The Hefner's CAVALCADE OF COMICS! The Used-Comics Edition! HAWKWORLD! BATMAN! SPIDER-MAN! DOOOOOM!!!

[thehefner]

So how did I celebrate getting the Winnipeg Traffic Authority to forgive my $50 ticket for parking illegally on their ill-marked and confusing streets?



I rarely ever buy back issues anymore, as I'm firmly a trade paperback guy. Hell, the LAST thing I need are more old comics, when I very much need to sell off the contents of at least six of my twelve long boxes. That's roughly 2,500 comics I have from over the years.

And here I go, throwing an assload of new ones onto the pile. Shit, I need to buy a new box for them. Counter-intuitive, Hefner!

What really started this was my desire to catch-up with a series absolutely beloved by angrylemur, the post-Crisis reboot of Hawkman, HAWKWORLD, starting with the original mini-series by Tim Truman:



... followed by the first twenty-five issues of the ongoing series by the great John Ostrander, Truman, and terrible early art from the eventually-great Graham Nolan.



Going in, I knew virtually nothing about Katar Hol, and even less about Shayera. Superheroes from a fascist planet, that was about it. My entire Hawkman knowledge was pretty much rooted in Carter Hall's reintroduction to the DCU by Geoff Johns in JSA.

I was never a fan of Hawkman per se, but I always had a strong appreciation for Carter, who could be like Conan the Barbarian with wings. If I were a bad guy and I saw Carter coming for me, I'd shit myself. I really would. He is the kind of guy who will fly headfirst into a plane's cockpit, smashing through the windshield and bashing a terrorist's skull in with a huge fucking mace. Hawkman will fuck your shit up with his feathery beaked justice.

But then there's Katar, and all the brain-hurting continuity problems he introduced. On top of that, there's Post-Crisis Katar, from the late 80's. This means yet another take on a shiny Silver Age character, redone in the grim 'n gritty grr argh angst/violence/boobies/angst era of comics. I went into HAWKWORLD with a healthy dose of skepticism, you understand. And I ended up absolutely loving it.

What mainly sells the series is not just the vivid depiction of Thanagar itself, but particularly the character dynamics of Katar and Shayera, which is one of the most fascinating and complex partnerships I've ever seen in superhero comics. It's the kind of treatment I'd really love to see done with Hal and Ollie, as well as the Green Lantern Corps in general. Neither Katar nor Shayera come off as mouthpieces for the writer's views in the way Green Arrow did, the way so many others do in comics that tackle thinly-veiled metaphors for society. They're more complex and nuanced than that, which is hardly surprising, given it's John Ostrander at the helm.

Ostrander: one of the most underappreciated comic writers ever, if I do say so myself. It's a shame that he's not held in higher esteem today. To make matters worse, he may be losing his eyesight to glaucoma. Here's hoping they'll be able to raise the funds, because as Warren Ellis pointed out, there are few things scarier for a writer than the prospect of going blind. Hopefully he'll be all right, and furthermore, hopefully the word spread about this will ultimately lead to more work and greater appreciation of him in the comics community.

The man salvaged Barbara Gordon after her horrifically dehumanizing treatment in THE KILLING JOKE and subsequently made her more awesome than ever by creating Oracle in the pages of SUICIDE SQUAD, an excellent series that gave us richly awesome and layered badasses with Amanda Waller, Floyd "Deadshot" Lawton, and Boomerbutt. Okay, Boomerbutt wasn't exactly layered and badass, but he was awesome in his own skeezy back-stabby way. That's because Ostrander understands character dynamics in a way few other mainstream comic writers do, given layers and levels of interaction and humanity to even the most gaudily-dressed superfolk.

Which made my next acquisition all the more intriguing:



GOTHAM NIGHTS #1-4, and GOTHAM NIGHTS II #1-4, two mini-series by Ostrander that explore a handful of average Gotham citizens in their daily lives. Kind of like SHORT CUTS in Gotham City, with Batman himself making little more than a cameo apparance.

I liked the first mini-series better than the second, which was less about citizens of Gotham as a whole and more about people involved with a rusted-down old theme park located in an island in the Harbor. Still, both stories are way better done than they could have been in the hands of most other writers, and the closest we've seen since is, like, GOTHAM CENTRAL. I'm an absolute sucker for down-to-earth character-based stories in my superhero comics, and wish there could be more of that amidst the fisticuffs and action. Ostrander is one of those rare writers who can excel at both.

But since we're already in Gotham, we'd be remiss to leave out the Bat-family entirely. Check out this three-part gem I found:



I'm willing to guess that about three of you shuddered in geekgasm at the night of this cover. The rest of you probably wondered why anyone would see fit to write Batman's darkest secrets into an impractically giant book or anyone to discover. Maybe the logic went, "I'll make it so big that no one will be able to lift the cover! You'd need like, THREE people to read it! No one will ever think of that!" Or maybe it's a normal book, and these are Lilliputian tiny Bat-villains. Either way, it strikes me that writing a book of this is a bad idea.

My history with THE UNTOLD LEGEND OF THE BATMAN stretches back to 1989, when six-year-old John Hefner procured miniturized versions of issues #2 and #3 as prizes in the BATMAN breakfast cereal. It's retained a place in my heart ever since, even though I'd never read the first part until last week. UNTOLD is essentially the Ultimate Pre-Crisis Batman story, covering the 40-year-history of Batman, his allies, and his enemies in a way that makes a fine introduction to newbies.

Part #2 was the second comic book I ever read. The first was the third part of "A Lonely Place of Dying." What do the two have in common? Jim motherfucking Aparo drawing Batman, and also introducing little Heffie to a strangely intriguing new character by the name of... wait for it... yes, you guessed it: Harvey Dent. These were the comics that, in one fell swoop, introduced me to the Bat-world in general and Two-Face in particular.

I think a whole generation identifies Aparo as THE Batman artist. In the years since, I've come to see that he was far from perfect. His Joker particularly is one of the most notably less-impressive ones out there, which is all the more regrettable considering Aparo drew A DEATH IN THE FAMILY. And yet, going back to UNTOLD LEGEND, I was treated to three issues of Aparo on the very top of his game, and my head was spinning from a giddy combination of childhood nostalgia and modern geekgasm.

And then, there's Aparo's Harvey. I never realized till I reread this just why it is I love his take on Two-Face. I mean, sure, the scarring is your classic cheesy green lumpy scarring, and Aparo was known to dress Harvey up in white turtlenecks for some reason. And yet, his unscarred side was... I dunno, there was always something so sad about Aparo's Harvey. It's the same pained, tortured, haunted look that Aaron Eckhart had on that poster for THE DARK KNIGHT, the all-too-human aspect of the character that's so often lost in the interest of just making him a one-note bad guy with a generically handsome-ish "good side."

I mean, really, if you want a perfect origin of Pre-Crisis Two-Face, you won't find any better than this page from UNTOLD LEGEND OF THE BATMAN # 2:



Cheesy? Sure, in the way that the best classic superhero comics are! And for an impressionable little Hefner, it was this page that started what would grow into a lifelong adoration. That it should be included in what is pretty much one of the best Bat-comics ever, period. In its way.

Plus, it has Alfred playing Hamlet. So there.

Okay, this has gotten WAY more long-winded than I intended. Let's keep the rest short and sweet, shall we?

The last of the DC comics I procured, there's the AQUAMAN mini-series by Keith Giffen, Robert Loren Flemming, Curt Swan, and Al Vey:





I wish there were a better scan of that cover, because wow, between that and the creative team, how the hell could I *not* have been intrigued? Sadly, the story was seriously "meh." I had hoped to find a classic Aquaman story that I could finally use as proof of the character's awesomeness, just as I now can use HAWKWORLD to introduce folks to that mythos. But it wasn't to be. What a disappointment.

But DC's not the only one prone to disappointment:



SPIDER-MAN: THE DEATH OF JEAN DEWOLFE is the other great, famous, classic dark SPIDER-MAN story, right alongside KRAVEN'S LAST HUNT (it'd be my favorite Spider-Man story if it weren't such an atypical Spider-Man story so as not to really count). I'd always wanted to read it, but it was out of print. Now, at a discount price of $6.50, here was my chance.

What a piece of shit.

Seriously. What a goddamned fucking piece of shit.

I expected much, much better from Peter David. He, like Ostrander, is a writer whose name on a cover is usually a guarantee of quality, or at least having some worth. Not so here. Instead, we have one of the ugliest, most pointless fridgings of a female character I have ever seen, ignominiously killed off-panel at the start of the first issue, and why? For no goddamned reason other than cheap shock value.

I know, I know, we've heard this before, but I'm telling you, this is the most blatant time I've EVER seen it done. I know nothing about Jean, nor her contributions to the Spider-Man mythos at this point, but this outdoes Kyle's girlfriend being shoved in a refrigerator. There was literally no reason for her death. Her killer is a nut in the SEVEN mold called the Sin-Eater, killing people he considers to be sinners: a Judge who "coddles" criminals, a priest who opposed capital punishment, even going after J. Jonah Jameson for opposing masked vigilantes... but why Jean? What was her "sin"? Why did the Sin-Eater target Jean? "Because I felt like it."

Translation: so we could shock readers and grab attention by killing off a notable female supporting character. We'll think of an actual reason later.

Which they did, according to Peter David's notes. Something to do with the Sin-Eater being her spurred lover or something. The typical bullshit. I can't believe I wasted $6.50 on this crap.

But don't worry, Marvel did not fall out of my good graces entirely this haul. For there is one last comic I did have:



FUCK.

YES.

I'd read bits and pieces of this on scans_daily back in the day, and wanted to own it ever since. In it, Doom manages to manipulate the mind-controlling powers of the Purple Man to bend even the strongest wills to his own, including Namor and (most of) the Avengers themselves!

So what happens when Doctor Doom tries to take over the world... and succeeds?



The result is world peace, a thriving global economy, universal prosperity... and a very bored dictator. Because when your whole goal has been conquest, what kind of victory is one without any more challenge? This leads to a rather conflicted Doom defending his throne against the newly-awakened Avengers fighting to bring him down.

I'd be tempted to hold this up as the ultimate Dr. Doom story, if it weren't for one thing: the entire lack of Reed Richards and the Fantastic Four. They make only the barest of cameos at the very end, making nary a blip on Doom's radar while the Avengers (and frickin' Wonder Man, of all people) prose the greatest thorns in his side here. Look, I know it's debatable how much Doom defines himself against Richards, but at the end of the day, Doom and the FF are so inexorably tied that it's downright glaring that Richards doesn't even get so much as an off-handed dismissal in this story. Have him be Doom's footrest or something! Sheesh!

But that aside, this is still one of the great DOOM epics, right alongside DOCTOR STRANGE/DOCTOR DOOM: TRIUMPH AND TORMENT. A fascinating depiction of he who is perhaps the greatest supervillain of them all.

So yes, a pretty awesome haul, all considered. Even the bad stuff has given me food for thought, which is the best one can hope for when it comes to bad stuff. If you've read any of the above, do post your own impressions and recommendations as to where to go from here!

Comments

[lillaluv.livejournal.com]

I'm glad you didn't have to pay that ticket.

Was the bookstore here? If so, I'm guessing it was Book Fair. That place is pretty much on my walk home and I always spend WAY too much money there.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I still had to pay for the towing, of course. That was $77 down the drain. Sigh.

Most were from Red River Books, actually! Run by what appears to be a perpetually stoned father and daughter team! But I got the DOOM and SPIDER-MAN books from Book Fair. Good store, but I favor Red River for sheer time-wasteability.

[lillaluv.livejournal.com]

Red River's great too. And yes, way more of a time waster. Book Fair is all bright and organized.

Did you manage to come across Comic Factory, which is also in the area? I try to stay away from there because they have cheap action figures, and my collection fills my bookshelves as it is.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

God, Red River would be my number one recommended place to waste a few hours in Winnipeg. Loved it so much.

I did not, actually! I had no idea there was a proper comic store in the area!

I remember some of those when they were on the shelves...

[american-arcane.livejournal.com]

Mostly the older ones, of course.

The cover to The Untold Legend of Batman is a fantastic callback to the Batman (and other DC covers) that I grew up with from my father's collection. And that's the Two-Face origin I remember... though I'm pretty darn sure I don't own Untold Legend...

And as far as Emperor Doom goes... I remember that, too. I can tell you that the FF didn't make much of an appearance because, if I remember correctly, they were at a very low point in popularity at that time. The Avengers, on the other hand, were flying high in the public eye... serving as the #2 Marvel draw in the team category (second to the X-Men, I think... and not far in popularity from the old Web Head himself).

Awesome reviews, man. :)

Re: I remember some of those when they were on the shelves...

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

That cover, and all the other covers to UNTOLD, were drawn by the brilliant Jose Luiz Garcia-Lopez, a sampling of whose work you can check out here. Talk about another underappreciated great of comics! He's currently drawing the METAL MEN story for WEDNESDAY COMICS, and doing as sharp a job as ever... especially with Kevin Nolan on inks!

Man, how strange to consider that the FF's lack of popularity would keep them out of a DOOM story. Even as a throwaway moment when he acknowledges and dismisses them! Really, that accursed Richards ALWAYS deserves a mention when it comes to DOOOOM.

Re: I remember some of those when they were on the shelves...

[rattsu.livejournal.com]

I will always associate Jose Luiz Garcia-Lopez with his work on Atari Force... I really loved that art style back in the days. But yes, he is brilliant.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

WAIT WAIT WAIT.


Did you miss the part a few months back where Peter David basically went and told the internet, "Why yes, I AM quite racist!"?

I... have read a bit of stuff he wrote? I find it all pretty questionable from a lady's point of view, and even more so from a "hey um I don't like racism in my comics actually" point of view. I find him to be kind of a douche, and I really don't get why everyone thinks he is such a great writer.

PETER DAVID: YOU, SIR, ARE NO JOHN OSTRANDER.

But anyway.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Oh wait, there was that too, wasn't there? Yeah, it's kind of amazing how quickly he fell from grace and revealed himself to be something of a fucktard, isn't it?

But what gets me is that before that, I truly considered him to be one of the all-time great comic writers. Not that he was brilliant, but he was usually solid. In an industry where crap reigns supreme, a solidly dependable writer like PAD was a wonderful thing. Like, his runs on HULK, YOUNG JUSTICE, SUPERGIRL, and AQUAMAN? All great! Not to mention X-FACTOR, particularly the Maddrox mini-series... excellent stuff! Plus, he teamed up with Kyle Baker to do a simply wonderful CYRANO comic for CLASSICS ILLUSTRATED. Things like that!

And they're still great, even now he's shown himself to be... well, shall we say, less than John Ostrander's caliber. I'm never going to not like those stories, no matter what he does or how he is in his personal life, disappointing and infuriating as it is.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

Ehn, "great" is subjective. To me, something can have really sharp dialogue and excellent pacing and blah blah blah, but if one of the underlying messages is "black people hate white people! They are reverse racist!" then I'm gonna go ahead and call the whole thing crap. It's a game I like to play! It's called: don't let people get away with racism because they have some talent! (This is loosely related to the other game I also like to play, which is called: don't pay for things by rapists. (http://tigerbeatdown.blogspot.com/2009/07/perfect-disguise-isaac-brock-samantha.html))

For me, how good his writing is is kind of irrelevant, especially since there are people like John Ostrander out there, who mean that just because I want to read comics doesn't mean I have to compromise by reading stuff by people who I know are racist. I can choose to only read stuff by people who aren't racist, and don't hate women, etc, and still have more reading material than I could possibly finish ever. So. Yeah. For ever X-FACTOR comic, there is a HAWKWORLD comic or a SUICIDE SQUAD comic, or BIRDS OF PREY, or SPIDER-MAN LOVES MARY JANE, or a comic by Fly, or Phoebe Gloeckner, or Alison Bechdel, or Eric Drooker. So I have a hard time feeling that it deprives anyone of good stories to not read stuff by PAD.

This is kind of ranty, though, so I'll shut up now. I also don't mean to say that you're a terrible person for reading PAD comics. It's just, that's my choice, and my reasoning behind it, which I felt compelled to give because EVERY TIME I say I don't want to read/watch/listen to something because the person who created it skeeves me out, people start going on at length about how IT'S REALLY GOOD THOUGH, I'M TOTALLY MISSING OUT BY NOT GIVING MONEY TO THIS PERSON. And, well... I don't buy it (no pun intended).

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I understand that, I really do. And really, because you feel that way, there's no way I could honestly say you're "missing out" on anything. It stains and affects the work for you, however good it is for anyone else.

Me, though, I made the conscious decision some time ago to separate the art from the artist. To some degree, when an artist creates something and puts it out there for the subjective views of others, it no longer becomes "theirs." So with that mindset, I've chosen to still enjoy things like MADDROX and HULK: THE END (one of my very favorite comics, I think) without forgetting the kind of person PAD has shown himself to be.

And even if I don't like the art, well, as a writer, there's a lot one can learn by reading crap. For me, seeing what someone does wrong is a very effective way to guide me to try and express what actually is right, if that makes any sense. But at this point, I'm just musing on stuff.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity (genuine curiosity, I'm not just being snarky!), would you go the other way, too? I mean, would you make it a point to buy work by someone who you know has gone on the record as being feminist/womanist, against racism, etc - or someone who is a minority in a privilege-dominated field, like a woman and/or person of colour in comics - even if you felt that their previous work had been sub-par?

I find it troublesome and difficult to separate my own sense of ethics and my personal politics from the stuff I consume. That said, maybe the penalty for paying money for stuff by Peter David should be that you have to buy a comic by an independent "minority-in-the-field" artist like Julie Doucet, for karmic balance, or something. Or that you have to make a donation to help out John Ostrander.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

It's interesting to hear you put it in such a context as separating one's own ethics from that which we consume. Said that way, yeah, the implications could be rather troubling.

Honestly, I suppose it would have to depend. Just based hypothetically, my gut says that if I'm going to buy art, I want the art itself to be good, period. That's the question that comes first and foremost to me.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

Haha, said that way. That's what it is, dude! It's making a consumer decision based on one's personal ethics, versus making a consumer decision based on one's desire for personal gratification. It's a large part of why I don't eat meat, and eat only very little dairy these days. NOT being a vegetarian doesn't make someone a bad person, but I can't call myself a vegetarian and still have steak for dinner, as much as I find steak to be oh so tasty. Similarly, I don't feel I can call myself dedicated to supporting a more anti-oppressive society and still read stuff by Peter David.

I consider my own dedication to art to come second to my dedication to reality - it's this attitude that I have found informing my art so much lately (and interestingly, as I produce some of the best work I feel I've ever produced, artistically). I find artists who see it the other way around - that it's acceptable, even admirable, to ignore reality for the sake of Art, to be short-sighted and strange. Art is not some lofty, incorruptible ideal that exists high above the plane of our meager existences as mortals, like a god. Art is a living, breathing thing that exists inside people, whose existence depends on manifestation and consumption by human beings in the actual world.

Having said all of that, I'd challenge you (and a lot of people) to take a look at your comics collection, and all of the world that you judge to be "good, period", or at least, good enough for purchase, and evaluate how much of that work is done by straight, white, cisgendered men and how much of that work is done by people who are not as privileged. Once you have a tally, look at it and ask yourself why straight, white, cisgendered men might be so disproportionately represented, and what that might mean about what the comic world holds up as "good art", and why, and how much of those standards you may have internalized.

[zegas.livejournal.com]

What a good bunch of comics! My appreciation for Ostrander's work outside of Suicide Squad has slowly grown. SS is his underrated masterpiece. I have yet to read Grim Jack and Hawkworld, though.

Oh! And there's Jim Aparo, too! He was fantastic. Gimme Aparo over Adams any day. All that and a Garcia-Lopez cover (thanks for the cross link!) makes it near perfect.

In reading the subsequent thread, it's interesting to consider how one ignores or amplifies a creator's personal standpoint to the point of disengagement. I'd like to sometimes think that a work of art stands alone, free of connections to its creator. That's impossible, though, so every element it took to create said piece of art is important.

I had no idea Peter David was a self proclaimed racist. I like his work fine and appreciate his honesty. I haven't read his racism statement, but from what I can tell at least he's being open about it. Now it's up to us to support that or not, whether it matters to us or not. We'd probably abandon a few of the creators we hold dear if their personal views were held in such a revealing light.

[info]angrylemur raises another interesting question by flipping the roles, and I agree with you, thehefner , it really depends. An artist's personal views on things have made me appreciate them more, thus dispelling whatever I thought about their "sub par" work. In the end, however, if I don't like the overall work, then I just don't.

[zegas.livejournal.com]

First S_D, now this? Yikes. Ok, so i went back and read what the whole PAD thing was exactly about. I've been completely out of the loop. I thought it it may have been along the lines of a general "aren't we all a little racist?" type of remarks that I can see him saying, but this is a much bigger issue. Good thing your blog was posted on PAD's comment section, angrylemur.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Totally check out HAWKWORLD. It's Ostrander's other great work, alongside SUICIDE SQUAD (although I haven't read GRIM JACK either, so maybe I'll be blown away by it too). Did you read GOTHAM NIGHTS? I should scan those sometime.

Man, I need to find the rest of the HAWKWORLD issues. Also, wow, wait'll you see how shitty Graham Nolan used to be, it's painful. Well, we all had to start somewhere! I know a lot of people don't like him today, or hated his work with Dixon (that's one candidate for our debate on art and artists, eh?) in DETECTIVE, but I've always liked him.

I absolutely adore Neal Adams at his peak, but shit, I gotta agree with you, Aparo all the way. To this day, I STILL regret not being able to find him to commission a Two-Face drawing.

Again, a question that I feel should be brought back into the question of ethical consumption is how much of art is the artist's once he lets it go out into the public? Know what I mean?

[rattsu.livejournal.com]

YOU HAVE NOT READ GRIMJACK? READ IT NOW!

It is Ostranders best work in my opinion...

[zegas.livejournal.com]

It's funny... I've never liked Nolan. Especially back in the "Power of the Atom" days. You may have inspired a future post, though. As an aspiring cartoonist almost a decade ago, I took an already existing comic (at the behest of many pros' advice) and made a comic sample based on a comic that already saw print. Nolan's Detective was one of them. I will post it soon. It will be embarrassing for me.

"How much of art is the artist's once he lets it go out into the public?" Well, it is always "his", but once made public, it is open to infinite debate, scrutiny, and criticism. In regards to the previous comments, should an artist's personal views paint our views of their work? Dali was a fascist, does that make him a lesser artist? Ditko is a Randian; should we NOT enjoy his work if we don't agree with Ayn? Toth wasn't a nice guy; does that make his work not as good? Human reality over art, I agree... but should we impose our own views on others in order to appreciate them? I'm very frugal when it comes to consumer dollars given to specific causes, but my artistic appreciation isn't be limited to the price of whether an artist's views are in sync with my own.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Nice! I look forward to that post, then! I promise I won't laugh too much. Maybe. We'll see.

I know a lot of people don't care for Nolan, but not even his work in places like JOKER: DEVIL'S ADVOCATE did anything for you? Maybe it's childhood nostalgia with me, but I've always found his work (on DETECTIVE, not his horrible early work on HAWKWORLD and, I presume, ATOM) to be clean and dynamic, a quality I greatly admire. A slightly glossier style akin to what Breyfogle brought.

Shit, that's another artist much deserving in modern recognition, eh? I *still* love Breyfogle's work, and think he's as good as he ever was, but we never see him anymore. Wonder why that is?

[zegas.livejournal.com]

You're reading my mind!! I absolutely love Breyfogle's Batman! I've been planning a future Master Post on his early run, but it may be a little tiny while before I get the chance to do it right. Over on his website, http://www.normbreyfogle.com/ , he discusses how he was recently asked to pitch a new Batman book and eventually got turned down.

I'd have to revisit Nolan's work. I remember it having life to it but still leaving me a little cold. He seemed solid and consistent, but it may have been the inkers he had (Hanna?).

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

His work on J.M. DeMatteis' SPECTRE was the only thing making that poor series almost kinda worthwhile. To tie this back, the one and only issue of that run which had any worth--IMO--is the one on Apokolips, written by Ostrander. Great stuff from Breyfogle, and with a P. Craig Russell cover to boot!

So yes, I utterly and wholeheartedly support a Breyfogle master post. What a crime that he didn't get to do the new Batman book, though.

Yeppers, it seems Hanna is the inker in question, by and large. That could well be a factor in the problems with Nolan's art, at least for some people. Even in DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, the inking seems to vary in consistency from place to place. I'm trying to recall what I'd consider to be a highlight of Nolan's work. I'm quite fond of the Riddler/Quizmaster story.

Also, I think Sienkiewicz may have inked him at one point? Or maybe I'm thinking of that NO MAN'S LAND issue where he inked Jurgens. Man, was it just me, or was the odd-couple pairing of Jurgens and Sienkiewicz utterly inspired? I adored that art!

[zegas.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Ostrander rocks. I remember his Spectre, too (even that fill in). What a good run.

I'll try to pick up Devil's Advocate if I find it this week. Nolan inking himself may sway me.

Sinky and Jurgens were a dynamite match. Did you see that 4 issue Superman/Doomsday mini?

As per your original post, now I also wanna check out Emperor Doom, too! Always wanted to. Your take on David's Jean Dewolfe is hilarious! And yeah, despite being a Fleming fan, I disliked that Aquaman mini as well. Eclipso didn't fare too well under recent inspection, either.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I need to pick up his whole SPECTRE run one of these days. Also, MARTIAN MANHUNTER.

Sadly, no, it's Hanna inking him there as well. It's not consistent, but it's got moments of excellence, like the court sequences and the bit in the prison yard. You'll know which one I mean. I truly consider it one of the finest Joker stories ever printed.

Oh man, good call on that Doomsday mini. They are fantastic together, amazingly so! Really, theirs is just such an inspired pairing of polar opposite art styles that work magnificently together.

Yeah, do check out DOOM if you can track it down! It took me awhile, and I probably spent more than it was worth, but I still love it, warts and all. Bob Hall is a strange duck, between this and those three Joker-related projects he did about ten years ago (I, JOKER, BATMAN: DOA, and IT'S JOKER TIME!).

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

UM.

Human reality over art, I agree... but should we impose our own views on others in order to appreciate them?

How is it imposing my values on someone to not spend my money on their work?

If making decisions about who I want to give my money to is "imposing my values" on people, then I "impose my values" on a hell of a lot of people, every day. I impose my values on McDonald's, because they serve crappy food and I think food should be tasty and fresh. I impose my values on Chapters, because their selection sucks and I think bookstores should be better run. Etc, etc.

This is a ridiculously false dichotomy that you've created, not to mention a nice strawman argument. So is this one:

I'm very frugal when it comes to consumer dollars given to specific causes, but my artistic appreciation isn't be limited to the price of whether an artist's views are in sync with my own.

"In sync" is a nice way of putting it, but look, I'm not saying I'll refuse to buy someone's work if they're, like, a dog person, or a dreaded individualist. The criteria is this: a) that the creator have made public statements reflecting their oppressive beliefs, and b) that those beliefs inform their work in an obvious way. FURTHERMORE, there is a difference between "enjoying someone's work" and "spending money on someone's work". Say, for example, there was a band I liked, and then I found out that their lead singer was really abusive towards his girlfriend! As a survivor of domestic abuse, this would be upsetting to me. I might not want to listen to this band's music at all anymore, or I might still like their music and want to listen to it occasionally still, but EITHER WAY, what I DON'T want to do is give a guy who beat up his girlfriend my hand-earned money. Fortunately for me, there s this thing called "the bittorrents" that means that if I absolutely MUST listen to this ONE SPECIFIC BAND I can do it for free, and they don't get any money from it! It's kind of illegal, but then, so is beating up one's girlfriend, so I figure it evens out.

(One might argue that one can always just listen to another band instead, but downloading the album for free is like... eating free-range organic meat instead of going vegetarian and eating tofu. You're still consuming flesh, but you're not paying for animals to be slaughtered in inhumane conditions.)

This is super-long, but I just had to point that out.

[zegas.livejournal.com]

Well, I was actually hypothetically asking if we should or should not impose our views when deciding what we support, financially or aesthetically. Clearly "impose" is the wrong word. Of course our value systems inform our (consumer) decisions, but I'm curious about the exact point where the two are in direct conflict.

Super long or not, it's worth discussing.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Well, what about consumption of art that does not support the artist? Like libraries, used comics, or pirated materials? Or is it ethically wrong to even see art from such people?

Furthermore, is there a statute of limitations? Wagner was an anti-Semitic fucktard, among other faults, so should his music be avoided forever?

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

Um, I'm talking about consumer decisions, wherein you give money to someone for their work. Ergo, libraries and pirated stuff aren't really the issue here at all. I'm not saying that it's ethically wrong to just SEE certain artwork. I'm saying that purchasing power is a power, and should be used accordingly.

Now, I wouldn't even download a Peter David comic, personally, because I don't think the effort is worth it. But if you're going to read it and not spend money on it, that's... I guess "better" than supporting Peter David with your cash. Similarly, Wagner is dead. His music is in the public domain. While personally I'd be fine if I never heard Wagner again in my life, one has no purchasing power over him now that he is in the ground.

I'm not saying that there is a set of rules that everyone should adhere to, that people "should" in general "shouldn't" listen to Wagner. This discussion is about my PERSONAL beliefs and my PERSONAL philosophy, and if you see that as a dictation or a judgment on you, that's something that you're inferring on your own, I think.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Oh, well, in that case I'm better off that I thought I was, as I'm really very picky about which comics I buy these days.

I appreciate you reaffirming that this is your personal philosophy and not a dictation or judgment on me. I wasn't specifically thinking that, but it's good to know anyway. No, I'm just considering the implications of things I hadn't before, that's all. And I honestly will have it in mind in the future whenever I do buy new comics.

[philippos42.livejournal.com]

Er, PAD a racist? Wow, considering that he was hired on Spider-Man by a black editor (Owsley), took over the Green Lantern strip from that same Jim Owsley, & as far as I could tell seemed to largely like Owz, that's out of left field for me.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

I want you to take a minute and think about the fact that what you just typed and posted basically amounts to "But I heard he has a Black friend!" which is, um, a) not really relevant and b) kind of derailing, here, especially given that this comment thread is a few days old, which is, like, OVER 9000 years in Internet-time.

But whatevs. You want proof that PAD is a racist asshole, here you go: Relevant links (http://tempest.fluidartist.com/peter-david-class-act/) are relevant. (http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2009/02/24/sooooelecting-barack-obama-was-an-act-of-cowardice/) Also: easily google-able.

[philippos42.livejournal.com]

Yep, I hunted them down. Sorry, not remotely big-R Racist, not really even small-r racist. More like a regular guy tired of the mau-mauing. If he's a racist for saying what he said there, I'm an anti-Semite because I think Israel shouldn't kill 100 Arabs for every one Jew Hamas kills.

[rattsu.livejournal.com]

That's true, I had almost forgotten about Tim Truman's Hawkworld. For the longest time this was Hawkman for me, I was always so very confused when they decided to go back to the weird cursed Carter Hall or whatever is the current version of the character. What's wrong with a tough, winged space-cop from a pseudo-facist planet?

Sometimes I think that's what alienates me from so many comics today, this urge to go back to the earliest origin of things and just never allow the character to grow and change at all.

Also, speaking of Tim Truman... have you ever read Scout?

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

to go back to the weird cursed Carter Hall or whatever is the current version of the character. What's wrong with a tough, winged space-cop from a pseudo-facist planet?

... I WANT BOTH! BOTH! GIMMIE GIMMIE GIMMIE!!!

And well, it depends. They took a big step backward in bringing Hal Jordan back, but it set the stage for the Sinestro Corps War and onward, which took the entire GLC mythos a giant leap forward, further than they've ever gone before. I don't mind a return to basics if it means they go somewhere from there.

I have not! Should I?

[rattsu.livejournal.com]

I actually have to agree on Hal Jordan. I was never a Jordan fan, at least not since Green Lantern/green Arrow ended. He was just such a one note character to him. But after rediscovering Green Lantern Corpse during the Sinestro Wars I've actually changed my mind. The Green Lantern family of comics is the most interesting that DC publishes (of the big titles) at the moment in my opinion. So, if they would do something cool with Hawkman I would be all game. Maybe Blackest Night can be a new start...

And yeah, I think that Scout is worth checking out, both the first series and Scout-War Shaman. I mean what can go wrong with a post-apocalyptic western inspired comic where all the chapter titles comes from blues songs?

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Hal was my favorite character next to Harvey Dent for years and years, just due to what I felt to be untapped *potential* for the character. I still feel that way.

It's funny, did you read the thread on this post? http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/656698.html

The people in the comments made observations about this story I'd never considered, about how this heavy-handed story actually contained some surprisingly complex revelations about Hal and Ollie as characters. Particularly, how Hal is actually the true liberal between the two of them. I've been thinking of giving those observations their own post, along with victoria_wayne's magnificent "Saga of Itty": http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/720642.html

I get the feeling Blackest Night will kick off a rebirth for Aquaman, so here's hoping Carter and/or Katar will get the same treatment. But man, I still miss Shayera.

Rock, I shall most assuredly check out SCOUT and especially GRIM JACK!

[philippos42.livejournal.com]

I started reading Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man just before Peter David took it over. PAD is one of my near-definitive Spidey writers, alongside David Michelinie & Tom DeFalco. "The Death of Jean DeWolff" is from his first year writing Spidey & my first year buying it regularly, & I'm bemused that it's seen as a classic.

Rich Buckler did a good job on the art, but really it's a pretty bad idea (dismissive passing description of the Ozarks as primitive & superstitious aside). I blame not only PAD, but Jim Owsley (later known as Priest). It foreshadows the poor treatment Owsley would give to Katma Tui in the Action Comics Weekly Green Lantern strip.

I want to like those guys, but sometimes they make some bad choices.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Did Priest do any truly great work before he became Priest? His post-Owsley work is littered with gems and magnificence, but before that, the work strikes me as much more suspect, by and large.