Art vs. the Artist

So... you guys have probably seen this. Well, I don't want to turn this into some grand political debate, but let's just say that I vehemently disagree with Orson Scott Card on this issue and many others. More than that, he subscribes to a world view that is so different from my own that it's hard for me to accept that he's not being satirical. I think his stances on homosexuality, family, and women are just downright wrong. That's my opinion. I respect his right to believe and say as he pleases, and I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me.

But I've granted Card a hell of a lot more than respect over the years. As a kid, the Ender series were among my favorite books. They spoke to me in a way that other fiction did not. It was a huge part of my adolescence, and, in many ways, those books got me into sci-fi, which got me into other geek stuff, which eventually got me into comics. I owe a lot to my love of Card's work.

I guess I don't really have a point here. I mean, it's not like I didn't know he felt this way, but to see it out there, so unequivocally, and in such an over-the-top tirade... it just has me wondering... as consumers of art, how obligated are we to evaluate the art on its own merits, regardless of the character of the artist? More importantly, is there a reverse obligation? One that requires us to consider who benefits when purchasing a piece or body of work?

Card is not the only example out there, I'm sure. So, second printers, I ask you... how do you reconcile the art with the artist?

The Most Beautifulest Thing In This World...

BLACK MANTA appropriately enough at San Diego Comic-Con.

You may, now, go about your day.

(Thanks to Ulie Campbell for the use of his photo.)

If A Superstar Tree Falls Exclusively Does Anybody Hear It?

Well, another Nerd Prom has come and gone. In previous years, I sat around all weekend staring blankly at the computer, waiting for the announcements, ready to be blown away. Nine times out of ten, I wouldn't be disappointed.

There it was some guy from some "reasonable hit" TV series would be announced as coming on to write something for someone and we would clap our little Cheese Doodle-stained hands in glee and wait... and wait... and wait...

Still waiting...No, I don't think Damon (Lost) Lindeloff's Ultimate Wolverine/Ultimate Hulk mini-series will ever be done. Give up, it's oddly freeing.

We got the announcements of writer and artists exclusives. And we jumped up and down and screamed over how awesome it is that "they" "stole" "so-and-so" from "whoever." And we waited... and waited...

Yeah, we got, like six Superman covers from Art Adams during Chuck Austen's Action Comics run. The Kubert Bros. were lured away from Marvel and the possibilities were mind-boggling, they could show up anywhere and they eventually were announced as showing up where it looked like they could soar: Andy on Batman with Grant Morrison and Adam with Geoff Johns on Action. What we got was delay after delay after delay, fill-in art after fill-in art and eventually DC threw up their hands and ultimately decided to make them their default big project cover artists.

"We" got Terry Dodson from Marvel fresh from working on Marvel Knights: Spider-Man following working with notorious deadline blower/writer Kevin Smith. DC, of course, was going to give this superstar artist a comic he could sink his teeth into, along with a superstar writer who could keep him enthused and help him hit deadlines, right?

No. He was teamed with the overcommited writer of Grey's Anatomy and his run on Wonder Woman sort of limped along. He got another writer Jodi Picoult who knew little about comics writing and was given the task of thrusting Wonder Woman into an ill-conceived crossover event. Gail Simone eventually took over as writer but by then, the damage was done and The Dodsons were gone. Three writers in two years. Back to Marvel.

Again.

You can't build readership that way, another consequence of the hype neither the company or the talent seems quite able to live up to.

Sean McKeever, fresh from building buzz with Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane, was assigned what seemed like a no-brainer, Teen Titans and the results have been... *meh*

He takes on Birds of Prey and realized after five issues it wasn't for him. So after his "run," we get back the writer who was "filling-in" in for him. Umm... OK?

Thanks for playing, though.

This weekend was Nerd Prom and I fired up the internets, checked my e-mail, went to work, went on a date and went about my business.

Why? Because there was this revelation. Exclusives give the company a chance to crow in the short term and the talent a chance to, I guess, work on characters they've been wanting to work on for a while and I guess, get health insurance, which I applaud. In the long term, It does nothing for the characters. In twenty years, no one will think back and remember an awesome cover run.

Why should we get excited about the prospect of possibility when the reality of the thing has ultimately been disappointing?

What it comes down to is this: as Mike so eloquently put it yesterday, "The Big Two, DC in particular, got so burned by trying to bring in creative talent from other media, that they’re sticking with what they know. It’s the creative equivalent of exhausting your starting rotation because you don’t trust your bullpen."

This year's Nerd Prom found us with... not much. A few re-ups, a few additions to the bullpen and you know what...

I welcome it.

Exclusives do nothing but make me weary. Of talent. They usually aren't given the proper venue in which to work. As much as the idea of a Dodsons' Wonder Woman is exciting, the reality of it is that, let's be honest, it's only short-term. The company uses them for their name and the ability to put certain asses in seats, meaning guys who like the way he draws the pretty girls. The appropriate writer seemingly was an afterthought. We should celebrate talent, never become wary of talent.

Exclusives don't excite me anymore. Exclusives seem to me, to be the comics equivalent of speed dating. Names gets out there. There's some face time. Everyone moves on in too short a time and ultimately, everyone's time was wasted but somehow someone figured out a way to make money. Really, how the hell could anyone possibly build any sort of exclusivity in so sort a time?

That said, the lack of exclusive announcements may have been the best news I heard coming out of San Diego and it sounded pretty danged sweet.

Feeling... Uninspired?

What is it about super-hero comics right now? As I have previous mentioned, I am enjoying a lot of comics at the moment. They’re really solid. And yet, why do I feel so uninspired? Why is it that even the comics that entertain me aren’t tickling my brain like they have in the past?

Maybe I just have crossover fatigue. We’ve gone over how draining it can be to be constantly building towards something ‘huge’ and ‘extreme’ rather than just getting a decent story. Now that Secret Invasion and Final Crisis are here, I guess I’m just stuck waiting for the next shoe to drop.

Maybe it’s the relative dearth of fresh creative energy. Let’s be honest: Our super-hero comics are written by the same group of 20 or so guys (and a few gals). Each creator has a voice, and, after a while, it gets pretty easy to guess what you’re going to get.

‘By Kurt Busiek’ usually means ‘Slow moving and cerebral story in which the conflict between hero and villain is incidental to the hero’s internal struggle to discover or overcome something within him or herself.’

‘By Geoff Johns’ usually means ‘Continuity heavy story that gives the fanboys a refreshing look at past stories, while also moving the story and characters forward. This story will show you your hero in his or her most quintessential portrayal. If you haven’t read Kingdom Come, you should probably put this comic down.’

‘By Gail Simone’ usually means ‘Like Geoff Johns, only better. Less continuity, more silver-age style craziness and witty dialogue. Plus, this comic will feature women who actually act like women.’

‘By Greg Rucka’ usually means ‘Procedural comic. People will talk in abbreviations, because that’s how official business is done when you’re a cop or a spy or Alan Scott with an eye patch.’

‘By Grant Morrison’ usually means ‘Do not read this comic sober.’

‘By Mark Millar’ usually means ‘This comic takes an otherwise sound basis for a story and devolves it into ULTIMATE EXTREME ACTION!”

So you get the picture. Even Morrison and Ellis, writers who tend towards innovation, are feeling a little predictable these days. I guess the big two, DC in particular, got so burned by trying to bring in creative talent from other media that they’re sticking with what they know. It’s the creative equivalent of exhausting your starting rotation because you don’t trust your bullpen.

But maybe, just maybe, after we get all of our crises, invasions, and numbers of the beast out of our collective system, the big two will get smart about how to inject fresh talent into the game. Devon has already talked about the relative under-use of up-and-comers like Jason Aaron. I think we need more of these guys on the big stage. It’s a shame that Brian K. Vaughan, one of the best innovators in mainstream comics over the past decade, wants out of the biz. Whatever happened to the days when being on the Real World could get you a lucrative gig writing super-hero comics?

I realize that we’re just as likely to find the next Rob Leifeld as we are the next Brian K. Vaughan. I realize that the devil you know is sometimes better than the one you don’t. But since when is super-hero comics the medium for playing it safe? And besides, even a grandiose creative flop has the benefit of giving us all something else to blog about, right?

Who is the Man Who Laughs?

I thought about writing a review of the Dark Knight… but what’s left to be said? It’s really really good. Go see it if you haven’t. But seeing the film sparked an interesting conversation among some of my friends about the ‘essential’ nature of the Joker as a villain and which portrayals are true, iconic, or just plain good.

Since the Joker’s been around for 70 years, it’s kind of hard to debate whether or not a portrayal is ‘true’. Like most characters with a long history, he’s been touched by so many creators in so many eras that it’s safe to say that it’s almost all been done before. The Joker’s been a bank robber, a sniper, the guy who interrupts the broadcast to announce his latest threat, and even an emperor. All of these portrayals are true. But what are the pieces that are essential to the literary value he brings to the stories of the Batman? Why is it that, since 1940s, most of the best Batman stories involve going toe-to-toe with a killer clown?

I believe that what separates the Joker from the pack is that he can be simultaneously similar and different to his ultimate foil. On the surface, the Joker is nothing like our Dark Knight. He seeks neither vengeance, nor retribution, nor justice. His reward is the anarchy, the existential terror he brings down on the people of Gotham. He takes a life without thinking twice. He feels no regret, no remorse, no guilt. He does not question himself. He is the quintessential sociopath… but then again…

The Joker is a lot like Batman. He’s always in control and always a step ahead. How many times have we seen him be arrested, only to wreak havoc from the inside? The best Joker stories are the ones where we discover that finding his hideout or defusing the bomb was really all part of his plan. The Joker doesn’t just know information. He knows you. He knows how you will react, and his best laid plans hinge on using that reaction to his advantage.

But most importantly, the thing that Batman and the Joker have in common is that they seek to impose their will on the world. In fact, Batman has this in common with most of his important villains. Batman’s desire is justice, and he seeks to bring justice to the world. The Penguin is corrupt, thus he sews corruption. Two-Face has surrendered his morality to chance, and thus the lives of those in his path are granted or taken by the flip of a coin.

And the Joker? Well, the Joker is, at his core, a nihilist. Where we see structure and institutions, he sees chaos clouded by the constructs of the collective imaginations of the supposedly sane. There’s no such thing as justice or law. We invented those ideas so we could sleep soundly in a dangerous world. The Joker sees it. And his only true motive is to make us see it too. He and Batman both see a world that is insane, corrupted, and lawless. Where Batman seeks to extinguish those fires, the Joker says ‘let the motherfucker burn’.

In that sense, though they may be sides of the same coin, it’s easier to believe that the Joker could exist than it is to believe that there could ever be a Batman. And that scares me shitless.

The Dark Knight Breaks Box Office Records, DC Comics Fearful, Perplexed

"Aw, man."

These are the words heard emanating from the offices of New York-based DC Comics.

"The California boys (Warner Bros.) are gonna start wanting things again. They're (the suits) gonna want changes.

They're gonna want us to put Katie Holmes in the comics. We can't do that. We already gave Batman a girlfriend, a black one."

"Warner Bros. is already sneaking around the office. They keep touching my stuff, holding up my action figures, asking "Who is this?"

"It's Superman, noob."

"Man, it's coming. This guy over here, he keeps asking us what happened to that "Jack Black Green Lantern vehicle."

"Geez, man, it's coming."

When reached for comment, Warner Bros. issued this brief statement:

"We at Warner Bros. couldn't be happier with the performance of The Dark Knight. It did Iron Man-type numbers."

The Color of Politics

I love what Geoff Johns is doing with the set up of the Blackest Night and the whole “War of Light” thing. I love the idea of seven corps. It is more than kind of awesome. The other day I was talking about the splash page from DC Universe, you know the one where we see the spectrum of rings, and talking about the Blue panel. This one:

One of the mysteries around the “War of Light” that has intrigued me the most is who is the “he” they are talking about? I keep hoping that the “he” will be Superman – I mean who else inspires such hope? Well the other day, I posed that question to a buddy. His response?

Barack Obama. You know what? He’s right. I mean whether you are a Democrat, Republican or whatever you can’t deny the fact that Obama has the power to inspire great hope. Voter turn out is higher than ever and there is a whiff in air that maybe – just maybe – something is going to change. That is more hope than I, as a voter, have ever felt in the few elections I have participated in. For that ability I would agree with my buddy and grant Obama a Blue Ring. What about the other rings?

Red Ring












Those who possess the Red Ring are powered by rage. In fact they have so much rage that the power literally pours out of their mouths. These are angry people here. Known for his moments of rage, for losing his cool (type in Angry McCain into YouTube and see what comes up), for loving the hell out of some war, I grant the Red Ring to Republican nominee John McCain.


Orange Ring
The orange rings are those of Avarice – they go to beings whose greed overwhelms them. Who are so driven by want and need that they will stop at nothing to obtain it. Hilary Clinton, I grant this ring to you. I believe that Clinton felt she was the right person for the job but her truth stretching (she was called out by Sinbad) and bizarre comments (Kennedy Assassination) made me feel that she what she wanted, lusted after, was the title “Madam President” more than anything else. It was all hers as is were. Her precious.

Yellow Ring















Sinestro and his Corps traveled the universe with one goal – to spread Fear. They would kill, kidnap, torture, whatever just to make a galaxy shake in their proverbial boots. I think one should be obvious – the Yellow Ring goes to President Bush. His presidency has been about planning on worries about the unknown. Anywhere could have a terrorist. Anyone could have a dirty bomb. I can just see the sickly, yellow glow illuminating the Oval Office. For the ability to inspire great fear, Bush is Sinestro’s man.

Violet Ring












The ring of Love. Not day trips to the beach, puppies and butterflies, soft focus sort of love. No the violet rings are the sort of love that drives you crazy, that makes you lust after someone, that takes over your mind. With the number of scandals out there in the dozens there was a virtual plethora of people to choose from. However, one man truly stood out in my mind, mostly because of the amount of money he spent on a single woman, I give the Violet Ring to Eliot Spitzer. Go sex the crap out of something now, former Governor.



Indigo Ring
So far the Corps we know the least about. They have weird looking staves and weird looking tattoos. They are powered by Compassion and the want to spread said feeling around the universe. They seem a little crunchy with a sort of hippie vibe. Oh, and they have their own language that no one understands. There really is only one person who really screams Indigo Ring of Compassion – Dennis “I’d Make A Department of Peace” Kucinich. I mean, for real, when the Representative form Ohio starts talking about veganism does anyone understand the words that are coming out of his mouth?

I guess by this point you noticed that I left out the Green Lanterns in my list. The idea of a Corp of people somewhere in politics who are powered by Will, whose sole purpose is to stop evil in the world, yeah I am not sure that shit exists in politics. What about you?

Who Would Be Your Green Lantern Corps of Politics?