Is Superman Damaged Goods?
robo
Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
alien8er
So did I; maybe it's just the anti-Liberal in me. If nothing else he
disproves the rule about absolute power and absolute corruption.
Mark L. Fergerson
Joe Pfeiffer
Well, other than the fact that fiction can't prove or disprove anything.
Sean Eric Fagan
robo <digit...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
>supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
This has been discussed here in the past -- a few years ago. I found it
interesting, as it provided some interesting insights. (I think Dorothy
commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and someone else pointed out
Gaiman's subtle observation that in his dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself
as Batman, while Kal-El thinks of himself as Clark Kent.)
Given the character's abilities, there are two basic ways to do a story about
him: limit his abilities and/or create a nemesis who is at least as powerful
as he is; or do a character / moral study.
I don't think the latter has been done enough. Not enough stories about
Superman struggling to figure out what is right, so he can do it. This was
one of the better parts of the first movie, I think, but they erased it all
with time travel.
Wayne Throop
: (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
: someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
: dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
: of himself as Clark Kent.)
Whereas Bill (in "in Kill Bill II") said exactly the opposite, iirc.
That what he found interesting is that "when he gets up in the morning,
he's superman; Clark Kent is the disguise". I mean... Kent's the one
who wears props to obscure his features, unlike Bruce Wayne. Even the
supersuits: Superman's is made from materials sent with him by his
biological parents; Batman's is completely made up. Etc.
See also "Kill Bunny". For no particular reason, just as an
unusualy good instance of an internet meme, in this case,
doing parody "Kill Bill" trailers.
"I feel like I live in a world made of cardboard." --- Kal-El
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
RyanMcCoskrie
Personally the reason why he doesn't appeal to me is because he is
almost
invulnerable (most of the time) and seems to be able to lift pretty
much anything
while still having astounding fine motor skills.
... And he flies
... And he can see through walls
... And he can send heat beams from his eyes
... And he can freeze things with his breath.
With this many advantages you can't bring in a threat against him that
can be taken
seriously unless you use kryptonite / red sun radiation in every
single story which
will become monotones very quickly.
Wayne Throop
: With this many advantages you can't bring in a threat against him that
: can be taken seriously unless you use kryptonite / red sun radiation
: in every single story which will become monotones very quickly.
Oh no, not at all. Kryptonite comes in many colors and shades.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
He's also vulnerable to magic and mind control.
Jim Starlin played him very well in the recent Death of the New Gods mini
by having him outclassed on raw power the whole time and actually having to
think things through.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In article <Oz17m.16751$Rb6....@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com>,
> robo <digit...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>> Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
>> supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>
> This has been discussed here in the past -- a few years ago. I found it
> interesting, as it provided some interesting insights. (I think Dorothy
> commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and someone else pointed out
> Gaiman's subtle observation that in his dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself
> as Batman, while Kal-El thinks of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
And then it was (I think) Mark Atwood that wrote about Superman being
invulnerable, immortal, and INSANE, and all of the comic book reality is
basically something to keep him happy, the biggest Black Ops project
ever made.
One of the creepiest ideas EVAR.
Me, I like Superman as the epitome of good, the moral compass of his
universe, where his super powers are not necessarily the most important
aspect of his character; I see him and Captain America as occupying the
same position in their respective universes.
(One of my pet peeves about stuff I've seen in latter-day Marvel:
"Civil War", in which Tony Stark/Iron Man, one of the original and
longest-standing Avengers, ends up on the Government Registration side,
and Steve Rogers/Captain America is on the other. And Tony doesn't
immediately realize he has LOST THE BATTLE, so to speak. Tony, Tony, let
me say this slowly: You. Are Arguing Morality. With CAPTAIN AMERICA. You
ARE WRONG. By DEFINITION.)
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
"Outclassed on raw power the whole time" doesn't fit with "Superman"
for me. Maybe ONCE, but "raw power" was always Supes' biggest forte.
Some of the incarnations of Superman have been awfully wussy; out
STRENGTH-ing Superman is just... wrong.
Brenda Clough
And the right thing to do, with a hero of titanic powers, is to
immediately sock him with a complex emotional life. Hence the necessity
for Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc. They haven't anywhere near worked this
part properly in the films.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
My novel REVISE THE WORLD is now appearing at
www.bookviewcafe.com
Joe Pfeiffer
> : s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
> : (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
> : someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
> : dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
> : of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
> Whereas Bill (in "in Kill Bill II") said exactly the opposite, iirc.
> That what he found interesting is that "when he gets up in the morning,
> he's superman; Clark Kent is the disguise". I mean... Kent's the one
> who wears props to obscure his features, unlike Bruce Wayne. Even the
> supersuits: Superman's is made from materials sent with him by his
> biological parents; Batman's is completely made up. Etc.
That's why I find the two characters interesting, and wish I'd seen more
good stories contrasting them (though, after "Dark Knight Returns",
what's left to say?).
But it's neither Gaiman's observation, nor "Bill's", that make it
interesting -- it's that they're both right. The super-powerful space
alien sees himself as the small-town farm boy dressing up to hide the
people he loves from the consequences of his do-gooding, while the
playboy/philanthropist/executive is a borderline (or not) psychotic in a
bat suit who wears a rich guy costume to go out in public by daylight.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Or use his vulnerabilities. One of the points I made with my fanfic
character Windlash; he has the ability to take, without injury,
medium-level thermonuclear weapon blasts at point-blank, which makes him
really REALLY hard for even the other super-types to hurt, but then he
ran into psionics, mind-affecting spells, etc...
Wayne Throop
: Or use his vulnerabilities. One of the points I made with my fanfic
: medium-level thermonuclear weapon blasts at point-blank, which makes him
: really REALLY hard for even the other super-types to hurt, but then he
: ran into psionics, mind-affecting spells, etc...
Hm. What physical effects of upping the ante from "medium level" to
some higher level would finally overcome him? I mean... the temperature
doesn't peak all that much higher, right? Or does it? I mean... well,
once you've got the photons and plasma from a bomb that's your own size
handled, what makes dealing with a bomb the size of a freight truck worse?
Most of the extra oompf is going to pulverize sutff further way from
where your personal body is located. Or so it would seem to me.
Or maybe I'm mistaking what "point blank range" means.
Maybe I'm just conceiving of nuclear weapons wrongly.
David Johnston
wrote:
>: s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
>: (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
>: someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
>: dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
>: of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
>Whereas Bill (in "in Kill Bill II") said exactly the opposite, iirc.
That's because he hadn't read a Superman comic since the Silver Age,
when Superman was still pretending to be a timid, weak klutz.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> : "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
> : Or use his vulnerabilities. One of the points I made with my fanfic
> : character Windlash; he has the ability to take, without injury,
> : medium-level thermonuclear weapon blasts at point-blank, which makes him
> : really REALLY hard for even the other super-types to hurt, but then he
> : ran into psionics, mind-affecting spells, etc...
>
> Hm. What physical effects of upping the ante from "medium level" to
> some higher level would finally overcome him? I mean... the temperature
> doesn't peak all that much higher, right? Or does it? I mean... well,
> once you've got the photons and plasma from a bomb that's your own size
> handled, what makes dealing with a bomb the size of a freight truck worse?
> Most of the extra oompf is going to pulverize sutff further way from
> where your personal body is located. Or so it would seem to me.
> Or maybe I'm mistaking what "point blank range" means.
>
Comic-book terminology, really. In Realistic Terms a smaller nuke is
probably just as nasty to hug to you as a larger one. But the total
damage and destruction of the larger bomb is larger, so in comic-book
terms it's a bigger nastier weapon.
Practically speaking his invulnerability topped out somewhere higher
than the core of a nuclear weapon. The number of adversaries he ran into
(at least in the early days) which could PASS that threshold was very,
very low; even the gods generally didn't throw bolts badder-ass than he
could handle. Without psionic or other tricks, in the early days the
worst injury he ever took was a scratch to the cheek, which was done to
him by a nearly-berserk Phoenix Saint Ikki.
(later on he ran into the Titans, who DID have a couple of members
capable of slamming him hard enough to do real damage, and encountered
one thing that did literally gut him, but that was a special case -- at
least until "Brave New World" changed everything)
David Johnston
Mind-controlled. Again. Yay.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
No, more like mind-blasted, influenced. Not impossible to fight, but
not nearly "oh, yawn, I walk through you again".
Of course, the other thing that was amusing was that in a standup fight
he couldn't be HURT, but compared to most of his companions he couldn't
do any damage and he was slow, slow, slow. Eventually he got a good
handle on his other abilities, but he was an interesting contrast.
Quadibloc
Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
tutor him is to blame for that.
John Savard
Quadibloc
This is, of course, a reference to D.C. Super-Stars #12.
John Savard
Wayne Throop
: Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
: tutor him is to blame for that.
Hm. Random thought; does the "el" in Jor-el and Kal-el have the
same derivation as the "el in Michael, Gabriel, et el?
Brenda Clough
> : Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> : Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
> : tutor him is to blame for that.
>
> Hm. Random thought; does the "el" in Jor-el and Kal-el have the
> same derivation as the "el in Michael, Gabriel, et el?
>
Unlikely -- Kryptonian has nothing to do with Hebrew.
Dimensional Traveler
the trap." :-D
--
Things I learned from MythBusters #57: Never leave a loaded gun in an
exploding room.
Kurt Busiek
> : Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> : Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
> : tutor him is to blame for that.
>
> Hm. Random thought; does the "el" in Jor-el and Kal-el have the
> same derivation as the "el in Michael, Gabriel, et el?
Superman's creators were Jewish, and knew what the -el suffic meant
(though when they named the characters, it was Kal-L and Jor-L).
In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
"Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com — for all your Busiek needs!
Kurt Busiek
Which is a great comic.
Except for the creepy-ass aspect of it, where the Super-Teacher
hypnotizes some poor girl into being the perfect "first" for young
Clark.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
"Yeah, until his MOUTH drives the villain away."
Sean Eric Fagan
>> by having him outclassed on raw power the whole time and actually having to
>> think things through.
> "Outclassed on raw power the whole time" doesn't fit with "Superman"
>for me. Maybe ONCE, but "raw power" was always Supes' biggest forte.
On Earth. In the greater universe... not so much. There are lots of beings
in the greater universe who are at least his equal. I think any of the New
Gods in that series are at least close to him, physically, and some surpass
him.
But while Superman can be described as a demi-god, the New Gods are described
as *gods*.
John F. Eldredge
> Wayne Throop wrote:
>> : Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> : Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
>> : tutor him is to blame for that.
>>
>> Hm. Random thought; does the "el" in Jor-el and Kal-el have the same
>> derivation as the "el in Michael, Gabriel, et el?
>>
>>
> Unlikely -- Kryptonian has nothing to do with Hebrew.
>
> Brenda
The Jor-el and Ka-el names were probably intended to be reminiscent of
Biblical names, particularly the angelic names.
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
Moriarty
> > : Well, of course he's damaged goods. That crazy robot Jor-El built to
> > : tutor him is to blame for that.
>
> > Hm. Random thought; does the "el" in Jor-el and Kal-el have the
> > same derivation as the "el in Michael, Gabriel, et el?
>
> Unlikely -- Kryptonian has nothing to do with Hebrew.
Is it too early in the thread to discuss the problems facing
Superman's moyel?
-Moriarty
Kurt Busiek
You mean Moh-El, Last Rabbi of Krypton?
Wayne Throop
: On Earth. In the greater universe... not so much. There are lots of beings
: in the greater universe who are at least his equal. I think any of the New
: Gods in that series are at least close to him, physically, and some surpass
: him.
Well, even on earth (depending on the continuity) he's been up
against evil clones and/or tinkered clones of himself, or
pseudo-Krypotonian constructs or clanks.
"That man won't quit as long as he can still draw a breath. None of
my teammates will. Me? I've got a different problem. I feel like
I live in a world made of cardboard, always taking constant care not
to break something, to break some*one*. Never allowing myself to
lose control even for a moment, or someone could die. But *you* can
take it, can't you, big man? What we have here is a rare opportunity
for me to cut loose and show you just how powerful I really am."
--- Kal-el
alien8er
> alien8er <Alien8...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Jul 14, 8:42 am, "robo" <digital...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >>http://io9.com/5311382/is-superman-really-damaged-goods
>
> >> Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
> >> supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>
> > disproves the rule about absolute power and absolute corruption.
>
> Well, other than the fact that fiction can't prove or disprove anything.
Quite all right with me, since the rule is fictional as well.
Mark L. Fergerson
Sean Eric Fagan
> "That man won't quit as long as he can still draw a breath. None of
> my teammates will. Me? I've got a different problem. I feel like
> I live in a world made of cardboard, always taking constant care not
> to break something, to break some*one*. Never allowing myself to
> lose control even for a moment, or someone could die. But *you* can
> take it, can't you, big man? What we have here is a rare opportunity
> for me to cut loose and show you just how powerful I really am."
> --- Kal-el
Yes, I really liked the Timm-verse. Ironically, because of an *earlier*
Superman-Darkseid confrontation. Resulted in a detective being actually
killed, and I was so surprised that it happened that I watched the next
episode.
The problem with that scene, however, is that Superman and Darkseid had
tangled in the past, and Supes had gotten his ass whupped by Darkseid.
I like the *thought* behind it, though.
J Moreno
> Me, I like Superman as the epitome of good, the moral compass of his
> universe, where his super powers are not necessarily the most important
> aspect of his character; I see him and Captain America as occupying the
> same position in their respective universes.
Yep.
> (One of my pet peeves about stuff I've seen in latter-day Marvel:
> "Civil War", in which Tony Stark/Iron Man, one of the original and
> longest-standing Avengers, ends up on the Government Registration side,
> and Steve Rogers/Captain America is on the other. And Tony doesn't
> immediately realize he has LOST THE BATTLE, so to speak. Tony, Tony, let
> me say this slowly: You. Are Arguing Morality. With CAPTAIN AMERICA. You
> ARE WRONG. By DEFINITION.)
Except that neither Tony nor Reed (the two big guys on the side of
registration) are in it for the morality -- they see it as a necessary
evil in order to save the world.
--
JM
"Everything is futile." -- Marvin of Borg
Derek Lyons
>http://io9.com/5311382/is-superman-really-damaged-goods
>
>Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel.
Yeah, other than he massively overestimates Batman's impact on popular
culture, and manages to miss Superman's entirely. It reads like it
was written by a Batman fanboy tapped (forced) to write about
Superman.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Greg Goss
>In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>"Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Quadibloc
> Yeah, other than he massively overestimates Batman's impact on popular
> culture, and manages to miss Superman's entirely. It reads like it
> was written by a Batman fanboy tapped (forced) to write about
> Superman.
The subject of the article was claims by D.C.'s lawyers that Superman
wasn't really that valuable anyways in order to get out of giving any
money to Siegel and Shuster.
John Savard
Jaimie Vandenbergh
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>Sean Eric Fagan wrote:
>> In article <Oz17m.16751$Rb6....@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com>,
>> robo <digit...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>> Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
>>> supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>>
>> This has been discussed here in the past -- a few years ago. I found it
>> interesting, as it provided some interesting insights. (I think Dorothy
>> commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and someone else pointed out
>> Gaiman's subtle observation that in his dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself
>> as Batman, while Kal-El thinks of himself as Clark Kent.)
>>
>
> And then it was (I think) Mark Atwood that wrote about Superman being
>invulnerable, immortal, and INSANE, and all of the comic book reality is
>basically something to keep him happy, the biggest Black Ops project
>ever made.
>
> One of the creepiest ideas EVAR.
Yeppers - worked well in the Alan Moore reboot of Miracleman, too.
Shivers.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
I think I'm too sarcastic to believe in myself. -- Nietzsche
William F. Adams (willadams@aol.com)
> In article <Oz17m.16751$Rb6.3...@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com>,
>
> robo <digital...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
> >supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>
> This has been discussed here in the past -- a few years ago. I found it
> interesting, as it provided some interesting insights. (I think Dorothy
> commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and someone else pointed out
> Gaiman's subtle observation that in his dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself
> as Batman, while Kal-El thinks of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
> him: limit his abilities and/or create a nemesis who is at least as powerful
> as he is; or do a character / moral study.
>
> I don't think the latter has been done enough. Not enough stories about
> Superman struggling to figure out what is right, so he can do it. This was
> one of the better parts of the first movie, I think, but they erased it all
> with time travel.
Agree the latter isn't done enough, but an excellent instance of it
was the paperback book _Superman: The Last Son of Krypton_ released at
the same time as the first movie (in lieu of a novelization --- it had
photo stills from the movie).
Upping the power level of those around him works well --- always
enjoyed the Legion of Superheroes stories.
William
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Depends on the era, again, and my vision of Superman has always been
that he was *IT* when it came to sheer physical strength. You might be
able to play on his level by using magic, you might use Kryptonite, you
might out-think him, you might do a lot of things, but if you got into a
straight out "Quien es mas MACHO?" slugfest with him, god or no, he'd
beat you like a rug eventually.
Exception of course being if you were not *a* god, but God Almighty or
something one step down (the Spectre, IIRC).
But that was just my own gut-level feel for him which comes from my
childhood.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
But that's part of a moral problem. In the end, they're destroying the
world that's worth defending. Ben Franklin, Liberty, Safety, etc.
The fact they're on the opposite side from Cap should be telling them
they're filled with epic fail. The people USUALLY on the other side from
Cap are people like, well, Hitler, the Red Skull, etc. This is the elite
company they're now with.
robo
>
> Well, other than the fact that fiction can't prove or disprove anything.
>
There's an old aphorism that goes something like, "politician tell lies and
call it truth, artists compose lies that convey truth..."
Derek Lyons
Sure, that was the subject of the article - but I was discussing the
content of the article.
Taki Kogoma
allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> wrote:
>>In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>>"Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
>
> Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
Do I dare look for Clark/Lex slashfic?
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
Kurt Busiek
> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> wrote:
>
>> In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>> "Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
>
> Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
Not that I'm aware of, but if Mort Weisinger and E. Nelson Bridwell had
thought of a way to tie those together, I bet they would have.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
JimboCat
Truth is somewhat independent of proof, of course (it's been proven!
So it's True!). I'd say it's somewhat independent of facts, as well:
"Truth in her dress finds facts too tight. In fiction she moves with
ease." [Rabindranath Tagore]
OTOH:
It's much easier for stupid plot twists to happen in reality than in
fiction, since nobody involved is concerned with preserving
suspension
of disbelief. -- David Eppstein
"Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't." -- Mark
Twain
Not to mention:
"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the
opposite
of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."
- Niels Bohr
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"it's no more difficult for me to not-believe in a
deity who can alter fundamental logical truths than
to not-believe in one who can't." -- Wim Lewis
Kurt Busiek
Is that how people online are misreading it?
No, what's going on in this set of claims and counterclaims is that the
creators' heirs are saying DC sold the Superman movie rights to Warner
Bros. on a sweetheart deal, below market value. DC is saying that _at
that time_, under those circumstances, Superman was not as valuable a
movie property as the other side is claiming, and that the deal they
made was in a reasonable range for deals of that sort.
It's an argument about market value in a specific context, at a
specific time, not overall value. And it's not about not giving them
any money (not this time, at least), but about them arguing that the
money they did get, that the law requires them to split, was a fair
amount.
As it happens, the judge agreed that it was a reasonable amount. On
the low side of the range, but within range. Me, I have no idea what's
reasonable value or what they got, but in cases of this sort, this is
the point where both sides jockey for position -- one side is going to
claim that every dollar figure is too low, for whatever reason they can
argue, and the other side is going to argue that they're all fine, for
whatever reason they can manage.
Kurt Busiek
> On 2009-07-15, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org>
> allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
>> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> wrote:
>>> In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>>> "Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
>>
>> Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
>
> Do I dare look for Clark/Lex slashfic?
If you do, you'll find plenty, I'm sure.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
David Johnston
wrote:
>On 2009-07-15 09:10:34 -0700, Taki Kogoma <qu...@swcp.com> said:
>
>> On 2009-07-15, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org>
>> allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
>>> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> wrote:
>>>> In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>>>> "Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
>>>
>>> Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
>>
>> Do I dare look for Clark/Lex slashfic?
>
>If you do, you'll find plenty, I'm sure.
Particularly if you look at Smallville fanfiction. Sometimes I
thought they were writing them as canonically gay.
Tim McDaniel
>On 2009-07-15 09:10:34 -0700, Taki Kogoma <qu...@swcp.com> said:
>
>> On 2009-07-15, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org>
>> allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
>>> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> wrote:
>>>> In-story, "El" means "star," so "Kal-el" means "starchild," and
>>>> "Jor-el" means, uh, "star-jor."
>>>
>>> Does that tie in somehow to all the love interests being L.L.?
>>
>> Do I dare look for Clark/Lex slashfic?
>
>If you do, you'll find plenty, I'm sure.
I wonder: is there Clark Kent/Superman slash? That's rather trickier
to set up.
--
Tim McDaniel, tm...@panix.com
Kurt Busiek
But I bet it exists, somewhere.
Joe Pfeiffer
Brenda Clough
God, I love you guys.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
My novel REVISE THE WORLD is now appearing at
www.bookviewcafe.com
William George Ferguson
Not to be confused with Tur-Mohel, the applicant to the Evil League of Evil
(on the Dr. Horrible DVD, and uploaded to YouTube here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFAhVyyL3SU )
--
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
(Bene Gesserit)
J Moreno
> J Moreno wrote:
> > Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Me, I like Superman as the epitome of good, the moral compass of his
> >> universe, where his super powers are not necessarily the most important
> >> aspect of his character; I see him and Captain America as occupying the
> >> same position in their respective universes.
> >
> > Yep.
> >
> >> (One of my pet peeves about stuff I've seen in latter-day Marvel:
> >> "Civil War", in which Tony Stark/Iron Man, one of the original and
> >> longest-standing Avengers, ends up on the Government Registration side,
> >> and Steve Rogers/Captain America is on the other. And Tony doesn't
> >> immediately realize he has LOST THE BATTLE, so to speak. Tony, Tony, let
> >> me say this slowly: You. Are Arguing Morality. With CAPTAIN AMERICA. You
> >> ARE WRONG. By DEFINITION.)
> >
> > Except that neither Tony nor Reed (the two big guys on the side of
> > registration) are in it for the morality -- they see it as a necessary
> > evil in order to save the world.
> >
>
> But that's part of a moral problem. In the end, they're destroying the
> world that's worth defending. Ben Franklin, Liberty, Safety, etc.
While I agree with you, repressive governments come and go, extinction
of the human race last forever (except in universes with time travel).
> The fact they're on the opposite side from Cap should be telling them
> they're filled with epic fail. The people USUALLY on the other side from
> Cap are people like, well, Hitler, the Red Skull, etc. This is the elite
> company they're now with.
Hmn, I wonder if their prediciton for success of their little play
required Cap be on the other? Otherwise I don't see much reason not to
tell him what the numbers say...and having him on their side would have
greatly increased their legitimacy.
RyanMcCoskrie
wrote:
> In article <e3ac5184-33c5-4322-8099-59c569c6f...@c2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mccosk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 15, 3:42 am, "robo" <digital...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >>http://io9.com/5311382/is-superman-really-damaged-goods
>
> >> Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
> >> supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>
> >almost
> >invulnerable (most of the time) and seems to be able to lift pretty
> >much anything
> >while still having astounding fine motor skills.
>
> >... And he flies
> >... And he can see through walls
> >... And he can send heat beams from his eyes
> >... And he can freeze things with his breath.
>
> >With this many advantages you can't bring in a threat against him that
> >can be taken
> >seriously unless you use kryptonite / red sun radiation in every
> >single story which
> >will become monotones very quickly.
>
> He's also vulnerable to magic and mind control.
>
> [snip]
Considering that Superman tries to fit into the SF cannon magic falls
within the "can't
be taken seriously" category.
In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
for the for people in English
speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
resemble super heroes.
[1] Maybe it's the difference In culture but from what I've American
comics and Japanese manga
are heading in opposite directions. Comics are gaining finer art and
more believable characters
while manga seem to have a very ... hurried ... production
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
What makes you think those don't exist?
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
RyanMcCoskrie
> In article <bf6d3be5-4711-4d17-8dd7-9a0834b26...@a37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
I'm sure they exists some place but I'm stuck out in the countryside
at the moment so coming
by comics is pretty hard.
Do you have any recommendations?
Jack Bohn
>> : Or use his vulnerabilities. One of the points I made with my fanfic
>> : character Windlash; he has the ability to take, without injury,
>> : medium-level thermonuclear weapon blasts at point-blank, which makes him
>> : really REALLY hard for even the other super-types to hurt, but then he
>> : ran into psionics, mind-affecting spells, etc...
>
> (later on he ran into the Titans, who DID have a couple of members
>capable of slamming him hard enough to do real damage, and encountered
What'd they do? Drop a colony on him?
--
-Jack
Jon Schild
alien8er wrote:
> On Jul 14, 8:42 am, "robo" <digital...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>>http://io9.com/5311382/is-superman-really-damaged-goods
>>
>>Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some critics say the
>>supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>
>
> disproves the rule about absolute power and absolute corruption.
>
That isn't really a rule in the first place. It's one man's opinion,
quoted endlessly by certain people against any politician they don't
like. Note who quotes it, and against whom. It is always used against
someone of the "unworthy other party" as an all-purpose accusation
without needing any evidence to back it up.
--
Wanted dead and/or alive: Shroedinger's cat.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Wrong Titans, though that would certainly have annoyed him too. These
were the Titans that Zeus had shut away/driven off ages before.
trag
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Wayne Throop wrote:
> > Hm. What physical effects of upping the ante from "medium level" to
> > some higher level would finally overcome him? I mean... the temperature
> > doesn't peak all that much higher, right? Or does it? I mean... well,
> > once you've got the photons and plasma from a bomb that's your own size
> > handled, what makes dealing with a bomb the size of a freight truck worse?
> > Most of the extra oompf is going to pulverize sutff further way from
> > where your personal body is located. Or so it would seem to me.
> > Or maybe I'm mistaking what "point blank range" means.
>
> Comic-book terminology, really. In Realistic Terms a smaller nuke is
> probably just as nasty to hug to you as a larger one. But the total
> damage and destruction of the larger bomb is larger, so in comic-book
> terms it's a bigger nastier weapon.
I think that a higher yield bomb would actually achieve higher
temperatures at the core. Temperature doesn't mean much at that
magnitude, so let's think of it as energy density, energy per cubic
meter. The physical size of a medium yield vs. high yield bomb isn't
that different. Most of the increase in yield comes from techniques
such as combining fission with fusion or using multiple cores which
increase the efficiency of the fissioning of the bomb material.
So a higher yield bomb is going to emit more energy, maybe hundreds of
times more (megatons vs. tens of kilotons) in a volume which isn't
more than two or three times larger than a lower yield bomb. Of
course, that energy flees the scene pretty quickly, but assuming that
both bursts require approximately the same amount of time, the energy
density at the center should be between tens and hundreds of times
higher with the higher yield bomb.
This is all back of the envelope, I would argue it over a beer, kind
of stuff. I haven't snuck into Sandia Labs and used their big iron
to model the different detonations.
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> : s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
> : (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
> : someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
> : dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
> : of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
> That what he found interesting is that "when he gets up in the morning,
> he's superman; Clark Kent is the disguise".
Which doesn't make a lot of sense unless Clark was acting like
Kal-El before he learned about his history. People don't change
their entire personality just because they learn they were adopted.
--
Sean O'Hara <http://www.diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
New audio book: As Long as You Wish by John O'Keefe
<http://librivox.org/short-science-fiction-collection-010/>
Sean O'Hara
Spoor) declared:
> >
> The fact they're on the opposite side from Cap should be telling
> them they're filled with epic fail. The people USUALLY on the other side
> from Cap are people like, well, Hitler, the Red Skull, etc. This is the
> elite company they're now with.
Captain America's power includes the ability to always be on the
morally correct side? Otherwise this is a dubious argument that
since Captain America's been correct in the past he must always be
correct.
And isn't Captain America's position that vigilantes are okay, and
they should be able to hide their identities from the police and
process servers -- trust us, we're self-regulating?
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> >
> And the right thing to do, with a hero of titanic powers, is to
> immediately sock him with a complex emotional life. Hence the necessity
> for Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc. They haven't anywhere near worked this
> part properly in the films.
>
Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't
be married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This
isn't proper continuity!"
Joe Pfeiffer
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Brenda Clough
> declared:
>> > And the right thing to do, with a hero of titanic powers, is to
>> immediately sock him with a complex emotional life. Hence the
>> necessity for Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc. They haven't anywhere near
>> worked this part properly in the films.
>>
>
> Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't
> be married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This
> isn't proper continuity!"
"complex emotional life" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as
"sucky chick flick".
I didn't object so much because they didn't respect continuity as
because they made a weepy chick flick, and saving the world was almost a
throwaway subplot. If I'd gotten past that, maybe I would have gotten
concerned about continuity.
Kurt Busiek
> In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
> for the for people in English
> speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
> resemble super heroes.
Comics about non-superhero characters predate comics about superheroes.
What sort of thing do you like to read? Because if you just want
comics aimed at English-language readers that aren't superhero comics,
they're as close as your local newspaper. If you're looking for a
specific kind of non-superhero comic, what kind? There are an awful
lot of comics out there.
There are a lot of awful comics out there, too, but luckily, the two
sets don't overlap cleanly.
Remus Shepherd
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
> Spoor) declared:
> > The fact they're on the opposite side from Cap should be telling
> > them they're filled with epic fail. The people USUALLY on the other side
> > from Cap are people like, well, Hitler, the Red Skull, etc. This is the
> > elite company they're now with.
> Captain America's power includes the ability to always be on the
> morally correct side?
From a story-telling perspective, yes. Captain America's function in
a story is to personify the moral qualities of freedom and justice. Superman
has the same role.
> And isn't Captain America's position that vigilantes are okay, and
> they should be able to hide their identities from the police and
> process servers -- trust us, we're self-regulating?
His position was that it's better for the vigilantes to self-police
their own, rather than be slaves to an often immoral government. And events
since the Civil War have proven him right. Even Tony Stark has been replaced
by 'Iron Patriot', who is going around doing all kinds of scummy things
under the government's direction.
... ...
Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com>
Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/remus_shepherd/
David Johnston
wrote:
>In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Wayne Throop
>declared:
>> : s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
>> : (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
>> : someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
>> : dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
>> : of himself as Clark Kent.)
>>
>> Whereas Bill (in "in Kill Bill II") said exactly the opposite, iirc.
>> That what he found interesting is that "when he gets up in the morning,
>> he's superman; Clark Kent is the disguise".
>
>Which doesn't make a lot of sense unless Clark was acting like
>Kal-El before he learned about his history. People don't change
>their entire personality just because they learn they were adopted.
Not Kal-el. Superman. Although in fact the Silver Age Superman did
identify with Krypton to a strange degree (Great Rao!), what Bill is
pointing out is that in the comics he read in his youth, Clark was
always pretending to be weak, clumsy and cowardly, so nobody would
suspect he was Superman. It was only as Superman that he was letting
himself be who really was, not just in terms of power, but
personality.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Brenda Clough declared:
>> > And the right thing to do, with a hero of titanic powers, is to
>> immediately sock him with a complex emotional life. Hence the
>> necessity for Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc. They haven't anywhere near
>> worked this part properly in the films.
>>
>
> Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't be
> married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This isn't
> proper continuity!"
>
Actually, most of the complaints I saw were:
1) The "Substitute Lois" was wayyyyy too young, and not convincing as
the mother she was supposed to be.
2) LEX LUTHOR AGAIN??? C'mon, guys. Yes, Spacey's portrayal was a
magnificent extension of Hackman's original, but did it HAVE to be Lex
Luthor again?
3) The kid was mostly more flat-affect than the one who played Anakin
4) A bunch of other minor complaints. My pet peeve was that it appears
that STILL no one can portray an asthmatic in anything like realistic
ways on TV.
Lee Ratner
> : s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
> : (I think Dorothy commented that it was the story of a demi-god, and
> : someone else pointed out Gaiman's subtle observation that in his
> : dreams, Bruce Wayne thinks of himself as Batman, while Kal-El thinks
> : of himself as Clark Kent.)
>
> Whereas Bill (in "in Kill Bill II") said exactly the opposite, iirc.
> That what he found interesting is that "when he gets up in the morning,
> who wears props to obscure his features, unlike Bruce Wayne. Even the
> supersuits: Superman's is made from materials sent with him by his
> biological parents; Batman's is completely made up. Etc.
>
Both are true, it depends what Superman you are talking about. In
the pre-Byrne Superman, Clark Kent is the disguise and Kal-El is the
real identity. After Byrne, Clark Kent is the real person and Superman
the disguise. Byrne also got rid of the elements of the Superman
mythos that made Superman an analogy for Jews. Many Jewish fans,
especially the older ones, have not forgiven Byrne for this.
Sean O'Hara
declared:
Fallacy of the excluded middle -- just because those who opposed him
were wrong doesn't make him right.
Sean O'Hara
declared:
Odd, it's the only superhero movie I've ever enjoyed that doesn't
star Adam West and Burt Ward. And I'm not someone who likes weepy
chick flicks. Just films that think characters are more important
than explosions.
Joseph Nebus
Also in the New Movie they kinda forgot to have stuff happen
except for stuff that already happened in the first couple movies.
Granted, Supes II/III/IV suffered from that too, maybe because the
first *did* such an astounding job at getting the look and feel right,
but we'd had another twenty years of grand iconic images from the first
movie being ripped off^W^W paid homage to in the rest of pop culture to
make pulling them out again feel the more worn-out.
--
Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Pfeiffer
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Joe Pfeiffer
> declared:
>> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>> Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't
>>> be married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This
>>> isn't proper continuity!"
>>
>> "complex emotional life" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as
>> "sucky chick flick".
>>
>> I didn't object so much because they didn't respect continuity as
>> because they made a weepy chick flick, and saving the world was almost a
>> throwaway subplot. If I'd gotten past that, maybe I would have gotten
>> concerned about continuity.
>
> Odd, it's the only superhero movie I've ever enjoyed that doesn't star
> Adam West and Burt Ward. And I'm not someone who likes weepy chick
> flicks. Just films that think characters are more important than
> explosions.
You didn't see any of that in either of the new Batman movies?
Dimensional Traveler
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Joe Pfeiffer declared:
>> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>> Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't
>>> be married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This
>>> isn't proper continuity!"
>>
>> "complex emotional life" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as
>> "sucky chick flick".
>>
>> I didn't object so much because they didn't respect continuity as
>> because they made a weepy chick flick, and saving the world was almost a
>> throwaway subplot. If I'd gotten past that, maybe I would have gotten
>> concerned about continuity.
>
> Odd, it's the only superhero movie I've ever enjoyed that doesn't star
> Adam West and Burt Ward. And I'm not someone who likes weepy chick
> flicks. Just films that think characters are more important than
> explosions.
>
--
Things I learned from MythBusters #57: Never leave a loaded gun in an
exploding room.
Remus Shepherd
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Remus Shepherd
> declared:
> >> And isn't Captain America's position that vigilantes are okay, and
> >> they should be able to hide their identities from the police and
> >> process servers -- trust us, we're self-regulating?
> >
> > His position was that it's better for the vigilantes to self-police
> > their own, rather than be slaves to an often immoral government. And events
> > since the Civil War have proven him right. Even Tony Stark has been replaced
> > by 'Iron Patriot', who is going around doing all kinds of scummy things
> > under the government's direction.
> >
> Fallacy of the excluded middle -- just because those who opposed him
> were wrong doesn't make him right.
Yes, well, it is a comic book, so only two sides were presented. The
only third option in Civil War might have been the X-Men and the Hulk, both
of whom effectively said, "We don't care, just leave us out of it or we'll
make you sorry." The X-Men were left out of it. The Hulk, not so much.
Derek Lyons
>assuming that both bursts require approximately the same amount
>of time, the energy density at the center should be between
>tens and hundreds of times higher with the higher yield bomb.
As it turns out, that assumption is incorrect.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
RyanMcCoskrie
> On 2009-07-15 23:03:47 -0700, RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mccosk...@gmail.com> said:
>
> > In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
> > for the for people in English
> > speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
> > resemble super heroes.
>
> Comics about non-superhero characters predate comics about superheroes.
>
> What sort of thing do you like to read? Because if you just want
> comics aimed at English-language readers that aren't superhero comics,
> they're as close as your local newspaper.
There hasn't been any new Footrot Flats[1] in decades and that's the
only
strip worth reading.
> If you're looking for a
> specific kind of non-superhero comic, what kind? There are an awful
> lot of comics out there.
espionage perhaps...
[1] the kiwi equivalent of Garfield. Except Garfield wasn't a sheep
dog.
And I don't think any of his comics have dealt with violence, incest,
sex or
gangs.
Konrad Gaertner
> In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
> for the for people in English
> speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
> resemble super heroes.
I follow 43 webcomics and only one is explicitly about superheroes,
though about a third of them have effectively superpowered characters
(more if you count magic and mad science as superpowers).
The most mundane comics I read would be:
Afterlife Blues
Crimson Dark
Family Man
Faux Pas
Freefall
Galaxion
Get Medieval (finished)
Lackadaisy
The Zombie Hunters
Full list of what I read:
http://www.comic-nation.com/users/show/895
--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - email: kgae...@tx.rr.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll
Brenda Clough
And this gets us around to the Byrne reboot, in which it was proposed
that Clark Kent was an ordinary boy until about his late teens or early
adulthood, when he suddenly developed the Super and flew off to be
Superman. Nonsense! Had to write a novel to refute it.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
My novel REVISE THE WORLD is now appearing at
www.bookviewcafe.com
Brenda Clough
That it was badly done doesn't change the fact that it is the only way
to make Superman interesting. There is a logical limit to how many
plsnets he can move, world-cracking menaces he can meet, and comets he
has to smash.
David Goldfarb
RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 17, 3:36 am, Kurt Busiek <k...@busiek.com> wrote:
>> If you're looking for a
>> specific kind of non-superhero comic, what kind? There are an awful
>> lot of comics out there.
>
>espionage perhaps...
That one's gonna be hard: the adventure fiction genre in US comics
is dominated by superheroes. There's plenty of slice-of-life literary
fiction comics, and/or autobiography. But in general people who want
adventure fiction want superheroes, and people who don't want superheroes
don't want adventure fiction. (As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
or so, without success.)
--
David Goldfarb |"In the fifties, people responded well to
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | authoritative disembodied voices."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- MST3K
Kurt Busiek
> On Jul 17, 3:36 am, Kurt Busiek <k...@busiek.com> wrote:
>> On 2009-07-15 23:03:47 -0700, RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mccosk...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>>> In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
>>> for the for people in English
>>> speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
>>> resemble super heroes.
>>
>> Comics about non-superhero characters predate comics about superheroes.
>>
>> What sort of thing do you like to read? Because if you just want
>> comics aimed at English-language readers that aren't superhero comics,
>> they're as close as your local newspaper.
>
> There hasn't been any new Footrot Flats[1] in decades and that's the
> only strip worth reading.
Actually, it's been less than a decade since new FOOTROT FLATS stuff
was published. The strip stopped running in papers 15 years back, but
new material was coming out in book form 'til 2000.
Still, I'll see your FOOTROY and raise you CONCHY. That's over thirty
years gone, and still much missed.
>> If you're looking for a
>> specific kind of non-superhero comic, what kind? There are an awful
>> lot of comics out there.
>
> espionage perhaps...
QUEEN & COUNTRY, by Greg Rucka and various artists, Oni Press.
Kurt Busiek
> In article <07521e33-bfd5-4b4b...@i18g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 17, 3:36 am, Kurt Busiek <k...@busiek.com> wrote:
>>> If you're looking for a
>>> specific kind of non-superhero comic, what kind? There are an awful
>>> lot of comics out there.
>>
>> espionage perhaps...
>
> That one's gonna be hard: the adventure fiction genre in US comics
> is dominated by superheroes. There's plenty of slice-of-life literary
> fiction comics, and/or autobiography. But in general people who want
> adventure fiction want superheroes, and people who don't want superheroes
> don't want adventure fiction. (As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
> non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
> or so, without success.)
Espionage comics isn't all that hard. There are, what, 11 QUEEN &
COUNTRY TPBs? There's also THE LOSERS, lots of MODESTY BLAISE, a few
JAMES BOND projects here and there. Marvel's recent BLACK WIDOW series
have been techno-thriller espionage with the superhero stuff dialed
down to virtually nothing
You probably couldn't fill up a bookcase, but a shelf or two?
I'm not sure what comics you're thinking of -- ARROWSMITH was a
success, and a sequel's in the works. SHOCKROCKETS might have been
successful with a publisher funding it, but we weren't able to continue
it on the strength of my second mortgage -- it did make a profit in the
long run, though. CONAN was a riotous success. I'm not sure what else
I've done in the last decade that would count as non-superhero
adventure.
Kurt Busiek
> RyanMcCoskrie wrote:
>
>> In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
>> for the for people in English
>> speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
>> resemble super heroes.
>
> I follow 43 webcomics and only one is explicitly about superheroes,
> though about a third of them have effectively superpowered characters
> (more if you count magic and mad science as superpowers).
>
> The most mundane comics I read would be:
> Afterlife Blues
> Crimson Dark
> Family Man
> Faux Pas
> Freefall
> Galaxion
> Get Medieval (finished)
> Lackadaisy
> The Zombie Hunters
>
> Full list of what I read:
> http://www.comic-nation.com/users/show/895
Some of what I read online that might appeal to the non-superhero-inclined:
http://claypoolcomics.com/deadbeatsonline/
http://www.sintitulocomic.com/
http://zipandbit.com/ (not currently active, but two longish complete stories)
http://www.greasemonkeybook.com/
http://jonnycrossbones.com/2004/07/01/chapter-one-page-1/
Quadibloc
> But in general people who want
> adventure fiction want superheroes, and people who don't want superheroes
> don't want adventure fiction. (As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
> non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
> or so, without success.)
Of course, that depends on the medium more than the genre. And some of
the great licensed properties in comics are only borderline
superheroes - I'm thinking of Tarzan, Flash Gordon, and John Carter.
Is Agatha Heterodyne a superhero, for that matter? But then, that's
more humor than adventure, it could be argued.
As for the Byrne Superman - well, I'm in no position to judge it
fairly. I like his artwork, and there was good writing in that series.
But what I loved about Superman in my youth was the Weisinger mythos.
John Savard
Joe Pfeiffer
> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Brenda Clough
>>> declared:
>>>>> And the right thing to do, with a hero of titanic powers, is to
>>>> immediately sock him with a complex emotional life. Hence the
>>>> necessity for Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc. They haven't anywhere near
>>>> worked this part properly in the films.
>>>>
>>> Well, they tried with the last film and fans hated it -- "Lois can't
>>> be married to some other guy! And now Clark's a stalker! Wah! This
>>> isn't proper continuity!"
>>
>> "complex emotional life" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as
>> "sucky chick flick".
>>
>> I didn't object so much because they didn't respect continuity as
>> because they made a weepy chick flick, and saving the world was almost a
>> throwaway subplot. If I'd gotten past that, maybe I would have gotten
>> concerned about continuity.
>
> That it was badly done doesn't change the fact that it is the only way
> to make Superman interesting. There is a logical limit to how many
> plsnets he can move, world-cracking menaces he can meet, and comets he
> has to smash.
Oh, I agree completely -- sorry if that wasn't clear. Superman is only
interesting as something other than nerd wish fulfillment if we consider
character and relationships. The movie sucked because it was a sucky
movie, not because Lois had moved on.
Wayne Throop
::: for the for people in English speaking countries[1] and doesn't
::: contain any characters that even resemble super heroes.
Hm. Non-superhero.
Wapsi Square? Nope, the golems.
Questionable Content? Nope, Pizza Girl, Vespa Avenger, etc etc.
Freefall? Eh, maybe... if Florence and/or powerful robots don't count.
Candi? Nope, Menjou vs the Squirrel Mafia.
Gunnerkrigg Court, nope, many superpowered characters.
El Goonish Shive, of course not.
Thunderstruck? nope. Girl Genius? nope. Zap in Space? nope.
Heart Shaped Skull? nope. Sister Claire? nope. Evil Diva? nope.
College Roommates from Hell? nope.
Sparkling Generation Valkyrie Yuuki? oh hell no (well, I also don't
actually read that one much, but it's a stilly "magical girl" parody,
so I'll mention it; and Megatokyo got boring imo, so I don't read it
anymore either)
Ah. Girls With Slingshots. There. I guess.
Dunno of Crimson Dark, Escape from Terra, 21st Century Fox, etc
would count, but I guess people with unusual abilities and/or
heroic impulses in them aren't unusual in context. So maybe.
I guess Freefall belongs down here also.
Super King has all the powers of a King
Plus all the power of Superman,
Also he's a robot
Ain't it cool? Super King you rule!
--- New Justice Team theme song
Citizens, never fear
Crazy do-good freaks are here
Until they run out of steam...
Miracle cream, miracle cream
Gives the power to the team
Its effects wear off for sure
So they just slop on some more
The New Justice Team!
--- ibid
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Kurt Busiek
> ::: In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
> ::: for the for people in English speaking countries[1] and doesn't
> ::: contain any characters that even resemble super heroes.
>
> Hm. Non-superhero.
>
> Wapsi Square? Nope, the golems.
> Questionable Content? Nope, Pizza Girl, Vespa Avenger, etc etc.
> Freefall? Eh, maybe... if Florence and/or powerful robots don't count.
> Candi? Nope, Menjou vs the Squirrel Mafia.
> Gunnerkrigg Court, nope, many superpowered characters.
On the other hand, there's a difference between "superpowered" and "superhero."
Poul Anderson's OPERATION CHAOS has heroic characters who have
more-than-human, but I hthink the novel would be classed as fantasy,
not a superhero tale. I haven't read all of GUNNERKRIGG COURT, but the
paranormal elements there seem to suggest mysticism (and in some cases,
SF) more than superheroes.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>::: In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
>::: for the for people in English speaking countries[1] and doesn't
>::: contain any characters that even resemble super heroes.
>
>Hm. Non-superhero.
>
>Wapsi Square? Nope, the golems.
>Questionable Content? Nope, Pizza Girl, Vespa Avenger, etc etc.
Oh, come on -- how often do they appear?
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
I'm selling my comic collection -- see http://www.watt-evans.com/comics.html
I'm serializing a novel at http://www.watt-evans.com/realmsoflight0.html
Wayne Throop
: Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com>
: On the other hand, there's a difference between "superpowered"
: and "superhero." [...]
: I haven't read all of GUNNERKRIGG COURT, but the paranormal elements
: there seem to suggest mysticism (and in some cases, SF) more than
: superheroes.
True, though I was thinking about Sir Eglamore, who's a
professional hero/protector/whatnot, with some fairly superhuman
abilities/tools/weapons and such. And when threatened by Reynardine (or
when they thought he was threatening them), Kat's parents certainly lept
into action like they were used to hero-ing around, as some flashbacks
seem to establish a propensity for it among their group, including Surma.
Eg, the situation re Eglamore's predecessor as court protector.
Plus, Antimony and *her* contemporaries seem to be training
for hero-ing at least part of the time. Their Danger Room, er,
I mean simulator, adventures against the Jupiter Moon Martians
and/or the Creepy Space Aliens From Outer Space, seem to
have some suggestive training elements.
http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/archive_page.php?comicID=118
http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/archive_page.php?comicID=107
http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/archive_page.php?comicID=556
http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/archive_page.php?comicID=167
: Poul Anderson's OPERATION CHAOS has heroic characters who have
: more-than-human, but I hthink the novel would be classed as fantasy,
: not a superhero tale.
True, but the phrasing of the OP was "doesn't contain
any characters that even resemble super heroes". So I'd
class "A Miracle Of Science" as Right Out (or at absolute
best, borderline), despite that fact that the protagonists
are a cop and a technical liason from Mars, which doesn't
smack much of superheroism... but the situation with an
evil lair and Martian capabilities... well. There's a
certain resemblance.
To be fair, I wouldn't class Gunnerkrigg Court as "superhero tale"
either. But it has characters that fairly closely resemble superheroes.
In fact, the only one of the ones I ruled out that I *would* say was a
superhero tale is... well, SGVY. Possibly Heart Shaped Skull, maybe,
since the start of Goodby Crestfallen has backstory where witches are
tolerated only as government controlled superheros for quite some time,
and Serenity Rose and one or two other recent cases have been let slide.
(More or less, sort of.) But the story proper, not so much.
"I don't think you're a monster. I don't think you're built
for evil. I don't think I can stop what's going on here by
taking pot-shots at you from the dark and praying for a clean
hit. I didn't even bring a firearm today. No, Sera, I think
the only way I'm going to stop you... is to *help* you."
--- from Heart Shaped Skull
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>On Jul 16, 6:10 pm, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
>> In article
><bf6d3be5-4711-4d17-8dd7-9a0834b26...@a37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>
>>
>> RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mccosk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Jul 15, 10:31 am, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>> >wrote:
>> >> In article
><e3ac5184-33c5-4322-8099-59c569c6f...@c2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> >> RyanMcCoskrie <ryan.mccosk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Jul 15, 3:42 am, "robo" <digital...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>> >> >>http://io9.com/5311382/is-superman-really-damaged-goods
>>
>> >> >> Interesting article. I always liked the man of steel. Some
>critics say the
>> >> >> supe is just 'too good.' I always liked that about him.
>>
>> >> >Personally the reason why he doesn't appeal to me is because he is
>> >> >almost
>> >> >invulnerable (most of the time) and seems to be able to lift pretty
>> >> >much anything
>> >> >while still having astounding fine motor skills.
>>
>> >> >... And he flies
>> >> >... And he can see through walls
>> >> >... And he can send heat beams from his eyes
>> >> >... And he can freeze things with his breath.
>>
>> >> >With this many advantages you can't bring in a threat against him that
>> >> >can be taken
>> >> >seriously unless you use kryptonite / red sun radiation in every
>> >> >single story which
>> >> >will become monotones very quickly.
>>
>> >> He's also vulnerable to magic and mind control.
>>
>> >> [snip]
>>
>> >Considering that Superman tries to fit into the SF cannon magic falls
>> >within the "can't
>> >be taken seriously" category.
>> >In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
>> >for the for people in English
>> >resemble super heroes.
>>
>> What makes you think those don't exist?
>>
>
>I'm sure they exists some place but I'm stuck out in the countryside
>at the moment so coming
>by comics is pretty hard.
>Do you have any recommendations?
Well, not-like-a-superhero is pretty broad.
The easiest to find comic books on the stands now that fit that
description are the "Archie" books, which are teenage sitcoms, but
I haven't read them for years, and couldn't really recommend them
to a random adult.
Others that will be available through amazon, possibly used and
including both comic *book* and comic *strip* would be:
Max Alan Collins "Ms Tree" hardboiled mysteries.
Peter O'Donnell's "Modesty Blaise" collections which are *excellent*
espionage/adventure.
Kyle Baker's "The Cowboy Wally Show", possibly the funniest graphic
novel ever written.
Various old collections of Walt Kelly's "Pogo".
New collections of Charles Schulz's "Peanuts"
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Wayne Throop
: Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net>
: Oh, come on -- how often do they appear?
Heh. Yeah, yeah. But it does sort of make the point I think the
OP was a bit sore about; how many webcomics throw in a character or
two that closely resembles a superhero? Sort of gratuitously.
It's really frequent, when you count them up.
Arguably I suppose, QC is more akin to Freefall or Crimson Dark,
except with althist instead of future, and with quirky human
interest stories crowding out all the dilating doors, except
for Pintsize and Hannelore's father's spacestation, minitary
grade lasers and combat robots, etc, etc.
Robert A. Woodward
<2d951b17-dbce-40e4...@u38g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
,
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Jul 16, 7:42�pm, goldf...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) wrote:
> > �But in general people who want
> > adventure fiction want superheroes, and people who don't want superheroes
> > don't want adventure fiction. �(As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
> > non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
> > or so, without success.)
>
> Of course, that depends on the medium more than the genre. And some of
> the great licensed properties in comics are only borderline
> superheroes - I'm thinking of Tarzan, Flash Gordon, and John Carter.
>
> Is Agatha Heterodyne a superhero, for that matter? But then, that's
> more humor than adventure, it could be argued.
>
Agatha would fit right in a supers world. She is a Gadgeteer and
would be running around in a Battlesuit (and with lots of little
robots messing up other battlesuits and robots). She also inherited
a army of superpowered minions (and a Fortress of DOOM) from her
supervillain ancestors.
--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw>
Wayne Throop
: "Robert A. Woodward" <robe...@drizzle.com>
: Agatha would fit right in a supers world. She is a Gadgeteer and
: would be running around in a Battlesuit (and with lots of little
: robots messing up other battlesuits and robots). She also inherited a
: army of superpowered minions (and a Fortress of DOOM) from her
: supervillain ancestors.
Plus, some constructs are pretty much standard physical superheroes.
Jaegers, Von Pinn (if eeevil, maybe), Punch and Judy, probably others.
Most handicapped by loyalty programming, but still.
Possibly even some of the clanks (though most are pretty clearly
not smart enough to classify as characters in their own right;
but the Lucreziabot is, and the Muses are, and possibly DP is).
Even characters like Zeetha are probably superhero candidates,
of the highly-trained-martial-artist variety.
Not clear how to classify Trelawney Thorpe, Spark of the Realm.
And of course (grimace, spit) Othar.
Kurt Busiek
> : Poul Anderson's OPERATION CHAOS has heroic characters who have
> : more-than-human, but I hthink the novel would be classed as fantasy,
> : not a superhero tale.
>
> True, but the phrasing of the OP was "doesn't contain
> any characters that even resemble super heroes".
Yeah, I'd need to know more about what that means. Resembles how?
Visually? Conceptually? In genre-patterns?
David Goldfarb
>On 2009-07-16 18:42:15 -0700, gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) said:
>> (As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
>> non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
>> or so, without success.)
>
>success, and a sequel's in the works. SHOCKROCKETS might have been
>successful with a publisher funding it, but we weren't able to continue
>it on the strength of my second mortgage -- it did make a profit in the
>long run, though. CONAN was a riotous success. I'm not sure what else
>I've done in the last decade that would count as non-superhero
>adventure.
I was thinking of _Arrowsmith_ and _Shockrockets_. You had said here
a while ago that _Shockrockets_ was a minor money-loser, converted
into profitability by a movie option. My impression was that _Arrowsmith_
had done similarly; I'm surprised and pleased to have been mistaken.
Katie was just asking me recently why there wasn't any more _Arrowsmith_.
She'll be very glad to hear that a sequel is coming.
I have to admit that I was forgetting _Conan_, and that it is an
excellent counterexample.
--
David Goldfarb | "Questions are a burden to others.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Answers are a prison for oneself."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- _The Prisoner_, "Dance of the Dead"
David DeLaney
>>> >In all honesty though, I'm just waiting for a comic that is intended
>>> >for the for people in English
>>> >speaking countries[1] and doesn't contain any characters that even
>>> >resemble super heroes.
>
I'd have to disqualify this last, because of Snoopy's many secret identities
and unsuspected-from-a-normal-beagle capabilities...
Dave "Also, Linus has exhibited Special powers involving his blanket more than
once" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> On Jul 16, 7:42 pm, goldf...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>> But in general people who want
>> adventure fiction want superheroes, and people who don't want superheroes
>> don't want adventure fiction. (As Kurt has found out -- he's tried
>> non-superhero adventure comics a couple of times in the last decade
>> or so, without success.)
>
> Of course, that depends on the medium more than the genre. And some of
> the great licensed properties in comics are only borderline
> superheroes - I'm thinking of Tarzan, Flash Gordon, and John Carter.
>
> Is Agatha Heterodyne a superhero, for that matter? But then, that's
> more humor than adventure, it could be argued.
Agatha isn't, but undoubtedly Othar IS.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com