Comic Book Resources

“Or, to put it another way — are you a daytime hero fan or a night-time hero fan? Here’s the easy check. Quick, without thinking about it too hard, name your five favorite super-characters.”

Mine were Daredevil, Squirrel Girl, Modok, The Thing, and Psycho-Man. So what am I? Please help.

I’ve mentioned this before occasionally, and it fits with your thesis: some writers are NOT GOOD at superhero comics. Cronin loves to bash Greg Rucka, but I like him - when he’s doing crime stuff. Queen & Country is freakin’ brilliant. He doesn’t seem to do as well on mainstream superhero stuff, because he brings his own sensibilities, and that doesn’t work on the “day-time” superheroes. DC and Marvel can’t seem to figure out what kind of writers they have - if they’re hot writers, they can do ANYTHING! But they can’t, and that’s fine. I don’t mind a writer trying to stretch, but if they stretch and fail, that’s okay - they can do fine in the things they’re good at. DC and Marvel seem to think if you can write one specific kind of fiction, you can write any kind, which is ridiculous. And you touched on this and I’ve said it before - good superhero comics are DIFFICULT. Why do the Big Two think anyone can write them?

“Mine were Daredevil, Squirrel Girl, Modok, The Thing, and Psycho-Man. So what am I? Please help.”

Daytime. Every one of those but DD was from an over-the-top kind of daytime strip. It’s not JUST the character, but the environment they move in. See? Easy.

There are more things in heaven and in earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

How, exactly, do you call Spider-Man a “daytime” hero? No, he’s certainly not a “night-time” hero, but just because he cracks jokes doesn’t cover up the fact that the character has been the venue for some of the greatest tonal darkenings in mainstream comics. Is Ben Grimm daytime or night-time? Because he yuks it up with the day-glo Fantastic Four, but he’s one of the most iconically tragic figures to emerge out of the superhero genre. Even Batman isn’t a clean fit, given that he pals around with a boy who dresses like a day-glo pixie and is well-known for the Adam West/Burt Ward incarnation. There are a lot more shades of gray here than I think you’d like to admit.

I’m a Batman guy. My other favorites are Elongated Man, Thor, J’onn J’onzz, and OMAC, though…

Moose: the short answer is that the beauty of this sort of theory is that you can derive hours of entertainment arguing over who fits in where, and I and my friends have done exactly that over the last thirty-some years.

The longer answer would be to counter that the most successful versions of Spider-Man and Ben Grimm were the ones that acknowledged tragedy without wallowing in it, it’s not what people would characterize as the overall tone of the story or the force driving the strip, and then give examples. (I.e., I thought “Kraven’s Last Hunt” was an amazingly well-done story, but the tone was way too dark for Spider-Man.) Sure, there’s all sorts of sub-classifications and variances of tone, there’s no argument there. I’m talking about overall, as an approach, what works best. Remember, these are superheroes, archetypes — broad strokes.

But really I think you all would have more fun kicking it around amongst yourselves. I was careful this week to acknowledge that this is just my personal assessmernt and not necessarily shared by the universe.

But the iconic daytime heroes (Captain Marvel, Superman, Plastic Man, etc.) aren’t really tragic heroes at all. They may have experienced tragedy, but it doesn’t really shadow them or influence them to the extent that it does Daredevil or Spider-Man or the Hulk.

Now I know why Giffen’s 5YL arc on the Legion was so controversial. It was a nighttime story about a daytime group.

Now I know why Giffen’s 5YL arc on the Legion was so controversial. It was a nighttime story about a daytime group.

That’s just called “a new direction.” Pre-existing fans never like those.

Except that some of us *loved* it!

“But the iconic daytime heroes (Captain Marvel, Superman, Plastic Man, etc.) aren’t really tragic heroes at all”

How can you say that Superman isn’t shadowed by tragedy? It is his whole raison d’etat - the destruction of Krypton created Superman. However, he’s a daytime character, because he chooses to be filled with the idea that in the face of that destruction, his parents sacrificed everything to save him. Which is also tragic.

His optimism alone makes him “daytime.”

I said those characters were touched by tragedy, but that they weren’t dominated by it. So Superman lost his home planet - as an infant (or a fetus!), before he even was aware of it. Spider-Man is indirectly responsible for the deaths of his uncle and his girlfriend and is hated by much of his city just for going out and trying to do the right thing. That’s a significant difference.

I don’t buy it. Spider-man is still, by nature, more light-hearted, up-beat, and fun-loving than Superman, who always IS, WAS and will be the perenial outsider.

I don’t see one being more tragic than the other.

An’ Plastic Man died and was reborn to find himself the only sane man in an insane world.

Maybe I’m readin’ to much into it but it feels to me like the iconic Plas reflects Jack Cole’s worldview. (Of course, Cole killed himself in 1958.)

I agree that there are LESS tragic daytime heroes, like Captain Marvel (who was an orphan, but wasn’t dominated by it) and the Barry Allen Flash.

But Superman, Spider-man, and the Golden Age Plastic Man would all be more tragic.

And MORE tragic daytime heroes.

Brilliant article, Greg; you really nailed this one, IMO. I’d agree with the categories you put the characters into, even, yes, Spider-Man.

Working with your theory, I think that the thing that often makes Spider-Man and Batman a little more interesting than other super-dudes is that they do a good job of straddling both poles (and, yeah, ultimately falling into the categories you assigned to them.)

I’d hold up stories like ‘The Super-Key to Fort Superman’ and the virtual entirety of the Adam West Batman show as great examples of a fun, day-timey Batman, and stories like the deaths of Gwen Stacey and Harry Osborne (and the origin story) as examples of great, night-timey Spidey… you could also make a case that the writing and colouring on Captain America at the moment makes him a night-time hero… but these stories are really the exception to the rule. (And besides, the reason Frank Gorshin’s performances in the Adam West show hold up so well is because his Riddler was a dark SOB, despite everything else.)

So, the truly great characters can be played either way, but your theory is pretty much perfect. Oh, and I have the exact same problem with Smallville, as well. I figure they never mean for him to become Superman, so it doesn’t matter how many folks see him without the glasses, but it still bugs me.

“I said those characters were touched by tragedy, but that they weren’t dominated by it”

… as most “classic” DC heroes are. i’ve always seen MARVEL’s heroes being “darker” (= “tragic”) than DC’s, for some reason, MARVEL’s being more often than not human and just slightly more realistic (= “lives constantly dogged by tragedy and self-doubt”) in portrayal and handling, as compared to DC’s slightly sunnier more mythic approach.

(an aside: so maybe CIVIL WAR shouldn’t be that controversial of an idea, seeing as to how (maybe Millar thinks) it’s a logical natural progressive “mature” step up from MARVEL’s teenage angst approach to yesteryear’s comic books? maybe that’s why INFINITE CRISIS (et al) seems so wrong as it sullies the sunny mythic godly DC heroes?)

i mean, when you think about it, imagine Captain Marvel existing in MARVEL COMICS. stan lee’d probably play up the teeny-Billy-Batson-trapped-inside-a-god’s-body factor to high heaven, a la Peter Parker being guilty about Uncle Ben’s death, or Bruce Banner being guilty about Hulk’s tantrums, etc etc etc, instead of just simply relagating him to being a Superman knock-off, which would have made Captain Marvel “darker”, or at least, overtly “tragic” (as i always did think that, like RJackson’s Superman analysis, Captain Marvel always was tragic). i imagine we could’ve gotten better characterization out of the stories, but knowing Lee, the narrative push would still have been as cheesy as anything.

Spidey is more a nght time guy to me–but maybe that’s from my introduction through the old cartoon, and old stories that mostly happened at night.

The Spidey/Superman crossovers were fun–but I wanted one with Batman at that time…

“Kraven’s Last Hunt” is the exception that proves the rule - it stands out as a story because it is so different than what you expect for the character. On the other hand, Daredevil’s “Born Again” is remembered not as an oddity in the character’s history, but as the ultimate example of the book and its tone…

It’s gotta suck to be Rucka, and for people to only want to buy his superhero writing, which he is awful at, and not his crime stuff, which he was good at.

I really liked about the first year of Rucka’s Wonder Woman. And Elektra/Wolverine was freaking brilliant.

I asked myself the question: Am I a Batman fan or a Superman fan?

I got back the answer, “You’re a Doctor Who fan.” I’m still scratching my head as to how it applies, though.

i mean, when you think about it, imagine Captain Marvel existing in MARVEL COMICS. stan lee’d probably play up the teeny-Billy-Batson-trapped-inside-a-god’s-body factor to high heaven…

Roy Thomas actually kind of took a swing at this idea, when the Kree Captain Mar-Vell was trapped in the Negative Zone and linked to Rick Jones. Only one of them could exist on Earth at a time. This was actually the longest-lasting run of the character at Marvel, Thomas’ successors kept the idea and ran with it. Some of those, including Starlin and Englehart and Milgrom, did some really amazing stuff. It was certainly what I’d call a night-time take on the idea — not as dark as Miracleman, but much more in that end of the spectrum.

I still don’t think I want to see someone try it with the real thing though. The Dini-Ross Captain Marvel book was even pushing it, in my opinion. But your mileage may vary.

Mine are:

DOCTOR STRANGE, MAN-THING, SCARLET WITCH, BLACK KNIGHT, but the 5th fave has rotated for years.

My previous 5th’s have been (in no particular order):
Hellblazer, Starman (Jack Knight), Sandman (Gaiman), Howard the Duck, Dr. FATE, ZATANNA, Ghost Rider…
well, you get the idea.

I’m a night-time guy.
No question about it.

When the “MIDNIGHT SONS” “brand” had come about, I was THRILLED! Here were titles (and a “team”, of sorts) with publisher promotional push, so they really seemed to want to TRY the concept of “darker heroes” as a real entity as opposed to a few here and there.

Sadly, even with great concepts as Morbius, Ghost Rider(s), Nightstalkers, Book of the Darkhold, Blade & Dr. Strange…they STILL managed to ‘eff it all up. Badly. With poor writing and art.

But I was there for the ride. Front and center.

The subsequent solo fare such as Hellstorm & Druid were excellent! Then however, they slipped into nothingness.

It makes me wonder if Marvel can actually DO a DARK book properly for a sustained amount of time?

Daredevil waxes and wanes, but seems to be a fairly consistant “good, dark” title. That seems to be the only exception.
Is it because he’s more of a “super-hero”. Tights and all that?
Sure, DD has indeed had crap runs and a more “light” feel on occasion, but that usually when sales plummet, because readers know it feels “wrong”.

I’ve always HATED (I mean LOATHED) Captain America (although I liked his Kirby years - with baddies like Arnim Zola and the like).
Yet, oddly enough, since the recent “Winter Soldier” stuff, that title has been produced in a VERY “dark” manner.
The art is realistic and gritty.
(Steve Epting doing BEAUTIFUL work on that)
The storylines have been gripping.

It’s the only time in history that I’ve WANTED to read Captain America.

Suddenly, he’s a NIGHT-TIME character in his own book.

But, I still can’t bring myself to actually BUY them. I just read my buddies copies.
The trades might entice me, though.
I’m still on the fence about that.

But I wonder if Marvel can step up to the plate and really do a GOOD, NIGHT-TIME, dark character for more than a few arcs, before they screw it up.

Any thoughts?

~P~
P-TOR

“But I wonder if Marvel can step up to the plate and really do a GOOD, NIGHT-TIME, dark character for more than a few arcs, before they screw it up.”

What about The Punisher? That’s a pretty consistently dark character. You could also argue Wolverine, but I would think that’s one they screwed up…

Overall I agree with Greg’s thesis here.

How do people feel team book fit into this dynamic? An insular team book like FF is cleary a daytime book. But team titles that draw characters from other books end up mixing and matching the day and nighttime characters.

Avengers used to be a book that was clearly on the daytime side of things, but its revival as New Avengers gave us daytimers Cap, Ironman, and Spidey, nighttimers Wolverine, Luke Cage, and Jessica Drew, together with Sentry, who’s sort of a nightime take on a daytime character. Needless to say, the book, while occasionally entertaining, is a colossal mess.

The Marvel Universe as a whole has recently gotten a lot darker. I blame it all on Civil War.

Civil War forced these “daytime” heroes into “nighttime” settings. Captain America, Young Avengers, Falcon, Hercules…theyre all on the run from the law, so of course they now have to adapt to the nighttime settings.

And Iron Man, Henry Pym, Reed Richards…due to Civil War theyve all turned into darker characters as well because theyve all turned essentially evil (well, one probably could say Pym has been a darker character since he first hit Wasp). Now, theyre all fittings into a darker mode as well.

Spiderman fluxuates back and forth, but is generally a more “daytime” book.

What would X-Men be considered though? I want to say nighttime, but Im not sure.

The new X-Factor is definitly nighttime. She-Hulk is definitly daytime.

Black Panther? Daytime I guess.

In DC, where would Green Lantern (all of them) be classified? And how bout Green Arrow since it seems every writer likes to change him.

Considering that I have Tourettes, kissing cousin to OCD, you may be on to something there…

As for your theory, I’ve always held that pantheons are much better metaphors than dualities. Even if there were only two types of super hero (the solar and the lunar) there would still, by their own definition, need to be a third who represented the abscense of either. My own pet theory has five types.

You’ve already covered the Superman (solar) and Batman (lunar) types. I just want to add that most Batman types tend to be “self-made men” while most Superman types tend to be aliens or divine or super powered. Because of this I go with solar and lunar over day and night. In mythology, Solar Dieties tend to govern things like divinity, strength, and creativity while Lunar Dieties tend to govern things like esotericism and inner knowledge.

The third is the Hulk type. He represents completely unleashed ego/power/creativity. He is completely free in his emotions in a way that we all occasionally wish we could be. We all wish we could just pound the crap out of anyone who bothers us, or flip out when things don’t go our way, but to actually do it would make us a sociopath. Thats why Hulk need Bruce Banner, the human concience. Now we, the reader, can cheer on Hulk as he smashes monsters, cities and armies (symbols for everything that irritates us in life) while not having to worry about rooting for a sociopath. Occasionally Superman wanders into Hulk-type territory, but while Hulk embodies the Ego, Superman tends to more embody the potential of complete, uncontrolled creativity. Namor could be considered a prototype Hulk without the “Banner” conciense.

The fourth type is the Spider Man, the “freedom within responsibility” hero. He is somewhere in between Superman and Batman. First, lets look at his powers. Due to his agility and webbing, he is capable of almost entirely free movement in any direction. But take him out of the city and what can he do? Maybe jump and run a bit better than a human, but no longer can he “fly” the way he does throughout the city. So he only has his freedom within the confines of the city. This is key, as most Spider Man type heroes exist in cities. Spider Man’s origins and character follow similar themes, he follows a strict moral code given to him by the Uncle he feels he let die that states “with great power comes great responsibility”. Whenever he wavers from this, he will more likely than not lose some control of his powers, his freedom. Spider Man is only truly free when he is a. fullfilling his responsibilities (wether to himself or to others) and b. within the confines of a city (an apt metaphor for the man-made responsibilities of the modern world). Spider Man is a hero because we all want to find similar freedom and solace within our jobs, our relationships, and ourselves.

The last type is the X-Men type. The pure outsider. They are pretty easy to sum up, they are the ones that are hated by their community for being different. But wait, you may say, so are Spider Man and Hulk and occasionally Batman. Yes, but they are all pure individuals. The X-Men types are all defined by their relationships with each other and the outside world. Take Wolverine away from the X-Men and he’ll transition into either a Batman type or a Hulk type, depending on who is writing. X-Men types are individuals within a community.

I’ve never been able to come up with an existing hero that doesn’t fit into one of these categories. I’ve created numerous sub-cateogries such as the Talisman Superman (Superman type heroes whose powers are defined by an object rather than by themselves; Green Lantern, Iron Man, Thor) or the Symbol Superman/Batman (characters who exist solely to embody an ideal, people or theme, most often then moving into the Superman or Batman types; Captain America, Wonder Woman, Black Panther), but even those relate back to one of the 5 primal archetypes.

Matt Brady,

I don’t really consider PUNISHER to be (at least MY definition of) a DARK title.

Now before everyone gives me the “what the hell is he talking about” look (I mean more than the USUAL, anyway)… he is DEFINITELY a “NIGHT” character, as presented in the main theory.

No doubt about it.

I mean hell yeah, he’s all sorts of DARK, (in ATTITUDE) but he’s really just a violent, obsessed sociopath on a vengeance kick.

That’s more a “VIGILANTE” book than a “DARK” book. To me, anyway.
He sees bad guy, he kills bad guy.
Pretty cut and dried, really.
Of course, the good writer fills that bill of fare with MORE than just the basics to keep storylines “different” from what was published the month before, so it all “tastes” different from meal-to-meal.

I know I included DAREDEVIL in my original post, but it felt “off” when I did so. He’s also a Vigilante title.
Perhaps that’s why I added the “good, dark” and “tights wearing” caveats.

VIGILANTE books are pretty easy.
It’s alomst formulaic.
(Although a bad writer can STILL screw it up pretty badly.)

The recipe for PUNISHER is:
- Take one part BAT-MAN (for attitude, vengeance-angle and one-man’s unceasing war on crime angle)

- ONE part DAREDEVIL (for the underworld angle and any noir you want to throw in)

- a dash of WAR MACHINE *NOT Iron-Man* (for the over the top amount of ’splodo on your person)

- a touch of Nick Fury (for any foreign agents)

Mix well. Serve like revenge - cold.

Perhaps, my idea of “DARK” is more along the mystical, unknown-worlds type where the DARKNESS is more a metaphor for the shadowy world just beyond our own.

Although, DAREDEVIL has gone to hell to battle Mephisto and Blackheart. That kinda counts.

AND PUNISHER did become an undead angel of vengeance for a little while, right?
Right?
But, I probably shouldn’t have mentioned that.

Perhaps, the “shadowy world” mataphor is possibly why I also added Capt. America’s recent storylines in there as well.
Day-time superhero who is now being dragged thru some twisty-turny espionage and the like, where the lines of good and evil and what’s real and perception are being blurred.

Not mystical (unless you count the Cosmic Cube. That could easily qualify). But there were definitely some head-games going down.

So, anyway…THAT’s what I meant by my “Can MARVEL publish a DARK title consistantly?” query.
They CAN do “NIGHT” titles.
But DARK? I dunno.
Most of their mystical “dark” books get awfully fluffy after awhile.

Otherwise, you ARE absolutely correct.
PUNISHER has been handled (occasionally) well.
(At least well enough to appease his fan-base and keep an ongoing title.)

Sorry to ramble like this.
It was a minor hair-split, but I just wanted to toss that in there.

~P~
P-TOR

Article felt disjointed. I thought the end would tie to the beginning more … that Smallville is a ‘night-time’ show with a ‘day-time’ character, which puts a lot of people off to it. We don’t really want to see angsty teen Superman sneaking around saving people in his civvies. Isn’t this why the ALL-STAR interpretation is so universally praised? Because it’s so unmitigatedly ‘day-time’ with the character?

Hi! Very nice site! Thanks you very much! fbYvbroavfNhR