Let's see....Anthro and family celebrate the winter solstice, Jonah Hex has a Hanukkah adventure, John Stewart teaches a tyro Green Lantern that sometimes religious holidays can be creepy and weird, Superman attends a Thanksgiving parade and meets the hero he most admires, theSpectre celebrates Norouz, the Persian New Year and the Legion of Super-Heroes celebrate - get this "Holiday", And, no, I'm not making that up.
All in all, it's an OK book - I wouldn't suggest that you must race out and buy it, but if you were bored and looking for something, you could do worse.
Oh, and...Meh. ;)
P.S. Say, it just occurred to me that there really was nothing in here that could be considered a "Christmas" story. Not that that's the end of the world or anything, I just would of thought they'd of put one
Views: 86
You need to be a member of Captain Comics to add comments!
I haven't read them all yet, but I actually liked the GL story quite a bit. I liked the stories folded into each other -- one serviceman passing on a lesson to another, to another. Could have done without the Stewart's last couple of word balloons, though -- they seemed way too on-the-nose for me. Up till then, though, I was right with it all the way.
I thought good writers strove to place 'it' on-the-nose?
Why was this problematic for John's dialogue?
(I haven't read the comic, obviously. BTW Abhay writes about taking on the Jimmy Olsen story in his blog. You might like it Rob, having read the story.)
Also, I'd like to wish The Baron all the felicitations and studiously non-specific spiritual blessings (if any) of the Winterval season.
Figs, I think you're thinking of the Superman giant. There's no Jimmy Olsen story in this, IIRC.
And by "on-the-nose," I mean directly underlining the point that the preceding pages already made. John's dialogue is: "I only wish every crisis could be resolved like that... and that my people could look into each other's hearts as easily." It's a yearning for cultural tolerance and lack of judgement that John tries to teach to the rookie GL, which he was taught by his fellow Marine in Baghdad, and who had learned it himself in a different way from a friend he knew when he was serving in Manila.
As for the "murder, anarchy, and slaughter"? I don't think you were reading carefully, Rich. The story specifically makes a point that there are no casualties on Hathor -- it's more like a ritualized mosh pit. And as for the rituals in Iraq and Manila, I don't think anyone's getting killed in those, either -- at least not how the story presents it. The only death mentioned is Jesus on the cross. (John calls him the "holiest man who ever lived, in my opinion But the cross is also what killed him." He says, "You might think it's morbid to revere an instrument of torture, but you'd be missing the point.")
Anyway, I can certainly understand why it isn't for everyone -- it's certainly a dark story for a holiday special, and it's odd that the GL story is darker than the Jonah Hex entry. But I wanted to explain why it worked for me.
Ah. You are correct. There is not any intentional slaughter. The smears of blood on the faces of the participants doesn't and the comparisons to penitente-like practices still creep me out.
And while I concede that the author is not saying that John is correct, but rather is giving us an insight into his otherwise rather tabula rasa character, I do believe that you can "get the point" and still disagree with it.
Rob Staeger said:
As for the "murder, anarchy, and slaughter"? I don't think you were reading carefully, Rich. The story specifically makes a point that there are no casualties on Hathor -- it's more like a ritualized mosh pit. And as for the rituals in Iraq and Manila, I don't think anyone's getting killed in those, either -- at least not how the story presents it. The only death mentioned is Jesus on the cross. (John calls him the "holiest man who ever lived, in my opinion But the cross is also what killed him." He says, "You might think it's morbid to revere an instrument of torture, but you'd be missing the point.")
And while I concede that the author is not saying that John is correct, but rather is giving us an insight into his otherwise rather tabula rasa character, I do believe that you can "get the point" and still disagree with it.
Oh, you'll get no argument from me on that, believe me.
Replies
I thought good writers strove to place 'it' on-the-nose?
Why was this problematic for John's dialogue?
(I haven't read the comic, obviously. BTW Abhay writes about taking on the Jimmy Olsen story in his blog. You might like it Rob, having read the story.)
Also, I'd like to wish The Baron all the felicitations and studiously non-specific spiritual blessings (if any) of the Winterval season.
The John Stewart story creeped me the hell out. Murder, anarchy, and slaughter are peachy as long as they're ritualized and held as annual events?
Oy.
Figs, I think you're thinking of the Superman giant. There's no Jimmy Olsen story in this, IIRC.
And by "on-the-nose," I mean directly underlining the point that the preceding pages already made. John's dialogue is: "I only wish every crisis could be resolved like that... and that my people could look into each other's hearts as easily." It's a yearning for cultural tolerance and lack of judgement that John tries to teach to the rookie GL, which he was taught by his fellow Marine in Baghdad, and who had learned it himself in a different way from a friend he knew when he was serving in Manila.
As for the "murder, anarchy, and slaughter"? I don't think you were reading carefully, Rich. The story specifically makes a point that there are no casualties on Hathor -- it's more like a ritualized mosh pit. And as for the rituals in Iraq and Manila, I don't think anyone's getting killed in those, either -- at least not how the story presents it. The only death mentioned is Jesus on the cross. (John calls him the "holiest man who ever lived, in my opinion But the cross is also what killed him." He says, "You might think it's morbid to revere an instrument of torture, but you'd be missing the point.")
Anyway, I can certainly understand why it isn't for everyone -- it's certainly a dark story for a holiday special, and it's odd that the GL story is darker than the Jonah Hex entry. But I wanted to explain why it worked for me.
Ah. You are correct. There is not any intentional slaughter. The smears of blood on the faces of the participants doesn't and the comparisons to penitente-like practices still creep me out.
And while I concede that the author is not saying that John is correct, but rather is giving us an insight into his otherwise rather tabula rasa character, I do believe that you can "get the point" and still disagree with it.
Rob Staeger said:
And while I concede that the author is not saying that John is correct, but rather is giving us an insight into his otherwise rather tabula rasa character, I do believe that you can "get the point" and still disagree with it.
Oh, you'll get no argument from me on that, believe me.
Also, I'd like to wish The Baron all the felicitations and studiously non-specific spiritual blessings (if any) of the Winterval season.
Back atcha, my dear young man! And that reminds me of a song from Mystery Science Theater 3000, called "Merry Christmas...If That's OK"
Jonah Hex has a Hanukkah adventure ...
In Santa Monica?