Wally West
PRIMUS
Does anyone remember how cool it was just before this latest
series of the Flash was launched? It was about the same time as the Flash
TV series. I was still in the States then as well. Oh..man it was so
great. I have to abmit, I really really love the Flash, especially when
Mark Waid was writting. I'm not all that keen on Morrisson's run,
although he writes a hell of a JLA (and Animal Man, and Doom Patrol, and
Skrull Kill Krew, ah to heck with it, everything else he's written, I've
liked)
Anyways, what I'm trying to get at is the fact that Wally West
taking over from Barry Allen as the Flash was the best thing ever to
happen to that book. This, I believe, stems from a problem most old DC
characters have had, i.e. their character's were a bit resistant to
change. This can't be successfully applied to Superman or Batman as their
characters are practically iconic, but second stringers like Barry Allen,
Hal Jordan and Aquaman, were a bit, you know, to rigid.
Same I suppose could be said for the Hulk, but Peter David took
the Hulk (a character with extremely limited scope) and made one of the
most interesting mainstream comic book heroes we have (or should I say
had now that he's left). And he's doing the same with Aquaman (god
thatbook rules). Not many other writers would have been able to do the
same with Barry Allen though. We have enough characters out of time as it
is (Capt America + Superman being the bes examples). And besides, even as
Kid Flash, Wally West was so much more an embodiment of Speed than Barry
Allen ever was.
Take, for example, Wally in the Teen Titans. God those were the
days. Did anyone ever read the issues where the Titan's took on Triton
where Wally's heart kept seizing up. Man I was on the lower corner of my
bed. Those days were really great, hadn't seen anything like 'em till
Mark Waid came along. (he's not paying me by the way, I just love his
work). I know you still get loads of people clamouring for the return of
BA, but me, personally, I think you might as well revive a tree trunk
with a direct link to the Speed Force.
ConnMoore
> Anyways, what I'm trying to get at is the fact that Wally West
>taking over from Barry Allen as the Flash was the best thing ever to
>happen to that book. This, I believe, stems from a problem most old DC
>characters have had, i.e. their character's were a bit resistant to
>change. This can't be successfully applied to Superman or Batman as their
>characters are practically iconic, but second stringers like Barry Allen,
>Hal Jordan and Aquaman, were a bit, you know, to rigid.
> Same I suppose could be said for the Hulk, but Peter David took
>the Hulk (a character with extremely limited scope) and made one of the
>most interesting mainstream comic book heroes we have (or should I say
>had now that he's left). And he's doing the same with Aquaman (god
>thatbook rules). Not many other writers would have been able to do the
>same with Barry Allen though. We have enough characters out of time as it
>is (Capt America + Superman being the bes examples). And besides, even as
>Kid Flash, Wally West was so much more an embodiment of Speed than Barry
>Allen ever was.
> Take, for example, Wally in the Teen Titans. God those were the
>days. Did anyone ever read the issues where the Titan's took on Triton
>where Wally's heart kept seizing up. Man I was on the lower corner of my
>bed. Those days were really great, hadn't seen anything like 'em till
>Mark Waid came along. (he's not paying me by the way, I just love his
>work). I know you still get loads of people clamouring for the return of
>BA, but me, personally, I think you might as well revive a tree trunk
>with a direct link to the Speed Force.
Actually the charactors are only as rigid as the writers who create them.
Barry Allen and Hal Jordan could do everything their modern dopplegangers can
do, but DC decided to take the lazy way and just start over instead of working
on what they had.
Barry
PRIMUS
ConnMoore wrote:
I know it that may be right, but I think Barry Allen, maybe more so than
Hal Jordan, was quite a boring character. He seemed to be an amalgam of
bits from other characters that never seemed to gel quite properly.
From the very first time Wally was shown in the comics, if you read the
early issues with Wally. He brought such enthusiasm with him, that you'd
really believe he was blessed with the speed powers. His enthusiasm was
so catching, Barry Allen even seemed a more interesting character when
Wally was around. And that ain't all good. In order for Barry to still be
alive and all that, I think It would have become necessary to kill Wally
off before he choked off the main character of the book.
The worst part of the whole deal is that, I believe the
introduction of Wally West as a character, was intended as yet another
amalgamation of a popular stereotype into Barry's life, i.e.
sidekick-a-la-Batman. Except Robin isn't as interesting a character as
Batman (close but not quite), while...well I've covered the Barry- Wally
thing already.
Besides, did anyone else but me think it was kind of ironic Wally
looking up to Barry so much when he was so much more interesting than
Barry was?
Rub al-Elmo
PRIMUS <MEA9...@sheffield.ac.uk> writes:
> I know it that may be right, but I think Barry Allen, maybe more so than
> Hal Jordan, was quite a boring character. He seemed to be an amalgam of
> bits from other characters that never seemed to gel quite properly.
I see. What bits were those? The comic collector? The happily married
husband? The chronically late super-speedster?
--
"Wendy 2099: Wendy the Bad Little Witch. Wendy as you've never seen her
before! Plenty of spandex and action! Look for the Cry for Dawn crossover."
--Lance Smith
elmo mor...@physics.rice.edu
http://www.bonner.rice.edu/morrow
Jim B. Elliott
ConnMoore wrote:
> Actually the charactors are only as rigid as the writers who
> create them. Barry Allen and Hal Jordan could do everything
> their modern dopplegangers can do, but DC decided to take
> the lazy way and just start over instead of working on what > they had.
I tend to agree that Barry and Hal could do everything their successors
are doing adventure-wise. Of course the differences in character lead
to different stories. I enjoyed the early Wally West as Flash days when
he wasn't quite so fast and life was more of a struggle. I enjoy the
comics now, though with Waid gone that might change.
As for the Hal versus Kyle debate . . . well all that has been said over
and over and over and over.
The one point that I do like about the changes from Barry, Hal and Ollie
to Wally, Kyle and Conner is that in the super hero game people should
die. Die heroically, die tragically, but die. It makes it more
"realistic," the word is quoted as I know it's subjective in a world
where people run as fast as light and have rings that can level
mountains. Still with human's weilding that power and fighting other
who weild similar power and saving the world and the universe, there's
got to be some people who don't quite make it and have to make the
sacrafice.
Barry's death in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was classic. Hal's death
in "Final Night" was tragic and redeeming. Ollie's death, well Ollies
not dead. ;-) He's just letting the government think he is so that he
can fight his own battles on his own terms. Then again maybe I've read
"The Dark Knight Returns" too often.
On tthe topic of the demise of heros, I don't even mind some of them
buying the farm in a stupid and sensless manner as did the JLE in
Starman at the hands of the Mist. It would have been nice if the
writing was a little better and some more attention to continuity was
paid. But in fights of heros and villians of that power there will be
deaths.
If no hero ever died it would look a little too easy. Anyone could put
on a cape and fight the good fight. The death of Jason Todd does a lot
of things, including show us all just how good Dick Greyson is. Not
just anyone can put on a costume with no pants and a big yellow cape and
fight next to the Batman. It takes a special person to remain alive and
sane.
Jim
fan
Jim B. Elliott wrote:
>
> If no hero ever died it would look a little too easy. Anyone could put
> on a cape and fight the good fight. The death of Jason Todd does a lot
> of things, including show us all just how good Dick Greyson is. Not
> just anyone can put on a costume with no pants and a big yellow cape and
> fight next to the Batman.
You're right; most of us would pull on a pair of pants and a black
cape, a la Tim Drake. (He's no Dick Grayson, but having enough sense to
fix the costume more than makes up for it.)
Paul Edward Freitag
From article <354A0A...@sheffield.ac.uk>, by PRIMUS <MEA9...@sheffield.ac.uk>:
> Anyways, what I'm trying to get at is the fact that Wally West
> taking over from Barry Allen as the Flash was the best thing ever to
> happen to that book. This, I believe, stems from a problem most old DC
> characters have had, i.e. their character's were a bit resistant to
> change. This can't be successfully applied to Superman or Batman as their
> characters are practically iconic, but second stringers like Barry Allen,
> Hal Jordan and Aquaman, were a bit, you know, to rigid.
Well, yes, in Wally's case, it worked. The Wally Flash series had good
writers. But similar situations have just turned into huge messes-just
try to figure out what the hell happened to Hawkman, for one.
I don't hear many people clammoring for the return of Barry Allen anyway.
Sure, I miss the guy, but he died valiantly, he had a long run (over 200
issues) of his own series, he had some interesting times, he had one of
the best rogues galleries in the history of superheroes (which was, for
the most part, passed down to Wally, thank you very much), and he was a
genuinely nice guy. But I don't see any reason for him to come back.
"The Return of Barry Allen" storyline is as close as anyone'll get, and
it's a damn fine piece of work.
(By the same token, I've got nothing against Kyle, but I think Hal should
have gone out with a little bit more respect. Oh well.)
BTW: Was there even any closure on Fiona Webb? Or did she just dissappear
into comic book limbo, along with Dale Gunn, Onyx and Chunk? Just
wondering.
Paul Freitag
(Who'd love to see BlueJay adopt new powers and become the next Hawkman,
but knows it ain't gonna happen)
Tom Galloway
In article <6idt4m$fuf$1...@uwm.edu> de...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu writes:
>BTW: Was there even any closure on Fiona Webb? Or did she just dissappear
>into comic book limbo, along with Dale Gunn, Onyx and Chunk? Just
>wondering.
Actually, Chunk showed up in the latest issue of Impulse, after being
refered to last issue. Not surprisingly, Impulse is written by
William Messner-Loebs, who made Chunk a significant member of Wally's
supporting cast.
And Fiona Webb finally got closure in the Life Story of the Flash book.
"Iris" mentions that before Barry left to live with her in the 30th
century, he visited Fiona and told her he was the Flash and that Iris
had returned to life. She took this well, and was released from the
sanitarium where she'd been since the interrupted wedding.
tyg t...@netcom.com
Christopher William Stahl
Paul Edward Freitag (de...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu) wrote:
: BTW: Was there even any closure on Fiona Webb? Or did she just dissappear
: into comic book limbo, along with Dale Gunn, Onyx and Chunk? Just
: wondering.
Good question!!! I sort of stopped following Flash soon after he was
kicked out of the League and got that ridiculous plastic surgery (ok, his
face was beaten to a bloody pulp but did they have to make him look quite
so "Guy Smiley"?). To my recollection (and my collection is in Ohio) they
really didn't resolve the issue. Flash was accused of murder and to all
intents and purposes, Barry Allen got cold feet, skipped out on his own
wedding and didn't appear much after that. I vividly remember a panel of
the comic where Fiona is throwing down her bouquet in abject misery as the
Reverse-Flash rushes at her to do the old "scramble the brains of my
arch-rival's bride" bit. Yeah, yeah. Been there, done that.
This brings up two other points. The Reverse-Flash was vibrating to the
point of invisibility before he supposedly murdered Iris Allen. All this
was caught by a security camera. The video that Barry watched (over and
over) just showed Iris falling over suddenly. Would Barry's "speed-geared
vision" have been able to catch Zoom's vibrational blur on the film?
Other point: Barry was unable to deal with/see Professor Zoom at the time
because one of Zoom's henchmen had laced his drink with Angel Dust.
Basically, Barry tripped out and fell over on Iris' corpse (they were at a
costume party: she was dressed as Batgirl, he forgot to pick up a costume
so dressed as The Flash). I totally forgot that episode when some asked
"have any DC heroes ever been on drgs" as part of the "Starman and Pot"
thread.
Regards,
---------------------->Chris
--
Christopher Stahl * cws...@is5.nyu.edu * 212/998-1624
__ Department of Performance Studies
\/ Tisch School of the Arts
New York University
"Tell me what you eat: I will tell you what you are."
- Jean-Anthelme Brillat-Savarin
Indigo
In article <6idt4m$fuf$1...@uwm.edu>#1/1,
de...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu wrote:
>
> From article <354A0A...@sheffield.ac.uk>, by PRIMUS
<MEA9...@sheffield.ac.uk>:
> I don't hear many people clammoring for the return of Barry Allen anyway.
> Sure, I miss the guy, but he died valiantly, he had a long run (over 200
> issues) of his own series, he had some interesting times, he had one of
> the best rogues galleries in the history of superheroes (which was, for
> the most part, passed down to Wally, thank you very much), and he was a
> genuinely nice guy. But I don't see any reason for him to come back.
While I would love to see Barry brought back, I'm inclined to agree with this,
too. I believe occasionally "dead" should mean "permanently". Such a paradox
that I'd love to see a character return who was killed.
> "The Return of Barry Allen" storyline is as close as anyone'll get, and
> it's a damn fine piece of work.
>
> (By the same token, I've got nothing against Kyle, but I think Hal should
> have gone out with a little bit more respect. Oh well.)
>
> BTW: Was there even any closure on Fiona Webb? Or did she just dissappear
> into comic book limbo, along with Dale Gunn, Onyx and Chunk? Just
> wondering.
Chunk showed up in the last Impulse, having saved that little Alabama town
from being submerged in flood waters.
I haven't seen boo of the others.
>
> Paul Freitag
> (Who'd love to see BlueJay adopt new powers and become the next Hawkman,
> but knows it ain't gonna happen)
>
>
Indigo
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
AGlaess
You hit the nail on the head Barry. I think far too much fault is placed on so
called "boring characters." Some creative teams just aren't as talented as
others. When the books in the toilet you need some help--killing characters is
just a brief blip in the sales figures anyhow.
quimico
>ConnMoore wrote:
>
>The one point that I do like about the changes from Barry, Hal and Ollie
>to Wally, Kyle and Conner is that in the super hero game people should
>die. Die heroically, die tragically, but die. It makes it more
>"realistic," the word is quoted as I know it's subjective in a world
>where people run as fast as light and have rings that can level
>mountains. Still with human's weilding that power and fighting other
>who weild similar power and saving the world and the universe, there's
>got to be some people who don't quite make it and have to make the
>sacrafice.
Why ? Why should it happen when the Doomsdays, the Jokers,
the Luthors, etc. are being constantly brought back with scarcely an
explanation? Is it REALISTIC ??!
I don't think so.
>Barry's death in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was classic.
Yeah, a classic piece of cheap melodrama...
> Hal's death
>in "Final Night" was tragic and redeeming.
No, it was stupid and reader-insulting.
> Ollie's death, well Ollies
>not dead. ;-) He's just letting the government think he is so that he
>can fight his own battles on his own terms. Then again maybe I've read
>"The Dark Knight Returns" too often.
>
>On tthe topic of the demise of heros, I don't even mind some of them
>buying the farm in a stupid and sensless manner as did the JLE in
>Starman at the hands of the Mist. It would have been nice if the
>writing was a little better and some more attention to continuity was
>paid. But in fights of heros and villians of that power there will be
>deaths.
Why?
For Realism?
As I said before, DEATH does not equal realism.
Is it FRIDAY 13 realistic ?
Besides,I don't appreciate realism in comics.
When I want deaths, I read the morning paper.
It's even more economical than smearing comics with
tomato-juice and gratuitous violence...
>
>If no hero ever died it would look a little too easy. Anyone could put
>on a cape and fight the good fight. The death of Jason Todd does a lot
>of things, including show us all just how good Dick Greyson is. Not
>just anyone can put on a costume with no pants and a big yellow cape and
Xian
Ahhh, let me guess?
Another one of those who:
-Does not like characters to change.
-Thinks that every time a new character is introduced to replace an old one,
its because the teams weren't "creative enough to use what they had."
-Thinks that character aging is a bad idea.
Well, while I have to agree with your Hal Jordan statement, I'm definitely
not opposed in any way to seeing Marvel and DC spike a little realism into
comics, not for realisms sake, but for the emotional impact that comes along
with it.
Comics aren't just "jaunty little reads" to me. I like a comic that
engrosses me as much as a novel would. Like a perpetual story that grabs you
and moves you along in its own unique direction. And in any good story,
you'll come into some tragedy, and that grips you even tighter, brings you
closer to the characters. Being dead, having children, even the gradual
change of personality, aging, passing on the mantle. These are things that
are GOOD for stories, and I appreciate them.
-xian-
Who will be pissed if they kill Wally West, though.
quimico wrote in message <3551cd98.9447114@news>...
quimico
On Wed, 13 May 1998 03:07:10 GMT, "Xian" <ta...@texas.net> wrote:
>Ahhh, let me guess?
>
>Another one of those who:
>
>-Does not like characters to change.
I don't like change for change's sake,
or even worse, for shock value...
>-Thinks that every time a new character is introduced to replace an old one,
>its because the teams weren't "creative enough to use what they had."
That IS a real reason, but not the only one by far.
The main reason to dislike "replacement" is the loss of the
"emotional investiment" placed in the "replaced" character.
One neccessary part of "comics" apreciation is identifying with
the main character.The other is a feeling of familiarity .
It isn't instantaneous, but gradual, and involves associatiating the
reading and enjoying of good stories with good real life memories
that took place at the same time (as the reading).
For instance, one of my favorite Flash storylines was read
when I was going home from an university test, in a Saturday,
in a particularly good mood.
I just can't apreciate Wally's storys like I enjoy Barry's because it
doesn't have that flavor I have come to associate with some good times
of my life.-
>-Thinks that character aging is a bad idea.
That I think, yes, and besides not liking "replacements" for the
reasons above, I don't like "events" to reset the world
and, most of all, I dislike the re-shaping of characters to make them
politically corrrect (i.e. conformed to the ideas of those in
authority at the time). all those things are associated with
characters's aging to the point that making characters "age"
either require them or make them desirable to the E.O.
>
>Well, while I have to agree with your Hal Jordan statement, I'm definitely
>not opposed in any way to seeing Marvel and DC spike a little realism into
>comics, not for realisms sake, but for the emotional impact that comes along
>with it.
One of the problems I have with comic book "Realism" is that it
is NOT realistic at all. In comics, Realistic means Gory, Pessimistic
and Nasty. Now life CAN be all of these things, but usually it is not.
However, to describe life in all its infinity variety and richness is,
and will probably allways be, beyound comic book writers.
That because 1) Good writing is no guarantee of good sales. Classic
writers stood nearly unpublished by many years.
2) Good writing ability is RARE, and it would
be very expensive to demand EXCELENCE in comic book writers.
The industry's budget is just not up to it.
3) Even if comb the world for excelent writers
and put them working in your books, they won't be able to
deliver good quality in a monthly basis. The TRULY realistic
description of life is time-consuming, and even the authors
of literary masterpieces took years writing them.
To accept it is to be a Realist in the TRUE meaning of the word...
I'm not talking about exceptions... A Masterwork CAN appear here and
there, but it is impossible to come up with one every month.
If you demand Realism every month, all you will get will be Goryness
and Nastyness, thing I really can't appreciate.
However, as Fryday 13th has a lot of followers, I can see that
some people will want comics to have that movie's kind of
"Realism"...
Trying to come up with a mutually agreed
definition of "Realism", I ask:
How much "realism" is "a little" ? Are today's comics more realistic
than Pre-Crisis's ?
Is Doomsday realistic?
If you GOT your "increase of Realism" would it stop there? Or would
you demand further "Increases of Realism" as the taste wore off?
If you wouldn't, wouldn't OTHER readers demand those further
"increases" ?
where exaclty would the "increase of Realism" stop?
As I understood it, your quest for "Realism" is motivated by
"emotional impact" . That "emotional impact" comes from
reader's involvement with the book's scenes, as he identifyes
with certain characters, he feels, up to a poin,t some of the tragedy
and the fears of those characters... The logical progression of
realistic comics would take real-life involvement of the readers.
It happens. A convicted serial killer was interviewed and asked
why did he kill... He said that he begun early in his life to
confection elaborate fantasyes... As time progressed, these failed
to impress him, and he made them grimmer and nastier, to extract more
sensation out of them... Till he was led to inject reality in them by
acting them out...
PS.
That case was referred in in Colin Wilson's
preface to "Mind Parasites" .