Overthinking My Own Snarkiness
Here's a first for me: A blog entry inspired by a comment on an
earlier
blog entry of mine (don't you just love the incestuous,
self-referential
nature of blogging?)
Matthew Clark wrote:
Uh, Huh - and they wonder why people don't
want to jump
into the
comics
world. There is now so much discourse continuity to sift through before
you even have to worry about the stories. Do these guys
know who they are copying or is it supposed to be ironic?
This got me thinking a bit more about what it was that bugged me about
the
WORLDWATCH
piece on ComiX-Fan. Was it simply that the concept
of superheroes as celebrity gods lording it over mere mortals feels
played out? Do I really believe that
every
revisionist-superhero book needs to be some Bold Step Forward In The
History Of Mainstream Superhero Comics? If so, why didn't any
of the previous permutations on
this concept draw my ire?
I think what it comes down to is this: I don't so much mind the
reuse of things that have been done before—as
Eve
Tushnet points out, often times playing with conventions and
twisting or tweaking them in new ways can create fresh stories; and as
I
myself said in defense of JLA/AVENGERS #1, "I'm not sure I see how
using a familiar format is in and of itself a strike against
[something]"—but I do
mind bad hype. What annoys me about the WORLDWATCH announcement
is that it ignores all the obvious precursors it likely owes
inspiration to. By comparing WORLDWATCH to only two superhero
comics (and two decades-old series, at that), the
creators seem to be implying that they are the first ones to come up
with this unique twist of "rockstar superheroes ruling the
world." Which is especially disingenuous when your book "homages"
so many similar works in title (STORMWATCH), character names (Power
Princess was the Wonder Woman analogue in SQUADRON SUPREME), and
character design (
Derenick's
Warrior Princess looks a lot like
Jim
Lee's Wonder Woman from "Just Imagine Stan Lee Creating the DCU"
only with even less clothing and even faker-looking breasts; I won't
even comment on the
obvious
AUTHORITY influences for some of the
other
characters).
And in anticipation of the "But you haven't read the story yet, so you
can't criticize it!" objection (which a friend has already jokingly
invoked
here):
I'm not criticizing the actual,
finished product; I can't, since I haven't read it. I'm simply
reacting to the information currently available to me, which, at the
moment, is pure hype. It's no different to reacting to a trailer
for an upcoming movie and deciding, "Well, that looks like crap."
I'm often surprised when creators (or marketers, or other fans) become
upset when
people react unfavorably to promotional efforts. The whole point
of hype is to generate awareness in a project. Of course, the
hope is that the awareness will be positive, but there's no way to
control or guarantee that response. Some individuals' reactions
may take the form of disgust, distaste, or even simply
disinterest. So don't cry foul if people
do
respond to your efforts to get their attention, but it's not the
reaction you wanted. Live by the hype, die by the hype.
