The Four Color Media Monitor

A writer at ComicBook supposedly draws attention to characters in the DCU who could be the most overlooked, but leaves out quite a few that could've made more convincing choices. For now, here's what they talk about:

First and foremost, let’s acknowledge the elephant in the room: ranking heroes as A, B, C, etc. is highly subjective. It’s also a great way to start a fight when people disagree on where their favorite heroes rank on various lists. That may be part of the problem here, as while people are busy fighting about the middle ground of heroes, the “established” top dogs keep getting the limelight. People generally classify A-list heroes as those getting top-billing status, like Batman. They consistently steal the show, get the highest-paid writers, and regularly obtain solo series. Meanwhile, B-list is one step down from that, they’ll still sometimes get a standalone series, but they’re not as widely known as A-listers. C-listers are a step down from that, with an even smaller chance of getting a solo series, and so on.

And this itself obscures the vital point I've made that writing and art merit are what matter, because that's how you make a character/series most enjoyable for reading pastime. Indeed, that's one of the biggest problems with this pretentious piece, though there are other troubling issues up ahead. And what a surprise that Batman's cited as the A-lister to get top billing, not Superman. Yup, they've done it again, and acted as absurd favortists, based on the storytelling angle. Oddly enough, in the following paragraph, talented writing is alluded to, but not very persuasively:

Buried inside the B and C lister stories are some true gems. Those who know how to look for it will strike gold because it’s not that well hidden. Creators want these stories to be found, while showcasing some of the best storytelling the franchise has to offer, taking bold risks with character origin stories, new arcs, and development.

While the above makes sense, the problem, as you'll soon see, is that again, the writer doesn't follow through convincingly on what he says.

Black Canary is an excellent example of this. Dinah has done everything from falling in love with a fan-favorite hero to leading an all-female team of heroes. Her story is simultaneously compelling and complicated, showcasing the messier side of superhero life. Her story may be full of retcons and changes, but one could argue that this happens because her creative team is allowed to make these executive decisions. Dinah’s story lets her shine brightly, standing out as a moral center of her small community of heroes, as she is a born leader and perpetual survivor.

On the opposite side of the spectrum is Booster Gold. He’s a total goofball, but his fans love him. He’s got a wild sense of humor with one of the brightest smiles around. Yet his stories sometimes come out of left field, surprising even his die-hard fans with their emotional depth. One needs only look at Booster’s trials with time travel (including multiple attempts to save a dear friend) to understand where this part of his story comes from.

Oh sure, BC and BG are both great examples for citation. But what about civilian co-stars? That's what doesn't seem to get attention here. No Jimmy Olsen, Sapphire Stagg-Mason, Lois Lane, Jean Loring, Sue Dibny, Doiby Dickles, Lynn Stewart-Pierce, Iris West Allen, Terry Long or Abigail Arcane. Nor for that matter do heroes like the Atom and Metamorpho, or even Hawkman. What sadly does is the work of at least 2 overrated scribes:

Every now and then, DC Comics will shock fans with a story that is out of this world. Most of the time, people attribute these stories to A-list heroes, but it’s safe to say that many belong to other heroes of the universe. For example, Animal Man (Grant Morrison) brought many real topics to the forefront, from animal rights to environmentalism. This is one example in a deep pool of options for readers.

Mister Miracle (Tom King & Mitch Gerads) took a closer look at the hero, bringing his depression and trauma to human levels, contrasting his superhero/domestic life. Doom Patrol famously brought a ragtag group of characters together, letting them tackle everything from mental health to the core of their identities and everything in between. Shade, the Changing Man (Peter Milligan & Chris Bachalo) likewise took a deep dive into the identity of the self, but with a different twist. It also looked at the nature of forgiveness and American culture. Finally, Deadman (Mike Baron & Kelley Jones) explored death, loss, and morality with a unique yet horrifying lens.

It's bad enough Morrison's work been cited as some kind of a classic, but at this point, what's especially telling is when King and Gerads' work does. Promoting their approach to writing has only worsened the situation. On the other hand, it's amazing to see that Baron's writings get attention here, but even so, that Morrison and King do ruins everything. Citing such awful writers years after DC's quality collapsed will not improve a dire situation. Nor will legitimizing King's contrived writing style that doesn't apply issues of trauma organically.

And again, there's plenty of cast members in the DCU, both superhero and civilian co-stars, who receive no mention at all. So what good does it do to make an argument about overlooked cast members when the writer won't find the time to bring them up as well? This is precisely why we've gotten so far down in terms of quality, which the writer seemingly argues over, but then spoils everything by supporting writers whose works aren't genuinely about serious quality at all.

Labels: Atom, dc comics, golden calf of death, golden calf of villainy, Hawkman and Hawkgirl, history, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, women of dc