Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities Re-Reads (Now Reading: Swamp Thing: 1971 through 1985)

I just finished re-reading Marvels.

I think the best-written issue by far is the first one, covering the Golden Age heroes. That one is up there with the best of Astro City.

The second issue is, in my opinion, the weakest one, and it betrays just how the concept of the X-Men doesn't really work when they share a universe with the likes of the Thing.

I feel it kind of spins its wheels from that point on, until the wonderful scenes in the fourth issue with Phil meeting Gwen Stacy before she dies. The scene of her basking in the fantastic spectacle of the Sub-Mariner's invasion is magical. And her death is a perfectly understandable catalyst for Phil's complete disillusionment with the Marvels.

And I found I had completely forgotten about the ironic ending with a grade-school-age Danny Ketch! Of course, it's also unintentionally amusing because Danny Ketch is pretty much a footnote in the Marvel Universe mythology these days.

In addition, I keep going back to something Sean Howe wrote in his very good book "Marvel Comics: The Untold Story":

"In this version of late-twentieth century America, there was no mention of the Cuban Missile Crisis, no plague of race riots, no campus protesters of the Vietnam War -- even though the Marvel Comics of the 1960s and early 1970s had tackled political and social issues quite explicitly. Here, the great trials of the modern world were the appearance of the Sentinels (as seen in the X-Men in 1965) and the subsequent anti-mutant riots, and the arrival of Galactus (as seen in the Fantastic Four in 1966). You could choose to dismiss [Marvels] as hermetic escapism, a history devoid of reality -- or you could admire the way it took the inherent sociopolitical metaphors always present in the comic books and fit them all together into one digestible package."

I guess that's my main problem with Marvels -- it's TOO digestible. There's a lack of ambiguity, this from the publishing company that made superheroes ambiguous in the first place!

If point-of-view protagonist Phil Sheldon is looked at as the stand-in for the embittered, out-of-time fan-child that so many fanboys and fangirls end up turning into, then the story just comes off like so many sour grapes; if we look at Phil as simply one opinionated individual from a particular generation, it works slightly better. But in the end, it just seems like a dry run for themes that Busiek would work out much better in Astro City.

As for Alex Ross' art, there are still a few images that have retained their power to awe. I'm thinking of the double-page spread of the Golden Age heroes skydiving, or the Galactus sequence. But with 20 years hindsight, Marvels seems to me like just another of a particular sub-genre of superhero comics, one that has evolved and surpassed this touchstone in the decades since.

I think it's a fair assessment that this sub-genre of superhero comic has in the years since been refined and surpassed. Much of that is by Busiek himself as this was clearly a prototype of what he would do on AC. I think it stands out because it was one of the first to do it, and not ironically or as parody, and to try to give it both charm and weight.

I recall it very fondly, but it's been years since I read it. It's the first TPB I ever bought, about 1-2 years after it came out (and the only one for a long time).

Your comments about Howe's quotes are well taken and I agree. There is no doubt that something has been lost by those stories not firmly being rooted in the 60's. Readers who don't understand that lose part (and not a little one) about what makes those series what they are. Race, "crisis on campus", viet nam, etc, hung a heavy shadow over the MU.

Cobie, this makes me think of something else I've kept coming back to, and not just to do with Marvels: Just how much weight can the superhero concept bear? Is it better to move it closer to reality, with all the ugliness that brings with it, or is it better to simply embrace its inherent absurdity and fly off into the stratosphere of the imagination? I don't think there will be a consensus on that issue in our lifetime. At least we get some good stories out people searching for the answer.

Well, I think you're right there will never be a consensus and I also feel there is no real answer.

I think the superhero genre--like all genres--is a bit of a "forced" method of compartmentalizing fiction. Therefore, it is not really beholden to any type of criteria in terms of tone, subject matter or other things. I think the key is as you move closer to either extreme--bearing as much weight as possible or being too absurd--you start to get to a point where it is harder and harder for the stories to actually be very good. You'll find more creators missing the mark and stories unable to provide anything relevant and insightful. Yet, among that muck there will always be creators who can create works of magic and pieces of genius. One only need look at Alan Moore or many others to see that.

For me personally, I will always need a variety. I collect so many comics and read so much fiction that the most important qualifying characteristic for a series is "what makes this stand out from the rest?" If I'm reading a few different series that are inherently absurd and a few more that are very serious, with most of the rest falling somewhere along the spectrum, that would ideal for me. Too much of one thing makes it dull and cumbersome.

The same applies, of course, for all other things, not just tone. Character v. plot, genre (returning to that again), narrative structure, length of story, etc. I need variety or I lose interest.

The superhero concept can certainly bear as much weight as a writer can put on it. But do we really want to read that? 98% of the time, I say NO, and I mean it firmly. But every so often someone gets it right and does something magically. (And then everyone copies that, but usually misses the point and copies the wrong elements).

Likewise, I love reading some Silver Age Wonder Woman or Metal Men, or reading Jack Cole Plastic Man, or even something modern in that vein by Kyle Baker or another genius. But I need it modest doses.

Also, I think certain characters and franchises have their own spectrum on how far it can go.

When Superman, for instance, starts dealing with rape or child slavery, the whole thing falls apart. 99.99% of the time it won't work. I leave 0.01% open because there is a chance some genius can tell one good story that does work, but that will be an exception.

Likewise, Batman as a science-fiction adventurer traveling through time and fighting aliens isn't really true to the character. Those stories in the 50's are fun--and I know, as the last few years my father and I have been hunting them down and buying them--but the truth is when you read them all in a row, it really gets too silly to stay engaged.

When a comic book character / series / franchise is created, it's not just the character being created. That's the easy part. It has to be so much more: what is the point of the character? What do they represent? What story elements--plot, tone, conflict--are part of that character's life?

There's a reason when Spider-Man fights aliens, it usually stinks. But when he fights gangsters it fits. It has nothing to do with his powers and nothing to do with being a loner. It's because it's part the very fiber of the concept: he's a representative of you, the part of you that can overcome your worst problems and insecurities, and therefore, is battling an enemy that you know in your every day life with the window dressings of a comic book villain (but never to the point where its unrecognizable).

Oddly enough, just yesterday, a retrospective article on Marvels with Busiek and Ross interviews.

Kind of strange, considering there was an article about Harras/Epting's Avengers just as that discussion was starting! We are being watched!

I'll add some thoughts about Marvels sometime this weekend.

If only someone would listen.

Cobie, I agree 100% percent with the insights in your last couple of posts and I appreciate you sharing them.

Like I said, I re-read Marvels a little over a week ago. It was my first-ever re-read of the series and the first time I'd ever read issue 4 because my old CBS got shorted that issue and never got it in. I got it a few years later as a back issue, intended to re-read it all together at some point but just never did until now.

First, as cover gimmicks of the '90s go, the acetate covers on the first printings work really well. I don't know if I really "got" this back in the day, but I can see how this recalls how magazines in libraries always had (and presumably still have?) similar covers to keep the magazines from falling apart under repeated reads. Even better, if you consider that Alex Ross' paintings are evocative of Norman Rockwell's style and that Rockwell's work graced magazines like Life back in the day. Add in the journalistic point of view, and this makes the cover gimmick one of the more inspired and logical of a bygone era.

Like Fickles, though, I often felt myself thinking that the story itself was less special than all of Busiek's greatest Astro City tales. this is good for Busiek, I'd say, because no artist would want his first hit to be considered the best thing he'd ever done. There is probably a portion of fandom that thinks just that, however, either because they haven't read any AC or because there a part of the dimwitted contingent who can only appreciate Big Two superhero stories.

But Marvels works really well in telling a story about what it might be like to be a civilian at the dawn of superheroes, something which had never been attempted before on anything resembling this scale. What would it be like to witness a synthetic man on fire? What if there was a prince from an underwater realm who alternately wanted to save the world and conquer it? Through the eye(s) and lens of photojournalist Phil Sheldon, we get a pretty fair and somewhat realistic look at how people might have reacted.

In Ross' case I think Marvels IS the work of his career. Some may argue between Marvels and Kingdom Come, but I think Marvels just suits his talents perfectly. The photorealism, the spectacle of it all and the iconography and presentation of the moments he captures along with the brighter, more Rockwellian feel are all just tailor-made for what Ross does best.

Of course, Ross doesn't have a huge body of work on interiors beyond Marvels and Kingdom Come. He's clearly made his bones on covers, having become one of the go-to guys in the industry for them. To his credit, he has remained involved with Astro City from the beginning, contributing all of the covers and the bulk of the character designs.

Ross's vision of iconic moments and characters are just transcendent on many occasions. All of those Galactus scenes, for example, are absolute money and really caught my eye in a big way when I first read the issue. This is still my first and only exposure to the original Galactus trilogy (though I finally have the FF Masterworks containing it but haven't yet read it), and it's not a bad primer for a first impression. I always thought it's the show stopper of the series, and I still do.

Some other great visuals, though, like seeing Giant Man from below, how the repetition of the Cyclops image helps sell the mutant hysteria and how the other-worldly look of the GA Torch sells the novelty and terror of the masses. And Ross, of course, uses models for all or most of his characters, so all of them look distinct, though in some cases the choices seem a little off (Johnny Storm comes to mind for some reason). And at certain points I could swear that the model for Sheldon was none other than Paul Levitz. I seriously doubt this, though, because Marvel wouldn't have let that pass muster, and it looks more like Paul does now and not how he did 20 years ago. Plus, it's only in a handful of panels that I thought there was a resemblance.

I like how Phil comes across as an enthusiastic but flawed witness to the biggest events of the Golden and Silver Ages. Though he is in awe of the spectacles he witnesses, he has all-too human reactions at times. He pushes away his fiancee when it seemed the world was becoming too overwhelming and dangerous. When caught in a wave of mob mentality, he finds himself throwing a brick at the X-Men. Phil falls shy of being a Mary Sue, and the story benefits from it. The use of the little mutant girl was pretty affecting and helps sell the hysteria and the humanity within it very well. (She reappears in Eye of the Camera, but I'm missing part of that.)

As mentioned, I read number 4 for the first time. At first blush, I was taken aback a little by how much of a downer ending it was. I know, I know....kinda hard to avoid when the issue centers around the fate of Gwen Stacy. And, of course, the larger metaphor is the end of the innocent Silver Age that her death has come to symbolize. In that context there is no other way that the series could have ended, but it certainly is a bit jarring. Seeing how it affects Phil and basically ends his career is certainly not a happy ending, even with the attempt to "happily ever after" things a bit at the end.

It's great, though, to have an extended look at Gwen before her death. The majority of her run among the living as an active supporting cast member of Spider-Man's comprises the biggest hole in my Amazing Spider-man reading. I've read very little of ASM between approximately issue 50 thru 120. So Gwen and her pop are mostly ciphers to me, remarkable mostly for their deaths and the longterm impacts they've had on Peter. So here, it's great to get a sense of her, even if it doesn't exactly contradict the Mary Sue version of her in my mind. That scene Fickles mentions where she basks in the wonder that the Atlantean army has wrought is definitely another standout moment. And it tells, for the longtime Spidey fans who wondered, exactly what Gwen was doing leading up to her fateful kidnapping and murder by Norman Osborn, when we never saw her conscious, much less have even a word of dialogue. It's nice to know that there was some wonder in her last days.

I guess, looking back on this review, it does come off as rather glowingly positive, given my earlier qualification in comparison to Astro City. It's certainly a really good work that is monumental for the new perspective it gave to the Marvel universe. I'd say it's a work that needed to happen for a Big Two universe, and we were lucky that Busiek and Ross were the ones to do so. It's also important for giving Busiek the perfect platform to get himself noticed and to enable him to take the storytelling approach he debuted here and develop and exceed it on his own creator-owned book.

Marvels remains a worthwhile read and one any fan of Marvel's concepts and history should make a point to read at their earliest convenience.

Lardy, I highly recommend ASM 51-120. Very underappreciated, in my opinion.



Yeah, and, like I said before, dragging in a grade-school-age Danny Ketch just makes the ending even weaker. I wonder if that might have been editorially mandated? I also wonder, though, how else it could have ended...hmmm.

I think that interview I linked earlier puts the "blame" on Kurt. In his defense it *was* a really hot book at the time, and there was every reason to believe the character would have staying power.

Ah, okay. I admit I didn't read it. Busiek and Ross can both kind of get on my nerves when they're interviewed. I prefer to let their work speak for them.

You make a good point, though, Lardy. Who'd have thought 20 years ago that Danny Ketch would end up such a footnote?

It's not my fault! I experienced Silver Age Spidey thru reprints in Marvel Tales. Unfortunately, Marvel stopped reprinting the run in the book after issue 50. They switched to a digest for a while, but it was hard to find and didn't last long. Tales then switched to showing Spidey's mutant-related team-ups from MTU and what-not for a while.

There's always the Essentials volumes.

True. I love me some color, though, so I'll eventually likely get Masterworks. I've had it in the first two volumes forever, so I'll eventually complete it.

Cool.

As great as the Steve Ditko and John Romita Senior issues are, I think the Gil Kane ones get unfairly overlooked. Especially when Romita was inking Kane. That was a magical combination.

Lardy, I have a new re-read project in the works, so whenever you get a chance, could you please change this thread's subtitle to "Coming Soon: Kevin Smith's Green Arrow"?

Your wish is my command, dahling!

Thank you, kind sir.

KEVIN SMITH'S GREEN ARROW

Kevin Smith was a geek voice in the mainstream years and years before geek culture was co-opted by the mainstream. I don't see eye-to-eye with him on everything (he thinks Alanis Morrissette is God, I think she's Satan) but his sincere commitment to geek culture can't be denied.

So it is with another Kevin Smith milestone: the first Gen-X writer from outside comics to come into the comics industry, and by far the best, in my opinion, with his 15-issue Green Arrow run as his magnum opus.

I love Ollie Queen, but the way he's generally been potrayed from about 1987 on really grates with me. That's why these 15 issues are an oasis of goodness in a generally rotten three decades.

Green Arrow Vol. 2 #1

A masterful opener, letting us into the thoughts of Roy Harper (Ollie's ex-protege), Dinah Lance (Ollie's ex-lover), and Connor Hawke (Ollie's illegitimate son, and for a few years, his successor as Green Arrow) on the complicated, and long-deceased, man known as Oliver Queen. It's nice that Smith respects all past Green Arrow continuity, even the bits which make hardcore Ollie fans uncomfortable. Smith clearly loves Ollie and loves those closest to Ollie as well, capturing their individual voices perfectly.

We then move to Star City, Ollie's former haunts from before Mike Grell moved him to Seattle. Late at night, a couple of young thugs try to rob an old man, and they're stopped by...Ollie Queen?? Great cliffhanger.

Green Arrow Vol. 2 #2

Here we're introduced to Mia Dearden, an underaged prostitute hired to service a disgustingly corrupt (in more senses than one) Star City politician, the kind of guy that Ollie Queen would disparagingly call a "fat cat."

Did someone mention Ollie Queen?

Why, here he is, righteous as ever, and back in the old threads , complete with the Robin Hood hat. He saves Mia from the politician, and leaves him trussed up for the police.

Later, Mia's pimp tries to kill her, for fear that the incident with the politician might bring the police down on him. She turns the tables on him, knocks him out, and metaphorically castrates him by cutting off one of his fingers. Then she runs away.

Meanwhile, Ollie turns out to have gained himself a benefactor in Stanley Dover, the old man whose life he saved. Stanley is also rich, and, apparently, gay.

Ollie's main priority at the moment is tracking down a serial killer known as the Star City Slayer, who preys exclusively on underage victims. In a bizarre final page, the Slayer, his identity hidden from the readers' view, feeds the blood of his latest victim to what appears to be an honest-to-goodness monster he is holding captive.

Smith's dialogue continues to be excellent, and it's clearer than ever that he really "gets" Ollie.

Even knowing what's coming later in this 10-part storyarc, I'm still enjoying it immensely, lack of surprises or not (and I'd ask Legion Worlders to please try not to spoil anything prematurely).

Green Arrow Vol. 2 #3

In which Ollie discovers that he's literally out of time, and Mia takes Ollie up on his offer to join the Star City Youth Center, where Ollie helps out, and which was reopened thanks to Stanley's generosity. Mia fits right in, and she's given asylum by Stanley, who brings her and the readers (partially) up to speed on what's happened since Ollie came back to life. We end with Ollie getting some unexpected help busting some hi-tech drug dealers led by super-villain Black Manta, courtesy of Manta's nemesis, Aquaman.

Having established herself as a tough cookie last issue, Mia quickly establishes herself in this issue as very likeable and a natural foil for Ollie, a remarkable achievement for a character created completely from scratch by Smith.

I think it started out well, but became a bit of a mess towards the end. I'll reserve chiming in more until we're further along.

Looking forward to that, Dave.

Without spoiling too much, I'll admit I'm not crazy about the resolution to the Star City Slayer arc, but I think the five remaining Smith issues that followed are pure gold.

Green Arrow Vol. 2 #4

This issue starts off with a great scene of Mia explaining why the Power Puff Girls (by any other name) are so much better than the old cartoons for girls. From there, we get a good action sequence at the Star City wharf followed by some good banter between Ollie and Aquaman, before the two are whisked off to the JLA Watchtower, where Ollie gradually suffers a meltdown when it becomes clear just how far out of time he really is. Batman, who is portrayed by Smith much better than the way anyone else was portraying him by this point, knocks out Ollie and takes him away to the Batcave to run some tests.

Meanwhile, we start getting the sense that Stanley may not be the upstanding citizen he presents himself as.

And Dinah finds out from Oracle that Ollie is alive.

Another good issue, except for Ollie's reaction to Kyle -- "First the black guy, then the redneck, and now a toddler! For the love of Pete, those little blue men give out rings like prizes in a crackerjack box." It's a cheap joke, and it sounds wrong coming from Ollie, one of the least likely characters to say anything even remotely racist.

This issue didn't really work completely for me and is where it started to unravel a bit. The Watchtower scene was awkward and painfully written. Ollie comes off as a caricature of his past appearances, and his patronising interactions with the League fell flat ("Cute as a button"). Add to that, the whole JLA also comes off as morons so Batman can look smart, since it's made really obvious that Ollie's not "current".

On the plus side, there is some fun and snappy dialogue, which is to be expected from Smith, and it redeems a lot of the book's faults, but if I recall, that balance won't hold for much longer.

Given some of the things that will be revealed in the next three issues, I'd say the whole point of that sequence was to be awkward and uncomfortable and for Ollie to come off badly.

And I don't think they were being stupid, I think they were confused and indecisive. Batman simply stated what was going through their minds and did what they knew had to be done.