerable little
girl.
Shawn
Cole Odell
bsvit...@mln.lib.ma.us wrote:
>
> In article <354DFF...@biggs-gilmore.com>#1/1,
> Cole Odell <co...@biggs-gilmore.com> wrote:
> >
> > Robinson hasn't explored the obvious mental
> > illness that would be neccesary for the Mist to act like this, and as
> > such she's not presented as a very complex person at all, just as
> > annoying, if pitiable.
>
> I disagree on several counts - though I agree that the standard self-conscious
> villainy in comics is pretty absurd.
>
> Nash; she hasn't overcome that pathological insecurity, she's just changed
> symptoms.
Point taken. I realize that she's obviously quite insane. Of course,
Nash's implicit mental illness hasn't been treated with any more depth
than Guy Gardner's ever was.
> One way or another, she thinks she's a bad person. That's actually a
> pretty plausible reason for doing bad things. Poor self-image can lead to a
> lot of destructive behavior
True, but she's got a fairly strange way of regarding herself as a bad
person, a mental state in which destructive behavior is usually
associated with self-loathing, guilt and recrimination. Nash instead
regards her villainy as an amusing clinical exercise, as if she has
dispassionately devoted her life to evil as an academic pursuit. She
goes about her business with a wry grin and cynical detachment which
seem "cool," but leave me scratching my head. Hyper-compensating for
crippling insecurity, then attempting to pass it off as cold, cruel
professionalism, is possible, but not altogether plausible to me, at
least not as presented. Compounding this is the fact that the
protagonist (and maybe the writer) seem to be taking her at face value.
All of this would be acceptable to me if someone in the series would
state the obvious--about the Shade, about Nash, about Jack, about all of
the characters who are a little too in love with themselves, with too
little justification.
> Of course, in the real world someone who considers him or herself a bad person
> isn't all that likely to take up the label "villain" - it's a bit
> melodramatic. Somebody with a self-image problem is more likely to see
> themself as a loser, an idiot, a bitch, even a criminal. But in the DCU, where
> significant numbers of people are commonly labelled "hero" and "villain", it
> seems a bit more reasonable to see oneself in those terms.
The DCU is an impossible world, filled with the most amazing technology,
aliens, proof of God's existence, mass murders who break out of the
asylum every once a month, etc—and no one seems to behave differently
for any of this. In that context, the Mist is somewhat more acceptable.
Cole Odell