Alex Groff
May 19, 2005, 08:13 am
<img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/columns/te_logo.gif" align=left width=115 height=100 border=0 alt="Typographical Errors">by Alex Groff
If I had to pick my favorite hero in the DC universe before I quit reading comics in 1999, it would have been Batman. I still have days now when I wonder if Batman couldn't be the best hero in the DC Universe, but he has one thing riding against him that moves him slowly down my list— oversaturation. For the burden of proof, I go to Legends of the Dark Knight.
Now I have always believed and to this day believe that Legends of the Dark Knight could be one of the best comics on the stands. You could get a wide range of writers with a wide range of styles, give them as much or as little space as they needed to tell the story they wanted, and once they were done, move on to the next one. Granted, the series started with the mediocre Shaman, which was not a good way to begin, but it picked up to later include stories by Grant Morrison, Warren Ellis, Ted McKeever, Chris Bachelo, Mike Mignola, John Francis Moore, and— much to my chagrin— DeMatteis' best story, Going Sane. So many great creators have been on this title that it could be awe-inspiring, and it provides an outlet for new creators to prove themselves without any real danger of damage control on DC's end.
So, you're asking, what's the problem? Well, the problem is, no one is using Legends of the Dark Knight. It's still being published, but as far as a quality series, it's lost its rank to the miniseries, the prestige format, and apparently to Batman itself. This year, we have had the brilliant Batman: Death and the Maidens, the visually stunning Batman/Poison Ivy: Casting Shadows, the Campbell's latest masterpiece, Batman: Order of Beasts, and Morse's stunning Batman: Roomful of Strangers. And, to make matters worse, Batman features two unrelated stories under the titles "Hush" and "Broken City", neither of which have been followed up on in Batman! (It is true that the "Hush" storyline is being continued in Gotham Knights, but that does not explain why it was placed in Batman instead of Legends of the Dark Knight.)
Now, I know that DC wants to make the most money possible. The promotion of Hush and then Broken City was designed to whet interest so that readers would stay as Judd Winnick took over the title. And the "Hush" storyline is being continued in Gotham Knights to pull fans of Batman over to the lesser-read Gotham Knights. I also won't argue with the fact that Order of Beasts was a great OGN; if you mentioned that I had asked why Roomful of Strangers wasn't squarebound, I would agree that yes, I loved that book as well.
The fact remains, however, that Legends of the Dark Knight is not being treated seriously. And if we're going to treat a book like the bastard child of the Batman line, then why do we bother publishing it at all? So when Rucka and Jansen's Death and the Maidens was published as a miniseries, it was just further evidence that nothing quality was going to be put in Legends of the Dark Knight. And each and every miniseries or OGN just adds to this evidence. To use an analogy, if you have a garage but you park on the street, sooner or later, you're going to fill your garage with crap. This is what has happened with Legends of the Dark Knight.
(And for all those arguing that great stories are not published in Legends of the Dark Knight because they would be ignored, I would point you to the "Hush" storyline as proof of how promotion can draw attention to a creative team change on a long-standing title. That argument doesn't hold water.)
This worries me largely because of the proliferation of this format. We have Unlimited Spiderman and Unlimited X-Men and now JLA: Classified and JSA: Classified, yet all four of these have multiple titles and miniseri. How important can Marvel or DC claim an anthology is when they're publishing a plethora of miniseri outside of the anthology? Wasn't that the point of the anthology in the first place? In this context, it becomes obvious why anthologies fail: because they're not given the support— the stories— they need to function. Which is a shame, because when they're good, they can be excellent.
So the next question I have is, how can we make a superhero anthology that actually works? Well, ladies and gentlemen, I draw your attention to Superman, and Madman.
THE ANTHOLOGY OF MY DREAMS
It's been almost a year since I've really enjoyed reading about Superman— basically, since Joe Casey left. Now, I don't believe his work was flawless— in truth, I only liked about half of his work on Adventures of Superman. But when he was on, it was the best Superman writing since John Byrne started writing big Blue. Each of the new creators has a different angle— Austen writes about your friendly neighborhood Superman as he pummels Old Testament rejects; Rucka offers a Mulder and Scully schtick which— while interesting— feels out of character; and Azzarello offers political commentary in place of action or suspense. I like political commentary, but I don't want it to replace the action of the story, and here it has.
So what did Joe Casey do right? In my opinion, he went back to the things that made Superman interesting in the first place. He reminded us that Superman is Clark Kent, and while he will save the world repeatedly during the day, his view of the world is not strikingly different than ours. Clark Kent does not need to be the underdog to be human: he just has to act like a person, and Casey understood that. Behind the big red "S" and Kryptonian DNA, there was an unshakable Kansas mentality, the sense of Superman being just another guy.
And what does this have to do with anthologies? Well, the Superman stories I want are not just Casey's work: they go back as far as Siegel and Schluster. The to-be-continued ministories. The books about Jimmy Olsen, Superman's Pal or Superman's Family, with tales about everyone from Lois Lane to Perry White to Superdog. I thought Austen's work on Superman: Metropolis was laudable simply because it looked at Superman's world through someone else's eyes, and it was a surprising point of view. Veitch's recent The Question and Azzarello's Lex Luther: Man of Steel further explore other angles of Superman, other relationships.
So I want a new Superman comic. An anthology, that breaks all the traditional rules, and sees if we can't do something new and exciting. And the role model I'm using is Allred's All-New King-Size Super Groovy Madman Special!, which you can read about here (http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/forums/showthread.php?t=22067). Imagine a Superman anthology at 64 pages. The first story is full-length: it can be a miniseries broken into chapters, or it can be a 22 page story, but it's a complete story. After that, you still have room for three or four more stories. Think even bigger for a second: you could fit a novella in one of these— Alan Moore's Batman: The Killing Joke and Warren Ellis' Batman/Planetary are both only 48 pages, remember— and still have room for one or two back-up stories.
Now, if someone in marketing really wanted to make this work, you would put a maxiseries like Chuck Austen's Superman: Metropolis or Waid's Superman: Birthrite as the opening story to keep the readers coming back, and fill the rest of the book with new talent and unexpected talent. Let the big name and the "to be continued" draw fans. Honestly. All you need is the name Jurgens (Superman: Day of Doom) or Busiek (Superman: Secret Identity) on the front of one of these anthologies and you have guaranteed readership. This is what makes Metal Hurlent work: a combination of ongoing stories and shorts that build long-term readership while constantly surprising and drawing in new readers. (Because I'll admit, I bought Metal Hurlent solely because of the names Rob G. and Rick Spears, and now I'm saddened that I can't buy it anymore.)
And if you really want to stretch your brain, let's take this idea to its logical end. Think about Grant Morrison's Seven Soldiers: seven miniseries that are all interwoven without being dependent on the others. Here you have a 64 page anthology, four stories that could all be pieces of a larger puzzle, all happening within the same world. A self-contained epic. It would be like having an entire universe to play with, all in one issue.
Nothing frustrates me quite as much as seeing so much potential in a book, and seeing so many books fail that potential. Prove me wrong, someone. Make anthologies work again.
<center><hr width=75%></center>
Alex groff writes columns at Comixfan. People read them. It's not a bad deal, when you think about it.
<center><hr width=75%></center>
The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the writer, and are not reflective of Comixfan or its other staff in general.
If I had to pick my favorite hero in the DC universe before I quit reading comics in 1999, it would have been Batman. I still have days now when I wonder if Batman couldn't be the best hero in the DC Universe, but he has one thing riding against him that moves him slowly down my list— oversaturation. For the burden of proof, I go to Legends of the Dark Knight.
Now I have always believed and to this day believe that Legends of the Dark Knight could be one of the best comics on the stands. You could get a wide range of writers with a wide range of styles, give them as much or as little space as they needed to tell the story they wanted, and once they were done, move on to the next one. Granted, the series started with the mediocre Shaman, which was not a good way to begin, but it picked up to later include stories by Grant Morrison, Warren Ellis, Ted McKeever, Chris Bachelo, Mike Mignola, John Francis Moore, and— much to my chagrin— DeMatteis' best story, Going Sane. So many great creators have been on this title that it could be awe-inspiring, and it provides an outlet for new creators to prove themselves without any real danger of damage control on DC's end.
So, you're asking, what's the problem? Well, the problem is, no one is using Legends of the Dark Knight. It's still being published, but as far as a quality series, it's lost its rank to the miniseries, the prestige format, and apparently to Batman itself. This year, we have had the brilliant Batman: Death and the Maidens, the visually stunning Batman/Poison Ivy: Casting Shadows, the Campbell's latest masterpiece, Batman: Order of Beasts, and Morse's stunning Batman: Roomful of Strangers. And, to make matters worse, Batman features two unrelated stories under the titles "Hush" and "Broken City", neither of which have been followed up on in Batman! (It is true that the "Hush" storyline is being continued in Gotham Knights, but that does not explain why it was placed in Batman instead of Legends of the Dark Knight.)
Now, I know that DC wants to make the most money possible. The promotion of Hush and then Broken City was designed to whet interest so that readers would stay as Judd Winnick took over the title. And the "Hush" storyline is being continued in Gotham Knights to pull fans of Batman over to the lesser-read Gotham Knights. I also won't argue with the fact that Order of Beasts was a great OGN; if you mentioned that I had asked why Roomful of Strangers wasn't squarebound, I would agree that yes, I loved that book as well.
The fact remains, however, that Legends of the Dark Knight is not being treated seriously. And if we're going to treat a book like the bastard child of the Batman line, then why do we bother publishing it at all? So when Rucka and Jansen's Death and the Maidens was published as a miniseries, it was just further evidence that nothing quality was going to be put in Legends of the Dark Knight. And each and every miniseries or OGN just adds to this evidence. To use an analogy, if you have a garage but you park on the street, sooner or later, you're going to fill your garage with crap. This is what has happened with Legends of the Dark Knight.
(And for all those arguing that great stories are not published in Legends of the Dark Knight because they would be ignored, I would point you to the "Hush" storyline as proof of how promotion can draw attention to a creative team change on a long-standing title. That argument doesn't hold water.)
This worries me largely because of the proliferation of this format. We have Unlimited Spiderman and Unlimited X-Men and now JLA: Classified and JSA: Classified, yet all four of these have multiple titles and miniseri. How important can Marvel or DC claim an anthology is when they're publishing a plethora of miniseri outside of the anthology? Wasn't that the point of the anthology in the first place? In this context, it becomes obvious why anthologies fail: because they're not given the support— the stories— they need to function. Which is a shame, because when they're good, they can be excellent.
So the next question I have is, how can we make a superhero anthology that actually works? Well, ladies and gentlemen, I draw your attention to Superman, and Madman.
THE ANTHOLOGY OF MY DREAMS
It's been almost a year since I've really enjoyed reading about Superman— basically, since Joe Casey left. Now, I don't believe his work was flawless— in truth, I only liked about half of his work on Adventures of Superman. But when he was on, it was the best Superman writing since John Byrne started writing big Blue. Each of the new creators has a different angle— Austen writes about your friendly neighborhood Superman as he pummels Old Testament rejects; Rucka offers a Mulder and Scully schtick which— while interesting— feels out of character; and Azzarello offers political commentary in place of action or suspense. I like political commentary, but I don't want it to replace the action of the story, and here it has.
So what did Joe Casey do right? In my opinion, he went back to the things that made Superman interesting in the first place. He reminded us that Superman is Clark Kent, and while he will save the world repeatedly during the day, his view of the world is not strikingly different than ours. Clark Kent does not need to be the underdog to be human: he just has to act like a person, and Casey understood that. Behind the big red "S" and Kryptonian DNA, there was an unshakable Kansas mentality, the sense of Superman being just another guy.
And what does this have to do with anthologies? Well, the Superman stories I want are not just Casey's work: they go back as far as Siegel and Schluster. The to-be-continued ministories. The books about Jimmy Olsen, Superman's Pal or Superman's Family, with tales about everyone from Lois Lane to Perry White to Superdog. I thought Austen's work on Superman: Metropolis was laudable simply because it looked at Superman's world through someone else's eyes, and it was a surprising point of view. Veitch's recent The Question and Azzarello's Lex Luther: Man of Steel further explore other angles of Superman, other relationships.
So I want a new Superman comic. An anthology, that breaks all the traditional rules, and sees if we can't do something new and exciting. And the role model I'm using is Allred's All-New King-Size Super Groovy Madman Special!, which you can read about here (http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/forums/showthread.php?t=22067). Imagine a Superman anthology at 64 pages. The first story is full-length: it can be a miniseries broken into chapters, or it can be a 22 page story, but it's a complete story. After that, you still have room for three or four more stories. Think even bigger for a second: you could fit a novella in one of these— Alan Moore's Batman: The Killing Joke and Warren Ellis' Batman/Planetary are both only 48 pages, remember— and still have room for one or two back-up stories.
Now, if someone in marketing really wanted to make this work, you would put a maxiseries like Chuck Austen's Superman: Metropolis or Waid's Superman: Birthrite as the opening story to keep the readers coming back, and fill the rest of the book with new talent and unexpected talent. Let the big name and the "to be continued" draw fans. Honestly. All you need is the name Jurgens (Superman: Day of Doom) or Busiek (Superman: Secret Identity) on the front of one of these anthologies and you have guaranteed readership. This is what makes Metal Hurlent work: a combination of ongoing stories and shorts that build long-term readership while constantly surprising and drawing in new readers. (Because I'll admit, I bought Metal Hurlent solely because of the names Rob G. and Rick Spears, and now I'm saddened that I can't buy it anymore.)
And if you really want to stretch your brain, let's take this idea to its logical end. Think about Grant Morrison's Seven Soldiers: seven miniseries that are all interwoven without being dependent on the others. Here you have a 64 page anthology, four stories that could all be pieces of a larger puzzle, all happening within the same world. A self-contained epic. It would be like having an entire universe to play with, all in one issue.
Nothing frustrates me quite as much as seeing so much potential in a book, and seeing so many books fail that potential. Prove me wrong, someone. Make anthologies work again.
<center><hr width=75%></center>
Alex groff writes columns at Comixfan. People read them. It's not a bad deal, when you think about it.
<center><hr width=75%></center>
The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the writer, and are not reflective of Comixfan or its other staff in general.