The 40 Years of Comics Project - Day 2354: Doctor Tomorrow #1, September 1997

For information on stopping the spread of COVID-19, and on the importance of being vaccinated, have a look at the World Health Organization site.

 

(Yeah, yeah, 2 in a row. Contain yer excitement 😏 Going to try a bit of a format change for a while, see how it feels.)

Publisher: Acclaim Comics

Writer: Bob Layton

Penciller: Don Perlin

Cover Artist: Mike Mignola

I've had this one kicking about the collection for about 20 years now. I started finding Acclaim comics in the comic bin at a used bookstore in Kitchener, ON, that I'm sure has gone the way of most used bookstores nowadays. It's where I first found Quantum & Woody, and where I started poking my nose into the Valiant/Acclaim universe. I've always found the idea of a historically presented superhero universe, like Astro City, for example, and this series is a cool way for the Acclaim superhero universe, relatively new, to establish a history for itself.

I don't really know much about the series, having only read this issue, but I'm intrigued by the premise, though I have inklings already, of an ontological paradoxical nature, about what's going to happen.

Or, perhaps I think I do, except that I don't. Bear with me. The series is the brainchild of writer/inker Bob Layton. Each issue has a different art team, and is presented in tribute to a particular luminary of Comics' history. Today's is a paean to Jack Kirby. I'm missing a couple of the later issues, which I may try to track down in the next few days, but I noticed at some point that Mr. Layton's name does not appear on the final issue. And, being, as far as I can tell, a fairly open company about the ways things work behind the scenes, there's an explanation in the back matter of the final issue. According to this, Layton asked to have his name removed from the issue because he had differences with the editorial department over how the series should end. The editorial side had plans for a character from later in the series that must have somehow conflicted with Mr. Layton's, as the writer, original ending.

That got me thinking about The Eternals. Not the movie, but the mid-80s maxi-series from Marvel that dropped around the same time as Squadron Supreme. The last four issues of that series, originally helmed by Peter B. Gillis, were written by Walt Simonson. It's been a while since I've looked, but I imagine the excuse given for Gillis' departure is similar to that given for Layton's. I wondered, briefly, why this might be the case until I realized that by the end of the series, there would have been significant sales figures for previous issues, indicating whether or not it was worthwhile to continue the character/series somehow. And that continuity, the imposition of the shared narrative universe, on what looks to be a story with a definite end, has to cause some ruptures. Perhaps I'll look into it a bit more over the next few days as I continue Dr. Tomorrow's cool-ass history.

"Who is this mysterious man from the future who has joined forces with the allied march into Europe?"

The 40 Years of Comics Project - Day 1257: National Lampoon #29, August 1972

Another discovery I've made since procuring my underground price guide is that a lot of the big names in underground comix actually did work in National Lampoon. A few years back I got a bunch of issues of the magazine in a lot I bought of Heavy Metals and other fantasy magazines. I was never really that into them, but held on to them just in case they came in handy for something. Which, inevitably, they have.

Actually, I have rifled through them a bit. Neal Adams's "Son of God" comics are amazing, and I'm sure I could have fit them into my dissertation somehow. And there's a bunch of Jeff Jones strips in them, and Jones is an artist I absolutely adore.

So what I did today, and probably will for the foreseeable future for this magazine, is I just read the comics. There were 23 pages, plus a few single-panel gags sprinkled throughout, which is just about the same as a regular comic. The text bits are funny, but are also very, very topical. Some of the critique of Nixon that I see in the comics is perhaps a little more relatable to us nowadays, but I don't know who a lot of the figures that get fun (and occasional vitriol) poked at them are.

The comics were cool. As I noted, there's some Jeff Jones with his excellent "Idyl," some single panel and strips from Gahan Wilson, and a full "comic" inserted that's riffs on the old EC titles, but is about the life of George Wallace. And this is the problem - I don't know who that is. The comic was funny, but I was missing the context.

I think I'll poke about through these a bit more for a few days. I had planned out a full month of interesting things to read, but these mags have taken my attention. More to come...

The 40 Years of Comics Project - Day 819: Iron Man #188, November 1984

One of the really cool things about reading stories from this particular era of Iron Man is getting to see Jim Rhodes learning the ins and outs of being a super-powered adventurer. At one point in the comic, Stark notes that Rhodey might have the potential to be a better Iron Man than he ever was, as Rhodey has piloting skills that make him more at home in the air than Tony might once have been. Rhodey might be technically better, but the story being told is demonstrating how much of being a superhero is a very specific skill set that allows one to deal with the unforseeable without having it throw you for a loop.

Rhodey's not great at this. Yet.

I think the part of the comic I found most interesting was the letter column. Comics fans don't change much, it seems - they just get more venues in which to give their opinions. At least here there is editorial oversight that keeps the vitriol to a minimum. Fans are fairly united in their desire to see Stark back in the armour. Comics fans have this need, sometimes, for something original, in that there's a belief that the first version of something, particularly a superhero, is somehow intrinsically the best version. I think this betrays an odd propensity for superheroes to take on a reality that's more significant than most fictional characters. But this undercuts the ability of the creative team to propel a character to greatness. A number of the letters claim that Tony Stark is Iron Man, but I think this betrays a misrecognition about where the vitality of a character comes from. It would be more suitable to credit a creative team with being Iron Man, as they are the ones who take the iconic assemblage that is a superhero and turn it into stories that we enjoy and cleave to.

History has shown that Rhodey is every bit as good in the armour as Stark. This is a result not of anything intrinsic to the character, but to the characterization he is given by the people writing the comic. As long as the story is well-told, the inhabitant of the armour doesn't matter that much.

Not to me, anyway.

To be continued.