DC's Untapped Potential

[GoldenAgeHero]

LOL! GAH, you wouldn't know logic if it came at you in hot women form and gave you a *******.

so that was you lastnight?

 

[Aristotle]

I'd very much prefer it if DC simply lifted this ridiculous Vertigo embargo they have.

The problem with that is that Vertigo decided to make its characters age in real time a long time ago. Basically, John Constantine is living in the future of the DCU, quite a few years, actually. That means nothing serious can happen to him in the mainline DCU, because it would have affected him in his Vertigo series years ago.

It's doable, but it would take a little continuity gymnastics.

 

[Aristotle]

Well, in that case, I really do doubt he would know it was logic. He'd probably think it was just a hot chuck giving him head.

Chuck, huh?

 

[The Question]

The problem with that is that Vertigo decided to make its characters age in real time a long time ago. Basically, John Constantine is living in the future of the DCU, quite a few years, actually. That means nothing serious can happen to him in the mainline DCU, because it would have affected him in his Vertigo series years ago.

It's doable, but it would take a little continuity gymnastics.

Is that a general policy of Vertigo? I thought it just happened a lot with Vertigo titles, but happened on a book by book basis. Anyway, I'm not saying there should be cross overs like crazy. Constantine doesn't even really fit in most mainstream DC books anyway, unless his presense is being played largely for laughs. I just don't like the fact that they're being cut off from one another completely these days. Like you said, it limits both imprints.

Chuck, huh?

Those Greek Philosophers that created logic were a bunch of hippies.

 

[Mladen]

Anyway, I'm not saying there should be cross overs like crazy. Constantine doesn't even really fit in most mainstream DC books anyway, unless his presense is being played largely for laughs. I just don't like the fact that they're being cut off from one another completely these days. Like you said, it limits both imprints.

Actually it strengthens the Vertigo imprint to not have superheroes running around. THE major drawcard for Vertigo is that its one of few who widely publish NON-SUPERHERO RELATED MATERIAL (its inconceivable, I know). I understand that superhero fans want superheroes everywhere, but I personally want to be able to read a mainstream comic which (shock) doesn't feature them... The same way I'd like to just once see a new comedy which doesn't star Ben Stiller or Owen Wilson (oh, wait...).

I'm happy for Constantine to appear in any DC book (thats originally how he was concieved), but it in no way 'limits' his own title if superheroes are kept out and never ever mentioned. I have no idea why people think you can't tell an excellent story without magic men flying around?

 

[Aristotle]

Oh for ****sake, you are so pretentious. Well over half of Vertigo's output is still superhero stuff, and always has been. There is nothing more ****ing irritating than a Goddamned Vertigo fanboy, because you all think you're really special for loving Vertigo so Goddamned much. Don't get me wrong, Vertigo's the ****, but there are far better places to find real non-superhero work.

You think Exterminators, Fables, Northlanders, Scalped, DMZ, Un-Men, Hellblazer, and Crossing Midnight aren't fundamentally still within the superhero genre of literature? For that matter, all of the Sandman titles, Animal Man, Shade the Changing Man, Kid Eternity, Preacher, Transmetropolitan, Invisibles, Lucifer, Jonah Hex, Y: The Last Man, and Swamp Thing were all superhero comics too.

Get over yourself.

 

[Mladen]

Oh for ****sake, you are so pretentious. Well over half of Vertigo's output is still superhero stuff, and always has been. There is nothing more ****ing irritating than a Goddamned Vertigo fanboy, because you all think you're really special for loving Vertigo so Goddamned much. Don't get me wrong, Vertigo's the ****, but there are far better places to find real non-superhero work.

You think Exterminators, Fables, Northlanders, Scalped, DMZ, Un-Men, Hellblazer, and Crossing Midnight aren't fundamentally still within the superhero genre of literature? For that matter, all of the Sandman titles, Animal Man, Shade the Changing Man, Kid Eternity, Preacher, Transmetropolitan, Invisibles, Lucifer, Jonah Hex, Y: The Last Man, and Swamp Thing were all superhero comics too.

Get over yourself.

Insults are a sure way to win an argument when you have nothing to say. If you want to argue the point, I'll be glad to, but its childish to bring language and name-calling into the mix. We're all adults here (hopefully), and I'm not going to be bullied into not stating my viewpoint.

No, i don't think most of the titles you mentioned are at all within the superhero genre (though many you mentioned of course are). Thats the kind of superhero-centric american comic-readership opinion that gets thrown around a lot, the kind of revisionist history which tries to claim that the first comics were superheroes (no, they weren't) and that the only 'pure' comic subject is superheroes (no, its not). Its the same opinion which suggest that somebody is 'pretentious' because they aren't particularly interested in superhero comics. That sort of opinion confused notions of personal preference for a personal attack, which it is not. I don't think any less of superhero readers than I do other genre readers. But I DO think less of people who DEMAND that their genre be universally loved.

Obviously a lot of mainstream comics owe their visual language and their story focus to american superhero comics (its what their creators grew up reading after all, most western comics owe a lot of their structure and craft to the hero genre), but to say half of those titles are 'fundamentally superhero genre' has absolutely no basis in reality. Look at half of those comics you mentioned, and yes, they may borrow the 'action' story format, but thats NOT exclusively superhero language. Superheroes are a genre, one that is essentially a repackaging of crime, war, and cowboy stories in a more eye-catching format. If you want, I could say that all action movies are fundamentally cowboy stereotypes (and most are), but to say that they're 'cowboy genre' is just incorrect.

I don't think Vertigo is 'the ****' as you call it. Far from it. But as I said, its one of few MAINSTREAM labels which doesn't exclusively publish superhero titles. I may not enjoy all of their titles, but I can usually assume that I can pick up a modern Vertigo title and NOT get a superhero comic. Independant and smaller publishers publish MUCH FINER non-hero work, but their stuff does not reach nearly the same audience. I want at least keep SOME semlance of genre variety in mainstream comics. You may not, you may prefer non-superhero genre stuff be delegated to special previews orders and arthouse bookstores, but I don't.

Your opinion is not universal.

 

[Aristotle]

The superhero genre of literature does not require that its protagonist be running around in a cape and spandex. It usually features one protagonist, or a singular group of protagonists, well-defined as protagonists, "taking on" the rest of the world. If not explicitly superpowered, there is something about the character that sets them apart, that makes them interesting, that gives them the potential edge with which to defeat the opponent. This is what superheroes, as a literary device, have come to mean. That's why the first comic books were, by today's definition, superhero books. The first comics, of course, were funny strips in 1700s France, one of which would later be shamelessly ripped off by the Disney Corporation for their Mickey Mouse strip.

the only 'pure' comic subject is superheroes (no, its not).

You didn't actually read what I wrote, did you?

Its the same opinion which suggest that somebody is 'pretentious' because they aren't particularly interested in superhero comics.

You're pretentious because you think less of superhero readers, and no amount of assurances otherwise will change what we can all see your attitude is. You're pretentious because you think that a comic book can't be good if it has spandex and a cape. You're pretentious because you've probably never given superheroes an honest chance, unless it was Watchmen, or possibly Kingdom Come. And most of all, you're pretentious because you come into a SUPERHERO COMICS MESSAGE BOARD AND TALK **** ON SUPERHERO READERS.

But I DO think less of people who DEMAND that their genre be universally loved.

I don't demand that you love superheroes. I realize that you're far too hip and literary to ever show any affection for bright colors and happy endings and good people. But I do demand that if you don't like them, you take your tight-assed hipster opinions on somewhere the **** else, because I've got no use for them. This board is for people to talk about DC comics. It isn't for wankass hipsters to brag about how hip they are.

Look at half of those comics you mentioned, and yes, they may borrow the 'action' story format, but thats NOT exclusively superhero language.

Separate any of those titles convincingly from superhero fiction.

 

[fifthfiend]

bright colors and happy endings and good people.

Oh come on, since when do superhero comics have any of those things?

Okay, I'll give you the colors.

You think Exterminators, Fables, Northlanders, Scalped, DMZ, Un-Men, Hellblazer, and Crossing Midnight aren't fundamentally still within the superhero genre of literature? For that matter, all of the Sandman titles, Animal Man, Shade the Changing Man, Kid Eternity, Preacher, Transmetropolitan, Invisibles, Lucifer, Jonah Hex, Y: The Last Man, and Swamp Thing were all superhero comics too.

With some of these you're expanding "superhero" to include anything that uses either super or heroic elements. I mean I'm not one to claim that e.g. spandex tights are a strict qualification, but I feel you at least have to have both elements represented for a working definition.

Its the same opinion which suggest that somebody is 'pretentious' because they aren't particularly interested in superhero comics.

That's not why he called you pretentious.

Actually it strengthens the Vertigo imprint to not have superheroes running around. THE major drawcard for Vertigo is that its one of few who widely publish NON-SUPERHERO RELATED MATERIAL (its inconceivable, I know). I understand that bsuperhero fans want superheroes everywhere, but I personally want to be able to read a mainstream comic which (shock) doesn't feature them... The same way I'd like to just once see a new comedy which doesn't star Ben Stiller or Owen Wilson (oh, wait...).

That's why he called you pretentious.

I mean I would have gone with "snide", or maybe "catty." But whatevs.

 

[Darthphere]

Iron Man is good people.

 

[Mladen]

The superhero genre of literature does not require that its protagonist be running around in a cape and spandex. It usually features one protagonist, or a singular group of protagonists, well-defined as protagonists, "taking on" the rest of the world. If not explicitly superpowered, there is something about the character that sets them apart, that makes them interesting, that gives them the potential edge with which to defeat the opponent. This is what superheroes, as a literary device, have come to mean.

And you've just described there: Zorro, Cowboy Movies, most Action Movies. Its not exclusively superhero at all.
The problem I have with your definition is that superheroes were adapting THOSE rules from previous genres. All of the things you mention applied to earlier genres (including a lot of space-opera, crime stories).

You're pretentious because you think less of superhero readers, and no amount of assurances otherwise will change what we can all see your attitude is. You're pretentious because you think that a comic book can't be good if it has spandex and a cape. You're pretentious because you've probably never given superheroes an honest chance, unless it was Watchmen, or possibly Kingdom Come.

I have no idea where you're getting this. I SAID that I wanted ONE PARTICULAR MAINSTREAM COMIC OUTLET TO NOT BE BASED ON THIS GENRE.
I know you find it inconceivable that somebody has read a lot of superhero material, and STILL finds it not quite their kind of thing.
Thats the decision I see you've made, since you'll happily assume that about ANYBODY who (god forbid), has tried them (tried quite a few), enjoyed a lot of them, but then still decided they'd rather read something else. You seem to have the idea that anybody who glances at a superhero comic should immediately fall in love, but you aren't the arbiter of everybody's taste, people like different things, and yes, people want to defend their right to like different things, hell, even 'discuss' them.
The same reason you probably know you may not enjoy a romance novel (even though you're being pretentious for never reading one, by your own definition).

And most of all, you're pretentious because you come into a SUPERHERO COMICS MESSAGE BOARD AND TALK **** ON SUPERHERO READERS.

I talk **** on superhero readers who demand that their favorite genre be everybody else's favorite.
I talked **** on the concept that there should be more superheroes in Vertigo, since for me, its one of the last mainstream labels which seems to be keeping hero content to a bare minimum. I've chosen to defend that last bastion of mainstream non-hero comics.
A forum is for discussion. So far all you've done is throw a bunch of insults at me as support for a pretty flimsy argument that all comics are 'superheroes' at heart. I'm not sure if its meant to bully me or whatever, actually I'm a little bewildered why you're so incredibly hostile.

I don't demand that you love superheroes. I realize that you're far too hip and literary to ever show any affection for bright colors and happy endings and good people. But I do demand that if you don't like them, you take your tight-assed hipster opinions on somewhere the **** else, because I've got no use for them. This board is for people to talk about DC comics. It isn't for wankass hipsters to brag about how hip they are.

Uhuh, thats not the reason I don't particularly like the genre. (I can go into it, but I don't think you'll listen)

As I said before, I'm not going to be bullied into not expressing my opinion on the relevant topic. Seriously, the swearing and insults are wearing a little thin.

Separate any of those titles convincingly from superhero fiction.

Happily.
Most are also great examples of the 'quest' genre, such as Y: The Last Man. The quest is often noble, but usually culminates in LOSING the thing that they were questing for all along, and realising it was what he/she earnt THROUGH the quest that was worth finding (usually friendship or love).
Sandman is a series of adventures that follow the mythic format. Gaiman adapts a slightly different story-telling device each time (usually outright from a famous pre-classical work), some of which are superhero, most of which aren't.
Preacher is a cowboy story (with Quest elements). A lot of the stories are, especially given your definition of 'superhero' story.
Many of the other stories have more to do with the 'crime' genre than they do superheroes. A lot DO have superhero elements.

That's why he called you pretentious.

I mean I would have gone with "snide", or maybe "catty." But whatevs.

I'll concede the wording was pretty rude of me. I'll apologise for that. Sorry to everybody (except Aristotle).

 

[gildea]

he's got a point, most of the superhero tropes named where around long before superheroes conceptually came into play.



Also the guys got master of magnetism in his sig and a pic of bats getting some robin lovin as his avatar, he's hardly as snobby as he's being made out to be.

 

[antonydelfini]

Uhm, If I may say so, I don't think Mladen is saying that superhero comics suck. I think all he's saying is that he appreciates the fact that Vertigo is a place where there are no superheroes, not because superheroes suck, but because it is just nice to have a universe without superheroes for a change. If that makes sense. Hehe.

 

[Aristotle]

Oh come on, since when do superhero comics have any of those things?

Well the ones I like do...

With some of these you're expanding "superhero" to include anything that uses either super or heroic elements. I mean I'm not one to claim that e.g. spandex tights are a strict qualification, but I feel you at least have to have both elements represented for a working definition.

Maybe, maybe not, the definition is open to interpretation, but I don't think there's really any way to say that much of what Vertigo does, indeed much of what they've ever done, transcended the general level of superhero fiction. Sometimes it may not always have fit, but generally it does, and it's almost always on the same intellectual level. Hellblazer is probably the most consistently fantabulously good book I've ever read, but I'm not about to kid myself into thinking it's more intelligent than Action Comics, and the same goes for just about anything Vertigo's put out. Sandman had moments when it rose above that level, such as the final issue, which was phenomenal. Lucifer also had such moments. Swamp Thing had a few too. But by and large, there's been very little Vertigo's published that justifies mladen's haughty attitude.

 

[Aristotle]

And you've just described there: Zorro, Cowboy Movies, most Action Movies. Its not exclusively superhero at all.
The problem I have with your definition is that superheroes were adapting THOSE rules from previous genres. All of the things you mention applied to earlier genres (including a lot of space-opera, crime stories).

Fair enough. I've been using muddled terms. Superhero fiction is, as you point out, a specific manifestation of a broader genre. I used them interchangeably in this context, because I really don't feel that any substantive difference exists between a comic book about The King of Dreams reclaiming his mantle and realizing his destiny and a comic book about Jack Knight claiming his mantle as Starman and realizing his destiny. Vertigo books generally don't operate at any higher level of literary "merit" (quotations used to denote my obvious derision for the artistic and literary establishments) than superhero books. The tone of your derision, however, implied something entirely different.

I have no idea where you're getting this. I SAID that I wanted ONE PARTICULAR MAINSTREAM COMIC OUTLET TO NOT BE BASED ON THIS GENRE.

It's not what you say, man. It's how you say it. Any ****head with a comms textbook can tell you that.

You seem to have the idea that anybody who glances at a superhero comic should immediately fall in love, but you aren't the arbiter of everybody's taste, people like different things, and yes, people want to defend their right to like different things, hell, even 'discuss' them.

I haven't told you **** about what to like. But I don't see why, if you abhor superhero stuff so much, what on God's glorious green earth would make you roll into a message board for discussing DC Comics' superhero material. And I also don't see why you're up on some high ****ity horse just because you read non-superhero comics. As if somehow that makes you better.

The same reason you probably know you may not enjoy a romance novel (even though you're being pretentious for never reading one, by your own definition).

I know I MAY not enjoy a romance novel? Well of ****in' course I MAY not enjoy it! I MAY not wake up alive tomorrow! I MAY never eat cheese again! China MAY attack the US with nuclear arms in a month! I know that all of these things MAY happen.

I'm a little bewildered why you're so incredibly hostile.

I really don't like people who are full of themselves. I come from Kansas, where egos don't grow big, and if they do they get cut down to size again. It's etched into my very being to react strongly to elitism. This isn't about anti-intellectualism or anti-rationalism, as feelings such as mine often are. I just cannot abide a person who thinks they are better for stupid reasons.

 

[Mladen]

I haven't told you **** about what to like. But I don't see why, if you abhor superhero stuff so much, what on God's glorious green earth would make you roll into a message board for discussing DC Comics' superhero material. And I also don't see why you're up on some high ****ity horse just because you read non-superhero comics. As if somehow that makes you better.

you're not reading any of the posts. Antonydelfini summed it up nicely for me, I'm not going to type it again.

I really don't like people who are full of themselves. I come from Kansas, where egos don't grow big, and if they do they get cut down to size again. It's etched into my very being to react strongly to elitism. This isn't about anti-intellectualism or anti-rationalism, as feelings such as mine often are. I just cannot abide a person who thinks they are better for stupid reasons.

I don't think I'm better. I think comics should have some variety. If you think that variety is superficial (and I agree, a lot of the time it is), then I honestly don't care. In a lot of cases, most comics (vertigo and superheroes, i'm not making a distinction here) are superficial action/adventure stories anyway. But if I want my superficial action/adventure story in a different outfit, then why can't I have it? Why do I have to put up with the notion that at all might as well be superheroes anyway (which is what my initial reply was adressing)?

The first chapter of Sandman may be similar to Starman, just as its similar to a lot of classic 'king reclaims throne' stories. But thats no reason why it should all be called 'superhero', or that I should accept superheroes running around in all of those books (Sandman is an odd-man out here since it DOES feature superheroes in cameo roles, but you know what I mean).

Yes my first post was pretty rude and I've apologised for it, but I think I've explained it thoroughly enough since, and I can't imagine ANYBODY responding politely to your haughty moral judge attitude, however you justify it culturally.