boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) (09/03/85)
> From: leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (Mark Leeper) There are two ways for a critic to examine his subject. The first is to take it on its own merits; the second is to determine how it works as part as a greater body of work. A critic who is familiar with the field he's examining can take either route; someone who is not familiar with the field can only take the first. For example: > Slight correction. It seems to go for the comics that people > recommend, not just comics in general. The ones I read were the ones > that comic readers told me were the best of the lot. Of course there > may be a multiplicity of opinions. As I remember, the one that was > recommended was a "relevant" Green Arrow that presented some pretty pat > views of race relations. Yes, examining those stories now, one can see not only how pat they are, but how naive they are. But one must take into account the fact that they were originally published circa 1970, a time when society itself was confused about its values, and tried to fit everything into a nice, pat black and white world. Also, before these stories were published, comics had not been used as a forum for talking about the issues of the day. From the 30's to the 60's, they were an entertainment medium only. Those GREEN LANTERN/GREEN ARROW stories ushered in a whole new era of comics in which concerns of the times --- racism, sexism, drugs, rape, famine, and other ills --- were displayed for the edification of the readers. Someone who is not acquainted with the field of comics, though, wouldn't see or understand that. As for recommendations, well, they're always tricky, since they can vary as widely as the opinions of the people making them. For instance: > I was loaned a copy of X-MEN that had a two of the super-characters > having a deep soul-searching discussion in a whirlwind half a mile > above the ground. I can stand outside of my fandom of science fiction > and laugh at the tacky look of certain Star Trek episodes. Surely you > can be big enough to admit there is something pretty weird about this > sort of juxtaposition if serious discussion and silly image. First of all, I like THE X-MEN. I always have and I always will. I've been a fan of it since issue #1. And it's had its ups and downs. But if I wanted to impress a non-reader with the maturity of comics today, I would not give him THE X-MEN. To me, it's the equivalent in the sf field to a Darkover novel. If someone asked me for an enjoyable sf novel, I probably wouldn't hesitate to recommend most of the Darkover novels, but if he asked me for a mature sf novel of high literary value, I certainly wouldn't. If you want *my* recommen- dations for comics with high literary quality, I'd suggest AMERICAN FLAGG!, CEREBUS THE AARDVARK, JOURNEY, JON SABLE, LOVE AND ROCKETS, MAGE, MIRACLEMAN, MOONSHADOW, NEXUS, STIG'S INFERNO, and SWAMP THING. And there are also a few undergrounds that are worth reading, namely Larry Gonick's CARTOON HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE and any of Jaxon's (Jack Jackson) comics about the Old Southwest, such as the Commanche Trilogy or the Tejanos Trilogy. Secondly, while I admit that the particular scene you describe was a weakly written scene, its "silly imagery" is solely a matter of perspective. You confess to having an aversion to superheroes, so obviously, any extravagant display of superhero abilities will probably seem silly to you. But to be able to appreciate superhero comics, one must be able to accept such things as givens, just as to be able to appreciate science fiction, one must be able to accept such unrealistic concepts such as time travel or faster-than-light travel. Thirdly, drawing an analogy between comics as a whole and a few STAR TREK episodes is not reasonable. The analogy to comics as a whole would be tele- vision as a whole. The analogy to specific episodes of STAR TREK would be specific issues of THE X-MEN. Certainly, there are some episodes of TREK which leave a lot to be desired, and likewise, there are some issues of X-MEN that aren't worth the paper they're printed on. But there are *excel- lent* issues of the comic, just as there are excellent episodes of TREK. I can recommend STAR WARS as a great film to see, but I can't claim that it's as mature as, say, a novel by Robert Silverberg. Comics can only be judged as comics. It's not fair to judge films as if they were novels; It's not fair to judge television series as if they were films; and so on. Each medium is different, and to expect one to hold up to the standards of another is both silly and pointless. --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Acton-Nagog, MA) UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA