tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post115925045888744928..comments2023-09-09T04:03:00.560-05:00Comments on The Fortress of Soliloquy: And everything in its placeUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-34944751345363845652007-05-09T21:37:00.000-05:002007-05-09T21:37:00.000-05:00I was unaware of this rant by Paty Cockrum, but I ...I was unaware of this rant by Paty Cockrum, but I really appreciated the thoughts you wrote down in response.<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/>IK<BR/>Morrison MindlsaveThe Incredible Kidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13840519564964681428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1160284298155369362006-10-08T00:11:00.000-05:002006-10-08T00:11:00.000-05:00Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was a bad run...Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was a bad run. As a matter of fact, unlike say when Doom and Reed "died" together back in the '90s, Waid took Galactus and Doom off the board for a reason. That reason is that the Fantastic Four have a small and crappy rogues gallery. <BR/><BR/>Now, I haven't read the FF regularly except for Waid's run (and for a time around Infinity War), but it seems to me that every landmark run and every big story involves one or more of the following:<BR/>1. Doom<BR/>2. Galactus<BR/>3. The Skrulls<BR/>And the rest of the FF's rogues? Puppet Master, Mole Man, and the Red Ghost. Sure, the Red Ghost is one of the most awesome characters in the history of comics, but the other two don't provide much of a threat. I think by taking Galactus and Doom out of the picture for awhile, Waid hoped that the FF could progress a little, could get past the same three threats and beef up their rogues' gallery a bit. <BR/><BR/>Mind you, I don't think that "not putting the toys back" is a bad thing. Sure, sometimes it sucks (see: Adam Strange: Man of Two Worlds), but it's often done in the best of intentions, and I think those are the intentions Waid had, trying to shove the Four out of a rut they'd been stuck in since Byrne or Simonson had been associated with the books. He knew as well as anyone that Doom and Galactus would eventually be brought back, but I think he hoped that it would be a longer period of time, that writers after him might innovate and experiment and invent, rather than go right back to the old standards.Tom Fosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13796424725228769265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1160276976573351252006-10-07T22:09:00.000-05:002006-10-07T22:09:00.000-05:00I think you're being overly harsh on Waid's FF run...I think you're being overly harsh on Waid's FF run -- Doom has been killed off and brought back dozens of times, it was pretty clear that Galactus would be back sooner or later (at the very least, no subsequent writer would have to jump through any hoops to bring him back), and the FF's standing had largely rebounded by the end of his run, IIRC. As for killing Ben, well, he DID bring him back, which seems the very definition of putting the toys back as they were.Matter-Eater Ladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07582100232490047227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159393319961596922006-09-27T16:41:00.000-05:002006-09-27T16:41:00.000-05:00The neverending struggle between "advancing the st...The neverending struggle between "advancing the story" and "preserving the trademark for merchandising purposes" carries on.<BR/><BR/>How many times has Marvel editorial (or DC, I'm sure) decided to shake things up and revive interest in their books, only to cram things back to the status quo in fear of hurting their licensing operations? <BR/><BR/>"Advancing the story without advancing the story" is a tricky, tricky business.<BR/><BR/>And dammit, I loved Morrison's X-Men. It was the only time I've read them in twenty years. As a mindlsave, I didn't have a choice.Harvey Jerkwaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07118848012122050416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159322706012922882006-09-26T21:05:00.000-05:002006-09-26T21:05:00.000-05:00Why? There's no sense in fighting someone who can ...Why? There's no sense in fighting someone who can say <BR/><I>But it is all interpretation. One can give examples to support one's views in any direction. and this is the beauty of the genre.. the complexity of the characters.</I><BR/>in one post, and then call people "mindlsaves" for liking Grant "walking, talking pile of excrement" Morrison, because he ruined her favorite character. There's no reasonable argument with a woman who, by her own admission, becomes "wild eyed and irrationalas [sic]" when you mention someone who had a different interpretation of Magneto. There's no point in discussion with a grown woman who would put "Magneto rules! Xavier drools!" in her signature. <BR/><BR/>Saying that someone is "better than Byrne" seems to be damning with faint praise. At least Byrne just comes off as an arrogant, self-righteous, self-centered, racist, sexist jackass. This woman comes off as an immature nutcase with an inflated sense of entitlement. With Byrne, you get the impression that, for all his ignorance, bigotry, and overreaching pride, he's not <I>insane</I>.Tom Fosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13796424725228769265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159320077040269962006-09-26T20:21:00.000-05:002006-09-26T20:21:00.000-05:00Paty is actually kind of nice. She's better than B...Paty is actually kind of nice. She's better than Byrne at any rate.<BR/><BR/>Dorian, I would LOVE to see you fight her on her message boards. Heck, any of you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159307043327803722006-09-26T16:44:00.000-05:002006-09-26T16:44:00.000-05:00I think that's why comics like Dini's Detective, A...I think that's why comics like Dini's Detective, All-Star Superman, and Jonah Hex, and even short arcs like Morrison's JLA Classified, feel like such a breath of fresh air. People have gotten so caught up in writing for the trade and decompression and event comics that they don't tell single-issue stories anymore, so it feels novel when they actually do.Tom Fosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13796424725228769265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159304366090258052006-09-26T15:59:00.000-05:002006-09-26T15:59:00.000-05:00I agree. I remember times, though, where I was alm...I agree. I remember times, though, where I was almost <I>begging</I> for some total standalones for a while. I collected <I>Teen Titans</I> (or <I>New Titans</I> or whatever they thought they called themselves) for a while in the early '90s, and they spent, I believe, over two years changing the membership of the team. Some storyline where Pantha came in and Danny Chase was Phantasm and there were these lame Titans from the future... Just cut it out and fight the Disruptor.Matthew Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01007497367844755093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159294454045027432006-09-26T13:14:00.000-05:002006-09-26T13:14:00.000-05:00Greg: Oh, "mindlsaves"...I always get those two te...Greg: Oh, "mindlsaves"...I always get those two terms confused, what with being a mindlsave and all. <BR/><BR/>Law Dog: I like how she's extolling the Claremont version of Magneto, which did its own selective ignoring of backstory. As I recall, Mags was pretty one-dimensional when Stan Lee wrote him. <BR/><BR/>Matthew: True enough, and what I think I failed to get across in the rambling was that the general status quo can remain static while progress occurs at the detailed level. I guess it's a matter of the blurry distinction between "status quo" and "subplot," but I think things like Keith being abandoned, befriending Superman, finding his mother once more, then losing her again, then getting adopted by the Whites, represents a progressive sort of status quo. It didn't affect the basics (strange visitor from another planet, etc.), but it gave the story a sense of forward momentum through the supporting cast.<BR/><BR/>Similarly, I remember Mary Jane's smoking being a big story arc back when I first started reading Spider-Man; Peter disliked it, and she tried to quit, and it wasn't until she saw sleazebag Nick Katzenberg dying of smoking-induced cancer that she actually gave up the habit. All this occurred in the margins of the stories, but it was real progress for some of the book's main characters. <BR/><BR/>The big leaps forward in status quo (Electric Superman, Kyle Rayner) are warranted less often, by virtue of their drastic nature. And I absolutely agree--if you're going to change the status quo, you have to be aware of what stories will be possible after, vs. what story possibilities will be lost. <BR/><BR/>But the stories that exist in a vacuum, the total-standalones, can get tedious after awhile. You have to find the balance between done-in-one standalones and longer stories, or progressive subplots.<BR/><BR/>Though it's not comics, I think the perfect example of this sort of thing was in Justice League Unlimited, where up until right before the season finale of the second JLU season, each story stood on its own, but also built toward a greater arc.Tom Fosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13796424725228769265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159282142219485492006-09-26T09:49:00.000-05:002006-09-26T09:49:00.000-05:00Good post, but to be fair to Paty, she called Morr...Good post, but to be fair to Paty, she called Morrison fans "mindlsaves." Get it right, Foss!Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13481137891542684401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159279393227716592006-09-26T09:03:00.000-05:002006-09-26T09:03:00.000-05:00The point of all this rambling is that comic story...<I>The point of all this rambling is that comic storytelling ought to be primarily progressive. If you can maintain momentum and suspense and interest with static storytelling (I'm looking at you, Paul Dini's Detective Comics), then by all means, do so. But most good stories come from moving things forward.</I><BR/><BR/>I mostly agree, but only mostly. It may be tougher to tell good stories with static storytelling, but I think that should be the usual target to aim for. I believe in progressive storytelling in stages. Figure out what works in the stage your comic is in right now, and tell some good stories accordingly. Then, when it's time to move on, advance the comic to a different stage, carefully. Repeat. Don't make changes to your status quo without knowing what kinds of stories you'll be able to tell after the changes. (And, depending on what comic book you're talking about, a stage could last months or decades.) You don't want to write yourself into a corner where the only way to get the next issue out is with an awkward retcon or, worse, a reboot.Matthew Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01007497367844755093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159278482693856012006-09-26T08:48:00.000-05:002006-09-26T08:48:00.000-05:00Here's a nice little exerpts from Paty's little fl...Here's a nice little exerpts from Paty's little flights of fancy - "There are factions at Marvel who hate Magneto's backstory. They want him not to be interesting but tyo be a one dimensional cookie cutter villain because that is the only type of character they are capable of writing. They don't want him to be a charasmatic adversary who is basically RIGHT in his view that you don't fight for your survival from a position of weakness or subserviance but from a position of power. They hate him being of Jewish stock, even if he isn't a practicing Jew... simply because he IS so powerful, charasmatic and yummy. He, a comic book character, gets more action from females than THEY do! How humiliating! Well... he, as Claremont portrayed him, is far more real and interesting and sexy than THEY are as supposedly real humans ...and that really enrages them. Hence the ongoing battle for the soul of Magneto...waged by his ardent fans...note my signature...the battle still rages..."<BR/><BR/>Hello, Earth to rabid nerdy fangirl, Magneto isn't real.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159277333428365892006-09-26T08:28:00.000-05:002006-09-26T08:28:00.000-05:00Dorian: to dwell too heavily on it leads only to m...Dorian: <I>to dwell too heavily on it leads only to madness.</I><BR/><BR/>As is clearly the case with Paty. BWAHAHAHAHA...uh, no. <BR/><BR/>I love the terms "fan entitlement" and "nerd rage," they're absolutely perfect descriptions, derisive without being vulgar.<BR/><BR/>law dog: I haven't yet had the intestinal fortitude to surf the NightScrawlerS boards, but it seems like it might be a good one to submit to SomethingAwful's Weekend Web feature.Tom Fosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13796424725228769265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159275805493915032006-09-26T08:03:00.000-05:002006-09-26T08:03:00.000-05:00This Paty person has a few isThe folks at that web...This Paty person has a few isThe folks at that website are a scary bunch of mouthbreathers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13848504.post-1159253038011014672006-09-26T01:43:00.000-05:002006-09-26T01:43:00.000-05:00Because Paty Cockrum, like many comic book fans, f...Because Paty Cockrum, like many comic book fans, feel that they "own" the characters and that it's the responsibility of the writers, artists and editors to tell ONLY the stories THEY want to read. ANY deviation from that model is clearly intended as a personal insult to them.<BR/><BR/>It's all just fan entitlement and nerd rage. When it crops up it's best to just let yourself be momentarily amused by it and move on. It's a never ending, vicious cycle and to dwell too heavily on it leads only to madness.Dorianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14754097613320749614noreply@blogger.com