Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities Lardy's Roundtable (Gym'll's Ed.): Grant Morrison

I suppose its a matter of degree, but I tend to see the color-spectrum stuff at the core as just a matter of taking existing concepts and linking them together (as in "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if GL's green energy, Sinestro's yellow energy, the Star Sapphire's power, and Black Hand's power were all manifestations of a single underlying set of forces? And then we could add more for the remaining colors?") rather than a really radical new idea.

I'd disagree there, Edie. Yes, he's doing something with the spectrum that was ripe for the taking, but the bottom line is no one else thought to go there before! If you can find a way to expand and enrich a hero's mythology without totally trampling on everything that ever went before, I'd say that's pretty inventive. As you say, elements were always there, but he found a really cool way to link them all and add lots of new stuff in the process.

You might argue that there was a good bit of revisionism, especially in his retelling of Hal's origin story, but it was more organic than, say, making Hal a drunk was back when Giffen retold it. In the process he explored answers to mysteries that we'd never even though about like why was Abin Sur in a ship when he crashed on Earth or why the GL oath might be worded the way it is. That's a lot of creativity and imagination at work there that feels a lot more organic than "everything you thought you knew was wrong!"

Yeah, Geoff's a little bit country, but he's also a little bit rock n' roll!

I'm still not convinced. It just seems to me there's a massive difference between

(1) "Hey, here's what we'll do next: We'll have a guy show up who used to be a Green Lantern, but now he's turned evil! And let's give him his own power ring that runs off yellow energy!"

and

(2) "Hey, there's all these different Green Lantern villains/characters with different energy-colored powers... why don't we link 'em all together! And make up some new colored energies?"

The Silver Age (and much of the Bronze Age for that matter) was about creating the dots, Johns's stuff is still primarily about connecting them.

Whilst gushing about how much I loved Kurt Busiek's 'back to the basics' stuff over at Marvel (particularly with the Avengers, and his use of older characters in the Thunderbolts), I noted that he got a lot of criticism for the exact same reasons that Johns is getting here.

He seems really good at playing with stuff that other people have dropped, and tying stuff together (the whole Avengers Forever thing could be seen as a parallel to the this Emo Spectrum thing, taking past stuff lying around and tying it all together with a shiny bow), but not so stellar at creating new and exciting things.

A decade after the fact, none of the new characters Busiek created have 'stuck.' Will any of the new characters Johns has created still be around a decade from now? Sure, Sinestro will still be around, but he's hardly a Johns creation...

For all that he's reviled, even Liefield can point to the enduring popularity of Deadpool, almost 20 years later, and say, 'Ha-Ha!'

Yeah, I'm one of those who enjoyed the HELL outta Busiek's Avengers run (except for that crazy Kang story--WTF?!?), so maybe that informs my comics reading tastes...at least with regards to the big icons. I'm a guy who likes really dark stuff, too, like Walking Dead and a lot of Garth Ennis's stuff. But when it comes to heroic characters like the Avengers and those DC characters we've been discussing, I like a certain optimism and heroic attitude to the stories. Busiek filled the bill very nicely with most of his Avengers stuff.

I've already said in this thread I like Geoff John's work and wish he could do *more* DC titles. But I have to say I agree with a lot of criticisms EDE and Stealth have put forward on Johns.

Do I think he's a great writer whose work I will buy? Yes.

Do I think sometimes fandom gives him a pass on his many flaws because he fulfills their fandom fantasies? Yes.

I think he's good but there is a lot of room for him to get better. While he might be one of the best writers at DC right now, that isn't saying *that* much. I would not put him in my "top 10 best writers writing comic books right now" list. I can name at least 10 other writers creating comic books that are putting on better work more consistently.

In the long run, I hope he continues to grow as a writer, stops focusing too much on the shared universe/continuity end of things and creates some great stories. He's certainly young enough and expresses a joy in making comics. I'm optimistic about what the future holds for him. But I don't want to give him the Nobel Prize 3 months after he's been elected President.

I also agree with Eryk that Morrison is more the heir to the Silver Age in the notion that the Silver Age was all about "creation" and "new ideas".

People who focus on the fact that a few Golden Age concepts were re-imagined are missing the point and haven't been paying attention. That wasn't what the Silver Age was about. It was about the exploration of new things, people, concepts and stories. It felt unlimited in the scope of what could come. Morrison captures this grand sense.

Wow! Now, that's pretty harsh! I'm pretty sure that he would make MOST fans' Top Ten lists very easily and would probably be at or near the top of most of those lists. I know in my case I could probably list several writers who are doing better stuff, but he would probably be put above, say, Chew's John Layman simply because I've only read one thing by Layman. The large body of quality work by Johns would probably put him at or near the top for me.

So you stepped in it, Cobester--name 10 writers currently putting out comics who you'd rank higher than Geoff Johns along with at least a brief explanation! I'd like to see this list!

...and Rob Leifeld cannot be on that list...

Like I didn't know that was coming.

Of course I never would have said that if I didn't already pick my ten. I know you too well for that, Lardy.

But first: I don't think it was too harsh. I think Geoff does a great job, he's just not the best of the best right now.

(1) Matt Wagner – Madame Xanadu and Zorro have been nothing short of excellent, of far superior quality than all of John’s work as a “storytelling” is concerned. Green Hornet: Origins has already started that way too. Plus, Wagner has a plethora of other comics to back it up.

(2) Grant Morrison – while not everything he does it the best thing ever, more of his work achieve “perfection” in my mind than Geoff’s does. He also brings a level of creation to his projects that Geoff sometimes achieves—while Grant almost always does it.

(3) Darwyn Cooke – Cooke is far superior in getting right into character depth with as few wasted moments as possible and making his characters extremely iconic in the process. He does the things Geoff does but in less time and far more consistently.

(4) Bill Willingham – Sure, Geoff writes several more comics than Bill does, but Willingham in all fairness writes more characters thane even Geoff! With Fables, Willingham has a cast of 50 or so characters who each have distinct personalities that continually surprise the readers. He consistently writes excellent stories too—so much that the stories are just as good as the characters. And his series has been going for like 100 issues now. Fables packs more of a punch in a single issue than all of Blackest Night’s 8 issues.

(5) Fred Van Lente – I meant it when I said Van Lente is doing incredible work at Marvel. If you haven’t heard of him by now, you’re really missing out. His Spider-Man stories are better than any others since probably Roger Stern. I’m not kidding. I’m not exaggerating. And the others series who feel his touch, from Incredible Hercules to whatever, are all top quality.

(6) Ed Brubaker – I know some of you get down on Ed, but I think that’s frankly just hog-wash. Bru is Marvel’s best writer right now and he is much more consistent than Geoff, Bendis or the other top names. He’s the best crime comic book writer since, hell, Lev Gleason. His stories are always poignant no matter what the scale of the story is, and he doesn’t pull any punches per the noir tradition.

(7) DnA – Just like Geoff, Dan and Andy don’t always get it right, but they do much more so than Geoff in my mind. Even more, while they use traditional characters like Geoff does, there is a sense of progression and newness Geoff doesn’t have. They are not hamstrung by this unrealistic desire to restore a company to its glory days of 1982. They tell great, solid sci-fi series. And they do it with two consistently good monthly titles (really three since there are so many minis—and recently, four).

(8) Robert Kirkman – I can already tell the response some of you will give me: “yeah, I think Kirkman’s great too, but he’s not on Geoff’s level yet.” Really? I mean, seriously? Where then, is Geoff’s Walking Dead? He doesn’t have one. Because he just hasn’t gone there yet. He might be comfortable with the DCU and want to play in it, but he then really needs to make the decision: do I want to have an ‘anything goes style’ (which he sometimes writes to) or do I want a ‘restore DC to its greatness’ style (which he also sometimes writes to). His overall body of work reveal a conflict in Geoff internally; Kirkman once had this conflict and overcame it IMO.

(9) Garth Ennis – I’m a big fan of Ennis and I can write you a 20 page paper on it, but I’ll sum it up: he takes risks; he has black sense of humor that pulls you right in; he creates character relationships that end up meaning more to me sometimes than relationships I see between real life people—and are more realistic too. And his storylines can make you laugh one page and then make you marvel at how moving they were. And then you think about them constantly after. I can’t say that for a lot of Geoff’s work.

(10) Gail Simone – Many point to this idea that Gail is also trapped in pleasing fanboy sensibilities but I think that’s a bunch of bull-crap myself. Gail’s works are not written for anyone other than herself these days, because you can see that in the risks she takes in every issue of Secret Six, which could easily offend a lot of people. Her Birds of Prey shows she can write characters with the best of them.

There are others I can mention too: I think Jeff Parker and Greg Pak are more reliable than Geoff but you can point out they’re still too “new” and don’t have Geoff’s body of work (which doesn’t necessarily help him—see: Infinite Crisis). Same goes for Jason Aaraon.

JMS is a writer putting out better stuff these days (Thor & Brave and Bold), but I know many would point to his Spider-Man stories but at this point I think it was pretty obvious Joe Q and Co. were the ones who pushed things in that bad direction. Removing those awful story decisions aside, most of his Spidey work was technically quite good.

There are writers who aren’t putting out enough consistent work to really be a competitor (Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, etc.), so I took them off the table.

Again, I like Geoff’s work and I don’t think I’m being that harsh about it. But I feel there must be a counter-part to the never-ending stream of Geoff Johns praise on the internet, especially by fans of Geoff.

You'll note I specifically left Bendis off the list, and PAD too.

One more thing: go ahead and make your arguements on the writers. I know Gail & Fred Van Lente will be the easy ones for people to claim Geoff does a better job than (and again I'll say specifically about Van Lente, you all don't know what the hell you're talking about ).

And let me even try to see one of you claim Johns does better stories than Cooke. You might as well leave Legion World permanently and quit comics

Bendis annoys the crap out of me, he's so bad, and yet so loved by mysterious 'fans.'

PAD just makes me cry. He has such amazing potential, and yet cannot tell a superhero story to save his life, it seems... Tons of intriguing storylines started, and almost always ended with a limp non-ending with the villain either just walking away, or giving a speech and walking away. Argh!

Re: PAD, It's very sad to see a once-great writer getting further and further away from his prime.

I sense a post in the re-reading thread coming...

Mr. Cooke is a given Cobie.

As far as Fred Van Lente goes...he could be writing the ultimate Spidey stories, but the fact remains that it isn't really spidey. So I'll never read them. I tried a few trades from the debacle on...really did nothing for me after reading the aborted attempt to derail Peters life.

Spidey would NEVER have made a "deal with a devil" to save anyone. It's not his fault...or maybe not totally JMS's either (Joey Q. wanted it done...but JMS wrote a horrid story, and yes I read it at the library.)

I have to point out the argument for anyone who says they won't read Spidey because of Brand New Day, many can easily say the same thing about the Legion, Green Lantern and most specifically, the Flash, all of which have been influenced by Geoff.

I wish Reboot would visit here and make that argument.

I won't pick up Spidey because I'd have to buy three (or more) titles a month, not because of OMD/BND. I've thought about picking up trades, but the sheer number of them created by so many issues being cranked out is just daunting. Also, add in that the quality is inconsistent by definition because there are so many different people writing. Certainly reviews I've read (including Cobie's) seem to bear that fact out.

As for your list, it's definitely different from what mine would be. Some I disagree with, mostly mildly, and others I just have no opinion about because I've read very little or nothing by them. Cooke wouldn't make my list because I simply haven't read anything at all by him, for example. It's not that I don't want to or never intend to, but I can't give a guy props sight unseen.

Anyhow, I'll react to your list (and possibly shoot back one of my own at some point) later, but for now, I gotta mow the lawn!

Looking forward to it! And of course, not only are all lists subjective, but all of us certainly can only list writers we have more than just a passing familiarity with (why I didn't seriously include, say, Dave Sim).

The Spidey/having to buy 3 comics a month argument is a good one that I (and I don't think anyone) can refute--well played Lardy

The only writer on Cobie's list that would make my top whatever list would probably be Bill Willingham. His Elementals work was some of the best stuff I've read, even if it was hardly 'superhero' fare at times.

Plus he gets points for making a joke about cunningulus and getting away with it.

Morningstar, apparently alone in bed - "That was amazing!"
Boyfriend, coming up into the panel - "For you maybe. I think I dislocated my jaw..."

Well, both Kirkman's THE WALKING DEAD and Simone's SECRET SIX are in my personal top 5... and Johns deosn't currently have a series I consider my own top 5... so, yeah.

To clarify: those aren't my top 10 writers. I'd have to give that a lot more thought and that might take awhile.

Those are just 10 writers I think are doing better work than Johns. I think I could probably 5 more if I tried.

I think Geoff is taking quite a beating here. he's doing a job, and has been asked several times (or at the very least gotten approval) to figure out and smooth out the histories of several very convoluted characters.

The violence that he does has gotten to me on occassions, but no more so than any other creator out there.

Ever since the first couple issues of super hero comics, writers have been reinventing the wheel. He does it better than some, worse than others.

He seems to be happy right now to play in the DC sandbox. He seems to have a respect for what come before, and trying to take them into the future. Didio seems to be fixated onthe silver/bronze age characters, and Geoff has a great knowledge of them.

He's not my favorite writer at the moment either, but he's up there, because I enjoy his work.

I'll fall on Dev's side here. I personally really enjoyed BLACKEST NIGHT and am looking forward to BRIGHTEST DAY.

And all this without reading one issue of GL.

Well, I don't want to be known as anti-Geoff. Like I said, I'm actually a fan and buy all of his work.

This is like the middle arguing against the top. It's not two opposite sides arguing. I just don't think he's the best of the best. He's good, though. I look forward to him continuing to improve over time.

PS - I rank Bendis right next to Geoff. Different writer all together, but same type of argument. I think he's very good. But he has enough flaws--I wouldn't rank him in my top 10 either, but I think he does quality work for the most part.

Perhaps its because the two are so prominent in their respective companies, it puts them in this position? Obviously, if you don't agree with my classifications, you wouldn't be able to comment on that. I think perhaps because they make such an effort to guide their respective companies it puts them in positions where they are forced to do things in their comics that make them occasionally sub-par? No real way to know if that's true or not.