The Comics Professor

My reflections on the post-Flashpoint DCU (and an unexpected walk down memory lane)

So here we are, in early October--New York Comic Con is several days away--and I realized I had written a lot about the new DCU before anybody had actually read the books, but I had yet to comment on it after reading September's big batch of #1's. Rather than give a book-by-book review, I'll just share some thoughts on the enterprise as a whole. I make no claims to originality, nor to any special insight--I just wanted to give at least one "postgame" wrap-up after I commented so much pregame.

Simply put, I hope some readers, new and old, embrace the new DCU as theirs, because it certainly isn't mine.

My love of DC superheroes started with Adam West's Batman and the Super Friends and soon spread to comics. The first comic book I remember reading was Green Lantern/Green Arrow #110 (November 1978), which introduced me not only to Hal and Ollie, but also to Alan Scott--and started my love for Earth-2. Soon I was plucking comics at random off the spinner rack at Betty Jay's soda shop in my small Ohio hometown, including Justice League of America #168 (July 1979), containing the pivotal mindwipe storyline that begat Identity Crisis (and featured a very buff Ralph Dibny on the cover), and an innocuous-looking DC Comics Presents #26 (October 1980), featuring Superman and Green Lantern, and also a special preview of New Teen Titans, which started a legendary run on comics that I was lucky to have read from the beginning (and now look forward to rereading in the beautiful Omnibus hardcovers).

Soon I was riding my bike up to City News, a newsstand/cigar shop in the same town, which carried the full DC and Marvel lines. (I didn't buy any Marvel books at the time, which was more an economic decision than an aesthetic one--I loved the idea of a shared universe and wanted to read the entire line from a company, and what can I say, I loved the DC heroes "first.") I lived for the annual JLA/JSA crossovers, and my favorite titles soon became All-Star Squadron and later, by subscription, Infinity Inc. The Earth-2 heroes were the "other" to me, and by implication cooler than the "normal" Earth-1 characters.

And then came Crisis on Infinite Earths, the first major reboot/relaunch of the DCU (unless you count the introduction of the Earth-1 Flash, Green Lantern, Atom, and Hawkman in the 1960s, which some do). I never regarded the idea of multiple Earths, with independent yet overlapping timelines and histories, to be complicated, but as the same time I thrilled at the idea--soon to be realized with the post-COIE Justice League--of having heroes from various Earths on the same team. (To me, Dr. Fate and Batman on the same team equalled awesome.)

The changes after COIE were just as selective as those following Flashpoint, although some of the former were dictated by the logic of merging the various Earths. Specifically, "duplicate" heroes, such as Superman, Batman and Robin, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow and Speedy, and Aquaman, who existed in roughy identical forms on Earth-1 and Earth-2, had to be collapsed into one (always the younger, Earth-1 version). But the changes went even further: Superman and Wonder Woman were given hard reboots, while Batman and Green Lantern were left mostly unchanged. (Sound familiar?) And since Barry Allen died during COIE, Wally West stepped up as the new Flash, but the world somehow remembered Barry's death (but not Supergirl's).

For reasons that I do not recall (but probably having something to do with getting my first guitar in high school), I dropped out of comics around the time Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns wrapped up. (Maybe I wanted to leave at a high point!) I didn't walk into a comics shop again until 2004, just in time for Hal Jordan and Jason Todd to come back from the dead--and for Sue Dibny and Ted Kord to replace them--and also for the huge ramp-up to Infinite Crisis, the successor to Crisis on Infinite Earths. I missed everything in between, including the deaths of Superman and Jason Todd, Batman's back problems, Hal Jordan's breakdown possession, and all the events like Zero Hour, likely the most thorough line-wide retcon other than COIE and Flashpoint (and the one which most closely resembles the revised "five-year" timeline of the new DCU). But through the magic of trade paperbacks and online comic book shops, eventually I caught up with what I had missed.

Admittedly, I was much much younger when COIE happened, but I don't remember having the same sense of loss, abandonment, and betrayal as I do now. (Who, me, overdramatic? Never!) Most of the changes after COIE reconciled the five most significant Earths (1, 2, 4, S, and X), the key word here being "reconcile." Redundancies were eliminated, with some minor casualties (such as Helena Wayne and Lyta Trevor), but most of the histories of the two main Earths, 1 and 2, were retained--with the notable exception of those of Superman and Wonder Woman. But even those hard reboots didn't seem so drastic to me--Superman was slightly depowered, his supporting cast changed a bit, and he no longer had a past as Superboy, and Diana no longer had a past with the Justice League (or anybody, for that matter). But their underlying characters were unchanged, or at least so it seemed to me at the time. Most importantly, they were still recognizable as essentially the same characters that they were prior to COIE.

But despite what the now-ubiquitous Purple Glowy Woman said at the end of Flashpoint about reconciling the DCU with the Vertigo and Wildstorm universes, the post-Flashpoint DCU is more about selective reinvention than reconciliation. Once again, Batman and Green Lantern are relatively untouched, while Superman and Wonder Woman are rebooted--along with most of the rest of the DCU. The extent of the changes vary, of course: Barry Allen is in the same job he had before Flashpoint but is no longer married to Iris (and apparently no longer has other speedsters to run with), Carter Hall is a different sort of Hawkman altogether, Ronnie Raymond and Jason Rusch are now brand-new Firestorms, Jamie Reyes is the first Blue Beetle, and Ollie Queen is just a blonde--and bland--archer with a half-assed goatee and no personality to speak of. The full changes to Wonder Woman have yet to be seen (other than the recent revelation of her parentage), but the new Superman is a travesty, edginess replacing nobility and cynicism replacing hope. The histories of the Justice League and Teen Titans, traditionally bedrock institutions in the DCU, are completely up in the air; thankfully, the Legion is little changed from its reintroduction during Brad Meltzer's and Geoff John's JLA/JSA crossover. (I did mourn the JSA most of all, but its planned resurrection on a new Earth-2 is a bright light in an otherwise dim new universe.)

This is why it doesn't feel like my DCU anymore--because it isn't. It's completely new, and in a different way than the post-COIE universe was. Rather than reconciling and retaining most of several alternate histories, Flashpoint replaced a single history with another, with elements retained (seemingly) at random. Like "One Year Later" but on a grander scale, I enjoy being teased with which elements remain the same and which are changed or lost. But now that game is being played with nearly the entire DCU--and frankly, I'm tired of waiting, guessing, being pleasantly surprised and horribly disappointed within the same 20-page story. The treasured history of my DCU, which survived largely intact through several major upheavals since 1978, is gone. RIP.

Am I just being selfish? Do I want to keep my DCU and prevent others from having their new one? Is this like fans wanting to keep Kyle or Wally when Hal and Barry returned? The difference is that those characters all co-existed in some form. But unless the post-Flashpoint world is revealed at some point to be an alternate universe co-existing with the pre-Flashpoint one, the new DCU has replaced the old one, and my DCU is gone. I don't begrudge anyone else the new DCU, and I hope for the sake of the medium that fans continue to embrace it after the novelty of 52 new #1's fades. But I cannot maintain my enthusiasm--this is truly a new DCU, and I simply liked the old one better. And through trades and back issues, the old DCU will say alive for me, while I selectively follow the new one--for there is fantastic work being done. But it's not the same.

-----

Funny--I had always wanted to write a personal history of my life with comics, but I hadn't expected to write it in the context of a DCnU post. (And there is more to tell, to be sure--later.) But it is appropriate, I suppose, since most of my comics-reading life has been within the DCU. Only in 2006 did I start reading Marvel in earnest, having been enticed by Brubaker and Lark's Daredevil (having loved their collaboration on Gotham Central) and the moral and political complexities of Civil War. Now I count Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and of course Daredevil among my favorite characters in comics, alongside Batman, Nightwing, and Green Lantern (Hal Jordan).

Many have noted the similarity of the new DCU with Marvel's Heroes Reborn period, in which a group of heroes were shunted to a pocket universe and "modernized," only to be returned to the 616 universe a year later in their traditional forms. Other than that blip (and scattered others, such as "One More Day"), Marvel seems to understand the value of stability, choosing to tell new stories with their existing characters rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater and start their characters from scratch, alienating loyal readers (like me) in hopes of attracting new ones.

DC must recognize this to some extent; after all, they kept their most fascinating character, Batman/Bruce Wayne, largely untouched. Countless stories can be told if you build on the foundation of a great character. And Superman is another great character, embodying strength, hope, and heroism, and showing us that humanity in its highest form is more than just DNA. His superpowers amazed us, but his heart connected him to us. Without that, he is not Superman, but rather just another strongman in a cape (and kneepads).

Characters can change and they can grow, but ideally this happens organically and gradually--in the same way that people change and grow in the real world--not suddenly and discontinuously, by editorial fiat. If this is done well, you have a rich, storied character on which a legacy can be built. For the most part, Marvel seems to realize this. DC seems to have forgotten it, but I hope they will remember it soon, but the sake of new readers as well as old ones.

Thoughts on DC's first batch of new #1's

Today, DC released details on eight new #1's - here are some early thoughts, a nice mix of positive and negatives (from someone who's sour on the whole project):

Wonder Woman #1 by Brian Azzarello and Cliff Chiang: I'll buy most anything drawn by Cliff Chiang,and  while I've not been keen on everything I've read by Azzarello, I trust him to deliver quality stories and a unique perspective on our favorite Amazon. It just remains to be seen exactly what will done with her.

Aquaman #1 by Geoff Johns and Ivan Reis: I was incredibly excited about this before the whole reboot was announced, and I see no reason to change that; given the cover's references to the corpses-of-the-sea from Brightest Day, I trust any revamp past that will be minimal.

The Flash #1 by Francis Manapul and Brian Buccellato: Manapul quickly became my favorite Flash artist with his fresh work on the last run, but I'm not sold on the chinguard--please ditch it.

The Fury of Firestorm #1 by Ethan van Sciver, Gail Simone, and Yildiray Cinar: Creative team is very interesting--Simone rocks, of course, and teaming up with van Sciver will be interesting--and Cinar's work on Legion has been amazing. I like the suggestion that Jason and Ronnie will each have an individual Firestorm "look" for some reason, so I can't say I'm happy with the overblown "composite" look.

The Savage Hawkman #1 by Tony Daniel and Philip Tan: Daniel's work writing Batman has been OK but not great, and Tan is very up and down for me--this one is a true unknown. Definitely don't like the tweaks in the costume (a complaint which will run through this post, unfortunately), too much metal (and again with the chinguard).

Green Arrow #1 by JT Krul and Dan Jurgens: Not a big fan of Krul's current GA run (or the debacle which led to it) but maybe this will be a fresh start. Jurgens is always nice to see, though sometimes he can lack a certain dynamic (for example, his run on Nightwing with Marv Wolfman). Again, too many superfluous highlights and tweaks on the costume.

Justice League International #1 by Dan Jurgens and Aaron Lopresti: "A team of internationally-drafted superheroes fight each other and their bureaucratic supervisors as much as they do global crime"? Really? Too bad it can't simply flow from their recently wrapped series, which was a lot of fun. Glad to see Lopresti on it, the best of the several artists from that book, but surprised to see Jurgens writing it rather than Winick--but at least he knows Booster (and we've yet to see if Booster gets a new series or not). Couple small complaints: 1) Batman don't get drafted by no one. 2) More superfluous tweaks to Booster's outfit (see my last post on "change for the sake of change"). 3) Who is the woman in the lower left? Gypsy? (I only guess that because her JLA-Detroit temmate Vixen is present, which I like.)

Mister Terrific #1 by Eric Wallace and Roger Robinson: Long overdue--the current Mr. Terrific has deserved a series of his own for years (as has the current Dr. Mid-Nite). But Wallace doesn't fill me with confidence based on Titans, and though I never loved the old costume, I like this new one even less. (Wacky as it was, I loved Terry Sloane's costume--sue me.)

Captain Atom #1 by JT Krul and Freddie Williams II: I love that Nate is getting his own series, but Krul still is a wild card with me and Williams is up and down (liked him on Robin but not on JSA All-Stars--but that may have been due to having to cram the huge cast into the book, resulting in very busy-looking pages). Hate the wispy hair-thing going on--works for Firestorm, not for you, Cap. The silver shell with the red and blue was an incredible look, and I will truly miss it.

DC Universe Presents #1 featuring Deadman by Paul Jenkins and Bernard Chang: No qualms about this. 1) I love anthology books. 2) Jenkins is fantastic (though I'd like to see him on Captain Atom instead). 3) Chang is great and underrated. 4) Deadman is awesome.

Soon we should see details on Superman, Batman, and Green Lantern titles, as well as Teen Titans and Legion... keep your fingers crossed!

Should superheroes take political positions?

In the latest Hot Button feature at Newsarama, Vaneta Rogers discusses social commentary in superhero comics with writers Denny O'Neil (notable in this particular context for his classic run on Green Lantern/Green Arrow), Judd Winick (controversial runs dealing with hate crimes and AIDS in Green Lantern and, uh, Green Arrow), and Greg Rucka (celebrated for redefining The Question and Batwoman as complex, nonstereotypical, and ethnically diverse lesbian characters). The article as a whole is a very good read, but this part stood out in particular:

Greg Rucka, who recently co-wrote with O'Neil a modern issue of his once-socially-relevant The Question, said the decision to make Green Arrow markedly liberal in O'Neil's comics was one that worked at the time, but he understands why publishers shy away from introducing political motivations to other characters.

"I think publishers are more frightened of political backlash than they are of issue backlash," Rucka said. "I do think that yeah, if you introduce political stances for your major characters, you have opened up a can of worms there. If you're telling stories in a shared universe about heroism, you don’t want to imply that X hero is only a hero for the Republican party, and is therefore not going to be doing heroic and noble things for everybody else. You never what to establish a risk of status quo that makes them less heroic.

Let me say first that I feel that defining political orientations for 2nd-tier (or lower) characters is fine, especially when they're set in opposition to each other: Hal and Ollie during O'Neil's run, Ollie and Carter Hall (Hawkman) in more recent comics, Hawk and Dove in their various incarnations, etc. But the thing that scared the bejeebies out of me when the DC Universe Decisions miniseries was announced (and luckily quickly forgotten soon after its release) was that they were going to define political stances for the top tier characters like Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman--especially Superman.

Why did this concern me so? Contrary to what Mr. Rucka says, I don't think defining a superhero as liberal or conservative would imply that he or she would help some people and not others in an emergency (though examples do exist, such as Ollie early in O'Neil's run), but making a hero's politics explicit does reduce the appeal of that character to a significant portion of the fanbase.

Furthermore, it contributes to the perception that our political affiliations define us. If Superhero A is conservative and Superhero B is liberal, many people will take those facts to determine much more about their characters than seems appropriate. There's a lot of room for widely different types of liberals and conservatives in this world (not to mention all the people who reject both labels). And I like to believe that most liberals and conservatives (excluding the ones on the extreme fringe of each group) have more in common than not.

So even though Mr. O'Neill "defines" Hal as an authoritarian (conservative) and Ollie as a progressive activist (liberal), they were still both heroes who fought evil--just in slightly different ways with slightly different emphases, styles, and tactics. But compared to the villains they confronted (super- or not), they were still heroes first and foremost. Liberal and conservative heroes may fight evil in slightly different ways, which can be interesting to see (as with Hal and Ollie, or Ollie and Carter), but can also be distracting if not handled delicately and sensitively (at which Decisions almost failed, but ultimately didn't, as I remember--whew).

That said, there are some heroes that should never be defined politically, and instead should represent the best of both (all?) political orientations, values that unite us all (though we disagree on their implementation), such as justice and equality. These heroes can stand as the moral (and political) centers of their respective comics universes, and if the other characters are defined more to the left or right relative to them, then the center will hold them together.

Superman, of course, is that character in the DCU, though his role as such has not been emphasized very much, though sometimes he functions this way as part of the Trinity, with Batman to his "left" and Wonder Woman to his "right," such as in the build-up to--and, literally, in the first issue of--Infinite Crisis. More clearly, as we all saw after Civil War and through Dark Reign and Siege, Captain America is that character for the Marvel Universe. The two are, as Mr. Rucka said, heroes for us all, but not because they don't exclude anyone from their heroism, but rather because they represent all of us in their characters. Let the other characters orbit Supes and Cap in their own unique ways--some a little to the left, others a little to the right--but I would hope the companies would retain balance overall, and focusing on their centers is, I think, the best way to do this.

Oliver Queen's Self-Loathing in Green Arrow #7

That was strange--I just read Green Arrow #7 last night, one day after I wrote this Psychology Today blog post on self-loathing, and what do I find Ollie and the mysterious Lady of the Forest discussing?

No big spoilers here, particularly concering the Lady's identity, which is tangentially relevant but not essential to exploring Ollie's attitude toward himself. After some discussion between them, the Lady says to Ollie, "Even you have some faith. In people if nothing else," to which Ollie replies, "People can  fail. Disappoint." The Lady responds, insightfully, "And yet, you only seem to hold that view of yourself." Ollie reasons, "Maybe I'm just beating them to the punch," to which the Lady says, "Or maybe you feel you don't deserve such people in your life."

The last two lines especially point to self-loathing on Ollie's part, feelings of inadequacy and worthlessness which he projects onto other people; if he doesn't think he's good enough, he assumes other people feel the same way about him ("maybe I'm just beating them to the punch"). Check out the Psychology Today blog post for more on this...

Of course, it is easy to understand why Ollie feels this way, having lost so much since Cry for Justice: Lian, Dinah, Roy, and a huge star-shaped chuck of Star City, not to mention a certain degree of respect among his colleagues for executing Prometheus (an act which, by the way, is discussed in several chapters in Green Lantern and Philosophy, in the context of discussing the difference between Ollie's and Hal's moral reasoning as well as retributivist justice). I hope that part of Ollie's current stay in the Brightest Day-Enchanted Forest will involve dealing with his recent lapses (as well as his older ones) and reflecting on his character.