|
Daredevil Message Board
The Board Without Fear!
|
The Message Board is currently in read-only mode, as the software is now out of date. Several features and pages have been removed. If/When I get time I intend to re-launch the board with updated software.
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 5:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
To restore the context of those remarks...
| admiralpetty wrote: | | jriddle wrote: | | As I wrote in the "Future of Daredevil" thread, what we have now is a Daredevil "who has no connection with and bears no resemblance to the character people have read for decades, living in an alien town (no more Devil of Hell's Kitchen, no more Folk Hero of New York, none of that cast that has passed through the book for all these years), in a world where everyone knows he's a superhero (and every villain knows how to defeat him), and we're all just forced to pretend he could credibly pull up stakes, move somewhere else and start over without any serious fallout, in spite of every logical consideration and years worth of stories warning of what would happen if his secret was ever out." In a credibly-written book, that confession would mean his life would be over, he'd be disbarred--disbarred, period, not just in New York--and he'd go to prison for as long as he could last there while everyone he ever loved was horribly slaughtered and he was powerless to do anything about it. And he would soon be killed himself. Any book in which these things don't come to pass in rapid succession is, inherently, the worst kind of idiotic, third-rate hackwork, a book for not-so-bright children, a book that openly insults every reader. It not only isn't anything that even resembles DD, it's something that can never be made to resemble DD again. |
Insulting the ones who do enjoy the run is entirely unnecessary when it is known that a number of people on the site do enjoy the current run. |
Taking offense at that requires making a negative value-judgment about books written for not-so-bright children. I've made plain I'm not overly fond of such books, and particularly not of Daredevil being written as one. Others are far more tolerant of this, and that's fine, but as the full context makes plain, I'm not trashing them; I'm making the case that DD written in that way is in fact being written at that level, and for all the huffing and puffing and the recent efforts by some to try to make every thread in which I comment all about me (instead of Daredevil), no one has made an even remotely credible counter-argument to that case nor will they, because there isn't one. The reader's willingness to suspend disbelief has been assaulted and murdered in a back-alley and he is being told by a book noted for its mature, well-grounded writing to accept things as a status quo that no mature, reasonably intelligent adult can accept. One can, to be sure, ignore this and play along with it because one thinks doing so has some other benefits that outweigh this, but if one plays along, that is what one is doing, and as you say, there will be people who don't want to go this route. And there's nothing wrong with that either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| qtmxd wrote: | | I wouldn't even try to reconcile them. That a character like She-Hulk, who has been used at least on occasion for outright comedy, to which I certainly would not object, can be equated with a usually more realistic and serious character like DD, shows how far apart the two sides in this discussion are. We don't all have the same expectations for She-Hulk and DD. We have different standards of mood and conventions of realism for the characters. |
And something that obvious shouldn't even have to be so overtly noted. I'm a big She-Hulk fan myself, but DD ain't Shulkie--they're as different as Wolverine and Plastic Man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Marcus Plato wrote: | Just out of interest, I asked the some guys at my local comic shop (who are all Batfans) if it would be okay if DC were to decide that Bruce Wayne outed himself as Batman and moved to Metropolis.
Their response was a resounding "HELL NO", and "those two elements (his secret identity and defending Gotham) are two of the things that makes the Bat great".
Found that fascinating. |
Isn't it just? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
qtmxd
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And again, pointing out that Osborn would not be made head of national security misses the point. Street level DD isn't the sci-fi Avengers either, as even Bendis's recent attempt to shoehorn him in there shows. And Osborne's national security gig was supposed to demonstrate how dystopian the world had become, that something so corrupt could occur. Waid's world is not dystopia. Quite the opposite.
That DD needs to insist on his secret identity, even against his own recklessness, has been a key point for decades of dealing with the issue, from Miller through Chichester on to Bendis and Brubaker (who, btw, restored his plausible deniability by resorting to some comics tricks). It was summed up best in a brilliant page of dialogue between Matt and Luke Cage, who challenged him to fess up, and Matt shot back that he would never do that because he needed to practice law (and btw, he doesn't have invincible skin either). Matt also turned down Cap's offer to just drop his life and join the Avengers. Of course, Marvel owns the character and can drop all this if they want. We can be in Waid's world where we know everything's a fantasy and let's have fun.
But to each his own. As I've said before, I don't have to read it. Maybe in a year, the noir fans will have DD back in comics. Or maybe not. We don't own it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admiralpetty
Flying Blind
Joined: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 48
Location: Kalispell, MT
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jriddle wrote: | | Taking offense at that requires making a negative value-judgment about books written for not-so-bright children. I've made plain I'm not overly fond of such books, and particularly not of Daredevil being written as one. Others are far more tolerant of this, and that's fine, but as the full context makes plain, I'm not trashing them; I'm making the case that DD written in that way is in fact being written at that level, and for all the huffing and puffing and the recent efforts by some to try to make every thread in which I comment all about me (instead of Daredevil), no one has made an even remotely credible counter-argument to that case nor will they, because there isn't one. The reader's willingness to suspend disbelief has been assaulted and murdered in a back-alley and he is being told by a book noted for its mature, well-grounded writing to accept things as a status quo that no mature, reasonably intelligent adult can accept. One can, to be sure, ignore this and play along with it because one thinks doing so has some other benefits that outweigh this, but if one plays along, that is what one is doing, and as you say, there will be people who don't want to go this route. And there's nothing wrong with that either. |
In essence you are calling the readers who enjoy Waid's run not so bright children, the context is plain. The things that you think no mature, reasonably intelligent adult can accept(another nice insult by the way) are things that the comic industry as a whole do on a regular basis, and are accepted by the industry and the mostly adult fans who support it.
The counter argument has been made by multiple posters on this forum, you just tend to ignore because you have already made your mind up. Bendis who you seem to put on a pedestal among DD writers, has done way more outlandish things to the Marvel universe as a whole. My favorite DD run will probably always be Miller's run, part of what I liked about it is how for most of it, DD seems to be in his own little world. But Miller did reference the wider Marvel universe on more than one occasion. The fact is, the Marvel Universe is vastly different than it was even during Bendis' run. The issues you seem to have with DD at the moment can be leveled at the Marvel Universe in general, and by proxy Bendis, as he has had a large hand(probably the largest) in creating the current status quo.
Last edited by admiralpetty on Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admiralpetty
Flying Blind
Joined: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 48
Location: Kalispell, MT
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| qtmxd wrote: | And again, pointing out that Osborn would not be made head of national security misses the point. Street level DD isn't the sci-fi Avengers either, as even Bendis's recent attempt to shoehorn him in there shows. And Osborne's national security gig was supposed to demonstrate how dystopian the world had become, that something so corrupt could occur. Waid's world is not dystopia. Quite the opposite.
That DD needs to insist on his secret identity, even against his own recklessness, has been a key point for decades of dealing with the issue, from Miller through Chichester on to Bendis and Brubaker (who, btw, restored his plausible deniability by resorting to some comics tricks). It was summed up best in a brilliant page of dialogue between Matt and Luke Cage, who challenged him to fess up, and Matt shot back that he would never do that because he needed to practice law (and btw, he doesn't have invincible skin either). Matt also turned down Cap's offer to just drop his life and join the Avengers. Of course, Marvel owns the character and can drop all this if they want. We can be in Waid's world where we know everything's a fantasy and let's have fun.
But to each his own. As I've said before, I don't have to read it. Maybe in a year, the noir fans will have DD back in comics. Or maybe not. We don't own it. |
Where it does apply is in the sense of realism everyone keeps going on about. You mention street level DD vs Sci-Fi Avengers, but the issue is a social one, and shows the dramatic change in the universe as a whole from the higher levels on down. You mentioned when Cap approached Matt about joining the avengers, he may have declined at that time, but since then, in the pages of New Avengers(written by Bendis at the time), DD did join the Avengers for a time, and still has an Avengers card. Matt is now under the Avengers umbrella for all intents and purposes, which also changes how he would deal with the kind of issues being discussed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| qtmxd wrote: | | And again, pointing out that Osborn would not be made head of national security misses the point. Street level DD isn't the sci-fi Avengers either, as even Bendis's recent attempt to shoehorn him in there shows. And Osborne's national security gig was supposed to demonstrate how dystopian the world had become, that something so corrupt could occur. |
And about that, the word "naïve" doesn't even begin to cover people who think creatures like Norman Osborn don't occupy such positions. Such a view isn't just ahistorical. We're only 5 years since the Bush administration; the only way anyone could have lived through that (or, for example, through Reagan in the '80s) and not noticed the animals in charge of making such decisions is if they'd been in a coma.
In context, Osborn was brought in because the government needed experienced personnel in the effort to reign in rogue superbeings, and he was meant to be--and was treated as--satire. Satire of that real world that was going on at the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admiralpetty
Flying Blind
Joined: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 48
Location: Kalispell, MT
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jriddle wrote: | And about that, the word "naïve" doesn't even begin to cover people who think creatures like Norman Osborn don't occupy such positions. Such a view isn't just ahistorical. We're only 5 years since the Bush administration; the only way anyone could have lived through that (or, for example, through Reagan in the '80s) and not noticed the animals in charge of making such decisions is if they'd been in a coma.
In context, Osborn was brought in because the government needed experienced personnel in the effort to reign in rogue superbeings, and he was meant to be--and was treated as--satire. Satire of that real world that was going on at the time. |
I'm well aware of the types of people who are often in power(and the studies that point to psychopaths being found in powerful positions in both the commercial and political world), the difference is Osborne was a convicted murderer. The satire is obvious as well, however it is still satire that was played out in the Marvel Universe as a whole. Bendis bent reality for the sake of storytelling and to make a point, just as authors before him have done, and yet more after will continue to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
qtmxd
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My comment on shoehorning DD into the Avengers meant that I thought it didn't work, and since it faded out with no impact, Marvel didn't seem to think it worked either. It's continuous with his world, which I like, but it's not his home. I know artistry is unreliable. I think Bendis's DD (and simultaneous Alias) was the best of DD, which for me makes it the best comics writing ever. Not that I don't understand some readers would have been bored by it. It was an attempt to blend comics and reality in the tradition of Watchmen and Marvels, though any reader could have liked those and not DD. ( I thought Dark Avengers was the one top level thing he's done since DD. Otherwise, it's been far too much Cap, Spider-Man, and Wolverine speeches in between explosions. And the sub-mediocrity of End of Days shows that getting the magic back is not guaranteed.) Has the Marvel Universe changed? I don't know, I thought comics continuity depended on Stan Lee's "illusion of change"...that characters' personalities and worlds would remain consistent once they found their identities. But thinking of Marvel's mainline characters, I guess none has had more personality swings than DD. If you really want the DD of Stan at his most comedic, Kesel, and Bob Gale, you've got it. I don't know that that kind of radical, 180 degree changes are good. Do other characters do it? Or maybe the wackiness of it has some kind of interest for you that I can't figure out, and you think there's a good reason to do this to DD instead of say, Ant-Man. Still, I'm detecting a lot of sentiments even among people who like it that Waid jumped the shark after the Bullseye reveal, and the defenses of the identity reveal (which had already been fixed by Brubaker... Waid chose to undo it) do sound strained.
But again, most clearly feel that noir and secret identities will return, and we can hope that it will be well written when and if they do. No guarantees. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimetre
Underboss
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 1366
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| qtmxd wrote: | | ...and the defenses of the identity reveal (which had already been fixed by Brubaker... Waid chose to undo it) do sound strained. |
I've said this before in a different thread... his secret identity wasn't secure even after the "fix" with Vanessa Fisk. Mr. Fear still called him Murdock. The occasional person on the street still taunted him by alleging he was Matt Murdock. The genie was never fully in the bottle. It was this wishy-washy "Yeah, he's probably Matt Murdock, but we can't prove it" status. It was that way through Shadowland. And it was the same way through Waid's run, right up to the point where the Sons of the Serpant had him and Foggy over a barrel. Given the story, I was able to see how Matt made his decision.
They could have left the secret identity in this wishy-washy place. They could have done another fix, which would have convinced every person alive that Matt wasn't Daredevil (by having Matt stand next to T'Challa or Peter Parker hopping around in a Daredevil costume) or they could have gone the other way, which hadn't been done before, and had him go the completely opposite way. None of these approaches would please all the people, and each approach would have it's detractors. I'm willing to stick around and see how Matt deals with this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
qtmxd
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hadn't Mr. Fear known his identity from other stories? Someone can probably confirm or correct me on that, but it's not major... DD's supposed to be under threat, and Kingpin knew for decades. If it's been going on for decades, it's canon, not unworkable. And personally, I thought the "wishy washy" plausible deniability was good, especially if it had been handled seriously, not with the silver age Lois Lane hilarity.
As to consistency of character, it's essential. Take another classic character who's had more incarnations than any, Sherlock Holmes. Whatever and wherever he is, he's the same man. Victorian England or contemporary, he's still the asexual man of reason. He's never a joking gigolo or a brawling gumshoe. DD had many writers after Miller.... Nocenti, Chichester, Smith, Mack, and even Bendis, who put him in all kinds of fantasy and sf situations, some good, some not, but the man was still Miller's DD. Holmes gets new settings also. Even the classic Rathbone movies of the 40s only did the first 2 films in Victorian times, then moved him up to WW II. It worked, because the mood and the man were the same. Now suppose the Conan Doyle estate had hired Dashiell Hammett to write Holmes and he had written the Maltese Falcon exactly as it is, except calling his tough, womanizing American detective Sherlock Holmes instead of Sam Spade. Would anyone have said sure, why not, they're both still detectives, it's a breath of fresh air, and the Conan Doyle estate owns him so it's okay, they can do what they want.
Legally they can, and Marvel can too. There's still enough memory of the noir DD that people want to talk about him, and there's a tv show coming, but if ten years from now, the Waid type DD is all that remains, we'll move on. Probably in a lot less than ten years. It would make no more sense to complain than it would to want the Adam West Batman back. But for a while at least, it's worth breaking promises to myself not to say anything for a while. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darkdevil
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Posts: 331
Location: The Bright, Sunny South
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First off, She-Hulk is relevant for both characters supposedly occupy the same shared universe. While the focus of their individual series may be different, both are highly accomplished lawyers. Yet Jennifer is still able to practice law in NY while Matt has to go to San Fran. Unless it relates to her registering under the Superhero Registration Act during Civil War. I think it's an interesting discrepancy.
Second, I would agree with certain comments jriddle made in another thread. Matt lives in NYC, is a lawyer, and operates in secret as DD. Those serve as prime foundations for his static character. But those should be guidelines for his static status quo instead of constrictive boundaries. Why should that dissuade Marvel from pushing those boundaries or even outright demolishing them?
For if you keep those same elements static throughout, eventually that will breed in stagnation, I don't care what talented writer you have working on the title. By pushing at the boundaries, Marvel is trying to increase business and recognition while they know that they can restore the static status quo at their discretion. You want the character to be familiar (ie a lawyer vigilante operating in NYC) while also expanding the purview of the character occasionally (ie Matt now living in San Fran).
Third, if you are read the book, you will see that Waid is just beginning to show the effects of Matt's reveal. The paparazzi, the fans, the nuts, whatever. So Matt may not like what happens with all this, which may spur him to somehow undo or fix his public reveal and Bob's your Uncle, Matt has his secret ID back.
I don't know what Waid has in store for this (and no, he has not been 100% perfect in this run, no writer ever is) but I'm interested to see how Matt reacts to his newfound publicity and will it convince him that he did indeed make a mistake? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
qtmxd
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Assuming he does get his identity back, I hope they at least let Waid do it , and get the credit or the blame. If they let him drop things in the middle, like still cracking jokes and fighting villains in a business suit, I don't think a new series geared to the TV show will spend a lot of time and issues fixing a wild and crazy Waid situation. Any fix could be very perfunctory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| qtmxd wrote: | | My comment on shoehorning DD into the Avengers meant that I thought it didn't work, and since it faded out with no impact, Marvel didn't seem to think it worked either. |
Many years ago, in the aftermath of the "Born Again" storyline, Steve Englehart was going to take over writing chores on Daredevil, and his plan was to move DD to San Francisco, have him join the West Coast Avengers and to rekindle the relationship with the Black Widow! This was announced but, fortunately, it ultimately fell through--Ann Nocenti wrote a DD/Black Widow story that undermined it, Englehart quit in a huff, and we got Ann on the book instead. A friend of mine reminded me that, at the time, I helped him draft an angry letter to Marvel protesting these plans. More recently, when it was announced DD would be joining the New Avengers, I don't remember many here having anything positive to say about the idea--I suppose the archive, if it goes back far enough, would speak for that. Daredevil is not an Avenger, and making him one is a horrible, horrible idea--very much analogous to putting DD on an entirely different planet. I'm not surprised it fell through; it should have never happened in the first place.
| qtmxd wrote: | | But thinking of Marvel's mainline characters, I guess none has had more personality swings than DD. If you really want the DD of Stan at his most comedic, Kesel, and Bob Gale, you've got it. I don't know that that kind of radical, 180 degree changes are good. Do other characters do it? Or maybe the wackiness of it has some kind of interest for you that I can't figure out, and you think there's a good reason to do this to DD instead of say, Ant-Man. |
You'll find very few examples of major characters in modern comics that have undergone such radical changes, particularly in that flip-of-the-lightswitch way. The obvious example that jumps to mind is the transformation of the Batman from the campy clown of the '60s tv series--while it had aired, the books had been brought in line with its tone--to the much more serious and mature dark avenger character of Bob Haney, Neal Adams, Denny O'Neil, Jim Aparo, etc. With DD, though, the change is just as instantaneous but in the opposite direction.
An equation that isn't terribly complicated: If, like Waid, one has absolutely no interest in writing a character like Daredevil then don't do it. Waid wanted to write a goofy book where he could play out his ill-considered literalist notion of the Silver Age and decided to impose that on Daredevil, a book where it simply isn't appropriate.
(I am, btw, all for wackiness, where appropriate.)
| qtmxd wrote: | | Still, I'm detecting a lot of sentiments even among people who like it that Waid jumped the shark after the Bullseye reveal, and the defenses of the identity reveal (which had already been fixed by Brubaker... Waid chose to undo it) do sound strained. |
Just to keep matters straight, there have been no--and that "no" is absolute--no defenses of the identity confession. Those who have spoken about it have offered mostly meaningless rationales for it--there aren't as many secret identities in the Marvel Universe these days, the Avengers (of which DD shouldn't be a part in the first place) could help protect him from trouble, some completely different character in a completely different book of a completely different kind has a similar situation, it's all to be blamed on Bendis, Brubaker, or anyone except Waid, etc. No one has made any case for it being a good idea or anything less than a very, very bad one. I've outlined repeatedly why such a confession is an horrendous idea that would lead to horrendous consequences (as the DD canon itself demonstrates), and there hasn't been a single credible counterargument to any element of that case (and to note the obvious, since, it seems, one must, offering the equivalent of "nuh uh" then writing half a dozen ad hominem-filled posts saying I refused to bow to such brilliant argumentation is no counterargument). I even offered up the only counter available--yes, in what the reader is being asked to swallow Waid's DD is being written at the level of a children's book (an evaluation not subject to serious challenge), but if one plays along with his conceit the book has x, y, and z merits that outweigh turning off one's brain on the rest--but no one has yet picked it up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
humanaccident
Flying Blind
Joined: 10 Jul 2014
Posts: 26
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting debate this.
People speaking here for Miller and Bendis and their amazing realism forget a few things, Miller used invincible ninjas, people coming back from the dead and all sorts of magic, this ain't real dudes! Bendis used magical ninjas as well. Both used a man mountain who looks like he must weight 800lbs as the main enemy! Luke Cage (invincible skin) and Iron Fist (more ninja magic) were used widely in Bendis's run.
Are we really claiming the stuff Waid is doing is unrealistic? I think a lot of you are choosing which fantasy stuff to accept and which not to which is downright silly really.
Matt lives in a world were this stuff exists, we have to accept that as fact.
Although I still do think the Monster Town story took it a bit far.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
