Inspiration props for this go to LissBirds for her comment that mentioned The Question.
In 1983, DC Comics acquired heroes from Charlton Comics (Captain Atom, Blue Beetle, Nightshade, Peacemaker, Peter Cannon, and, of course, The Question). Just so you know, I’ve long been of the opinion that ANY AMOUNT that DC may have paid was a bargain.
Two years later Alan Moore pithced an idea for an end story for these Charlton heroes (including killing at least one of them).
Huh? Why would DC pay good money for these characters (or at least the rights to these characters) just to kill them off?! Jeez! What was Alan Moore on?
I thank the comic book gods that Editor Dick Giordiano had the sense to halt such obvious madness.
As everyone knows Moore went on to create Watchmen (keeping the story and replacing the charlton heroes with derivative, pastiche characters).
But what if DC didn’t stop Mad Moore?
Just look at the character key below and let your mind wander:
Captain Atom = Dr Manhattan
Blue Beetle = Nite Owl
Peacemaker = The Comedian
Thunderbolt (Peter Cannon) = Ozymandias (Adrian Veidt)
The Question = Rorschach
Before Captain Atom, most (if not all) of DC's male heroes (other than Green Lantern) were completely free to do what they wished whenver they wished. Cap is both hero and government super-operative. So, he's almost never has that luxury.
What would the JLI have been without Blue Beetle?
What would have happened if Peacemaker was killed off in DC continuity?
The answers get worse once you compare the characters (in a Charlton vs Watchmen fashion). The Charlton characters are superior hero for hero. For example, Rorschach is easily the most popular of the Watchmen, but The Question is leagues more complex than Rorschach. In typical Moore fashion, he overcooks the Rorschach character by taking the slightly paranoid (in a suspicious way) Question and morphing him into a Paranoid Schizophrenic. Rorschach is just the Punisher in a coat and fedora with a sock pulled over his head. No wait, it could be Judge Dredd in a coat and fedora with a sock pulled over his head, couldn’t it? Didn’t Moore work for the 2000 AD imprint in merry old England? Even at Vic Sage's most 'things are black-and-white', he was never as one-note.
But that’s the problem with the Watchmen characters. They all suffer from the Alan Moore’s premise delusion: What if Superheroes really existed? Okay, if they really existed, they would be either depressed or depraved or cynical or disillusioned. Just plain dark. All of them.
This is simply NOT LOGICAL, because it doesn't allow for REALISTIC individual differences in personality, cognitive resources, and coping skills across INDIVIDUALS. [It also doesn't help that Moore views characters he didn't create as mere props.]
But Moore isn't alone in this ERROR. Garth Ennis and Warren Ellis also suffer from variations of this view and it could have been avoided if they'd been hugged more often during their formative years.
That's why I’m seriously considering leaving any future fortune I may amass to start a “Give a hug to every British child” foundation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"What if Superheroes really existed? Okay, if they really existed, they would be either depressed or depraved or cynical or disillusioned. Just plain dark."
ReplyDeleteYour choice of words, "premise delusion" is a very apt one. One can keep digging deeper in Moore premise until it reads, "Any super-powered being will feel isolation and resentment towards the general populace because of said superhero's burden of reponsibility." In other words: angst
The fact that Alan Moore sees the world through dark glasses gives rise to all sorts of premise errors. Why are heroes not allowed to be cheerful? Should heroes feel burdened with their responsibility? Can heroes have fun at superheroing? And, (this is not just Moore), do heroes need a traumatic childhood experience to become heroes, or can they just decide to help humanity for the sake of helping humanity?
"Huh? Why would DC may good money for these characters (or at least the rights to the charcters) just to kill them off?! Jeez! What was Alan Moore on?"
Do certain creators feel the need to destroy heroes, or at least tear them down to "humanize" them? I could go on about this for hours. (If I ever get my blog up and running.) But I think how certain creators (and readers) view heroes is very telling of their worldview and psychological and spiritual makeup. Alan Moore falls into the deconstructive category for whatever reason.
"What would the JLI have been without Blue Beetle?"
If this had happened, I would've just cried for every day.
Oh, and check my comment on your evil monkey post. I found a link that fits into your post perfectly!
My biggest problem with the "realistic = dark, depressed, angsty, disillutioned or even depraved" view of heroes is that Moore applies it to all heroes. I wouldn't have a problem with it if one hero had that type of chacterization, but ALL of them?
ReplyDeleteThat's the beauty of the main DCU: You have Batman and Blue Beetle and Green Arrow and The Question and many more. People who experience the world in different yet are in the same or similar 'lines of heroism'. I imagine that an alien hero could arrive here smack dab in the middle of an apocalypse and still think the earth has great potential for happiness. Every hero is different and painting them with the same UBER-broad brush is doing them a huge disservice.
By the way, I remember seeing this ad for a Question / Green Arrow story in Brave and Bold (i think). It had the Question looking alert in billowing fog with his arms stretched out slightly in front of him and to his sides, looking like he was feeling for something. It looked really eerie, but captured the character perfectly (his willingness to take on the unknown and wade through the mists of BIG mysteries / conspiracies). I think the teaser line had something to do with 'faceless killers in the night (obviously a taunt to the Q) and someone 'holding the key to the minds of millions.'
ReplyDeleteBTW, The Question is also an unforgivable omission from my top 12 hero list.
How about a Question-inspired blog title?
http://qjj_strangekord (which read like 'cue JJ strange Kord' and contains 4 of your fave heroes...ULTIMATE WIN)
That link in the monkey post...lol. Maybe the monkeys are trying to desensitize the world for their coming world dominination in the same way that alien movies are trying to desensitize to their coming invasion. Sounds like a comic book :)
"Every hero is different and painting them with the same UBER-broad brush is doing them a huge disservice."
ReplyDeleteThat is Alan Moore overapplying his worldview. I like dark characters as much as the lighthearted ones, but you're right, there needs to be some diversity.
I'll had to read that Question/GA story you mentioned. I'm trying to picture a Vic/Ollie teamup...I'm not sure if they'd get a long too well? I also need to read some Charlton Question titles. I'm only familiar with him through the Denny O'Neil series.
I like how you keep adding heroes into my blog title. Maybe we should just name it "Hero Grabag" or Comics Gragbag or something so that it'll encompass everyone? Too bad it's not going to be just about the Question or I'd name it "Ask the Question" or "Who is the Question" or something. (That sounded better in my head.) Or I could name it Cue JJ Strange Kord, instead of "Q"? Or "Comic(s) Philosopher," maybe? But people might just think it's about humorous blog about philosophy. But my degree is in Philosophy so maybe I should pay homage to that?
Is that the overarching alien plan?! J'onn? Is this all your doing?!