“This is not a metaphor; this is not sub-text. This is the explicit text of the comic”: If you click but one link this weekend, make it this one, so you can read Abhay Khosla’s essay about September’s Dark Reign: The List—The X-Men #1, from which he convincingly concludes that, “at the close of 2009, a woman with an appetite for sex is apparently the very definition of fear and horror for Marvel comic creators and their audience.”
Seconded!: At The Cool Kids Table, Ben Morse has a nicely written post about how the Kelly/Mahnke JLA run was underrated and overlooked. At the time it suffered quite a bit from its proximity to the Morrison/Porter/Dell run, of which it was a sort of extension, but I’ll be damned if DC’s had anyone do anything with the Justice League since that was half as good. My main discomfort with the run was that Kelly made Plastic Man into a deadbeat dad, and while the story was as well done as such a story could probably have been done, it seemed a bit of unnecessary realism and darkness. Of course, after years of superheroes in both universes torturing, killing and being a-holes—and the villains doing much worse—Plas being a terrible father seems positively tame.
I think it’s safe to say that Jeff Parker knows his audience: Here’s how he’s attempting to sell Fall of the Hulks: Alpha #1.
Come to think of it, were Jack Kerouac and Bigfoot ever in the same room at the same time?: When I first saw this, I thought it said The Beasts: A Graphic History, and that maybe it was a new, more fact-focused version of The Beasts books from Fantagraphics. Then, a second later, I realized I imagined an extra “s,” and it is really just The Beats: A Graphic History. Note to publishers: Apparently, I can’t get enough cryptozoology + comics artists projects, and my desire for them is so strong my subconscious is trying to rewrite unrealted projects into ones.
That library controversy dealie: There’s been some more news on the Jessamine County library in Kentucky where two employees were fired after they refused to allow an 11-year-old-girl to check out Leage of Extraordinary Gentleman: The Black Dossier, against their employer’s policy. Tom Spurgeon has a bit more here, but I kind of like this piece here, because it puts the word “graphic novels” in quotes like that, and then follows up by defining them as “best described as long comic books.”
December 5th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Khosla’s essay doesn’t do anything convincingly, aside from picking and choosing what he researches and what he doesn’t. The simple fact that everything about Marina has established many, many years ago undermines the idea that the elements she brings this story are intentional; the metaphors came with her, they weren’t added by Fraction for his own purposes.
To use a small example, as someone in the comments noted, Marina’s last name is a nod towards a political figure of the day, not a juvenile joke, but Khosla completely ignores that in an effort to make it fit into his overall theme.
It’s dishonest, and those who have never read Alpha Flight or the Avengers wouldn’t know any better.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
“…he convincingly concludes”???
December 5th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
What Khosla’s essay convinces me of is that, when armed with the proper tools, academics can take anything and spin it any which way they want and cleverly sidestep any semblance of the author’s intent (which we’re told in literary criticism is basically pointless). I think there’s a fair amount of misreading here, intentional or otherwise, that’s done solely to prop up the point that THESE COMICS ARE BAD and that he can use $10 words to prove that to you simpletons in the cheap seats.
I’ll never understand the comic blogger that seems to hate super-hero comics continue to devote large amounts of time trying to convince us that what we like not only is not up to their personal standards of quality, but contain an insidious message that must (apparently) be applied line-wide to everything a publisher creates.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Just reading a summary of the article was enough to give me a headache and make me depressed about the state of both comic fandom and the comic blogosphere. We’re not READING comics anymore…we’re just reading other people bitch about them. Wonderful.
December 5th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Whoa whoa whoa, no no way did I see Abhay make a definite judgment about the book itself. He just pointed out some themes that actually fit, tried to make a joke or two and defended his extensions of said theme. If you’re a little too insecure about your taste of comics why don’t you either NOT read Abhay’s personal criticisms in the future or go to the site and challenge it with your own assessment?
December 5th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I think you are all missing the point that Abhay’s article is hilarious.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:01 am
It’s not his conclusion that I’m questioning, it’s the quality of his argument aka it’s poorly done.
So I guess I am questioning his conclusion, but only so far as that it’s the end result of a poorly laid out and researched idea.
December 6th, 2009 at 1:07 am
Well, of course the giant snake represents a vagina. What other reproductive organ could you possibly interpret it as?
December 6th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Khosla could have scored better going off guys who REALLY get into this sort of thing, like Bendis, Kirkman, or Whedon, then attacking Fraction, who’s just going off previously established stuff.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Exactly. Fraction looked for a character from Namor’s past that would have some weight and Marina’s more or less the only one out there to use.
And as EJ implied, a decent argument could be made that this entire comic is about the homoerotic tension between Namor and Osborn.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
It was a joke. He was joking. Maybe you could argue that it wasn’t a funny article, but please stop trying to analyze what was clearly a humor piece. It’s hurting my brain.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
some good points were made, but they were also exaggerated. cap wasn’t rebelling against maria hill but what she was representing at the time, the whole registration thing. now as for unfair female symbolism in superhero books? hell yeah. there’s a hefty dose of that and racism. but do the creators set out to tie it all together like in the article? no way at all. it’s fun to think mainstream comics consist of bunch of people conspiring to ruin your idea of the ideal comic, but it just isn’t true.
it’s good to point out these things but not in such an inflammatory manner, cause at very least the people who you’re trying to reach may just write you off as another crazed fan.
i also not a fan of comics just suck now, camp. comics are pretty varied the world over now. and of course there are bad ones, but it’d be nice to see some rant about the positive symbolism found in comics, especially mainstream superhero ones.
December 7th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Here’s the thing.
I read the article. Twice. There are some funny beats to it, but, even as a humor piece (though I’m not entirely sold on it being done strictly that way), humor works off of establishing an assertion that you then have to sell by the end of the “joke” and I don’t think that his piece does because, well, the initial premise starts off on such shaky legs that you end up marveling at his rambling more than his actual argument.
I’m sure it was a fun writing exercise for him, though.