Quarter Bin 79 "Black Canary, Cerebus, Ultimate Daredevil & Elektra, Drax, Earth X, and Geoff Johns"

More comics from a real quarter bin!

Black Canary #6 (DC)
From February 2016.
So apparently the previous Black Canary I picked up from this sale section is among the back issues I haven't talked about here.  I'm beginning to form the opinion that Brenden Fletcher's Black Canary is DC's equivalent of Matt Fraction's Hawkeye over at Marvel.  This was a bold creative risk, but one that took the more intimate approach than is typical for bold creative risks at the Big Two.  Fletcher's Black Canary is probably what the Batgirl of Burnside, the creative revamp that inspired the DCYou approach that led to Fletcher's Black Canary, was supposed to be.  This is a version of a classic DC character that kind of ditched the superhero model altogether and made it into a rock band fronted by Black Canary  Granted, I don't think rock bands in 2016 are quite what they would have been, say twenty years ago, but as a creative vision, it's still one of the most interesting choices for a Big Two superhero concept that's come down the pike in years.  Of course, it was completely overlooked, too, just like Fraction's Hawkeye.  These were punk comics created for fans who think punk comics don't have to look like what punk comics usually look like.  They can just try something new.  It probably doesn't hurt that both Hawkeye and Black Canary featured the art of Annie Wu.  Coincidences like that just don't exist...

Cerebus #80 (Aardvark-Vanaheim)
From November 1985.
With all due apologies to the story featured in the issue, I'm not really going to talk about that.  (Right, and that's always been the exception...)  What interests me is the letters column, in which Dave Sim engages in a dialogue with Neal Adams over the issue of creator rights.  I know a thing or two about that lately.  Just ask John Seavey.  It's interesting, because it was almost literally the same conversation I had with Seavey, but more than thirty years earlier, and between two far more famous individuals.  It's the conclusion, from Adams, that I'll quote in full:

Dear Dave:

Thanks for letting me reply to your letter, and relative to your letter and [its] basic direction, I agree with you totally.

There is a small point that might be made at this time.  I have never really disagreed with contracts between parties.  In truth, I have never disagreed with contracts which are unfair to one party or another.  (Most contracts usually have at least one signer thinking he got a raw deal.  Sometimes both.)

I have never actually disagreed with the concept of standard contracts, although they are viewed by some as unfair.

What I have disagreed with from the moment of [its] inception, is the fact that the Congress of the United States created a copyright law which includes the concept of work-made-for-hire.  The insertion of work-made-for-hire in a contract removes the possibility of there being fairness in a contract.  It literally turns the publisher into the creator and owner of the work.  Any additional rights spoken about can only be rights returned back to the original creator from the new creator (publisher).  This is base hypocrisy, and that it was able to be slipped into a law, basically in two sentences, a law that is book length, and that it permeates ours and other graphic industries is an example of how a lack of alertness or caring on the part of the people involved, can lead to ethical disaster.

(Incidentally, if we get rid of work-made-for-hire and its contracts, they'll simply be replaced with other unfair contracts.  Right folks?)

Yes, I agree with your letter Dave, but there's a world of difference between the standard form contract which I have never argued with, and a work-made-for-hire contract, which I have always felt was a betrayal by our highest government institutions of the creative community of our country.  People in other countries have been struck incredulous when I have told them that by contract, publishers in America can become the "creator" of a work and that right is written into our law!

And, just in case the idea has gotten across to you and your readers that I (and my white horse0 somehow stand for truth and justice in all [its] myriad forms, that's not the case.  I simply try to point out gross injustices that, on real examination, are obvious and clear to thinking people.  For example: the return of Jack Kirby's artwork.

Sincerely,
Neal Adams
President
Continuity Graphics Assoc., Inc.

...Anyway, I just thought that was interesting.

Ultimate Daredevil & Elektra #4 (Marvel)
From March 2003.
This is Greg Rucka's version of the Daredevil Miller Narrative, and because it's Rucka, it focuses more on Elektra than Daredevil.  With Rucka returning to Wonder Woman in the DC Rebirth era, it's certainly worth revisiting classic Rucka, and I think this one's probably been lost in the shuffle, especially because Marvel's Ultimate comics kind of got summarized, in the grand scheme, by the Ultimates, Spider-Man, and X-Men, even though there were a few other stories worth remembering as well.  This comic was created at the same time the Daredevil movie was released, at the height of the backlash against Ben Affleck.  I always liked the movie, and how it helped return focus to Elektra, one of Marvel's worthier women.  Rucka's Miller Narrative doesn't even feature Kingpin, but rather a stand-in creation, which was nice to see.  Definitely worth checking out.

Drax #2 (Marvel)
From February 2016.
I suppose I should have seen this coming.  This is the same issue I already read, and talked about here.  It was in the same sale section, presumably because of some shipment mishandling.  At any rate, it was as much a pleasure to read the second time as it was the first, and CM Punk's thoughts were just as worth reading in comics form.  He's such a natural, it's scary, and this comic is such a perfect fit, I'm glad it happened.

Earth X Wizard Special Edition, #0, 3, 4 (Marvel)
From 1997, March, June and July 1999.
Now, I've given poor Jim Krueger a slagging, in the past, as Alex Ross's stooge, writing what Ross can't write himself, because Ross is busy reliving his glory days in endless regurgitations, but that's not really fair.  (It's probably not fair for Alex Ross, either, but that's a topic for another day.)  But Krueger has his own credentials, too, including Foot Soldiers, which was a pretty fair creative statement itself, too.

The real kicker is that Earth X is Krueger and Ross's first collaboration, and it's probably the best Krueger I've read to date.

It came about because of Wizard magazine.  Wizard was that great bastion of comic book geekdom that was, in some ways, the Internet before the Internet really exploded.  It was the biggest cheerleader around, and it could even be the launching pad for new projects, such as when it helped Marvel introduce Sentry, or Kurt Busiek create a new villain for Astro City.  It also helped inspire Earth X, when it asked Ross what Marvel's version of Kingdom Come would look like, which is kind of ironic, because it was Marvel's Marvels that inspired Kingdom Come, and fans still haven't given Kingdom Come its due, and apparently even Earth X has a hard time getting respect.

Earth X isn't Kingdom Come.  The Wizard brainstorming special where Ross detailed his ideas makes that clear.  It wasn't until he reveals his version of the X-Men that I was sold on the concept as creatively viable.  But Krueger's interpretation made it clear that this was truly a project I could get behind.

Ross's X-Men have a lot of interesting new mutants on the team, including Double Header, who literally has two heads.  If I ever got to write a Marvel comic, I would definitely write an X-Men story with Double Header.  It's perfect!)

Krueger's dystopian future revolves around a conversation between the Watcher and Machine Man.  This seems completely improbable and perhaps equally inexplicable, right?  All three issues I read are dominated by this conversation.  The concept itself has every human having gained their own mutant powers, thus negating superheroes, right?  It further alienates Marvel's famously alienated superheroes, and pushes everything forward, in a very classic Marvel way.  Previous to reading this, my ideal Marvel comic was Dan Abnett's Conspiracy.  Krueger takes a different stance, but the results are equally fantastic.

This is not the Marvel that exists today.  Today, Marvel is going after the movie crowd, and the idea that cuter, more kid-friendly comics will probably help ensure the continued viability of the medium, but creatively, it just doesn't compare to a mindset where things like Earth X, like Conspiracy, is possible.  When Marvel does a smart comic now (and maybe this was always the case?), it's the exception.  I wish that weren't the case.  You have things like Tom King's Vision, Jeff Lemire's Moon Knight, and yes, even CM Punk's Drax, but then, you also have Nick Spencer's Captain America.  You can see that the mainstream titles don't get the same kind of freedom.  Say what you will about Scott Snyder's Batman, and I've said plenty, but that was a mainstream title that took the right kinds of creative risks.

Eye of the Storm Annual #1 (Wildstorm)
From September 2003.
There are a bunch of short stories in this one, all of them exploring various facets of Wildstorm's landscape, but the one that I bought it for is written by Geoff Johns in one of his increasingly rare excursions away from DC proper.  As with a lot of Johns material from this period, his story of a team of bounty hunters is not afraid to be a little sexy (although as in The Possessed, it's kind of incidental, as in art-driven).  But like his later Ghosts short, Johns is experimenting with concept more than anything, playing against his type, having time unexpectedly be a factor in the story, which is to say, have a surprise element be as important as anything else.  I hope he has time to do more experiments like this in the future.