Polite Dissent

There have been several excellent discussions going on around the comics blogs recently.

1. Over at the Howling Curmudgeons there has been an intriguing discussion of John Byrne’s run on the Fantastic Four, concentrating on the “Trial of Reed Richards”. I have read a handful of Byrne’s issues, had enjoyed them, and was planning on picking up more on e-Bay. Now I may need to reconsider. Marc brings up many excellent points, especially about Byrne tearing down the work of other creators.

I never read the “Trial of Reed Richards”, so I can’t comment on that. I did read “Terror in a Tiny Town”, but wasn’t very fond of it because the whole plot seemed rather telegraphed. Also the retelling of the first Dr. Doom story with Herbie the robot in it instead of the Human Torch pretty much ruined the entire isue for me. Byrne’s best issue was #240, when Attilan was relocated to the Blue Side of the Moon. The scene where the landing city buried forever the place where Phoenix died was poignant, or did I miss one of Byrne’s digs at Claremont? The fact that the first child born on the moon (to Crystal and Pietro) ended up being human was clever. Though now that I think about it, why was Reed Richards delivering the baby in the first place? He’s a physician now, too? Dammit, now I’ll have to take a look at that issue again.

2. John Jakala and his commenters have some great thoughts on the whole concept of reviews and reviewing. John raises some excellent points, and I agree with all the comments, even the ones that contradict each other. Each one I read makes perfect sense and I nod agreeing, then go on to the next comment, and start agreeing again. Every one raises good points; it’s just a tough subject.

To me, a review is a persuasive piece; it is an argument for or against buying the comic. Any good review needs two things:

• First, an opinion on the worth of the comic. Should I buy it? Burn it?
• Second, reasons why this decision was reached. Don’t just tell me it was great or it sucked; let me know why. Then I can determine whether or not I agree with your reasoning. To one person, the lettering could make or break an issue, while another person may not care as long as it’s legible.

The reviews of Brian Hibbs at the Savage Critic are good examples. In just a few lines, he tells you whether he thinks the books is worth reading, and why he feelsthat way. You may not agree with him, but you know how he reached his decision. On the other hand, H at the Comic Treadmill has recently gone over several JSA stories. These posts were more his thoughts about the comics, than an actual review.

3. Matt Rossi has an extremely insightful post on the Legion of Super Heroes. He makes excellent points made about Superboy and Supergirl’s importance to the Legion that had not occurred to me before. Certainly the various reboots of the Legion suffered from their absence. Using Valor as a 20th century super-hero never made much sense to me, and using the L.E.G.I.O.N. as an inspiration was an even more asinine attempt to make up for the lack of Superboy. John Byrne comes off as a villain here too, due to certain repercussions of his reboot of the Man of Steel. I’ll plead ignorance here, being mostly unfamiliar with the details of this.

Unlike most people, my favorite LOSH series by far was the infamous “Five Years Later” series. Many people seem to have a predilection for the bubble-gum happy Legion. I always preferred the darker incarnations. I’ve always liked stories with dystopian futures, and the Legion fit surprisingly well in this setting. Sometime next week, I see I’ll have to write a post explaining the brilliance of “Five Years Later” to all you heretics…