August 15, 2007

The Superman Story

Supermancover

Expect this to be a review in parts as I simply kept finding more and more images I wanted to scan and more and more of the frenetic, high Silver Age plot I wanted to either gently chide, openly admire or even more openly mock. I'm still figuring out the new scanner, as well as TypePad's picture insertion features, but I really have wanted to review this paperback my wife found for me in a second hand store for quite some time now.

Entitled "The Superman Story" it's a black and white paperback reprinting of Superman's origin and, at the same time, it's a hilariously convoluted... well, why should I spoil it for you? We won't even get half way through all of the crazy in this one little paperback today.

Supermanbw7_3

 

I love the idea that he knows he can melt steel with his eyes, but it never occurs to him that if he does that with glasses on he'll melt the lenses. I know I would do that.


Continue reading "The Superman Story" »

If you want Iron Man to be heroic again, here's what you have to do.

It's fairly simple, actually, and although this whole Skrull business is silly, it does open the door to allow it.

Suppose Tony Stark really does and has suspected some kind of weird conspiracy inside S.H.I.E.L.D. and HYDRA and even various world governments. How would he fight it? He'd need to throw suspicion off of himself, possibly by integrating himself into the machinery of the very conspiracy he feared, of course. Directorate of S.H.I.E.L.D. which he had a hand in creating after all isn't a bad idea. But how does he hope to dig up any dirt on it from such a well watched, public position?

Well, clearly he couldn't.

But a dead man could.

What if this whole thing, from the Civil War on, has in part been a smoke screen? What if it's a plan? What if it's Cap's plan?

We often forget what a brilliant tactician Steve Rogers is. His behavior in the final confrontation with Iron Man and his forces was, quite honestly, tremendously sub-par. Oh, sure, he won the fight, and then he gave up. Captain America, depicted so often as someone who never gives up, gave up. And then he was assassinated in the most ridiculously contrived scene ever, as every advantage that would have prevented his death was haphazardly neutralized.

Perhaps not so haphazardly. Perhaps Cap wanted to make sure he would be believed as dead as dead can be. After all, while the red, white and blue costume would be conspicuous, what's just another blandly handsome blond dude wandering around America? No one would notice him.

We forget how many superspies Cap has worked alongside. The Black Widow, Nick Fury, Sharon Carter and most of S.H.I.E.L.D. - there's a reason Cap took the front line against HYDRA and Madame Viper as many times as he did, a reason that goes beyond tossing a disc at people. Cap's much smarter, and far more tenacious, and far more gifted tactically than most are willing to give him credit for. They...we... see the big broad grin and the brighly colored costume and we forget that this man's been on the front lines for years, has worked behind the scenes as well as in full view of everyone, that he managed to outfight and outwit everyone from Baron Strucker to the Masters of Evil, from AIM to Doctor Doom. He doesn't give up, he doesn't repeat a mistake, he can think on his feet better than anyone, and he's smart enough to smell a set up a mile away.

If you want to redeem Tony Stark, make him Steve Rogers' inside man for the biggest con ever pulled, the conspiracy to deceive skrulls.

August 07, 2007

Gratuitous Gil Kane post Number One

Since I'm using the scanner to make up for any real content on this page, I might as well do a post about Gil Kane. This scan is from Kane and Roy Thomas' adaptation of The Ring of the Nibelung, as is a scan I'll be linking to instead of posting because, well, it's a drawing of a very naked woman.

I don't have much to add to the pictures... Kane's always been one of my favorite artists, but I'm no master of illustration. I would have loved to see Kane get to work on Conan more than the two issues and covers he did. I'm hoping to find good scans from his run on Thor soon, or the Superman storylines he illustrated. For now, I'll leave you with these.

Since I have a working scanner now...

Wouldn't it be funny to see what it would look like if Jim Shooter and Curt Swan were the creative team on Batman? Sure it would! And while I can't actually show you that, I can show you what Batman's origin would look like in their hands, thanks to an imaginary story from December of 1967.

Okay, so maybe not so much funny as horrifying. The look on young Bruce's face really sells it.

The story in question ("Superman and Batman - Brothers!") is kind of demented, but at the same time, a fairly entertaining read. For some reason, instead of letting a dometic servant take care of the kid with no real supervision for a decade, the Gotham City Social Services department decides to put the kid in a foster home in Kansas, and he ends up adopted by the Kents. Soon (according to the story, days later in fact) young Bruce starts beating the hell out of bullies and taking crime scene photographs of defeated tank-riding burglars who made the mistake of taking their tanks to rob Smallville, where the most powerful living thing in existence happens to reside, instead of taking those selfsame tanks to, say, anywhere else. Soon, young Clark is concerned that Bruce intends to emulate the very villains he himself foils so assiduously as Superboy, and one misunderstanding later, Batboy is born and helps fight crime in Smallville alongside Superboy.

No, I don't know why a small town in Kansas had so much crime that there was enough work for Superboy and Batboy.

Upon growing up, the dynamic duo of Batman and Superman decide to go fight crime from out of Bruce's enormous mansion in Gotham City. They foil an attack by Luthor, which leads to the following page, which I will let speak for itself.

Yeah. Luthor really should have known better than to try androids against Batman. Especially when his adopted parents are on the line. There's more images to come, because I went scan happy, so sit back and enjoy.

We all know Batman is about to seriously kick Luthor's ass, of course. I mean, for one thing, the dude just killed his adoptive parents right in front of him. Also, the costume's really badly ripped up, and we all know that when Batman starts showing some skin you're in deep trouble, Finally, take a look at those hands. No one holds their hands up above their head like that unless they're going to bring them down on someone else's skull. Am I right?

Oh yeah, I am right. (I should learn how to thumbnail these.) Anyway, Batman almost kills Luthor but manages to snap out of it at the last moment and soon tells Superman that he's giving up crimefighting for good. Superman's remarkably calm about the whole 'hey, your parents just got snuffed' thing compared to Batman, and decides he knows the best therapy for an unhinged vigilante who has had to endure the deaths of two sets of parents.

Yes, he takes him to the future and basically forces him to join the Legion of Super Heroes.

Superman doesn't have time for crap like grief or therapy, he just tosses your ass in the deep end of the 30th century. I wonder how many members of the LSH joined because Superman kidnapped them from their own time periods. Is Element Lad really just Jacob Priestly, forced to join rather than give up his love of chemistry?

Anyway, yeah, that's what Jim Shooter and Curt Swan did with Batman. Some of the scenes are actually quite touching, but I didn't let that stop me from making fun of them.

Look, if you don't want people to spread rumors, don't weep when you see him kissing a woman, okay?

From the annals of Batman and Robin, I present you with this.

Yeah, okay. You know, I often think people just want to BELIEVE that you guys are a couple. But then you go and do this, and well, I don't know what other conclusion I could be drawing.

July 12, 2007

The Joker and his problems

I have a confession.

Like everyone who has ever read a comic book, I have liked the Batman from time to time. I mean, the concept's golden. A brilliant, wealthy man orphaned by a senseless, random killing who dedicates himself to preventing the very type of crime that made him, living in a vast cave stocked with dinosaurs and giant coins, there's a lot to like there. I enjoy the detective aspect of the character, that he doesn't just drop down from rooftops and beat information out of thugs but that he can also sift through clues to find a criminal. Decades before the American public found CSI, Batman was tracking down criminals by determining that a specific kind of mud on their shoes came from a quarry outside of town or remembering a pirate captain whose name sounded like the prefix Bi. To be honest, since the Batman is just a normal human who has trained and studied to be where he is, my biggest problem with him is when he's too omniscient and omnipotent - I like stories where the Batman might actually take a shot to the noggin or be held at gunpoint once in a while. I know that he'll get out of whatever predicament he's put into, mind you, but I like it better when I have to wonder how instead of knowing he'll just dodge the bullet and beat the guy up. Not that I mind it when Batman brings the punching, but it shouldn't be all he does. The best Batman stories are ones where he outwits his enemies as much as outfights them.

That's why Bane was such a lackluster villain, to my mind. Sure, he broke Batman's back, but he didn't do so by any brilliant scheme aimed at the man, he did it through attrition. On the one hand, it's an interesting idea to release all the crazies from Arkham and force Batman to track them all down, but should the big master villain be counting on fighting an exhausted, weakened Batman? It kind of makes a lie of the whole idea that Bane wants to fight Batman to prove anything, since it doesn't prove anything other than the fact that Batman does in fact need to eat, sleep and rest from time to time.

And this is why, in theory, I like the Joker so much as a villain and therefore dislike how he's been used in the years since The Killing Joke. It's even possible to blame The Joker's Five Way Revenge to some degree, since it was the first reappearance of the Joker after he'd been watered down in the 50's and 60's to the kind of guy who talked about boners all the time, and it was a brilliant re-invention and return to the roots of the character as a dangerous and lethal criminal mind. It hearkened back to his first appearance, when he managed to kill a man in a room full of police by poisoning the man's dog, which attacked the intended victim and not the disguised Batman. However, as brilliant as it was, and as welcome as the Englehart and Rogers appearances of the character which deepened his insanity (who can forget the Joker Fish?) the problem is what happened when the homicidal clown ended up appearing again and again, killing and maiming as he went.

One of the reasons the Joker went from a maniac to a capering jester, in fact, was due to the fact that the DC Editorial offices didn't want reoccuring characters who went around murdering folks because it made Batman look ineffectual. And many, many fans have pointed out over the years that the Batman's refusal to kill the Joker has in fact cost countless lives. At this point, Jim Gordon alone has lost a wife and seen his daughter crippled by the Joker, and both of those events could be laid at the Batman's boots. He's had plenty of opportunity to toss the Joker off a roof by now, and he never does it. Indeed, he's probably not capable of killing someone, due to the traumatic event that formed his persona so many years ago. Bruce Wayne is a man who was broken forever as a child, broken by a murder to the degree that he can't ever put paid to the experience. Therefore, he can never kill the Joker.

Therefore, the Joker has to stop randomly killing people.

The Joker as a homicidal madman is a good idea and one that should be retained, but quite honestly we could use a few years of a less psychotic criminal. Personally, I don't know why, when we're dealing with a character who takes his central motif from a playing card and who traces back his origin to having fallen into a vat of chemicals that permanently deformed him, that no one's ever decided to throttle back the murder aspect of the character and throttle up the random aspect.

Both Batman and the Joker are creations of chaos intruding into a life, formed by a random moment that is at once pivotal and unimaginable in the context of their previous lives. The Batman is a boy forever prevented from becoming a normal man by the sudden shock of a muzzle flash, his childhood forever broken by a graveside vow and his own inability to accept what had happened: his world changed, but he could not accept it, could not accomodate it, and spent his entire life dedicating himself to the idea that he could somehow make it right, bring order to the chaos of crime infesting his city, the real city that was suddenly and brutally shown to him in one veil-rending instant. And the Joker? The Joker is a man who dressed up in a Red Hood either to commit crimes or because he was forced to (depending on if you like the more classic origin or the Alan Moore version) who lost everything when he was driven into a vat of caustic chemicals by Batman. Made a freak, he embraced his freakishness, and became in fact the thing he resembled, a chalk white loon.

Batman's reaction is to try and impose order on chaos. The Joker's reaction is to bring chaos everywhere he goes, but chaos can be portrayed in other ways than random murder. I was disappointed that when Grant Morrison took on the Joker recently, he chose to simply deform him even more and have him poison his own henchmen... again. Why not have the Joker come out of his recent trauma with a newfound interest in the small butterfly wingbeats that beget typhoons? Imagine a story where the Joker is playing dominos with the people of Gotham... robbing this person, kidnapping that one, diverting a pension fund into yet another person's private account... in an attempt to manipulate the city of Gotham into mass instability. And Batman has to try and work out how the chaos is going to bloom. Why did the Joker steal the costume from a local college team's mascot and wear it while robbing the Gotham Stock Exchange, and for that matter, why did the Joker break into the Gotham Stock Exchange just to steal three stockbroker's wallets at gunpoint? Why is he paying street gangs to slash the tires of every Audi 5000 in the city? Imagine a Joker storyline where nobody dies at all, because the Joker spends the entire time manipualting people to careen off of each other in unexpected ways so that a young woman who would have died is delayed getting home? The Joker's insanity is played up more often than his genius is, but it's telling to remember that he invented that Joker Venom of his. Imagine his twisted genius turning itself to the study of Chaos Theory as the Joker plays ever more elaborate simulation games... except with real people, in the actual city, the best test bed a madman could ask for.

A Joker who wants to study chaos could be a nice change of pace. Gotham is a complex system - a Joker who understands how to properly knock over the right piece could make millions without even committing a crime, and then spend millions on a series of crimes that serve no purpose other than to help increase his understanding. And in the end, once he's achieved enough he could go back to killing people again, but this time killing with an eye towards creating that perfect storm of chaos - killing one man, if it's the right man, can bring down the whole system. And it's not the Commissioner, or the Batman, it's someone else... someone who can have the proper effect, a domino who in toppling starts the whole chain reaction going. How does Batman prevent the Joker from killing one man out of millions, and if he can't, can he prevent that one act from toppling Gotham?

A Joker story where there's tension again, where it matters, where the Joker's not just a giggling homicide factory. I think it could be interesting. And more, it makes the Batman/Joker dynamic worth pursuing again.

July 06, 2007

The Conspiracy to Destroy a World

You know, there's a lot of mileage in conspiracy stories. Faceless, unknown men and women hidden behind a veil of secrecy, taking advantage of political instability for their own reasons and to benefit their suspicious, unsure goals. Imagine a beloved General involved in an attempted coup, a respected rocket scientist destroying a whole city full of people, occult madmen sacrificing whole herds of endangered sacred animals in a bid for immortality and framing an innocent for ther crime. Imagine unheeded warnings about planetary scale disasters, a respected family fallen on hard times, laughed and derided by the people. And imagine all the whole the doomsday clock ticking closer and closer to the end of the entire world while the populace writhed against itself, seeking to find new ways to imprison its people.

Imagine this, and you imagine the end of a world. That world was Krypton.

By the middle of the Silver Age the mythologization of the world of Krypton had hit a fever pitch. The flora and fauna of that lost paradise were established, complete with creatures who projected their thoughts onto their own foreheads, animals that could create their own rebirth, and at least two separate species that could breathe fire. The mountains were pure crystal. The waterfalls burned as they fell. And the people of Krypton lived in a paradise ruled by scientists, thinking men and women in a council of Science who supposedly governed their planet outside of the hobblings of superstition and irrationality. And yet, the cracks were showing by the time Jor-El first realized something was wrong. His own family, the house of El, now had an arms merchant among its number. His former friend and mentor, General Zod, led an attempted coup against the Science Council itself while another of his former respected colleagues blew up the moon Wegthor while attempting to develop a ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead anywhere on Krypton's surface, killing an entire colony. Nam-Ek, a respected scientist, wipes out a population of sacred animals known as Rondors in an attempt to attain a form of immortality and actually succeeds. Geneticists and scholars, cryogenicists and martial arts experts, it's strange to consider how many experts in their fields end up going mad and being imprisoned in an extradimensional gulag at this time.

If you were of a mind to, of course, you could think about the implication that the impending destruction of the planet was looming large in the collective unconscious of the Kryptonians themselves. It's even more tempting to see the Phantom Zone itself as a kind of borderland between dimensions, in effect saying that Krypton chose to imprison its criminals in a land of pure thought (on many occassions it was shown that the Zone was affected only by thought and that the Zoners could send their thoughts into our reality, even once trying to use Jor-El himself to get free). Is the Phantom Zone Krypton's Akashic Record? Was the choice to imprison so many here what caused them to go mad and commit crimes that got them imprisoned there, a cause and effect and cause nightmare similar to an ourborous, and was all this planned for? Did someone want to make sure that some of Krypton survived, visionaries and experts who could convievably use their abilities to rebuild a new Krypton somewhere else? You have Zod and Faora to defend the nascent New Krypton, Nam-Ek and Va-Kox could theoretically recreate many of its flora and fauna, Jax-Ur and Kru-El could develop new weapons... if you wanted to create a pocket army of Kryptonian conquest, the Phantom Zone is a great place to stash it.

Another paradox to consider when thinking about Krypton and its ultimate explosive end is that, in great part, it was made worse by alien intervention. Specifically, little blue aliens and their green garbed servitors. I'm speaking here of the Guardians of the Universe and their Green Lanterns, especially the GL of Krypton's sector, Tomar Re. As per the Guardians orders, Tomar Re dampened the radioactive reaction at the core of Krypton, allowing the planet more time to learn of its perilous circumstances, yet in so doing he also caused a major problem for Jor-El, the scientist who did learn of it. Mainly that Jor-El's findings indicated that the planet should have already blown up. As a result, no one would believe him, and he was unable to convince the Science Council to fund his project to evacuate the planet. Am I the only one who thinks it possible, perhaps even likely that the Guardians, immortal psionic intelligences, might well have known this was going to happen? Perhaps they even wanted it to happen?

One Kryptonian on any other planet than Krypton can change the course of development for a world, maybe multiple worlds. He can change history, even. But ten? A hundred? A thousand? All of them? If Jor-El had succeeded in his plan to evacuate the planet, what happens next? A planet of Kryptonians exposed to conditions in the greater universe could rise to become a power so great that even the godlings of Apokolips and New Genesis must contend with them. Could even the entire Green Lantern Corps stand against tens, hundreds of thousands of Kryptonians? And keep in mind that despite their enormous power (or potential power) the people of the planet Krypton have proved themselves to be just as irrational, just as capable of love or hate, cruelty or kindness as any other mortals. These are not cosmic embodiments of ideals, these are flesh and blood men and women... with the possible power to crack planets. Do you want to let them out into the cosmos? And if not, how do you stop them?

If a group of meddling immortals who have been manipulating the cosmos for eons finds itself face to face with the possible rise of a power that would blot it out of existence, do they subtly invade said power's culture and begin manipulating it? Do they try and direct the culture's energies inwards, subvert its best and brightest down blind allieys and into paths of egotism or narcissism? Do they try and cause the leadership to exile their greatest minds to a hoary netherworld to reduce their influence while preserving their genius? And do they in the end make sure that the planet's greatest visionary is reduced to a near-gibbering wreck launching his son's pets off into space in a doomed effort to save some small corner of his own world, until strapping his own son into a rocket seems like all the choice left to him? The Guardians sure look like prime suspects here. But there are other candidates. What, after all, about the future?

By coming to Earth, Superman forever changes it. He brings with himself his heritage, and builds an outpost of his lost homeworld on our soil like a seed. He stands as an immigrant, keeping his alien traditions alive while embracing ours, an adopted son of our star and our soil. He is raised a man, and seeks to be a good one, to protect the only home he'll ever know. Earth changes him from infancy. And he changes it. Who is this near-god who walks like a man? Who never seeks to profit by his enormous power, his titanic intellect? No Zod, to attempt to sieze control. No Nam-Ek, no Jax-Ur, not even a Jor-El who fails ultimately to save his people. In a cosmos where most remaining Kryptonians are stuck in a bottle, or on a dome over a lead sheet that will eventually fail them, or as hate-choked ghosts who escaped death by being for all intents and purposes angry undead trapped in Krypton's netherworld, the Last Son of Krypton manages to bring all that was good and noble about his lost home and weld it in himself to all that is kind and worthwhile in his new one. He starts a legacy that lasts for over a millennia, which leads to a United Planets which forges peace and colonizes the stars, and a mighty Legion of Super-Heroes which patrols that future. Through him comes the utopia.

Would the utopia sacrifice millions, if not billions, of Kryptonian lives in the past to ensure that their future came to be? Would they travel back to lost Krypton and use their shape shifting, their telepathy, their uncounted 12th Level Effector intelligences to shape and manipulate the direction Krypton travels? Would they take it upon themselves to ensure the existence of the Superman by, in effect, orphaning him? They certainly could do it. One can imagine a Legion Espionage Squad tale of the suspicions of some members of the team as to the actions and whereabouts of others... why did Chamelon Lad and Brainiac 5 take the Time Bubble to the early 20th Century while the rest of us were fighting Universo? Why did Saturn Girl and Dream Girl have Mon-El write that account of his ancient visit to the planet and how Jor-El warned him away? And why does it seem like the Time Trapper is helping them?

In the end there are no answers, because these are just questions asked in passing of stories long since told. But it's curious to realize that, just before it destroyed itself, the world of Krypton seemed to go completely mad. Not that you or I would know anything about a world suffering and seemingly divided against itself when it should in fact be working together, each woman and man, to solve the terrible catastrophes looming on the horizon.

July 04, 2007

The duty of a writer of pastiche is to resemble the original - Thomas and Windsor-Smith vs. Busiek and Nord on Conan

It's hardly a suprise that I enjoy Robert E. Howard's writing, I've said it enough times. As a result, my hesitation to read the recent relaunch of an ongoing Conan series by Dark Horse Comics may or may not be surprising. On the one hand, I enjoy every single Conan story written by Howard himself, but on the other, I can't stand Lin Carter, L. Sprague de Camp or Robert Jordan's attempts to write him. And I've had mixed feelings about Kurt Busiek as a writer in the past. I've liked parts of Astro City but disliked Marvels, and haven't felt strongly enough about his other work one way or another.

It doesn't help that I've been re-reading the original Roy Thomas stories as Dark Horse has collected those, and frankly despite an ominvoric attempt to take every REH story that's not nailed down and adapt it as a Conan tale (and some stories neither about Conan nor written by Howard - at one point, Thomas adapts C.L. Moore's classic Shambleau which basically takes balls of molten steel the size of small planets... why not adapt Moby Dick? Hell, who knows, maybe he did, I haven't read past volume 6 of the reprints yet) Thomas does a really good job of making a Conan who resembles the original, a lot better than most fans of Howard would be prepared to admit, I think.

This is in part due to a general hostility towards the 'non-canonical' interference of later authors interpolating their own versions of Conan, generally less intelligent, less interesting Conans to be sure, and to be fair Thomas' Conan is less intelligent and capable than Howard's is. But Thomas isn't writing straight pastiche here, he's adapting the character and his milleu to the comic book form, and paradoxically to bring Conan to four color life it's actually necessary to present him as, well, less superheroic. This is most easily seen in the development of the series from the first few issues, which are drawn by Barry Windsor-Smith in a rather typical Kirbian four color style and which feature time travelling wizards, pictures of moon landings, and apes straight out of the silver age. Frankly, they don't work. It's only when Thomas and Windsor-Smith focus on Conan's exploits as a young, untried thief and adventurer new to the southern lands of the Hyborian Age that the series begins to find itself, and frankly in order for that change to work Conan cannot seem as indomitable and omnicapable as he often does in Howard's work.

Yeah, I can't believe I just argued that for Conan to work in the comics he has to be toned down, but it's true, at least for the first issues of Thomas' run. Howard's character is admirable because, in his first appearance, he's already an experienced man, a former reaver, a King, learned in both lore and the hard language of violence, still capable and willing to draw steel but not the fur-clad near savage he once was, and because Howard chose a non-linear way to produce new Conan stories we always met him at some different point in his career, always informed of his ultimate destiny but able to see him through new eyes... a young savage in Zamora climbing an elephant tower, a reaver along the southern coast called Amra the Lion, a frontiersman on the Aquilonian border to Pictland. Thomas' series, on the other hand, was progressing in a linear fashion from younger to older, and as a result Conan needs room to change and grow in a way that he didn't in Howard's stories. For the most part, it works. It helps that, despite the general sneering of the Howard fan at the comics, Windsor-Smith's portrayal of the man helps capture the 'panther-like ferocity' so oft remarked by his original chronicler.

To see Barry Windsor-Smith's work on Conan in Volumes 1 through 4 of the collections is to see an artist continually improve in almost surprising leaps and bounds. The artist who draws the first few stories would seem a pale imitation of the man who painstakingly illustrated Red Nails if not for the fact that we know it's the same man, and while Smith has never been a bad artist, it's telling to say that if Gil Kane had done two issues of the book at the early stages of the run, Smith might well have never come back to it. But by the end of his run, he could leave the book in Kane's hands and then decide to return, and in fact was even a better choice for interior artist on the title. Considering how much I love Gil Kane as an artist, that's saying a BIG something, but it's still true. As good an artist as Kane was, by that time Smith was even better. He perfectly suited the character and subject matter.

Having said that Thomas did a better Conan pastiche than some of the most famous authors ever to touch the character, and having said that Smith did wonderful, character defining art for the book, how then do I rate Busiek and Nord, the writer and artist who launched the modern series?

They do themselves proud. In fact, I was very surprised to find that, while I still prefer Thomas and Smith, I really enjoyed Busiek's take on the character. Unlike some of his superhero work, which can be somewhat drenched in maple for my taste, Busiek writes a sparse, lean script on the six plus issues of the book collected in the Dark Horse paperback entitled The Frost Giant's Daughter and other stories. Unlike Thomas, who often chose to adapt REH stories about other characters into Conan stories, or non-REH Conan stories, or even non-REH, non-Conan stories if he liked them enough, Busiek appears to be taking the established Howard stories and using them as a frame to give himself room to write all new tales of the Cimmerian. It allows him to stamp the stories as his own from the start without being nearly so beholden on the interpolations of writers like Carter and De Camp, although it's clear that like them he keeps the essay A Probable Outline of Conan's Career by Clark and Schuyler somewhere in mind, in terms of the chronology of Conan's career. I found myself impressed by Busiek's ability to present Conan as smart, young, eager, brave, and vicious in turn in his stories, while still retaining just enough youthful naivete to believe the legends of lost Hyperborea. Nord, for his part, usually does a rather remarkable job portraying the moody and violent land of the northern Hyborian wastes, and might well be at his best in the issues set in Hyperborea itself, where Conan confronts the horrible cost of the magical paradise he's come so far to discover. Nord's art isn't perfect - at times he renders the future King of Aquilonian with a simpering, slack-jawed grin simply not suitable for a man who would rather let a poet stab him than destroy an artist, but such missteps are rare.

Luckily, in the volumes I have assembled I can compare and contrast the two creative teams by looking at one story they both adapted: Howard's The Frost Giant's Daughter. Nord and Busiek choose to open with scenes of headless bodies laying dead in the snow as seen from above, while Thomas and Smith give us a vast panorama of the dead against the white with two small figures in the center of the dead, two last warriors coming to blows alone amidst the corpses. Nord chooses vivid, jagged motion and grotesqueries to set the piece in a distinctive style, while for Smith there is instead a clean, stark spareness to the lines as Conan slays the last member of Hymdul's band and later chases the daughter of Ymir across the snowy wastes, intent on catching her for his own lusts. I can't say which approach is better. I prefer Windsor-Smith's rendition of the daughter of Ymir and the frost giants, but Nord's dynamism is visually appealing and suits the story well.

In the end, an old man prefers that which he came to know first, but I can't say I dislike Busiek and Nord's work on Conan so far. It's some of the best work Busiek's ever done.

Next time, I may discuss The Immortal Iron Fist which I read, I think, based on Chris Maka's recommendation. But I may not be doing it here. It depends on a few things. Cryptic enough for you?

June 26, 2007

Spider-sense and my obsessively fannish need to explain it

Been thinking about Spider-Sense for a while now. It's the kind of detail that, quite frankly, ends up mattering a lot more in the comics then you'd expect. It's simple on the surface: Spider-Man can sense danger and take split-second action to avoid it, making it extremely hard for his enemies to bash, zap or otherwise cause him harm, what with the whole superhuman speed and agility deal he's got going on. The problems start once you examine what the ability does and doesn't do, and who it works against and when it doesn't.

For starters, Peter was quick to determine a means to create radio signals that he could detect with his Spider-Sense and created tracers he could affix to people and then follow them via the ability. My kudos to the man, at the time still in high school, for figuring out how to create a radio signal that a seemingly psychic ability to predict danger could detect. Was it very menacing radio waves? Was he broadcasting War of the Worlds on those Spider-Tracers?

Things get more interesting when we consider that there are three people who have displayed the ability to suppress or 'fool' spider-sense to one degree or another. The first was Norman Osborn, the Green Goblin. who created a gas that could shut it down for extended periods. The second was the alien symbiote that originally bonded to him and then to Eddie Brock, becoming Venom. This enemy doesn't trigger spider-sense at all. And finally, recently Iron Man used biometric data collected from a suit he designed for Spider-Man to create a supposed 'pheromone' means of blocking the spider-sense, which most folks dismissed as technobabble. But in fact I think it fits perfectly.

Look at it this way. Spiders have exceptionally keen tactile senses - wolf spiders can detect an intrude outside their lair, most web-spinning spiders can tell when something is on a strand of their webbing and pinpoint their location with ease. Obviously the radioactive spider bite generally enhanced Peter Parker strength, speed and general acuity to superhuman levels. Perhaps it also tuned up his senses: he can see, hear, smell, taste and has an enhanced tactile sense. But he's not cognizant of the changes, or just how far reaching they are, in part because his brain is still human and doesn't really have the wiriing a Daredevil or Wolverine has. So Peter can't consciously use these enhanced senses. But subconsciously, his advanced tactile sense combines with his other general senses to create a constant, jumped up sense of low-grade paranoia, a constant 'what's that' that translates to a buzzing in the back of his brain. His ability to detect radio signals would simply be a very high-tuned extension of that buzz all human beings have felt when entering a place with a great deal of electronic equipment humming away. And the pheromone bullshite from Iron Man suddenly makes a lot of sense: he neutralizes the spider-sense by fooling Peter with smell. Essentially, he smells like Peter so to Peter's subconscious, he is Peter. This also works for how Venom fools the sense. Venom was biologically bonded to Peter and as a result, replicated him and his abilities - in essence, Venom smells and moves so much like Peter does that to Peter's subconscious alert system, that's him back there. Finally, the Pumpkin Bombs probably worked on the same principle that causes you to tune out a horrible smell if you're around it long enough. Blanket Spider-Man in a chemical so awful that his tuned up senses won't stop screaming at him that it's bad, bad news and his brain simply stops producing the warning buzz because if it didn't, Pete would probably go insane.

Yes, i spent all morning thinking about this. My apologies.

June 25, 2007

Why do you still read comics if you hate them most of the time?

That's a very good question. I don't have a very good answer.

I recently had a very negative experience with a comic book weblog I used to write for. Frankly, there was a very unpleasant human being writing there and he made it impossible for me to continue to write for them, which was a shame for me as I enjoyed having a place to post these musings. However, since it's not terribly onerous to start a new website, here I am. Eventually I hope to post weird essays here again, as it was my first love in blogging, but in the meantime here I sit, wondering why I still read comic books.

I guess it comes down to me still enjoying the idea of comics, both superheroic and non. I enjoy the combination of words and images, a strange admixture of art and dialogue that brings to mind cinema or theatre. I like the idea more than the reality most days, which makes me kind of sad. To be honest, I enjoy the unlimited ability of comics to show you something truly vast and sweeping without fear of a budget issue: comics are the natural home for stories with tens or hundreds of thousands of boats crashing ashore to sack Troy, or space lit with the exhaust of hundreds of fighters locked in combat, or a essentially noble and good-hearted alien pushing a planet. Comics are where crime orphaned avengers can do backflips off of rooftops and kick five men in the jaw in three seconds. The image is monarch of comics, be it a quiet study of a woman's recovery from cancer or a small planet of microscopic monster-movie rejects in a crazed geneticists basement.

I suppose I keep looking for that magic. I don't enjoy painfully nitpicking over every published appearance of a character and rejecting certain ones because they don't fit whatever some editorial board has declared the one, true version of said character this year and which we'll reject in turn soon enough. It's tedious. But I enjoy wonder and epic scope. I enjoy a story where a man in a metal suit can end up fighting the Frankenstein Monster, a giant silver robot, a man who turns things to gold with a touch, and a scarred knight on a mutant horse more than I enjoy the same man in a metal suit running a government agency seemingly dedicated to arresting people for stopping a robbery at a convenience store. I like it better when the guy in the cape and cowl fights human-animal hybrids in an art museum to when he gets a teenage girl killed. I even like it better when I read a psychological and moral explication of the Trojan War to when a bunch of people stand around a table bickering with each other.

I guess I'm weird that way.