DC blows it big time.
Over at the Basement Tapes Joe Casey describes the Superman story that never was:
"CASEY: The Christ metaphor was just about the only thing I could sink my teeth into. Back in 2001, we'd actually come up with a huge story where Superman's secret i.d. is exposed, Lois is killed and Superman travels to the 5th dimension where he makes a deal with Mr. Mxyzptlk to use his powers to 'fix things.' So Mxy plays a trick on him. He sends Superman back, and everyone had forgotten his secret i.d.... including Lois. The twist was, Superman remembered everything, so the burden of his life was restored... could he now stand to protect Lois by not marrying her? He became, in a weird sense, the Wandering Jew, which to me brought him right back to the kind of superhero Seigel and Shuster created in 1936. Denying that kind of intimate, lifelong relationship... it was the ultimate sacrifice. It was celibacy, basically.
(in case you're wondering... there was one thing Superman didn't remember: Mxy himself. It was Mxy's plan all along when he made the deal with Supes in the first place, that he'd finally be rid of his Achilles heel… the whole 'saying his name backwards sends him back to the 5th dimension'-gag. Now, Mxy could show up on Earth, raise hell and their 'game' could begin anew, their relationship starting from Square One)
So, we'd found a new paradigm that was in the greatest traditions of the character... and the suits shut us down. Perfectly within their rights, but I don't think any of us -- not me, Loeb, Joe Kelly or Mark Schultz -- ever recovered from that kick-back. That was the beginning of the end. First Loeb took off, then Schultz, then Kelly and I. Maybe you're right. Maybe they were shying away from any religious overtones. That's when I started equating Superman to Muhammad Ali. I thought that'd be a safer role model..."
Why wasn't THAT the big Superman relaunch? This muddled-three different directions-Azarello's story makes no damn sense at all-relaunch hasn't solved any problems or increased any readership. I've always felt Lois and Clark's relationship is only interesting as a courtship, and managing to return it to that phase while adding an extra motive to forever keep it there is just sheer genius. I can only imagine Jeph Loeb had almost nothing to do with this, because it's actually good.
The whole column, a Marvel vs. DC discussion, is worth a read. I tend to agree with Casey except on a few points. Namely I think Batman and Wonder Woman are both icons for whom ongoing stories are better than origins (like the greek Pantheon). It's fair to say nobody has hit the right stories for Wonder Woman yet, but I'm sure they're out there. The fact that she has survived this long as a character with no stories of note is proof that she's got something going for her.
Anyway, things tend to be cyclical, and I think it's fair to say that we may be headed for a time when we need our heroic icons back. It may not be too long before people are deriding Marvel for having too many characters and not enough golden gods. We'll see.
"CASEY: The Christ metaphor was just about the only thing I could sink my teeth into. Back in 2001, we'd actually come up with a huge story where Superman's secret i.d. is exposed, Lois is killed and Superman travels to the 5th dimension where he makes a deal with Mr. Mxyzptlk to use his powers to 'fix things.' So Mxy plays a trick on him. He sends Superman back, and everyone had forgotten his secret i.d.... including Lois. The twist was, Superman remembered everything, so the burden of his life was restored... could he now stand to protect Lois by not marrying her? He became, in a weird sense, the Wandering Jew, which to me brought him right back to the kind of superhero Seigel and Shuster created in 1936. Denying that kind of intimate, lifelong relationship... it was the ultimate sacrifice. It was celibacy, basically.
(in case you're wondering... there was one thing Superman didn't remember: Mxy himself. It was Mxy's plan all along when he made the deal with Supes in the first place, that he'd finally be rid of his Achilles heel… the whole 'saying his name backwards sends him back to the 5th dimension'-gag. Now, Mxy could show up on Earth, raise hell and their 'game' could begin anew, their relationship starting from Square One)
So, we'd found a new paradigm that was in the greatest traditions of the character... and the suits shut us down. Perfectly within their rights, but I don't think any of us -- not me, Loeb, Joe Kelly or Mark Schultz -- ever recovered from that kick-back. That was the beginning of the end. First Loeb took off, then Schultz, then Kelly and I. Maybe you're right. Maybe they were shying away from any religious overtones. That's when I started equating Superman to Muhammad Ali. I thought that'd be a safer role model..."
Why wasn't THAT the big Superman relaunch? This muddled-three different directions-Azarello's story makes no damn sense at all-relaunch hasn't solved any problems or increased any readership. I've always felt Lois and Clark's relationship is only interesting as a courtship, and managing to return it to that phase while adding an extra motive to forever keep it there is just sheer genius. I can only imagine Jeph Loeb had almost nothing to do with this, because it's actually good.
The whole column, a Marvel vs. DC discussion, is worth a read. I tend to agree with Casey except on a few points. Namely I think Batman and Wonder Woman are both icons for whom ongoing stories are better than origins (like the greek Pantheon). It's fair to say nobody has hit the right stories for Wonder Woman yet, but I'm sure they're out there. The fact that she has survived this long as a character with no stories of note is proof that she's got something going for her.
Anyway, things tend to be cyclical, and I think it's fair to say that we may be headed for a time when we need our heroic icons back. It may not be too long before people are deriding Marvel for having too many characters and not enough golden gods. We'll see.
2 Comments:
Wow. That is seriously one of the most disappointing things I've read in a long time. What might have been, indeed.
In defense of today's creative teams, though, I will say that as great as that 2001 arc is on paper, the writers tasked with seeing it through aren't all that great. Loeb and Kelly are both middling talents and I just can't see them pulling off an arc this good.
It's like that first arc of Superman/Batman. Now, let's pretend that we live in a world where they didn't do that arc. And then, a year later, we get a breakdown of that arc's beats. And we're like, "Ho, damn. That sounds pretty cool. Bats and Supes are framed, all the other heroes are trying to bring them in, Lex gets power armor, an alternate Superman from the future comes, Batman fights Hawkman, Superman fights Captain Marvel!" It all sounds pretty awesome, right? Well, of course it does. But in practice it sucked BALLS, because the guy writing it (Loeb) is not very good. I think that might be the same situation here. This Myx arc from 2001 sounds awesome as a big picture sort of thing, but in practice? Who knows.
Yeah, even I thought that sounded cool when I read it.
I would say Rucka's Wonder Woman is really that good. Seriously. She's an ambassador from Paradise. Of course she'd want to spread her crazy hippy socialist ideas to us. And I don't know how far you've read, but the current "Stoned" arc makes great use of the Greek mythology aspect, as Diana fights Medusa, and Athena proves herself to be very crafty indeed as she vies for Zeus' soon-to-be-abandoned throne, but also completely ruthless, completely content to use Diana as a pawn. But I admit I'm a total sucker for the myth stuff.
Good timing about Superman/Batman, because I read the trade at Border's today. I'll just say if you add the key plot points of "Lex's presidency falls apart because he's crazy addicted to krypto-heroin," and "There's a big Superman/Batman hybrid robot" to that list, it starts to seem as dumb on paper as it ends up being in execution (I mean, I would add Lex getting power armor to that, as well). Loeb usually has a few good ideas that are good. But so very many that are wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home