I don't think the artist behind this image realized theAnd no, it is not that Tupperware is good enough to
preserve even the heart of Green Lantern.
...
But really, who's to say that it isn't?
I was a big enough fan that I made websites devoted to my favorite characters. My most prominent one, JLA Reborn, is still up, though dated and neglected. It focuses on DC Comics' powerhouse team of heroes, which, for a few years, also provided me with my favorite monthly title, "JLA." The coding of the site worked back when I made it 8 years ago, but now it looks ugly and definitely amateur. (As a sidenote, I even learned HTML and a bit of JavaScript in the process of making these -- something to put on the resume!)
What ensues is my summary of the Justice League of America's downfall; my theory as to why it happened (hint: see the title of the post); and how this rude awakening has affected my spectatorship...
*Please note that neither the Shark, nor his calves, harbor any ill feelings toward Native Americans, nor does he really believe that their culture ruined the JLA.
JLA #1 (1997), shown above, was the start of a new era of glory. During the previous decade, the Justice League of America comics had become so diluted with mediocre characters and half-witted stories/challenges that they had created several satellite teams to contain them all,
each with its own book to follow its exploits. Examples included Justice League Europe, Justice League International, and Extreme Justice. After this silliness continued for some time, DC Comics executives decided to take the comic back to its roots by recomposing the team of the DC label's powerhouse figures: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, and the Martian Manhunter. (Note: Martian Manhunter is not as widely recognized as the other heroes listed, but was mostly included because he has been a part, in some form and at one time or another, of every incarnation of the League in history. Refer to the bottom left of the image at right.)Suddenly DC Comics found themselves with a best-selling title that fans couldn't keep their hands off of. I was lucky enough to buy issue #1 off the stands, but it literally took me years to track down #'s 2 and 3 to complete my run. The stories were on a grand scale and involved interesting interactions between amazing characters. One of my favorite involved the Flash (who has always been my favorite superhero) having a casual discussion in their headquarters with Superman (the Zeus to his Hermes) about their personal lives. I believe it's issue #5, though I could be wrong. Flash confides in Supes certain inadequacies he confronts in his daily heroics, and Superman expresses the high amount of respect and admiration he feels towards the scarlet speedster. A very personal insight, a rare glimpse into how the hearts of these supermen relate to each other.
Thus the series followed suit for a good four years or so. The first writer, Grant Morrison, left the series in the hands of Mark Waid, a wise decision. Waid had proven his hand in comics he'd
written the decade before, most notably the Flash ongoing series and Kingdom Come, a prestigious graphic novel focusing on a future Justice League that has been overrun by a younger, reckless generation of "heroes."Waid continued Morrison's tradition of large-scale dilemmas, yet also entreated us with personal tales of sleuth and betrayal (e.g. Ra's al Ghul using Batman's secret failsafe plans of how to disable his teammates). It was during his run on the series that I left for my mission. During my two year sabbatical, Joe Kelly took over. Joe Kelly, a name I shall always remember as one that attempts to create, yet succeeds only in the destruction of the text he builds from.
One of Kelly's first tasks was to tackle a big issue: bringing Aquaman back from being temporally outcast, along with the rest of Atlantis, to 1,000 B.C. Yes, you read that right. The first in a long line of mistakes was the writers of a huge DC summer crossover event deciding to invoke a spell upon Atlantis that would cast it back in time if it were threatened beyond its ability to protect itself. The JLA learns of this lame plot device and decides to hurdle themselves backwards in time in hopes of correcting this enormous error in continuity.
Unfortunately, the horrors only increase. During their attempts to rescue Aquaman and his people, the League falls under attack by a group of prehistoric superheroes who see them as a threat. You'd think that millenia of evolution would give our heroes the upper hand (not to mention that by their shear might they have earned the right to laugh in the face of certain doom, intergalactic paradoxes, and even Noam Chomsky). You'd be wrong.
Within one issue taking place in their time travel exploits, The Flash, who not only moves faster than the speed of light but who also thinks at an equally-increased rate, gets his legs ripped off. Martian Manhunter is burned to death (fire is his weakness). Superman is killed by magic (which, next to Kryptonite, is his only Achilles Heel). One by one, each member of the League dies, except for Plastic Man (who had joined the team earlier, only to end up in this story as a disassembled mess of atoms floating somewhere in the ocean) and Green Lantern.
Discovering that Green Lantern still lives, one of the bad guys, Manitou Raven, makes a sudden change of colors and asks for GL's help in resurrecting his teammates -- but it involves Raven cutting out GL's heart. No, really it does. And it makes perfect sense. See, Manitou Raven is a weird, magical Indian guy who can turn himself into a flock of birds in order to get around. So he MUST know what he's talking about, right? Well, maybe he does. But I sure as heck don't, and I'm starting to get ticked that 1) everyone has died in a rather anticlimactic way and 2) magic is the problem and solution to everything.
Without going off on too much of a tangent, I should mention that magic is my bane. Even in an impossible world of comics, there are rules that are defined in order for us to accept the possibility of what's happening. We know the limits of the world, even if they are more flexible than our own. MAGIC, however, is an excuse to break those limits at the expense of a creative plot. It's the ever-reliable deus-ex-machina for when the writer has written himself into a corner.
Next to Kryptonite and Doomsday,THIS guy is the only thing that can kill Superman.
Can you really hold that against the Man of Steel?
(Bonus points if you can recognize this person.)
The League wakes up temporally restored and healthier than ever, excepting, perhaps, Plastic Man -- who has been FLOATING as an unrecognizable heap of disorganized atoms for over 3,000 YEARS in the middle of the ocean! Batman does him a favor and picks up the pieces from his Batwing. After cleaning out his glass of Plastic Man, the malleable oldest-man-alive walks away in the most bummed out mood, quitting the League in order to spend more time with his son and less time in the pages of an incoherent story.
Oh, and Aquaman made it back, too. It makes sense that he's unscathed, though. I mean, after all, isn't he the most powerful of the eight JLA members? Who would hurt a guy who lives to protect fishkind?
Thankfully, though, in response to the unexpected slam they've just taken, the League decides to take on a few new members and increase their ranks. And guess who one of the new kids is: you guessed it! Manitou Raven! AND... his wife! Having won our hearts with their magical ability to turn Green Lantern's heart into the resurrection of his teammates, they obviously fit right in among the pantheon of superheroic gods, and seem right at home in a headquarters that floats miles above the earth.
And that's where I left the JLA. I picked up a couple issues after that, but the subject matter got too preachy and boring. One issue compared the Justice League, in a dream sequence, to American soldiers in Iraq who, at the bidding of an evil superior, do not much better than cause an endless bloodbath. Another dealt with Martian Manhunter's desire to overcome his fear of flames.
Who comes up with this stuff? Don't stories get filtered through higher authorities before being printed in order to protect the readership from running away?
But in the end, this is the problem with all comics. The good runs (there's such a thing as "good runs"?) inevitably end. Ending on a high note is difficult to do, considering that the publisher is going to milk a title for all its worth, and fans are always going to demand more until they are disappointed. JLA's good runs (keep those mental images under control) lasted about 60 issues. Then, instead of continuing to keep up the hype with what they already head, DC execs decided to try something "new," as if the title needed it, and resulted in a flop title.
At the same time, what title can run forever without changing? It is sort of ludicrous that Batman has been around since the forties, yet in the comics he is still in his early thirties. But fans demand more of the same, yet it is this very weakness that prevents true character develpment, unless you are satisfied with development being a neverending cycle.
An example of this is Hal Jordan, Earth's original Green Lantern and the first in comics. DC writers made a daring decision by making him go insane as an indirect result of Superman's death/resurrection. Fans hated it. They hated it even more when he was replaced as GL and later died in one "final" attempt to be a hero. A few years further down the road he was given a chance at redemption by becoming the mortal soul of the Spectre, a being who seeks vengeance on evildoers in the name of God (a God of relentless justice rather than mercy). I stopped reading comics before I found out how this next event happened, but somewhere in there Hal returned to mortality and became reinstated as a Green Lantern, his replacement exiled to space to fight intergalactic crime.
Where is the development in that? We've come full circle! So much for lasting consequences! No wonder dead characters always end up coming back. The only dead superhero I know of who has stayed dead is Barry Allen (the original Flash), who better stay put, for heaven's sake. Is nothing sacred?
And this is why I no longer read comics regularly. I'm tired of reading the same old tales being told over and over again, always unsure of how big consequences really are because they can always be undone.
In conclusion, the JLA didn't fall because of a Native American. Indeed, the JLA fell because of what that character represented: uncreative change as a response to an inability to tell new stories with the same characters bound to a set of rules by time and space. DC Comics lost me when they decided to take a good thing and flush it down the proverbial toilet, when they took clever characters and replaced them with mystical beings with inexplicable loyalties. If comic books have become so capitalistic that such a lame character needs introduction to a series/story simply to keep the status quo, to ensure that the story can end, thus supposedly ensuring income over solid storytelling, then count me out.
EPILOGUE:
I still love the idea of comics. I talk about them with whoever can keep a good discussion going on them. I rush to see worthwhile comic-based films, and they tend to be my favorite. I wear my superhero t-shirts from time to time, and I love my DVD's of "Batman: The Animated Series," "Superman: The Animated Series," and "Justice League." I've found relief in my comic book frustrations by escaping to the same characters in a different interpretation. Thank goodness the DC Animated 'verse is still there to keep me intrigued.
Wait. What's that?
And we didn't even get to see an animated Manitou Raven.
*Note to self: Write sequel to "The Downfall of Comics" entitled "The Downfall of DC Animated T.V. Shows: Why Ordering Half-Seasons of an Otherwise-Successful Show while Only Showing New Episodes Twice Every Three Months For a Year and Juggling its Time Slot Around Will Lead to its Inescapable Demise"
**Note to Cabeza: Thanks for being probably the only person alive to read this whole thing.
Oh, and Aquaman made it back, too. It makes sense that he's unscathed, though. I mean, after all, isn't he the most powerful of the eight JLA members? Who would hurt a guy who lives to protect fishkind?
Thankfully, though, in response to the unexpected slam they've just taken, the League decides to take on a few new members and increase their ranks. And guess who one of the new kids is: you guessed it! Manitou Raven! AND... his wife! Having won our hearts with their magical ability to turn Green Lantern's heart into the resurrection of his teammates, they obviously fit right in among the pantheon of superheroic gods, and seem right at home in a headquarters that floats miles above the earth.
And that's where I left the JLA. I picked up a couple issues after that, but the subject matter got too preachy and boring. One issue compared the Justice League, in a dream sequence, to American soldiers in Iraq who, at the bidding of an evil superior, do not much better than cause an endless bloodbath. Another dealt with Martian Manhunter's desire to overcome his fear of flames.
Who comes up with this stuff? Don't stories get filtered through higher authorities before being printed in order to protect the readership from running away?
But in the end, this is the problem with all comics. The good runs (there's such a thing as "good runs"?) inevitably end. Ending on a high note is difficult to do, considering that the publisher is going to milk a title for all its worth, and fans are always going to demand more until they are disappointed. JLA's good runs (keep those mental images under control) lasted about 60 issues. Then, instead of continuing to keep up the hype with what they already head, DC execs decided to try something "new," as if the title needed it, and resulted in a flop title.
At the same time, what title can run forever without changing? It is sort of ludicrous that Batman has been around since the forties, yet in the comics he is still in his early thirties. But fans demand more of the same, yet it is this very weakness that prevents true character develpment, unless you are satisfied with development being a neverending cycle.
An example of this is Hal Jordan, Earth's original Green Lantern and the first in comics. DC writers made a daring decision by making him go insane as an indirect result of Superman's death/resurrection. Fans hated it. They hated it even more when he was replaced as GL and later died in one "final" attempt to be a hero. A few years further down the road he was given a chance at redemption by becoming the mortal soul of the Spectre, a being who seeks vengeance on evildoers in the name of God (a God of relentless justice rather than mercy). I stopped reading comics before I found out how this next event happened, but somewhere in there Hal returned to mortality and became reinstated as a Green Lantern, his replacement exiled to space to fight intergalactic crime.
Where is the development in that? We've come full circle! So much for lasting consequences! No wonder dead characters always end up coming back. The only dead superhero I know of who has stayed dead is Barry Allen (the original Flash), who better stay put, for heaven's sake. Is nothing sacred?
And this is why I no longer read comics regularly. I'm tired of reading the same old tales being told over and over again, always unsure of how big consequences really are because they can always be undone.
In conclusion, the JLA didn't fall because of a Native American. Indeed, the JLA fell because of what that character represented: uncreative change as a response to an inability to tell new stories with the same characters bound to a set of rules by time and space. DC Comics lost me when they decided to take a good thing and flush it down the proverbial toilet, when they took clever characters and replaced them with mystical beings with inexplicable loyalties. If comic books have become so capitalistic that such a lame character needs introduction to a series/story simply to keep the status quo, to ensure that the story can end, thus supposedly ensuring income over solid storytelling, then count me out.
EPILOGUE:
I still love the idea of comics. I talk about them with whoever can keep a good discussion going on them. I rush to see worthwhile comic-based films, and they tend to be my favorite. I wear my superhero t-shirts from time to time, and I love my DVD's of "Batman: The Animated Series," "Superman: The Animated Series," and "Justice League." I've found relief in my comic book frustrations by escaping to the same characters in a different interpretation. Thank goodness the DC Animated 'verse is still there to keep me intrigued.
Wait. What's that?
And we didn't even get to see an animated Manitou Raven.
*Note to self: Write sequel to "The Downfall of Comics" entitled "The Downfall of DC Animated T.V. Shows: Why Ordering Half-Seasons of an Otherwise-Successful Show while Only Showing New Episodes Twice Every Three Months For a Year and Juggling its Time Slot Around Will Lead to its Inescapable Demise"
**Note to Cabeza: Thanks for being probably the only person alive to read this whole thing.
10 comments:
A few notes:
1) Indeed, I did read the entire post. And if anyone else read the whole thing, I'll hunt them down and kill them in order to remain the only person alive who did.
2) Technically, isn't Jay Garrick the original Flash?
3) Excellent post, excellent logic. I agree with you 100%. Perhaps JLA will make a comeback in coolness at some point, but it seems inevitable that eventually it'll be handed off to a lame writer again, thus perpetuating the cycle you so effectively demonstrated.
4) Magic isn't the only destabilizing force that ruins otherwise good storylines and acts as comics' annoying deus-ex-machina. The other: time travel. Think The Kingdom, DC 1,000,000, the whole freakin' Hypertime storyline, etc. Leave the time machine alone!
1) Come and get me Cabeza! If you think you can...
2) " Batman does him a favor and picks up the pieces from his Batwing."
I think that's wrong. Firestorm had to comb the bottom of the ocean with a device that gathered up all the scattered pieces of Plastic Man. Though you then get into the headache of "wait... so the entire time Eel O'brien has been alive, parts of him have been scattered out over the ocean?"
3) While I do agree the Joe Kelly run definitely went downhill fast, I thought the time travel wasn't TOO bad. You have to remember, despite whatever advantages JLA had over JLO (Justice League Old), the latter had advanced knowledge of the former (gleamed from Aquaman). As some will point out, in battle intelligence is everything. I thought the whole point about atlantis was so very confused. It's apparently been sunk, then raised, then sunk again and so Arthur is then arrested because he is the cause of it's sinking? Wait... what?
4) But after that, I thought the JLA vs Martian Manhunter was a decent effort (the prior 2 epics about the white martians being my fave JLA stories). However I also think that story is a perfect example of Joe Kelly's faults as a writer. There are so many threads throughout the story many of which are never resolved. The martian vs Vandal Savage? The guardians weren't "responsible" for the burning martians! Wait, J'onn has actually be suffering from multiple personalities?
From then on it just sucked. The comic took a very political turn (never a good idea for comics) and tried to get out "messages"(TM) in every issue... Does anyone have discipline at the DC offices?
3) "Indeed, the JLA fell because of what that character represented: uncreative change as a response to an inability to tell new stories with the same characters bound to a set of rules by time and space. DC Comics lost me when they decided to take a good thing and flush it down the proverbial toilet, when they took clever characters and replaced them with mystical beings with inexplicable loyalties. If comic books have become so capitalistic that such a lame character needs introduction to a series/story simply to keep the status quo, to ensure that the story can end, thus supposedly ensuring income over solid storytelling, then count me out."
Hey Shark, have you seen Shadowpact? I thought it interesting how much of the above statement applied to them. Yes it is a book devoted to magic but they do seem to be following some sort of rules as well. Plus what I think is a HUGE pro for the series is that it focuses on completely unknown characters so they should be able to have character development and archs but they don't have to worry about doing "resets" because so few fans will be upset with Detective Chimp ending up differently than where he started. Here's hoping it has a good run for awhile before it tanks.
Well, Cabeza won't have to hunt me down, because I only read the first couple of paragraphs or so.
Shark, did you know that I've never read a comic book before? Ever.
P.S. You said I get bonus points if I recognize the person with fire coming out of his hand. Where can I redeem those?
P.P.S. I know you weren't trying to keep it a secret or anything, but if you scroll over the picture, his name pops up in the window because it is included in the filename.
Man I just have to leave this comment: "I thought I was a geek enjoying classic Mega Man games!"
I don't even think I could follow all of those characters. I am amazed that everyone that left comments seemed to know comic book characters better than I know real history.
My hat is truly off to you all that spouted amazing amounts of comic, or perhaps comical, trivia.
Cabeza: The question of the "original" Flash depends on the continuity you are referring to.
Nate: I stand corrected. Obviously it's been a couple years since I read "Obsidian Age." If I were attempting to sound more scholarly or authoritative I would have done a better job at doing my homework.
I haven't read Shadowpact, but your comments about it remind me of the show "Heroes," which I think pulls off the same effect. The use of entirely new characters allows for greater development.
I also agree with your comments on Atlantis and Aquaman. Who knows what the heck was going on there... ?
J. Bod: Your points are redeemable at your local Curves. And you should read "Kingdom Come."
Mitch: I admit that I am somewhat nerdy, but what's the difference between someone who follows a comic serial and someone who follows "Lost" on a regular basis? It's just a different medium. And I'm sure you know more about lots of other things that perhaps aren't as important than you do about real history.
And Cabeza definitely knows more about real history than comic book jargon.
I can hold my own in both fields.
There are three that ruin story lines in the earth: the magic, the time travel, and the technology (in sci-fi). These three agree in one.
Not to steal from John too much, but these three have ruined many a story by reducing the complexity to some completely improbable unitary boring-ness. As Lehi would say, the story becomes "a compound in one."
But magic, along with technology and time travel, can be used for good (or for awesome) as well as for ill. It does not have to be a deus ex machina.
For example, bad technology=Prisoner of the Ant People, good technology=Brave New World or The Matrix. Bad time travel=Back to the Future part II, Good time travel=The Time Machine (the book). Bad magic=see Shark's post, Good magic=Tolkien.
It isn't magic per se that leads to the downfall of a plot line, it is treating magic as a system with no rules that can do anything and needs no explanation. Magic, if it is treated as a system of rules that cannot be broken, but that can circumvent natural law, can be engaging and compelling.
The idea of superman, if you think about it, could lead to plot sterility. If the guy has super strength and can't be killed, then he could become a deus ex machina. But throw in a weakness like Kryptonite and it gets more complex. Super strength has to play by the rules.
So it isn't magic per se that kills stories, it is laziness in deploying magic by ignoring the need to have rules for magic. Magic, technology and time travel are just tempting common places for writers to give up on rules.
As long as you are referring to the subject of my post when you cite a case of "bad magic," then I agree with you. Otherwise, I would beg to differ. My words can be quite magical at times - in the good way.
I know you aren't saying this, but your example of Superman made me think about a lot of people who think he is a boring character because he is "invincible." To me, it takes a good writer to work with Superman because they need to present issues that are challenges to him and that exploit his weaknesses, whether physical or mental/emotional. But he isn't invincible, and Kryptonite is not the only thing that can kill him. I love that he was killed by Doomsday, a beast that was simply a little stronger than he was. He IS mortal, he's just stronger than you and I by a thousand times or so.
And yeah, I like Harry Potter, so I can't say that magic is all bad. But I'm always skeptical of it just because it's so easy to say, "Oh, well there's this spell that can fix everything and we decided not to tell you about it until now for the sake of dramatic effect and misleading the spectator's emotions."
Harry Potter isn't all bad. She does play by the rules of magic for the most part. But there is a little bit of that, "oh, yeah, there's this spell" type of thing.
That's why I like LOTR a bit more. Gandalf can't just recite a spell, he has to put some effort into it. I love the part when he can't get the door open to the mines, for example. In LOTR magic is only one front on which the characters fight their battle; it is never a guaranteed victory.
Also, LOTR is just better written, in my opinion, than HP. I think the characters are more interesting, and more noble. Harry often comes off as kind of a whiny kid. More so in the movies, but in the books as well.
Post a Comment