The Objectiveness of My Opinion
Just getting caught up on blog-reading and noticed the escalating
dispute between Alan
. ADD has spurred a lot of discussion by nominating
as "the best superhero cover of the last decade."
have joined in
to wonder just what criteria ADD is using in order
to reach this assessment (nostalgia? simplicity? staticness?), Laura
seems to be the most flummoxed by ADD's pick, writing
ADD must be "pulling people's leg" (I like the thought of many
people sharing one collective leg--a leg at peace until ADD started
tugging on it).
What interests me most in this ongoing argument is that both sides seem
to think their opinions are objective truth, yet neither offers any
support for his or her position. Why does ADD think Seth's
superhero covers are even worth looking at, given that he also
pronounces "superheroes are dead"? No idea! Why does Laura think
that portraits of Aquaman surrounded by small fish are "tons better at
being superhero covers" than group shots of the X-Men or JSA?
Beats me! Neither side has seen fit to explain the criteria
behind his or her evaluation.
I know it's natural to lapse into objective speak when writing about
art or entertainment. I'm sure I do it too (or at least I've been
trying to, since I'm told my overly qualified subjective statements are
too passive and boring), but it'd be nice to see some reasoning
those opinions. Laura, if you simply assert
picks are obviously better than ADD's, how are you being any less
snobby or dismissive than ADD?
Plus, you're both wrong anyway. This
is the best
superhero cover of the past decade:
Dude! Look at the size of that gun!! AWESOME!!
Damn. Just after I posted this, I noticed
explain why he thinks the Seth cover is worthy of
entry from 12/6
Seth's subtle, post-iconic treatment captures the
lost innocence of the Silver Age with grace and an appealing
sentimentality, being far kinder to the characters and their fans than
anyone who has been officially charged with maintaining the franchise
in the past 15 years or so.
My apologies to ADD for missing this. I guess he is willing to
back up opinions no one else agrees with. That's what I get for
slacking off on my weekend blog reading. (I'm now off to re-read
Laura's blog, where I fully expect to find a passage explaining how the
Aquaman portrait covers grab readers' attention by causing them to
wonder, "Wha--? How can that man be surrounded by fish
And why does he look so...regal
? It's almost as if he were
King of the Seas or something...")