Comic Book Resources

I’m somewhat interested in Adventure Comics under Levitz. I’ll have to wait and see who they get on art, though.

Although, I would imagine that DC sure could do a lot worse than giving Karen Berger the job.

This may be true. I wonder if they could do worse than giving Diane Nelson the job. This might be a more interesting point to consider.

Brian:

” I would imagine that DC sure could do a lot worse than giving Karen Berger the job.”

Glad you noticed her, Brian. I’m hoping that they do at least offer it to her, but I don’t know. When Jenette Khan stepped dwon, my first thought was Paul Levitz was going to follow Khan very quickly- as in a year or less – and that Karen would get promoted to President/Publisher back then, and instead they brought in Didio from television.

We can keep our fingers crossed, though.

So is Johns off of Adventure Comics and is he taking Superboy with him? I hope not!

Johns is off Adventure Comics. That was announced a few weeks ago. Don’t know the status of Superboy.

So is Johns off of Adventure Comics and is he taking Superboy with him? I hope not!

Like Alan said, Johns and Manapul are off the book. Issue #6 is their last issue. Then the two move over to the new Flash book. Not sure who the artist joining Levitz on Adventure Comics is, nor if the book will still be a split Superboy/LOSH title or revert to just a LOSH book.

Since Johns is leaving for the new Flash book, I don’t think that Superboy is going with him. I’d think that Levitz will keep him in Adventure. I like the idea of Levitz going back to writing and editing, but I’d feel better if the new executive structure was explained today, I’d also have preferred that less was made of his resignation, and that he had been given an emeritus title like Julie Schwartz was.

My God, I hope they shove Superboy in the same locker as Scrappy Doo. I would be happy if DC would stop trying to shove these Scrappy Doos down our throats:
- Kon-El is like Kal-El … with an ATTITUDE!
- Bart Allen is like Wally West … with an ATTITUDE!
- Cassandra Cain is like Barbara Gordon … with an ATTITUDE!
- Renee Montoya is like Vic Sage … with a sassy lesbian ATTITUDE!

Enough with the Scrappy Doos, please.

While Karen Berger would be undeniable great for the position, I hope she doesn’t take it. She is a large part of what made Vertigo worked for so long. As I type this, I cannot imagine Vertigo without Berger and wouldn’t want to anytime soon.

should be interesting to see how the thing works out if nothing else Diana may wind up finaly letting smallvile fans get an appearance by batman by finaly doing away with that stupid ban that if a character has something in one media they can not show up in another without confusion of the fans. that plus maybe she will finaly find the key to getting wonder woman out of movie hell and get lobo to an r film. as for Paul will have to check out his take on adventure and maybe it means more legion also from him.

- Renee Montoya is like Vic Sage … with a sassy lesbian ATTITUDE!

If you read Mysterious Suspense #1, you’ll see that Vic Sage is already like the biggest dick in the world. He’s way more Scrappy Doo than Renee.

If you read Mysterious Suspense #1, you’ll see that Vic Sage is already like the biggest dick in the world. He’s way more Scrappy Doo than Renee.

Vic Sage was a Randian Objectivist, because Steve Ditko (his creator) was a Randian Objectivist. The Question was designed to fight for that type of morality. A lot of people disagree very strongly with what Ayn Rand had to say, so they chose to depict Sage as a jerk.

Not the classiest move, but I am fine with it.

However, Rucka taking The Question “brand”and removing the meaning that was intentionally incorporated by Ditko is deeply offensive. It is literally equivalent to someone taking his wonderful Batwoman and putting her into a relationship with Kyle Rayner. He destroyed the intent of the character’s creator.

@ Brian Cronin:

Sorry for thread-jacking. The Scrapy-Doo problem at DC drives me up a wall and the mention of Superboy remaining in Adventure Comics made me see red.

Paul Levitz is a class act and wonderful writer. I wish him the very best.

Denny O’Neill had already taken the Randian stuff out of the Question well before Greg Rucka got a hold of him.

Also, wow, Dean, do you think you could make yourself sound any more like a cantankerous old nerd?

So what’s the countdown until Levitz/Giffen Legion nostalgia project? Five minutes?

I have a healty amount of respect for Levitz and his comics career, but honestly…the leadership at both Marvel and DC needs some new blood and fresh ideas.

Also, wow, Dean, do you think you could make yourself sound any more like a cantankerous old nerd?

Personally, I don’t see what similarities Montoya, Superboy, Impulse, and Cass all share that they can be equally written off as “their mentors with attitude”.

I guess Superboy had an attitude 16 years ago when he first appeared, but that hardly seems like an epidemic.

I’d say they are all more Poochie than Scrappy.

Best of luck to Paul, his run on the Legion (not just the Giffen issues, but also with Steve Lightle and Greg Larouque) is one of my favorite runs.

- Kon-El is like Kal-El … with an ATTITUDE!
- Bart Allen is like Wally West … with an ATTITUDE!
- Cassandra Cain is like Barbara Gordon … with an ATTITUDE!
- Renee Montoya is like Vic Sage … with a sassy lesbian ATTITUDE!

Kon-El, yeah.
Bart Allen – maybe just – but only since he hecame Kid Flash
Cassandra Cain and Renee Montoya – no. Not in the slightest.

Also, wow, Dean, do you think you could make yourself sound any more like a cantankerous old nerd?

It’s a legitimate observation and complaint. As long as he’s not insulting anyone, unlike you in the above comment with the ad hom, I don’t see what’s wrong with it.

I’d say they are all more Poochie than Scrappy.

Yes and no. Scrappy is considered by many to be the original Poochie.

A lot of people HATED Scrappy for the same reasons people hate Poochies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrappy-Doo#History_and_criticism

I have to say, I’ve been floored by the reaction (especially but not exclusively from Rich Johnston) to Paul Levitz’s “departure.”

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems way too late at this point to retroactively decide that Paul Levitz was a hero, holding up the direct market and fighting for Truth, Justice, and the American Comic Store Way. Particularly without even acknowledging the years of quite-effectively portraying him as a sinister, censoring, comic-pulping corporate villain (again, led by but by no means exclusive to Johnston).

Assuming, just for a second, that Levitz really has been an unsung hero all these years: where’s the shame? Where’s the remorse from these pundits who failed to interrupt their excoriation of the man, to mention this all-redeeming heroic efforts, for one moment while he still had the big job?

Yeah but T, Poochie is Scrappy. TO THE EXTREME! lol

Dean, you forget about another DC Scrapy/Poochie: Blue Beetle.

Bart Allen – maybe just – but only since he hecame Kid Flash

You must not have read his early appearances. I’d say pre-Kid Flash, he was even MORE obnoxious in this regard. When he was Impulse, his whole shtick was “Kid Flash with an attitude.” That’s why his whole motto was “Don’t dare call me Kid Flash!” (because I’m SO much cooler)

And Montoya….definitely a horrible bastardization of the character. Because conservatism annoys modern writers so much they have to always find new ways to bastardize Vic Sage….conspiracy theorist in JLU cartoon, a Zen Buddhist under O’Neil, whatever weird take they gave him in his 2000s Metropolis based series, and finally offing him altogether for Rucka’s sassy pet lesbian.

DC is horrible.

My big question is now that there are outsiders being brought into the fold to oversee DC, how long will Didio last. I figure higher ups will now start paying more attention to his incompetence?

Yeah but T, Poochie is Scrappy. TO THE EXTREME! lol

Well played. I can’t beat that.

I’m not worried for Paul; he’s a talented and well-liked individual, he’ll do OK. It’s DC that I’m worried for… it has only gotten worse since Didio came along, becoming “Hollywood DC” (“More violence! More sex!!”) What if they insert someone else like him? Or even Didio himself?

My big question is now that there are outsiders being brought into the fold to oversee DC, how long will Didio last. I figure higher ups will now start paying more attention to his incompetence

I’ve been wondering that too. It could go either way. Didio comes from a TV background, so he may fit well in DC’s new role as “Hollywood Entertainment Production Machine.” Then again, it could come down to how well he plays ball with the new management. I’m hoping they actually look at what DC is publishing and realize there’s been way more crap than gold being produced by DC these days…

You must not have read his early appearances. I’d say pre-Kid Flash, he was even MORE obnoxious in this regard. When he was Impulse, his whole shtick was “Kid Flash with an attitude.” That’s why his whole motto was “Don’t dare call me Kid Flash!” (because I’m SO much cooler)

I’ve read a little Young Justice and about the first year of Impulse. To me he was much more of a fun loving, short attention-spanned goofball character than one with any particular attitude.

And Montoya….definitely a horrible bastardization of the character. Because conservatism annoys modern writers so much they have to always find new ways to bastardize Vic Sage….conspiracy theorist in JLU cartoon, a Zen Buddhist under O’Neil, whatever weird take they gave him in his 2000s Metropolis based series, and finally offing him altogether for Rucka’s sassy pet lesbian.

You could argue that Montoya is a bastardisation of the original character from the cartoon (though I think she’s a vast improvement – though I prefered her as a detective in Gotham Central), but she’s not a bastardisation of Vic Sage. She’s a different character who is carrying on his legacy.

I’m not familiar with the JLU or Ditko incarnations of Vic Sage so I can’t comment on that so much, but I think the motivation behind the personality that Denny O’Neil gave him was that Denny O’Neil wanted to write about all that Zen stuff. I’m glad he did. Those are some great comics!

To me, every Rucka-written Montoya story from Gotham Central to the Question is unbearable in its pet character Scrappy/Poochiness. I hate them all.

Also, wow, Dean, do you think you could make yourself sound any more like a cantankerous old nerd?

Probably not, but I am posting on a comic book message board. I kinda figured those three traits were assumed.

It would make sense to offer the job to Berger, as she’s been a solid employee for DC for years, but I frankly don’t see her being interested in the job. As far as I know, her interest in mainstream superheroes (still the bulk of DC’s output) is practically nil. She’s been running Vertigo since the early 90s for a reason. That’s where her sensibilites lie.

None of this is intented as a criticism of Ms. Berger, BTW. No real reason she SHOULD be into superheroes. Different strokes for different folks.

Dean, you forget about another DC Scrapy/Poochie: Blue Beetle.

Good point.

Blue Beetle is a pretty good example of why the Scrappy/Poochie syndrome bugs me. The instinct to make the DCU more diverse is a good one. More latino, black and asian superheroes would be great. I like the new Batwoman and would welcome some diversity in the way female superheroes are depicted.

However, killing off a white male and giving their identity to a “legacy” character for the stated purpose of diversity is a horrible idea. It implies an “either/or” mentality that is soooo seventies that it makes me want to scream. It is offensive on about a dozen different levels.

It is also a genuinely bad idea from a story-telling perspective. It is needlessly confusing. I read online that Stephanie Brown is the fourth Batgirl. Fourth. She is the second to be rolled out with some big mystery about who is under the mask. Now, I am person that prefers Barbara Gordon in the role of Oracle and think that putting the name sake of GirlWonder.org into that role was a smart decision. But, maybe someone should be giving some thought to what makes the Batgirll character special slapping an ugly variation of the suit on someone else.

Couple that laziness with the tendency to make these legacy character “diversity hires” and you get a strong tendency toward the non-straight, while male variations on these characters being clearly inferior. My guess is that is the opposite of the intended effect. If Greg Rucka wants to write a Hispanic lesbian superhero, then he should create one from the ground up. There should should be Asians who don’t have the number “two” or “three” after their code name.

I extended that to include being younger, because being under 40 is treated like just another diversity demo to patronize. Kon-El was conceived as a pathetic attempt to present Superboy … to the EXTREME. Fifteen years later, he is still the same damn character. The only difference is that how the middle-aged white dudes at DC perceive “kids today” has changed. I say that as a middle white dude.

Again, if you want to create a character that appeals to Gen Y kids, then you probably shouldn’t start with nostalgia for your Baby-Boomer youth.

If Greg Rucka wants to write a Hispanic lesbian superhero, then he should create one from the ground up

Or at least if you absolutely are deadset on recreating the Hispanic lesbian as the Question, which I think is a lame idea any way you cut it, at least let it make some thematic sense. For example how interesting would it be if Montoya was a super-extreme hard right ideologue conservative? A Hispanic lesbian who is a hard-right, free-market Randian objectivist? At least a gay minority conservative extremist, while derivative, would be DAMN interesting and almost surreal. But a Hispanic lesbian Question that has basically zero views on philosophy, has no strident views about ANY type of ideology, no larger causes to champion, just another cookie-cutter cops and robbers martial artist without powers with the only things notable about her being her ethnicity and sexual orientation? Tokenism at its worst.

Also, if you want to see Impulse at his Scrappiest, look at these pages from some of his first appearance, one from Zero Hour and the other from an early Flash storyline:

http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/06/27/naming-impulse/

ATTITUDE! To the extreme!!

Thankfully once he got his own series this was toned down some.

Re: T — Although they went with more of a Rorscatch-ish take on the Question in the JLU cartoon they included some of the original Ditko take on the character at varying points. He even got to say “A is A” in an episode.

I don’t know… if you don’t like what DC is doing, stop reading their books and write letters telling them how you feel. And pick up the older issues and collected editions of stuff you do like. No sense in griping about the company going in a direction you don’t like. For what it’s worth though, I think killing off the Question and replacing him with Montoya was a big mistake for both characters. Doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy some of the new Montoya Question stories and the older Vic Sage stuff.

But I strongly disagree with the assessment that the new Blue Beetle is a Poochie. He’s a great character and this is coming from someone who adored the character Ted Kord.

Have a good day.
John Cage

Is Kyle Rayner a Scrappy-Poochie? How many more can we name?

To cut DC some slack, Marvel went through a similar phase in the 90s with War Machine, Thunderstrike, US Agent, etc. But none of them had staying power, and many were intended to be temporary from the start.

I don’t know… if you don’t like what DC is doing, stop reading their books and write letters telling them how you feel.

I have stopped reading their books.

And pick up the older issues and collected editions of stuff you do like.

I do.

No sense in griping about the company going in a direction you don’t like.

Here’s where I disagree. Why does it make no sense to gripe about something? Why is griping about something any less valuable a contribution to discussion than raving about something? If it’s just name-calling, ad hom attacks or mean-spirited slander I agree but if we’re criticizing substantive content contructively why is it any more senseless than any other type of commenting?

Re: T — Although they went with more of a Rorscatch-ish take on the Question in the JLU cartoon they included some of the original Ditko take on the character at varying points. He even got to say “A is A” in an episode.

Yes they had things like “A is A,” but that’s mainly because McDuffie writes with fanfic tendencies and wanted to put in an easter egg, it’s not because he really was invoking and paying homage to the true objectivist spirit of the saying. It’s a fanwank easter egg.

A side question…er…not about the Question.

Is Objectivism really all that compatible with conservatism? I always thought it included precepts about religion, sexuality, and even to some extent the notion of risk-reward economics that would alienate a fair chunk of self-described conservatives. Similarly, she opposed traditionalism, which I’d always understood to be central and even fundamental to most working definitions of “conservative.”

It’s anti-Communist and pro-capitalism, sure, but in few ways is it particularly conservative. But Rand’s emphasis on the auteur and the romantic capitalist hero — Rand, not I, applied that word “Romantic” — also just as often blames any sort of committee — not just government interference, but, say, a board of directors that opposes some genius’s individual ideas. Would a free-market purist oppose work-for-hire contracts, for example? Objectivists often do; ask Ditko.

Is Kyle Rayner a Scrappy-Poochie?

Cusp-y. The manga inspired costume certainly had the smell of Poochie, so did the girlfriends in the ‘fridge. It was all very EXTREME! However, Kyle does have his own identity. He isn’t hanging around Ferris Aircraft trying to be just like Hal (except with snowboards), or changing his name to … ahem … “Kyle Jordan”

How many more can we name?

I’d say Ryan Choi is the Scrappy-Atom. He wears a variation on the Ray Palmer costume, worked at the same job and follows him around like a puppy in “Cry for Justice”. Moreover, you know the identity is just on loan.

Jason Todd was the Scrappy-Robin.

Chris Kent is the Scrappy-Nightwing.

Tim Drake is weird case. He is almost like a Bizzaro Scrappy. Maybe that is why people liked him.

Cassie Sandsmark is also a weird case. She stated very un-scrappy, but inched further toward the line with every year.

How this all relates to Paul Levitz ending his career is that the good idea to make the DCU more diverse was his. He set the goal of putting more different types of people into DC Comics. The bad implementation was Dan DiDio. He was the genius that signed off on the barrage of Scrappy Doos.

Short answer: objectivism fits in better with some schools of conservatism than with others.

Jason Todd was the Scrappy-Robin.

I’m not sure if Jason Todd was created as a Scrappy-Robin, since as he was first created more as a straight out clone of Dick Grayson rather than a “Dick Grayson…WITH ATTITUDE!” He kind of morphed into a Scrappy-Poochie later on post-Legends though.

While I don’t like a lot of replacement heroes (with exceptions, like Jaime Reyes), I can offer a defense:

In the ’50s, DC’s editors, writers, and artists reimagined almost all of their super-heroes to fit the times. The Flash, Green Lantern, and others were given new identities (unconnected to their predecessors) and costumes, and sci-fi origins. Their secret identities were upstanding professionals and authority figures, in keeping with the times (late-’50s) and audience (children).

In the ’90s, teen culture was prominent. Young children were drifting away from comics, leaving a (mostly) adolescent audience. While I can’t argue that there was an air of tokenism in DC’s multi-cultural replacement heroes, the U.S. was more diverse demographically, and popular entertainment was reflecting that diversity more than ever. DC was looking to capture their perceived audience, much as they had in the Fifties. No wonder Kon-El, Kyle Rayner, et al, were EXTREME!, slackers, and reflecting greater ethnic diversity.

Of course, the times were different and, most importantly, the caliber of writers and artists weren’t the same as they had been in the ’50s. Additionally, Marvel and Image were around to tap into the zeitgeist more effectively. In a perfect world, the writers and artists who handled the replacement characters would have advanced their characters with more care and in a more interesting fashion (a la John Rogers and Rafael Albequerque in Blue Beetle). I have no attatchment to Hal Jordan, Ray Palmer, Barry Allen, or Alan Scott, Al Pratt, and Jay Garrick. I wouldn’t mind seeing the younger generation take over, and allowed to grow into better characters (see: the difference between Impulse in Flash and Impulse in his own series) . I think the generational turnover works in the DC Universe, as long as it’s done right.

the writers and artists who handled the replacement characters would have advanced their characters with more care and in a more interesting fashion (a la John Rogers and Rafael Albequerque in Blue Beetle).

I think Blue Beetle was the worst of the bunch. Especially the teen banter. Geez was it bad. Especially considering Bendis was doing the exact same shtick so much better in Ultimate Spider-Man. Reading Ultimate Spider-Man with cheesy jokes and spanglish had zero appeal for me.

@ Mike Loughlin:

I would have no problem with DC doing a hard re-boot of the entire multiverse and finding out that the re-launched Green Lantern was black, the new Blue Beetle was a Latino and the new Atom was Asian. However, that is not what DC did.

Instead, they introduced those characters as legacy versions that work alongside the Silver Agers and/or their contemporaries, who just so happen to be still young enough to be in the role themselves. There are currently four generations of active DC heroes. They are all supposed to be equal, but some of them are pretty clearly more equal than others.

If Wally West can be the lead of the best mainstream DC series of the ’90s and get moved aside by a “star” writer on a trip down memory lane, then none of these “legacy” heroes own the identities they’ve inherited. That makes their creators give them more insistent personalities.

By insistent, I mean obnoxious.

By the way, I’m not just prejudging the book without trying it. I gave it 7 issues, I just couldn’t take the bad banter and narration captions. His “voice” just sounded like the tye of person I wanted to punch in the face. But with spanglish.

Dean,

Oh yeah, I agree that DC botched the execution. Too many Flashes, for example, dilutes the concept. A better-written Kyle Rayner might have made me like the character. If the characters were allowed to grow organically, instead of their collective Nineties-ness being shoved down readers throats, they might have succeeded. I think Morrison’s JLA did a good job of balancing the older heroes with the new. Unfortunately, the title was a nearly-lone ship in a sea of blah (Flash, Impulse, and Starman being the others). I feel sort of sad when I see DC bringing back its previous generation of super-heroes. It seems to be working out, saleswise (I read a few issues of Johns’s Green Lantern, including the Sinestro War, and was unimpressed, but it has a big enough following), but it feels so backwards.

T.,

The teen slang in Blue Beetle grated on me, too, but I think the series improved tremendously as it went along. I ended up caring about the characters more than I expected to, and I really liked Albequerque’s artwork.

Different strokes for different folks, of course. Out of curiosity, not being snarky: were there any ’90s or ’00s DC comics that you liked?

@ Mike Loughlin:

I’ve read and enjoyed Geoff Johns on GREEN LANTERN. He found a great hook when decided that the book was about will overcoming fear. However, he is like the comic book version of M. Night Shyamalan in that he has turned his break-though into a really dreary formula. The problem is that GL is fundamentally different than either the FLASH, SUPERMAN or even the LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES.

Speaking of the LOSH, Levitz has already signed on for the nostalgia tour. I hope it winds up better than the other times legendary creators have come back to their signature titles.

Mike, in the late 80s I became almost exclusively DC. Actually, in the 90s when Marvel went into its faux-Image phase all the way thru Heroes Return I quit Marvel altogether.

Dring that time I loved the Giffen DeMatteis JLA, Superman (pre-Loeb), New Titans, Robin occasionally, the Knightfall books, Superboy during Kesel’s first run, the Morrison JLA, early issues of Kyle Rayner GL, some Wonder Woman, Messner-Loebs and then Waid’s Flash and a bunch of other stuff I can’t remember. I also liked Waid/Ramos Impulse after they changed him from Poochie Kid Flash to lovable but well-meaning dumb kid.

Tried Connor Hawke Green Arrow but he just really really got on my nerves. Was he a Scrappy-Poochie too or just a really annoying Mary Sue? Anyway he was just really annoyingly perfect to me.

Also, I quit when Jeannette Kahn left. It just got really bad to me under Paul Levitz. When Didio came on I ended up dropping everything at DC altogeter eventually.

Because conservatism annoys modern writers so much

Can’t they just be annoyed by objectivism? I mean, I could see writing conservative character, even if I don’t agree with their views, but I can’t see writing an objectivist as anything other than I mindless narcissist.

Ted – that’s a valid point. I just used the umbrella term conservatism because I’ve rarely seen it portrayed positively, even the non-objectivism variety, such as Hawkman in his debates with Green Arrow, Hawk from Hawk and Dove whenever it wasn’t being written by Steve Ditko and others.

Also, while the actual higher ups in Objectivism were indeed narcissists and somewhat loopy, the actual philosophy is not really that crazy. For example in the anti-hippie story with the Question and Blue Beetle or the Mr. A comics I’ve read, there are solid philosophies and thought processes there, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. Objectivism is the principle that human knowledge and values are objective: not subjective and created by one’s thoughts but rather determined by the nature of reality, to be discovered by man’s mind. Hence “A is A,” and the endless splitting of hairs, grey areas and moral relativism that many engage in just excuse evil and give it room to grow. Then there are the parts that deal with enlightened self-interest, the idea that by doing the best one can for himself and not requiring others to live for you either, it helps society as a whole. Similar to Adam Smith’s “invisible hand of capitalism.”

Now one is totally free to disagree with it. I myself find it a little too inflexible myself, but there are plenty of interesting stories and dilemmas one can derive from such philosophies that don’t revolve around mindless narcissism. They raise some very interesting points. Now a lot of prominent Objectivists especially in Ayn Rand’s inner circle were mindless narcissists and promiscuous hypocrities, which people use to discredit the actual tenets of objectivism, but the same goes for a lot of the hippies and counterculture leftists of the 60s. A lot of them in their real lives engaged in a lot of mindless narcissism, drug fueled sex and hypocrisy but still generated a lot of engaging ideas that I could, if writing a progressive liberal character, could entertain seriously without writing them as insane lunatics.

T – I guess so, but then I would respond that neither critical realism, moral objectivism nor enlightened self-interest are ideas that are original to Ayn Rand, nor did Rand seem to develop them in any significant way. All Rand seem to do was take these ideas and add a “you’re brilliant, and if you’re not successful it’s because communistic parasites are holding you back, and if you are successful it’s all thanks to you and no-one else” to it. I mean, do any objectivists read The Fountainhead and say “I’m not Howard Roark, I’m one of the people holding him back.” We can’t all be Howard Roark, and I’m not sure that objectivism provides anything for the rest of us.

If you were to have a character that followed the principles of, say, Immanuel Kant and Adam Smith, then you would have a more interesting character, one that I would personally be interested to write even though I don’t necessarily agree with these thinkers (Kant more than Smith) and one who would act largely the same as an objectivist. The problem for me is that a character who follows Rand specifically seems to me to say that the character merely hasn’t read widely enough to realise that it has all been said before, and better, or has read widely but hasn’t found the ego-stroking that they need anywhere else, and that is the kind of character I don’t think I could respect.