52 and 0bj3ct1v1sm
plausible prose man
sorry for the 'leet speak, but I don't want to attract any of the
grepping loons, and Alice draws 'em like...you know, something that
attracts a lot of something else.
In the newest issue of 52, The Question is shown wearing a T-shirt
with what looks like a picture of Atlas. Oh, it could be Captain Atom
from the last few pages of Battle for Bludhaven, but I kind of doubt
it.
Is this a Mr. A allusion, was Steve letting his 0bj3ct1v1sm creep into
the Question?
(please, let's not debate the merits of AR and 0bj3ct1v1sm, there are
plenty of other places to do that)
YKW '06
<George...@aol.com> wrote:
The Question =was=, under Ditko's original shepherding, an explicitly
Objectivist character. The tee in FIFTY-TWO (a pastiche of the trade dress
under which ATLAS SHRUGGED has been published for at least a generation) is
obviously intended as a shout-out to the original incarnation without
explicitly contradicting the more Zen/spiritually-questing version of the
character as he has generally been seen since moving from Charlton to DC.
--
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
|| E-mail: ykw2006 ||"The mystery of government is not how Washington||
|| -at-gmail-dot-com ||works but how to make it stop." -- P.J. O'Rourke||
|| ----------- || ------------------------------------ ||
||Replace "-at-" with|| Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| "@" to respond. || Since 1998 ||
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
swintronix
in part after Howard Roark of the Fountainhead both morally and physically
(ugly w/ orange hair), as much as he was modeled after the Question. "No
compromise - even in the face of Armageddon." That's Ayn Rand, straight, no
chaser.
"plausible prose man" <George...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1153579984.1...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
plausible prose man
YKW '06 wrote:
> On 22 Jul 2006, the voices tell me "plausible prose man"
> <George...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > sorry for the 'leet speak, but I don't want to attract any of the
> > grepping loons, and Alice draws 'em like...you know, something that
> > attracts a lot of something else.
> >
> > In the newest issue of 52, The Question is shown wearing a T-shirt
> > with what looks like a picture of Atlas. Oh, it could be Captain Atom
> > from the last few pages of Battle for Bludhaven, but I kind of doubt
> > it.
> >
> > Is this a Mr. A allusion, was Steve letting his 0bj3ct1v1sm creep into
> > the Question?
> >
> > (please, let's not debate the merits of AR and 0bj3ct1v1sm, there are
> > plenty of other places to do that)
> >
> >
>
> The Question =was=, under Ditko's original shepherding, an explicitly
> Objectivist character.
Huh, I'll have to look into those. I always avoided Charlton comics on
the stands, they looked sub-professional. I recall being very angry
when I found out a legion of superheroes I had was drawn by "The
Charlton Hack" Later, I discovered that was steve Ditko, no flies on
him, but he was capable of really phoning it it, it cannot be denied.
>The tee in FIFTY-TWO (a pastiche of the trade dress
> under which ATLAS SHRUGGED has been published for at least a generation) is
> obviously intended as a shout-out to the original incarnation without
> explicitly contradicting the more Zen/spiritually-questing version of the
> character as he has generally been seen since moving from Charlton to DC.
I wonder if anyone was conscious of how odd it is for him to be
harshing Renee about smoking, you know, or it would be for an Ayn Rand
character. Do you think the characterization mostly comes from Frank
Miller's take?
YKW 2006
on my Omnicom bylined "plausible prose man" <George...@aol.com>,
dated Sat, 22 Jul 2006 19:59:24 GMT, and contains the following text:
>
> YKW '06 wrote:
>> On 22 Jul 2006, the voices tell me "plausible prose man"
>> <George...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > sorry for the 'leet speak, but I don't want to attract any of the
>> > grepping loons, and Alice draws 'em like...you know, something that
>> > attracts a lot of something else.
>> >
>> > In the newest issue of 52, The Question is shown wearing a T-shirt
>> > with what looks like a picture of Atlas. Oh, it could be Captain
>> > Atom from the last few pages of Battle for Bludhaven, but I kind of
>> > doubt it.
>> >
>> > Is this a Mr. A allusion, was Steve letting his 0bj3ct1v1sm creep
>> > into
>> > the Question?
>> >
>> > (please, let's not debate the merits of AR and 0bj3ct1v1sm, there
>> > are
>> > plenty of other places to do that)
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The Question =was=, under Ditko's original shepherding, an explicitly
>> Objectivist character.
>
> Huh, I'll have to look into those. I always avoided Charlton comics
> on
> the stands, they looked sub-professional.
Bad paper, bad coloring and that horrednous lettering machine they used
made it difficult to enjoy Charlton's heroes as much as maybe they should
have been. The Modern Comics reprints of the late 1970s improved on the
first, but the coloring looked even more garish than in the originals
(and that damned lettering machine still dominated every panel).
The stories early on, though, were every bit as good as anything then
running at either of the Big Two (outside only of FANTASTIC FOUR, AMAZING
SPIDER-MAN and, perhaps, DETECTIVE).
> I recall being very angry
> when I found out a legion of superheroes I had was drawn by "The
> Charlton Hack" Later, I discovered that was steve Ditko, no flies on
> him, but he was capable of really phoning it it, it cannot be denied.
It's important to keep in mind that a) Ditko was turning in pencils for
some of those LSH stories with as little as a week-to-ten-days lead time,
thanks to Jimmy Janes' deadline issues (why Ditko was being used as a
fill-in guy for Janes rather than vice versa is a matter for another
time) and b) he was being inked primarily by a guy with as little
flourish as I have ever seen from an inker; Frank Chiaramonte worked
absolutely literally, translating the most solid pencil strokes on the
pages he was given into photostatable form -- and nothing more. He didn't
add backgrounds, he didn't add detail, he didn't correct errors. That
served him in amazingly good stead on his primary DC work (Curt Swan's
caddy), but poorly indeed on pencils that, from some indications, were
barely more than breakdowns when turned in.
>>The tee in FIFTY-TWO (a pastiche of the trade dress
>> under which ATLAS SHRUGGED has been published for at least a
>> generation) is obviously intended as a shout-out to the original
>> incarnation without explicitly contradicting the more
>> Zen/spiritually-questing version of the character as he has generally
>> been seen since moving from Charlton to DC.
>
> I wonder if anyone was conscious of how odd it is for him to be
> harshing Renee about smoking, you know, or it would be for an Ayn Rand
> character.
Note that he doesn't try to use shame or force with Renee; he simply
relies on the power of fact and reason to convince her she should quit.
And, really, isn't fact and reason what Objectivism is all about?
> Do you think the characterization mostly comes from Frank
> Miller's take?
>
>
I'm not aware of a significant Frank Miller use of the character.
--
|| E-mail: YKW2006 || "I want to decide who lives and ||
|| at-gmail-dot-com || who dies." -- Crow T. Robot ||
|| ---------------- || --------------------------- ||
|| Eradicate "brucejones" || Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| in address to respond. || Since 1998 ||
lione...@yahoo.com
I love the Watchmen and I loved the Fountainhead. I never made the
connection. I mean I got that Rorschach was philosophically an
objectivist, but I did not make those explicit connections to the Roark
character, nor did I know that the Question was an objectivist.
Cool.
plausible prose man
YKW 2006 wrote:
> It's important to keep in mind that a) Ditko was turning in pencils for
> some of those LSH stories with as little as a week-to-ten-days lead time,
> thanks to Jimmy Janes' deadline issues (why Ditko was being used as a
> fill-in guy for Janes rather than vice versa is a matter for another
> time) and b) he was being inked primarily by a guy with as little
> flourish as I have ever seen from an inker; Frank Chiaramonte worked
> absolutely literally, translating the most solid pencil strokes on the
> pages he was given into photostatable form -- and nothing more.
Keep in mind I was, I dunno, nine or so. I'm thinking of the one where
the LSH encounters a guy who collects things from different eras, he
has a big medallion around his neck that says "I like Ike." Even at
such an early age, I felt that wasn't half trying.
? He didn't
> add backgrounds, he didn't add detail, he didn't correct errors. That
> served him in amazingly good stead on his primary DC work (Curt Swan's
> caddy),
Well, it sounds better than having Alcala's heavy foot stamped all
over everything.
> but poorly indeed on pencils that, from some indications, were
> barely more than breakdowns when turned in.
Yeah, well... remind me of all that if I ever again complain about a
book being late.
> > >>The tee in FIFTY-TWO (a pastiche of the trade dress
> >> under which ATLAS SHRUGGED has been published for at least a
> >> generation)
I don't know if anyone has any connections to either of the
objectivist groups, who I think control the IP rights for Atlas
Shrugged and the rest of them, but if I were they I would find some way
to get Alex Ross involved in a new edition of Fountainhead and Atlas.
He's the visual artist, at least the one I'm most familiar with, best
able to capture, what was it she called it, "Romantic Realism?" "Heroic
Realism?" Ah, okay. Heroic Realism is the way the Nazis and Soviets
illustrated their posters, which is a little ironic, I guess, since
that's what the current covers to R.'s work put me in mind of.
However, I think DC should offer a contract to whoever it is does
those giant posters in North Korea.
> >> is obviously intended as a shout-out to the original
> >> incarnation without explicitly contradicting the more
> >> Zen/spiritually-questing version of the character as he has generally
> >> been seen since moving from Charlton to DC.
> >
> > I wonder if anyone was conscious of how odd it is for him to be
> > harshing Renee about smoking, you know, or it would be for an Ayn Rand
> > character.
>
> Note that he doesn't try to use shame or force with Renee; he simply
> relies on the power of fact and reason to convince her she should quit.
> And, really, isn't fact and reason what Objectivism is all about?
Yes, indeed, and yet, I can't help but think of Ayn herself as a
person quite driven by her passions. Interestingly, when we talk about
someone being reasonable, you know, they're likely open to compromise,
and that's just the opposite of...but anyway, that's probably going off
topicful, and it's likely to get weirdoes falling by.
my point is just something like the characters in Atlas rather
notoriously chainsmoke like fiends, and the act of smoking was symbolic
and central to Ayn's life.
"Smoking a cigarette was symbolic to Miss Rand. As one character in
Atlas Shrugged said,
"I like to think of fire held in a man's hand. Fire, a dangerous
force, tamed at his fingertips. I often wonder about the hours when a
man sits alone, watching the smoke of a cigarette, thinking. I wonder
what great things have come from such hours. When a man thinks, there
is a spot of fire alive in his mind--and it is proper that he should
have the burning point of a cigarette as his one expression."
Of course, the author may well have been aware of the contradiction
there, and of course the Question is now no longer the character he
once was, cute allusions or no.
> > Do you think the characterization mostly comes from Frank
> > Miller's take?
> >
> >
>
> I'm not aware of a significant Frank Miller use of the character.
The Question appears in The Dark Knight Strikes Again. He's no zen
master, but he's definitely a health nut. He refers to a glass of
alcohol as "poison," and you can't imagine him enjoying a smoke. I
believe during the first part of his initial DC appearance he was a
smoker, before going off to learn the mysteries of the orient or
something, but there Vic was mostly a type A personality on the Dennis
Leary model, than an Objectivist per se. You know, you can't really
imagine him waxing all poetic over the cherry on the end of his
cigarette so much as just sucking it down to get the strength to edure
the misery of the next five minutes.
That'd be a neat series, if they're getting serious writers to write
DC comics. Objectivist Question faces off against Left-Liberal Green
Arrow. I hope I wasn't the only person who thought GA shooting the shop
keeper for selling diapers for the price the market will bear was just
exactly the wrong sort of thing to do if he wants to get Star City back
on track, and who better to explain the free market and its magic than
The Question?
YKW '06
<George...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> YKW 2006 wrote:
>
>> It's important to keep in mind that a) Ditko was turning in pencils
>> for some of those LSH stories with as little as a week-to-ten-days
>> lead time, thanks to Jimmy Janes' deadline issues (why Ditko was
>> being used as a fill-in guy for Janes rather than vice versa is a
>> matter for another time) and b) he was being inked primarily by a guy
>> with as little flourish as I have ever seen from an inker; Frank
>> Chiaramonte worked absolutely literally, translating the most solid
>> pencil strokes on the pages he was given into photostatable form --
>> and nothing more.
>
> Keep in mind I was, I dunno, nine or so. I'm thinking of the one
> where
> the LSH encounters a guy who collects things from different eras, he
> has a big medallion around his neck that says "I like Ike." Even at
> such an early age, I felt that wasn't half trying.
I was only maybe ten at the time, m'self. I recognized it as a step up
from the horror of Jimmy Janes, but a) not at all suited to the grand
heroic space opera of the LSH and b) really sparse beyond the main
figures and some colored bgs.
> ? He didn't
>> add backgrounds, he didn't add detail, he didn't correct errors. That
>> served him in amazingly good stead on his primary DC work (Curt
>> Swan's caddy),
>
> Well, it sounds better than having Alcala's heavy foot stamped all
> over everything.
>
>> but poorly indeed on pencils that, from some indications, were
>> barely more than breakdowns when turned in.
>
> Yeah, well... remind me of all that if I ever again complain about a
> book being late.
It didn't help that the writing in that period was awful, being tossed
around like a hot potato among three really excellent creators (yes, I'm
counting Conway!), none of whom had any interest in writing the title
(Gerry was a burnout, Roy hated the Legion, and Paul was =already= burned
out but took the gig on a short-term basis until a permanent writer could
be found. Longest temp gig in comics history. :)
No one working on the book -- writers, artists, no one -- had any clear
idea of what was going on from issue to issue, maybe even from page to
page. Even someone with scads of experience workin' it Marvel-style needs
a coherent plot from which to work. And Steve sure wasn't gettin' that
here.
>> > >>The tee in FIFTY-TWO (a pastiche of the trade dress
>> >> under which ATLAS SHRUGGED has been published for at least a
>> >> generation)
>
> I don't know if anyone has any connections to either of the
> objectivist groups, who I think control the IP rights for Atlas
> Shrugged and the rest of them, but if I were they I would find some
> way to get Alex Ross involved in a new edition of Fountainhead and
> Atlas. He's the visual artist, at least the one I'm most familiar
> with, best able to capture, what was it she called it, "Romantic
> Realism?" "Heroic Realism?" Ah, okay. Heroic Realism is the way the
> Nazis and Soviets illustrated their posters, which is a little ironic,
> I guess, since that's what the current covers to R.'s work put me in
> mind of.
It's not so much irony as deliberately provocative; having grown up with
the rise of Soviet culture, Rand was quite familiar with it and chose the
implementations of her literary and artistic ouevre to be a deliberate
inversion of the themes dominant in her youth while largely aping the
=forms= thereof. IOW, saying there was nothing exceptional about the
culture of Soviet Man that can't be invoked in the service of its polar
opposite.
> However, I think DC should offer a contract to whoever it is does
> those giant posters in North Korea.
Could be tricky for the forseeable future...
>> >> is obviously intended as a shout-out to the original
>> >> incarnation without explicitly contradicting the more
>> >> Zen/spiritually-questing version of the character as he has
>> >> generally been seen since moving from Charlton to DC.
>> >
>> > I wonder if anyone was conscious of how odd it is for him to be
>> > harshing Renee about smoking, you know, or it would be for an Ayn
>> > Rand character.
>>
>> Note that he doesn't try to use shame or force with Renee; he simply
>> relies on the power of fact and reason to convince her she should
>> quit. And, really, isn't fact and reason what Objectivism is all
>> about?
>
> Yes, indeed, and yet, I can't help but think of Ayn herself as a
> person quite driven by her passions.
Hence the title of Barbara Branden's biography, I suppose. But as with
any philosophical/spiritual/religious/whatever system, the system is held
as an ideal; those attempting to live up to the ideal are going to fall
short of it from time to time.
> Interestingly, when we talk about
> someone being reasonable, you know, they're likely open to compromise,
> and that's just the opposite of...but anyway, that's probably going
> off topicful, and it's likely to get weirdoes falling by.
>
> my point is just something like the characters in Atlas rather
> notoriously chainsmoke like fiends, and the act of smoking was
> symbolic and central to Ayn's life.
>
> "Smoking a cigarette was symbolic to Miss Rand. As one character in
> Atlas Shrugged said,
>
> "I like to think of fire held in a man's hand. Fire, a dangerous
> force, tamed at his fingertips. I often wonder about the hours when a
> man sits alone, watching the smoke of a cigarette, thinking. I wonder
> what great things have come from such hours. When a man thinks, there
> is a spot of fire alive in his mind--and it is proper that he should
> have the burning point of a cigarette as his one expression."
>
> Of course, the author may well have been aware of the contradiction
> there, and of course the Question is now no longer the character he
> once was, cute allusions or no.
>
>> > Do you think the characterization mostly comes from Frank
>> > Miller's take?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I'm not aware of a significant Frank Miller use of the character.
>
> The Question appears in The Dark Knight Strikes Again.
Gaa!!! I'd totally forgotten about that! He's in near-full Rorschach
mode, then gets stuck hanging around with an equally (and oppositely,
thank you Sir Isaac) wacked-out Ollie, right?
> He's no zen
> master, but he's definitely a health nut. He refers to a glass of
> alcohol as "poison," and you can't imagine him enjoying a smoke. I
> believe during the first part of his initial DC appearance he was a
> smoker, before going off to learn the mysteries of the orient or
> something, but there Vic was mostly a type A personality on the Dennis
> Leary model, than an Objectivist per se. You know, you can't really
> imagine him waxing all poetic over the cherry on the end of his
> cigarette so much as just sucking it down to get the strength to edure
> the misery of the next five minutes.
>
> That'd be a neat series, if they're getting serious writers to write
> DC comics. Objectivist Question faces off against Left-Liberal Green
> Arrow. I hope I wasn't the only person who thought GA shooting the
> shop keeper for selling diapers for the price the market will bear was
> just exactly the wrong sort of thing to do if he wants to get Star
> City back on track, and who better to explain the free market and its
> magic than The Question?
Who would be able to write a series like that? The only creators with
even a toe dipped into the superhero scene at the Big Two with the kinda
cred to pull off something like that'd be Paul Pope and Orson Scott Card,
neither of whom really seem to be at the top of any lists for work in the
field these days.
Peter Bagge's another guy who's got a much bigger "in", but super-heroes
aren't exactly his... ummm... bagge...
plausible prose man
YKW '06 wrote:
> On 22 Jul 2006, the voices tell me "plausible prose man"
> <George...@aol.com> wrote:
It also occured to me Ollie isn't just the arch-collectivist "look out
for the little guy" Superhero, he's the Robin Hood myth Rand rails
against come to, uh...well, not life, exactly, but you get the idea. I
think Hank could be Will Magnus, (plus he smokes!)
I don't know how much you want to develop that, as a whole little
subplot or perhaps just a coy allusion, but you pretty much have to do
it. You know, assuming you're anti-phoning it in.
I'm not sure who DC's closest analogue to her Capitalist Nemo
character is, but maybe you have something.
> Who would be able to write a series like that?
So far it looks like we are. I'm not totally sure, but I think by just
mooting it around this much, or anyway not much more, we've kind of
scotched a serious DC effort.
> Peter Bagge's another guy who's got a much bigger "in", but super-heroes
> aren't exactly his... ummm... bagge...
Yeah, hmm. I don't think he's quite right. You know, I'm not sure he'd
approach it unselfconsciously enough for it to work, and he may well be
too normal to fully get the objectivism across.
You'd need someone just absolutely gay for silver age DC comics, like
Alan Moore or John Byrne, but who could also show convincingly why
Ollie's actions mostly just mean no-one gets diapers.
What if, um...towards the end, next to last issue, Ollie's admitting
Vic and Will might be onto something after all, but they really need to
work on their PR, they come off as machines. You know, and then you
unveil the Rearden Metal Men in a sly way, and Will's got one of those
"wait till they get aload of me!" grins.
plausible prose man
swintronix wrote:
> PPM, I think you're onto something. I always thought Rorschach was modeled
> in part after Howard Roark of the Fountainhead both morally and physically
> (ugly w/ orange hair),
I don't think Howard is depicted as ugly, exactly, or at least not
ugly in the way, I dunno, someone ugly is, so much as rather stark
looking, and he's certainly tall and physically preposessing. In fact,
I think I have the idea, maybe even from an interview, that he's
probably trying to show that whole thing as ridiculous.
" had to look at The Fountainhead. I have to say I found Ayn Rand's
philosophy laughable. It was a "white supremacist dreams of the master
race," burnt in an early-20th century form. Her ideas didn't really
appeal to me, but they seemed to be the kind of ideas that people would
espouse, people who might secretly believe themselves to be part of the
elite, and not part of the excluded majority. I would basically
disagree with all of Ditko's ideas, but he has to be given credit for
expressing these political ideas. I believe some feminists regard Dave
Sim in much the same light; they might disagree with everything he
says, but at least there is some sort of sexual-political debate going
on there. So I've got respect for Ditko. "
http://www.twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/09moore.html
It's a little amusing, I suppose, at least to me, that Alan rejects
Objectivitsm, which I see as mostly self-evident, and Skepticism, (see
his rant about James Randi elsewhere, YCGFIAWAIC) about which I feel
the same, and yet write just the best comics around, hitting all his
marks like he should while finding some insight into the character. I
guess I feel about him like he feels about Steve Ditko. it's kind of
like Bob Fiore once said about Frank Miller; you wouldn't want him
elected chairman of the Federal Reserve or anything, but he can sure
come write my crime comics anytime.
Eh, well.
Kevrob
> swintronix wrote:
I challenge you to find one shred of pro-racist thought in Ayn Rand's
work. It just isn't there, She was expressly anti-Nazi, for all that
her philosophical opponents, though they call themselves '"liberal" or
conservative, have tried to smear her with that dirt. Her attitude
toward any "elite" was the same as, say, Thomas Jefferson's: an
"aristocracy of merit," open to all who could excel. Yes, she was
opposed to government enforced "charity", but never advocated any
culling of those who dropped below some standard of behavior or status.
The same cannot be said for the Nazis who condemned based on race, the
Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Maoists who based their urges on class, or
the various religious tyrannies who had people killed based on which
god(s) they did or didn't worship. I've always thought this was
projection. Since the critics were usually sympathetic to one or
another group that indulged these sick impulses, even if they didn't
participate themselves, they never could wrap their heads around
a worldview that judged others without a resulting massacre.
> burnt in an early-20th century form. Her ideas didn't really
> appeal to me, but they seemed to be the kind of ideas that people would
> espouse, people who might secretly believe themselves to be part of the
> elite, and not part of the excluded majority. I would basically
> disagree with all of Ditko's ideas, but he has to be given credit for
> expressing these political ideas. I believe some feminists regard Dave
> Sim in much the same light; they might disagree with everything he
> says, but at least there is some sort of sexual-political debate going
> on there. So I've got respect for Ditko. "
>
> http://www.twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/09moore.html
>
Ditko did get crap when a hero like the Question refused to put his own
life at risk to save criminals who would have had no qualms about
killing him. Vic Sage not being super-powered, I never saw how that was
fair It's not like a Ditko hero goes out of his way to kill an
antagonist, unlike the host of comics "heroes" descended from Mack
Bolan.
I may be misremembering, but wasn't Roger Slifer conversant with
the Objectivist point of view? In any case, one wouldn't have to agree
with Randism to write a character who was committed to it. I don't buy
all of it, and I could certainly put my head in that space. Mike Baron
might do, too.
Kevin
* But without the human slavery thing. :)
YKW '06
> I challenge you to find one shred of
<snip>
Re-read the post. He was quoting from an Alan Moore interview (to which he
linked). Ease up. :)
Kevrob
> On 23 Jul 2006, the voices tell me "Kevrob" <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > I challenge you to find one shred of
>
> <snip>
>
Ah, I knew he was quoting Moore, and now that I re-read his post,
I glean that he has differences with AM. I'm just sick of the
Rand=fascist trope that gets trotted out by statists of all types.
Ever since I read Whittaker Chambers' takedown of Atlas Shrugged
in National Review, ("..........to a gas chamber, go", indeed!)
this shibboleth has been around, and when people quote someone
repeating it without pointing out that the quoted speaker is full
of it, I get cranky.
I've got no beef with somebody quoting The Peej in his sig, though. :)
Kevin
plausible prose man
YKW '06 wrote:
> On 23 Jul 2006, the voices tell me "Kevrob" <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > I challenge you to find one shred of
>
> <snip>
>
> Re-read the post. He was quoting from an Alan Moore interview (to which he
> linked). Ease up. :)
Looking back, I was a little incoherent. I introduced a "he" that
refers to Alan Moore when the last name I'd said was Howard [Roark]
This is probably a little clearer:
" I don't think Howard is depicted as ugly, exactly, or at least not
ugly in the way, I dunno, someone ugly is, so much as rather stark
looking, and he's certainly tall and physically preposessing, and not
short and goofy looking like Kovacks. In fact,
I think I have the idea, maybe even from an interview, that Alan Moore
probably trying to show that whole thing as ridiculous, in the same way
you might see a comedy Superman with a pot belly and bad posture."