(no subject)
Metamorpho was a whimsical DC comic book in the 1960's. I only know it by reputation, but I'm given to understand that it was merry.
For some reason--or, worryingly, for no reason at all--DC for the last 20 years has insisted on portraying the characters from that series as deeply broken & morose.
I have a hypothesis that most "general DC fans" & most DC editors are unfamiliar with characters' own books & base their impressions of characters other than the Bat- & Super- casts on the various characters' appearances in books like JLA, & their guest appearances in Bat- & Super- books.
I wonder if Metamorpho's morosity is somehow traceable to the infamous The Brave and the Bold #123 (when it was a Batman team-up book). This is the issue which excited a minor controversy ten years later in the letters pages of Mike W. Barr's The Outsiders. Mike W. Barr condemned The Brave and the Bold #123 as a throwaway non-continuity Batman/Metamorpho/Plastic Man team-up in which Rex (Metamorpho) was out-of-character, being uncharacteristically downbeat. And MWB made a point of writing Rex as a happy guy.
But then The Outsiders was canceled, & Rex turned evil & died in a very strange final arc. Metamorpho was resurrected in Invasion! & got stuck in Justice League Europe, where he became mopey, because his wife had moved on while he was dead & evil. Then he was killed off again, & is now back in some strange form in a new version of the Outsiders.
~ ~ ~
I like Shakespeare, I do. Underrated comedian, who is perhaps not well served by his worshipers. Look, Hamlet, stripped to plot, is a morbid sack of vomit, much like Titus Andronicus--it has survived because the soliloquy is that good. Romeo & Juliet seems like a romp gone strangely off to me. I liked Macbeth as a kid, but am afraid that on seeing it or reading it again, I'll now hate it. But yeah, good comedian, & decent work on his "histories." Some few of the sonnets are brilliant. Too bad English teachers mistake "tragedy" for "serious" & thus for "good."
But in no way did Shakespeare invent the human or something. English culture would have muddled through much the same without him, thank you very much. And I say this as a matter-of-fact Stratfordian; Shakespeare's output, much of it adapted from previous material, isn't that incredible in a world where J. S. Bach existed.
~ ~ ~
All of which is to say I read The Sandman: Dream Country yesterday.
As a longtime comix fan, I naturally started with, "the one where Gaiman kills off Element Girl." They actually gave Bob Haney & Ramona Fradon credit on the title page for creating her, but I don't think it's the sort of thing Fradon would approve of, exactly. Gaiman's odd little pro-suicide piece might have gone down better if it weren't done as the canon fate of a goofy whimsical trademark.
Also, I don't think you're doing Colleen Doran's art a lot of favors with that inker (M. Jones III?).
Then I went to, "the one with the Charles Vess art." I have never in fact seen or read Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream. Perhaps this hot mess would have made more sense if I had. Can someone familiar with both tell me if the references work? There was some mildly cute characterization, but not a lot of, y'know, story there. It seemed like he was trying to ride on reference to a more well-known work with which his audience would be familiar, which is something I consider poor writing.
I read the introduction, & on reflection, no, I don't think the man's father was telling him the truth.
Then I figured I'd read the Kelley Jones ones.
I'll give Gaiman points for actually freeing Calliope from bondage in the first one.
Then there's "A Dream of a Thousand Cats." Maybe it's because I read that one last, but this one affected me. It really got to me. Not enough for me to let slide that apparently the colorist doesn't know what a blue point Siamese is (or Gaiman assumes that at least some cat owners who care about this can't tell blue from chocolate). Ahem. But no, it got to me.
Then I thought about it. Dream's just a big fat liar, isn't he?
For some reason--or, worryingly, for no reason at all--DC for the last 20 years has insisted on portraying the characters from that series as deeply broken & morose.
I have a hypothesis that most "general DC fans" & most DC editors are unfamiliar with characters' own books & base their impressions of characters other than the Bat- & Super- casts on the various characters' appearances in books like JLA, & their guest appearances in Bat- & Super- books.
I wonder if Metamorpho's morosity is somehow traceable to the infamous The Brave and the Bold #123 (when it was a Batman team-up book). This is the issue which excited a minor controversy ten years later in the letters pages of Mike W. Barr's The Outsiders. Mike W. Barr condemned The Brave and the Bold #123 as a throwaway non-continuity Batman/Metamorpho/Plastic Man team-up in which Rex (Metamorpho) was out-of-character, being uncharacteristically downbeat. And MWB made a point of writing Rex as a happy guy.
But then The Outsiders was canceled, & Rex turned evil & died in a very strange final arc. Metamorpho was resurrected in Invasion! & got stuck in Justice League Europe, where he became mopey, because his wife had moved on while he was dead & evil. Then he was killed off again, & is now back in some strange form in a new version of the Outsiders.
~ ~ ~
I like Shakespeare, I do. Underrated comedian, who is perhaps not well served by his worshipers. Look, Hamlet, stripped to plot, is a morbid sack of vomit, much like Titus Andronicus--it has survived because the soliloquy is that good. Romeo & Juliet seems like a romp gone strangely off to me. I liked Macbeth as a kid, but am afraid that on seeing it or reading it again, I'll now hate it. But yeah, good comedian, & decent work on his "histories." Some few of the sonnets are brilliant. Too bad English teachers mistake "tragedy" for "serious" & thus for "good."
But in no way did Shakespeare invent the human or something. English culture would have muddled through much the same without him, thank you very much. And I say this as a matter-of-fact Stratfordian; Shakespeare's output, much of it adapted from previous material, isn't that incredible in a world where J. S. Bach existed.
~ ~ ~
All of which is to say I read The Sandman: Dream Country yesterday.
As a longtime comix fan, I naturally started with, "the one where Gaiman kills off Element Girl." They actually gave Bob Haney & Ramona Fradon credit on the title page for creating her, but I don't think it's the sort of thing Fradon would approve of, exactly. Gaiman's odd little pro-suicide piece might have gone down better if it weren't done as the canon fate of a goofy whimsical trademark.
Also, I don't think you're doing Colleen Doran's art a lot of favors with that inker (M. Jones III?).
Then I went to, "the one with the Charles Vess art." I have never in fact seen or read Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream. Perhaps this hot mess would have made more sense if I had. Can someone familiar with both tell me if the references work? There was some mildly cute characterization, but not a lot of, y'know, story there. It seemed like he was trying to ride on reference to a more well-known work with which his audience would be familiar, which is something I consider poor writing.
I read the introduction, & on reflection, no, I don't think the man's father was telling him the truth.
Then I figured I'd read the Kelley Jones ones.
I'll give Gaiman points for actually freeing Calliope from bondage in the first one.
Then there's "A Dream of a Thousand Cats." Maybe it's because I read that one last, but this one affected me. It really got to me. Not enough for me to let slide that apparently the colorist doesn't know what a blue point Siamese is (or Gaiman assumes that at least some cat owners who care about this can't tell blue from chocolate). Ahem. But no, it got to me.
Then I thought about it. Dream's just a big fat liar, isn't he?