|
Good spot! The summary on that page does seem very much like it would fit in with Morrison's ongoing meta-commentary abut the comics industry. quote:Toby Tyler tells the story of a ten year-old orphan who runs away from a foster home to join the traveling circus only to discover his new employer is a cruel taskmaster. The difference between the romance of the circus from the outside and the reality as seen from the inside is graphically depicted. Toby's friend, Mr. Stubbs the chimpanzee, reinforces the consequences of what happens when one follows one's natural instincts rather than one's intellect and conscience, a central theme of the novel. The "aren't we too old to read comics" line from Stubbs in the preview could back this up. Maybe Morrison is using both Nix Uotan and Mr Stubbs as fiction suits in this to examine his own relationship with comics. Uotan as the youthful optimist, Mr Stubbs as the "grown-up" voice. Or maybe I'm just getting ahead of myself... Sod it. The "Don't read this comic" sounds very much like an inversion of this Flash cover that Morrison has mentioned a good few times in interviews. It also brings into play the "You" being a hero in Multiversity.  If it's not obvious, I'm really quite excited for this. I've been less than impressed with Morrison's recent output: Batman Inc vol 2 just faltered for me and it seemed like Morrison himself had lost interest by the end; Action again, just felt a bit half-hearted, like it went on for longer than he had planned. And Happy was just shite. But this... this looks like a proper return to form.
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 09:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Won't post anything specific until the rest of the world has had a chance to read it but... Oooh, that was good wasn't it? Just gave it a quick read over lunchtime and will go back over it tonight. Wasn't too sure what I was expecting from this but it certainly delivered. It feels very much like a direct sequel to Final Crisis, definitely meta-Morrison.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
Bown posted:Oh man that was nuts. Is the main villain in the beginning section a previously known character? DC wiki had nothing. Someone else would probably know for sure but I'm pretty certain that they're all new to this.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 12:24
|
|
|
Morrison's not really being very subtle with the Gentry. It seems pretty obvious that they represent comic book execs / editorial, destroying worlds at a whim. Talking about the Thunderer when they say "we'll strip him of his dignity" etc. harks back to one of the major theme of SevenSoldiers, namely, how creators treat their creations (or in this case, other peoples creations) The Gentry refers back to the British landowner class of aristocracy who made their fortunes by leasing out their land to farmers etc. Making their fortune on the back of other peoples work and, of course, they treated their tenants like poo poo for the most part. Morrison's definitely not happy about this sort of thing. Nix Uotan being corrupted is interesting too. Is this the naive young fan or writer turning to the dark side? *cough* geoffjohns *cough*
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Yes exactly, the constraints are definitely there, and Morrison is hitting that (Uotan trapped in the shrinking panel), but the constraints are only on the characters because they're on the writers in the first place. Writers aren't allowed to tell the stories they may want to tell because the higher-ups aren't allowing them to. This could be where the "you" hero of the series comes into it because, as readers buying the same old same old month in and month out, we're contributing to the problem as much as anyone. Edit: the first page with the landlady is interesting too and the pictures juxtapose the text. Whilst we're reading about life, written quite positively, we're seeing it negatively with the landlady demanding money, feeding off Nix, then her head-lice feeding off her, and then lice on the lice. Like an eternal parasitic cycle. Shameless fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Wachter posted:I think it's too simplistic to say that this is an attack on DC Comics editorial, or even popular narrative techniques. This is an attack on purism. The Gentry demonstrate their power by constricting the fictional space around Nix Uotan -- crushing him by limiting what is possible, which includes but is not limited to the narrative conclusion that is death. I agree that it is a simple view to take but it's not like Morrison hasn't overtly criticised DC execs before now, the President Superman issue of Action being the most recent example. As I said in my earlier post, I do think that the fans are complicit as well. It does seem like the big eye Gentry's speech patterns have a sort of "messageboard" quality to them. But very name Gentry itself suggests a "superior", a landowner profiting by other people working on something he owns. I think it's a call to arms against the same old ideas that we're seeing again and again by editorial mandate or unimaginative writing. The (awesome) anti-death equation is clearly calling bullshit against the trend of killing off characters. Yes, as I said, we the readers are definitely complicit in this but I'm not too sure that we're the main focus of Morrison's frustration. Or, like the front page shows, maybe we're just another parasite in the cycle. edit: It seems to me like there's something of a cautionary tale in here. Nix Uotan got into this mess by "dissecting" a comic book, which is a great word choice. He looked at these things too deeply and got spat out the other-side as... whatever he's become. I can't believe this is Morrison condemning analysis, he's not going to say "be dumber" considering the layers of meaning he puts in his own work, but more, like Wachter has said, don't get bogged down by the meaningless stuff, continuity, etc. Shameless fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Had a quick read on my break at work and.... Holy gently caress Frank Quitely! Definitely one to re-re-re-re-read.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:- There's the recurring infinity (/figure eight) symbol, but there's also a recurring symbol that could be traced as multiple figure-eights (or infinities) splitting off from one another. And in the end the infinity symbol with a bullet hole, combining the two. The panel with young Harley and his Dad's mask made it look like a strand of DNA too. Random thoughts: The president sacrificing himself in order to bring back Captain Atom works as a sort of inversion of Ozymandias' actions in Watchmen. Lots of nice bits of Watchmen reversals, I particularly liked the perfume going from Watchmen's "Nostalgia" to "Future Bomb". Interesting that they have Morrison and Quitely comics in their universe. Not sure myself about Lane's role. Has he already been corrupted by the Gentry? Is he their agent in this chapter? Atom in the park with the dog makes me think along similar lines to Nix in the first issue where he was "dissecting"the comic. Saying stuff along the lines of "I thought if I took it apart I could better understand the whole"... It seems like Morrison is criticising those who look for meaning instead of enjoying the story but for someone whose work is so dense it doesn't quite ring true. Kind of regret getting this digitally to be honest. Would have been easier to navigate the physical thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:I think he wishes we could all enjoy comics innocently, without the post-modern tricks designed for meta-analysis, or the pesky realism and pessimism and grim-dark grit. But this issue tries to reverse all that and ends leading right back to the same point. Yeah, for some reason I was reading it as the reader taking things apart but, having just read that section again, it seems much more likely to be Moore he's talking about. Having done the superhero dissection so thoroughly on Watchmen and started the whole trend.... You can't put the genie back in the bottle. By trying to understand the individual bits, to make superheroes real, the intangible wonder has gone. Is it also a criticism of Moore's absence from superhero comics and saying that if he only came back he could fix it again? Reminded of "Come back to us Allen" from Superman Beyond where he was very clearly a stand-in for Moore. I don't think it's a "gently caress you" to Moore, Morrison has been quite complimentary about his work last time he spoke about him. Edit: the "my daughter loved that dog as much as you" line is pretty much saying, look what you've taken away from children by making your superheroes all realistic. Shameless fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Even if the last section had been panel-for-panel backwards, so that the boy seemed to un-shoot his father, we the readers would still interpret the story the same forwards way. Which is maybe why the foreshadowing keeps implying that we are the true villains of the whole saga. So maybe the sideways 8 isn't an infinity symbol but a Möbius strip?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:Isn't the symbol for infinity always a Mobius strip? Like that's why that symbol is used for infinity in the first place, I thought. I guess so but, maybe it's just me, I see them as very different things. Infinity being... well, infinity as in something going on forever and a Möbius strip being a repeating cycle without beginning or end. Something that isn't actually infinite but repeating. I am often very thick though. Edit. Ooh, one thing I do know for sure is that the hunchback and the soldier are a question mark and an exclamation mark. A question and an answer. It's a Crowley thing. Shameless fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
It's Sarge Steel http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarge_Steel
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 00:20
|
|