![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Astonishing X-Men review and additional comics geekery
Today was comics day. I'm holding Astonishing X-Men #7, Lucifer #57 and Rising Stars #23 in my hands. Squee!
Astonishing X-Men starts a new miniarc while dealing with the aftermath of the recent one, and I continue to be swept away by the quality of Joss Whedon's writing. (I'm also grateful that I read 1602; otherwise I wouldn't have known who the Fantastic Four were supposed to be. A handy introduction into the Marvelverse, Mr. Gaiman, handy indeed.) Wing/Eddie's fate here is relentless and brings home one psychological aftermath of the "cure" that the more conventional cliché (for example, the cure turns out ot be a poison or has unprecedent negative physical effects) would not have had. I could see it coming, but I still felt sucker-punched.
The Emma-Kitty snark continues to amuse (Emma: "J. Jonah Jameson'll be tongue-kissing Spiderman before the X-Men catch a little public favor", Kitty: "WHy do you insist on saying things I can never un-hear?"), and it seems that in addition to Dr. Rao (and was I ever relieved she wasn't turned into a mad 'n bad scientist in the last issue!), Agent Brand is going to be other other female antagonist who sincerely believes she's doing the right thing, and whose point of view can't be dismissed out of hand as evil, racist or vengeful (a la Stryker). I bet Brand's argument that the end - saving Earth - justifies any means resonates for quite a lot of today's readers in or out of the US. I also appreciate that both Rao and Brand are presented as intelligent and courageous. It's a cliché in action movies as well to have the villain beg the hero for his (more rarely her) life and then trip himself by trying to trying to kill the hero one last time. I suspect to show villains not grovelling but retaining their dignity smacks too much of moral ambiguity for a lot of the genre. (Me, I'm with Susan Sontag on that one: courage is a morally neutral virtue. Good people have it, bad people have it. Doesn't say anything about the validity of their goals.) Not so here. Roa didn't back down when confronted by either the bullying Ord or in the last issue Emma, and Brand doesn't cringe in the face of possible execution. Can we keep her as an antagonist? (Rethorical question; Whedon would hardly have given her these scenes if he didn't intend to use her further.)
As for the set up: the earlier just alluded to Blindfold makes a sufficiently spooky first impression, and my guess is she'll join Drusilla and River in the ranks of Jossian murderous Ophelias/Cassandras. Who will be "the new one"? Bring on the next issue, I say.
Reading Lucifer occasionally reminds me that I wish Mike Carey had written all the Sandman spin-offs. I loved his The Furies as well, but never got warm with any of the Dreaming examples I read (sorry, Ms Kiernan), and felt distinctly let down by whoever penned the Thessaliad and its sequel. Thessaly is such a cool, memorable character in Sandman, and to have her don tight sweaters and waste a story which should be about her on endless quips by an annoying ghost sidekick is just a betrayal. Thankfully, there is cool fanfic instead like this Yuletide story which gets her just right.
Wait, I do recall one excellent not-Carey written minseries around a Sandman character. Though it appeared as a Hellblazer rather than as a Sandman special. That was Andy Diggle's four part story, Lady Constantine. Johanna Constantine (yes, ancestress of same) was created by Neil Gaiman and used in Doll's House and Fables and Reflections. I also read one of the Dreaming issues she appeared in, which was papery thin in comparison to the vivid personality presented in Thermidor, the story from Fables and Reflections which uses Johanna most. The Lady Constantine four parter, otoh, was a great story in its own right and cleverly used the different set of expections Hellblazer carries (as opposed to Sandman). It can be read without any Sandman knowledge, but if you're familiar with Johanna's appearances there, you feel additionally rewarded by the backstory that explains just what she expected from Dream to begin with when agreeing to work for him.
Astonishing X-Men starts a new miniarc while dealing with the aftermath of the recent one, and I continue to be swept away by the quality of Joss Whedon's writing. (I'm also grateful that I read 1602; otherwise I wouldn't have known who the Fantastic Four were supposed to be. A handy introduction into the Marvelverse, Mr. Gaiman, handy indeed.) Wing/Eddie's fate here is relentless and brings home one psychological aftermath of the "cure" that the more conventional cliché (for example, the cure turns out ot be a poison or has unprecedent negative physical effects) would not have had. I could see it coming, but I still felt sucker-punched.
The Emma-Kitty snark continues to amuse (Emma: "J. Jonah Jameson'll be tongue-kissing Spiderman before the X-Men catch a little public favor", Kitty: "WHy do you insist on saying things I can never un-hear?"), and it seems that in addition to Dr. Rao (and was I ever relieved she wasn't turned into a mad 'n bad scientist in the last issue!), Agent Brand is going to be other other female antagonist who sincerely believes she's doing the right thing, and whose point of view can't be dismissed out of hand as evil, racist or vengeful (a la Stryker). I bet Brand's argument that the end - saving Earth - justifies any means resonates for quite a lot of today's readers in or out of the US. I also appreciate that both Rao and Brand are presented as intelligent and courageous. It's a cliché in action movies as well to have the villain beg the hero for his (more rarely her) life and then trip himself by trying to trying to kill the hero one last time. I suspect to show villains not grovelling but retaining their dignity smacks too much of moral ambiguity for a lot of the genre. (Me, I'm with Susan Sontag on that one: courage is a morally neutral virtue. Good people have it, bad people have it. Doesn't say anything about the validity of their goals.) Not so here. Roa didn't back down when confronted by either the bullying Ord or in the last issue Emma, and Brand doesn't cringe in the face of possible execution. Can we keep her as an antagonist? (Rethorical question; Whedon would hardly have given her these scenes if he didn't intend to use her further.)
As for the set up: the earlier just alluded to Blindfold makes a sufficiently spooky first impression, and my guess is she'll join Drusilla and River in the ranks of Jossian murderous Ophelias/Cassandras. Who will be "the new one"? Bring on the next issue, I say.
Reading Lucifer occasionally reminds me that I wish Mike Carey had written all the Sandman spin-offs. I loved his The Furies as well, but never got warm with any of the Dreaming examples I read (sorry, Ms Kiernan), and felt distinctly let down by whoever penned the Thessaliad and its sequel. Thessaly is such a cool, memorable character in Sandman, and to have her don tight sweaters and waste a story which should be about her on endless quips by an annoying ghost sidekick is just a betrayal. Thankfully, there is cool fanfic instead like this Yuletide story which gets her just right.
Wait, I do recall one excellent not-Carey written minseries around a Sandman character. Though it appeared as a Hellblazer rather than as a Sandman special. That was Andy Diggle's four part story, Lady Constantine. Johanna Constantine (yes, ancestress of same) was created by Neil Gaiman and used in Doll's House and Fables and Reflections. I also read one of the Dreaming issues she appeared in, which was papery thin in comparison to the vivid personality presented in Thermidor, the story from Fables and Reflections which uses Johanna most. The Lady Constantine four parter, otoh, was a great story in its own right and cleverly used the different set of expections Hellblazer carries (as opposed to Sandman). It can be read without any Sandman knowledge, but if you're familiar with Johanna's appearances there, you feel additionally rewarded by the backstory that explains just what she expected from Dream to begin with when agreeing to work for him.
no subject
But it's not on Hero levels of "totalitarianism, yay!" wrongness, is it?
no subject