Designated Sidekick

Designated Sidekick

Ramblings on comic book store experiences and the comics industry

September 15, 2006, Filed under: Uncategorized — @ 9:52 pm

I know, I shut up for over a fortnight then two posts in one night. No consistency what so ever. Next up, I'll be liking Batman:Artists Against Decent Female Characters

During today's venture into the DC universe, I was chatting to my 'local' comic store guy (local as in 2000km from where I live, but hey, I know the guy who runs the shop, so it counts).

As it happens, I was trying to demonstrate the hideous hideousness of early to mid 90s Image comics (W.I.L.D.Cats, Adventures of DistortedBoobGirl and AwkwardBackTwistWoman and a few other titles that indicated the horror. Liefield. The horror, the pouchencrustedhorror).

BTW, Message to Gail Simone. I'm really really sorry he's drawing your work. Really. That said, when did Tim Drake get to start wearing Stephanie Brown's costume? Robin the Gender Interchange Wonder is kind of a cool concept, but I digress.

I really do digress don't I?

Anyway, after spending time in Ace Comics without actually buying anything (So I'll plug them instead), and in discussion with Jen (who what responds here and somewhat knows me in real life :), we came to the conclusion that what makes the Ace Comics work for us is that the crew in there really genuinely love comics. So when someone comes in, they're all about trying to share the sheer pleasure and fun they get from comics.

I can constrast this to my previous regular store, where it wasn't about the sheer love of the game, as much as it was a "Geekier than thou" mindset. Sure, in the 1990s, comics was a bit of a wasteland (Damn you Image), and frankly, much of my distaste for sexist comics came from that time (Incidentally, there was a very very cool woman who worked at the store who I really liked, even if she did call me Cerebus most of the time). The atmosphere of the old store was very much boys club, elitism, pecking orders and you needed to curry favour of the store upper echelon.

Given that I was part of the boys club, a white male middle class geek in a competitive field of comics geeks, and I found the place unpleasantly uncomfortable, any woman who came to the store would have had a bad time of it.

The thing is that the comics of DCU still represent that old store, and a lot of the independent and smaller franchises are about the new store. Pol could point me to good art, good stories, comics with women who were proportional to real people. (None wore primary coloured spandex, as he aptly put it)

The problem infesting the DCU is that they seem to have lost the joy that comes from comics, comicbook geekery, and the rest of the geek life. The celebration of the massively cool stuff that we get all a quiver and fanpeople drooling over because we're geeks.

Somewhere, somehow, they've equated "JOY" and "OMGSQUEE" with "Angsty" and "Character X, (usually Batman) is an iconic character so let's make him hateworthy and an asshole", and replaced good art with porn stills.

So really, you have to ask the question - why do the people apparently charged with making comics hate comics that much? Why do they want to have the clique elite, the power games and the small club house mentality?

I felt the big difference between the store of today and the old store was confidence. The store I was in today exuded confidence in itself, in being happy and proud of comics and the associated geekery, and wanting to share the joy of the experience. In contrast, I wonder if Dan DiDio's constant need to ruin the lives of fictional characters is derived from a lack of confidence that would let him leave happy characters having happiness for a while. Mebbe it's a confidence thing, or maybe DCU/Marvel are still stuck back in the early 1990s, where it was more important to be the cool kid in the store, up on the pecking order of nerds, geeks and outcasts (when, frankly, we were all outcasts).

Maybe a new generation of staff who feel confidence in the work they do, the medium they represent, and the stories they write are needed to lift comics from a shy, introspective outcast club into a vibrant, self confident medium.

7 Comments »

  1. Funnily enough my recent experiences reading and talking have been focused on how is it that <em>Marvel</em> has lost it's way and seems more interested making money hand over fist any way it can; including thinking of comics as potential movies. Whereas DC has seemed to still be about the <em>characters</em>. But you see DC as being all about those individuals willing to buy every crossover in an arc (those brave and faithful 25).

    Does it all boil down to - anyway you look at it, is the comics industry potentially losing a segment of audience because it's not growing and changing with the times? If neither of the big two can get into the 'OMG COOLEST <strong>STORY</strong> ever, and we had to share it with <em>YOU</em>' - then what comes next?

    Comment by Willow — September 16, 2006 @ 4:17 am

  2. Maybe I'm just really really strange, but I didn't get into comics until the 90s and at that time I didn't see anything extremely wrong with Image. At the time I didn't buy any titles though, so I don't have those comics to compare to something else now. I was young and foolish so what do I know?

    Now, the store from the 90's was a small hole in the wall, tightly packed with comics boxes and geek detritus. It saw a brisk business because it was smack in the middle of a college campus, but was kinda…dim and creepy.

    Contrasting that to the store I visit today which is very well lit, spacious (when it's not miniatures-gaming night), has curteous and energetic staff, and bends over backwards to make it's customers happy. Wow, that's a difference. The afforementioned miniatures-gaming kinda turns it into a packed testosterone pit where you can't hear yourself think, but that's only 3 days a week. I'll take having to shout over a crowd of arrogant geeks and being able to see the comics over lurking in a dark closet trying to get the mumbling proprietor to tell me what happened to this week's shipment. Needless to say, I buy a lot more comics now. I buy them from people who love comics, and I buy titles made by people who love the characters.

    I'm planning on reading 52 when it's all done (I'm crazy like that), but I saw that Booster Gold got killed off. When I asked, the boyfriend explained to me about DiDio's hatred of all things good and pure (the bf suspects he eats kittens). Well ok, Booster Gold wasn't really pure, but I liked him. Curse you DiDio, may the kittens you consume give you acid indigestion! I feel kinda ambivalent about buying comics from a company where the executive editor hates the characters.

    Comment by wallflower — September 18, 2006 @ 10:19 pm

  3. "The problem infesting the DCU is that they seem to have lost the joy that comes from comics, comicbook geekery, and the rest of the geek life."

    Are you on crack, man? This statement is so wrong that I don't know where to begin! Some would argue that comic books have become TOO geeky. What's wrong with this?

    Comment by Matthew — September 18, 2006 @ 11:34 pm

  4. Matt

    Okay, so we're on the same page, what do you see as making the comics "too geeky"?

    Comment by Designated Sidekick — September 19, 2006 @ 9:51 am

  5. Matthew,
    I don't think it's really a question of how geeky comics is, but rather the inability to extricate a misguided sense of superiority from one's geekiness. But you have to kind of wonder about the joy:angst ratio in the DCU. Not that I don't love a good character-angst, but when you start losing sight of the "Superheroes! Look! They do cool shit! And fight crime!" in favour of "OMGANGST" to the extent DCU has, one starts to wonder how much they actually love comics.

    Of course, Stephen, Larsen had to go and start resembling a counter-example, with his Non-comic reader and I really want to share column. Which is surprisingly insightful stuff when you get past Larsen's condescending tone about teh wimmins.

    Comment by jen — September 19, 2006 @ 12:05 pm

  6. DS: Obsessive continuity is one. People are rerferencing events no-one really remembers or knows about unless you have internet access or tons of books. While I like continutiy, I can understand why some people would not like what essentially is the geekiness of comic books fans.

    And in 52, the Odd Man showed up! That is definitly geekery, right there. Only an obsessive Steve Ditko geek/fan would remember this guy.

    Now Marvel on the other hand seems to enjoy making its heroes evil…DC has some problems but its minor compared to what Marvel is doing. When has Mr. Fantastic acted like Dr. Doom?

    Comment by Matthew — September 23, 2006 @ 8:16 am

  7. Obsessive continuity is one

    Obsessive continuity is one of the areas where I look at the Simpsons (mainstream TV), the Bill (UK police show), and Days of Our Lives (and similar) then go "How do I, as the casual watcher, get started on these shows?" then realise that they've got continuity/hard to follow character development issues

    The Simpsons have 10 years, and they frequently backward reference (eg continuity) events, or do obvious continuity jokes (the fact Mr Burns never remembers Homer).

    I've found the fact that soap operas have magazines with story line guides and support material to be every bit as much a soap opera geek barrier as it is in comics. I find soap operas, sitcoms (to a lesser extent), and other TV shows make use of continuity geekery to push their shows and reward their viewers. It's somehow become a problem in comics or used as a reason to explain why comics don't get new readers. I mean, really, when was the last Simpsons:Year One? It's assumed you start the show, then pick it up, or you go for back issues/reruns. It's never assumed that each season has to be newbie friendly.

    So, I see your point, but I disagree it's the source of problem, which, y'know, we can do, since fandom isn't a hivemind.

    Marvel on the other hand seems to enjoy making its heroes evil
    Marvel has been infected with the WWE? It's a wrestling stock in trade to turn the hero to evil, and then have them come back to good, only to go back evil. Storyline for the creatively disadvantaged I'd suggest.

    Comment by Designated Sidekick — September 24, 2006 @ 11:13 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

 

A wafflehouse moment

Filed under: Uncategorized — @ 8:23 pm

I read *that* supergirl tradepaperback today. I'm not proud of it, but it happened*

Two things.

A. Supergirl's ever shrinking costume led me to a series of conclusions. These are
1) Supergirl is a shapeshifter, a la Clayface or Odo. Her skirt is actual shapechanging skin.
2) Supergirl wears no underwear, unless the waistband of said underwear is that gold belt.
3) Her real secret power is the ability to put old men into jail for child porn
4) There's a talentless hack drawing the character. This was made really obvious be SuperGirl, PowerGirl, Batgirl…and gods almighty, Robin, being so hideously drawn.
5) Same talentless hack has a fetish for men, as evidenced by the loving detail on the Batman as Conan crotch shot

B) There's a series need for a couple of well placed retirements (by age, serious wounding or death) amongst the DCU editorial. The Supergirl story line wasn't bad per se, and has one near perfect line from Beastboy summing up the Teen Titans. That said, I hated reading the comic because there's this horrific gulf between the story (Here's Supergirl coming into her own as a character, out of the shadow of Batman and Superman, and gaining her own reputation), and this disturbing oversexualised child parading around going "Look at me! I'm 14 and not wearing underwear…Don't YOU WANT ME?".

I worry about anyone who signed off the art on that series.

In other news, Tim Drake or Dick Grayson dies or goes insane this year**. Why do I know this? Every other character I've cared about in the DCU has died, and they're the last two left not to have a dirtnap vacation or turn heel.

The problem I'm finding in the DCU comicverse is that I breathe a sigh of relief when characters I like die, so they're temporarily safe from the clutches of the editorial mandate. There are one or two more characters who's deaths will come as a relief, simply because then the female characters (who periodically accidentally get good stories and well drawn portrayals, but most not) will be free from the risk of being redrawn as pornstars and blow up dolls.

It's a sad industry where you rejoice the death of a character as the salvation from the editorial mandate of crappy stories and worse costumes

*(That's the waffle house moment adapted from Bill Hicks)
** (Or gets transfered to an ensemble cast where only the worst aspect of their personality is used for the entire time they're in the book, thus making them a pathetic shadow of their real self)

6 Comments »

  1. Same talentless hack has a fetish for men, as evidenced by the loving detail on the Batman as Conan crotch shot.

    As I said in the store, I think the more disturbing part about that panel is that BATMAN HAS NO PENIS. There's no bulge. Not even a hint of bulge. It's NEGATIVE BULGE.

    DoubleYew Tee Eff.

    Comment by jen — September 15, 2006 @ 10:51 pm

  2. <i>As I said in the store, I think the more disturbing part about that panel is that BATMAN HAS NO PENIS. There's no bulge. Not even a hint of bulge. It's NEGATIVE BULGE.

    DoubleYew Tee Eff.</i>

    I think it's fear of teh ghey. You already have a guy who dresses like an S&M dungeon master, but as long as he's ken-dolled, you don't have to consider the implications.

    Comment by Betty — September 16, 2006 @ 2:21 am

  3. Ok the misguided Supergirl fan in me demands that I stand up and at least try and defend Ian Churchill. I admit the very first issue I picked up with Churchill's art I was pretty much "This burns my eyes slightly less than Liefield." But I recently picked up issue #9 from my comic store and looking at the art then and the art now I'd say he's improved a lot compared to his earlier the ankles that almost wasn't. The ankles I use as an example because it's seriously the most bothersome part of his art to me. Also I have to agree with you when it comes to Supergirl's uniform. I still pray for pants to magically appear in her uniform. I would accept it without question or thought. However ranting aside, I really enjoy your articles and hope to see more in the future. Keep up the awesomeness.

    Comment by DracoTelitha — September 16, 2006 @ 8:39 am

  4. I'm willing to bet money that Dick Grayson goes horribly wrong in the next year since Dan DiDio wanted to kill him off at the end of Crisis. DiDio said that he thought Dick Grayson as Dick Grayson and Nightwing had become superfluous in DC. They didn't expect so much negative fan reaction to the idea though. To me, that doesn't mean they still won't find a way to screw him up.

    Comment by Skye — September 18, 2006 @ 4:33 pm

  5. Supergirl is a shapeshifter, a la Clayface or Odo

    I will consent to this possibility only if Lwaxana Troi guests for a trade to HIT ON HER SHAMELESSLY.

    D:

    Comment by Minna — September 20, 2006 @ 7:39 pm

  6. Every other character I've cared about in the DCU has died, and they're the last two left not to have a dirtnap vacation or turn heel.

    I know the feeling very much. I'm just waiting for Kyle Rayner to eat it. I wish they would just let Kon-El rest.

    Also. I enjoyed you using that wrestling term there.

    Comment by herozero — September 23, 2006 @ 3:08 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

 

Powered by WordPress