Detecting Detective Comics

[BentonGrey]

Howdy gents, I am thinking of picking up some of this classic series, Detective Comics Vol. 1, and I was wondering if any of our resident comic experts could recommend some really good runs.

[bat1987]

Definitely Steve Englehart and Marshall Rogers, its one of the the first things that comes to mind when I'm recommending anything Batman related. Very gothic-noire type of stories, I'm sure you'll like it.

I also liked Paul Dini's run that came later (had several artists attached to it), a lot of one shot stories, has a nice TAS feel to it (shocking I know ).

Will update if I remember anything else.

[daglob]

The "New Look" stuff had it's good points, although The Outsider stuff always bothered me.

Heck, it STILL bothers me.

[bat1987]

The "New Look" stuff had it's good points, although The Outsider stuff always bothered me.

Heck, it STILL bothers me.

Spoiler

The Outsider actually appears in new 52 as Owlman's butler, chalk white skin and all. Better use for the concept for sure.

[BentonGrey]

Thanks guys!  I have read the first dozen or so volumes of the Batman archives, following the Batman stories through the 40s and into the 50s and 60s, but I've never read much of his adventures in the 70s.  When I was a kid in the 80s, I read some of his books as well, and I don't have much interest in Bats AFTER that point (though I know there are lots of good stories out there).  So, I am going to fill in this gap in my reading and check out the 400-500 range of Detective.  I've just started and was pleasantly surprised to discover that this contained the origin of Man-Bat and other great stories.  Cool!

I'll watch out for the Englehart and Rogers run, Bat.  I've seen several of those stories adapted to B:TAS, which just goes to show how great they must be.

[kkhohoho]

Thanks guys!  I have read the first dozen or so volumes of the Batman archives, following the Batman stories through the 40s and into the 50s and 60s, but I've never read much of his adventures in the 70s.  When I was a kid in the 80s, I read some of his books as well, and I don't have much interest in Bats AFTER that point (though I know there are lots of good stories out there).  So, I am going to fill in this gap in my reading and check out the 400-500 range of Detective.  I've just started and was pleasantly surprised to discover that this contained the origin of Man-Bat and other great stories.  Cool!

I'll watch out for the Englehart and Rogers run, Bat.  I've seen several of those stories adapted to B:TAS, which just goes to show how great they must be.

What's not to be interested about? Just because a comic is newer doesn't mean it's bad. I know you have a stigma against newer comics for reasons I still can't fathom, but there's still some good stuff being put out. (Which you say you're aware of, but you're not actually willing to read them, so I'm not so convinced...)

[BentonGrey]

Well Kk, I have read some of them and, in fact, own some of the better stories from that era ("Long Halloween," etc.), but in general I don't like the Iron Age as much as the Bronze Age.  I enjoy the world of the Bronze Age, the classic Bat-Family, and the types of stories told back then.  I am pretty well versed in the nature of the different epochs of superhero comics.  I've been hanging around here long enough to learn a lot just by osmosis.   I've found the bit I enjoy most, so I intend to spend my time reading those stories, rather than stories that, however good they are, have elements that I don't enjoy.  I like Dick Grayson as Robin, I like Barbra Gordon as Batgirl, and I like my Batman cool, competent, but not a complete sociopath.  I also like my superhero stories serious, but with an element of joy, and mature in theme but not in terms of the false "maturity" of content that many modern books employ.

[kkhohoho]

Well Kk, I have read some of them and, in fact, own some of the better stories from that era ("Long Halloween," etc.), but in general I don't like the Iron Age as much as the Bronze Age.  I enjoy the world of the Bronze Age, the classic Bat-Family, and the types of stories told back then.  I am pretty well versed in the nature of the different epochs of superhero comics.  I've been hanging around here long enough to learn a lot just by osmosis.   I've found the bit I enjoy most, so I intend to spend my time reading those stories, rather than stories that, however good they are, have elements that I don't enjoy.  I like Dick Grayson as Robin, I like Barbra Gordon as Batgirl, and I like my Batman cool, competent, but not a complete sociopath.  I also like my superhero stories serious, but with an element of joy, and mature in theme but not in terms of the false "maturity" of content that many modern books employ.

I agree with Batman not being a sociopath, but I've come to accept one simple fact; comics change. They need to change; otherwise, we'd have the same stories being told today that we had decades ago, and that just doesn't work for a 50-70+ year franchise. Do I agree with all of the changes? Not necessarily, but I recognize the necessity of such change. And honestly, I don't see much of a difference between the element of 'joy' in Superheros comics from the 'the good old days', and comic books now. Oh, there are still some books that can be pretty dark, but so was Englehart's classic late 70's Batman run in it's day. So was Claremont's classic X-Men run after a while. But there are also plenty of comics today that have that 'joy' you've been talking about, at least when it comes to Marvel. Or at least depending on where you look, anyway. But while not every comic of today may  have what you're looking for, some certainly do. And again, is Dick Greyson Robin? No. Is Charles Xaiver the head of the X-Men? No. And others have different problems with change then you. You might be ecstatic to have Barry back as the flash or Hal Jordan as GL, for example, but many others would rather see Wally and Kyle back in the suits, and as the 'main' Flash&GL.

If you want to just read old comics, I won't stop you. It's just that I've been lately dealing with a lot of old comicbook fans who, quite frankly, are insane, and so I've just become... 'receptive' when someone says what to me sounds like they don't like change just because it's change. And I know that you like what you like; nothing agaisnt you at all. It just still irks me, is all...

PS.Also, I've just started a X-Men series in the Fan Fiction section, case you're interested.

[daglob]

The "New Look" stuff had it's good points, although The Outsider stuff always bothered me.

Heck, it STILL bothers me.

Spoiler

The Outsider actually appears in new 52 as Owlman's butler, chalk white skin and all. Better use for the concept for sure.

Hah! That I do like.

It wasn't so much that they did it, it was the absolutely perposterous things The Outsider did. They were just getting away from the "Alien/Transformed/Abducted by ETs" Batman of the late '50s and early '60s, and then this...

[BentonGrey]

I agree with Batman not being a sociopath, but I've come to accept one simple fact; comics change. They need to change; otherwise, we'd have the same stories being told today that we had decades ago, and that just doesn't work for a 50-70+ year franchise. Do I agree with all of the changes? Not necessarily, but I recognize the necessity of such change. And honestly, I don't see much of a difference between the element of 'joy' in Superheros comics from the 'the good old days', and comic books now. Oh, there are still some books that can be pretty dark, but so was Englehart's classic late 70's Batman run in it's day. So was Claremont's classic X-Men run after a while. But there are also plenty of comics today that have that 'joy' you've been talking about, at least when it comes to Marvel. Or at least depending on where you look, anyway. But while not every comic of today may  have what you're looking for, some certainly do. And again, is Dick Greyson Robin? No. Is Charles Xaiver the head of the X-Men? No. And others have different problems with change then you. You might be ecstatic to have Barry back as the flash or Hal Jordan as GL, for example, but many others would rather see Wally and Kyle back in the suits, and as the 'main' Flash&GL.

If you want to just read old comics, I won't stop you. It's just that I've been lately dealing with a lot of old comicbook fans who, quite frankly, are insane, and so I've just become... 'receptive' when someone says what to me sounds like they don't like change just because it's change. And I know that you like what you like; nothing agaisnt you at all. It just still irks me, is all...

PS.Also, I've just started a X-Men series in the Fan Fiction section, case you're interested.

Kk, it seems that you're projecting a bit of a strawman here, and I don't mean the Scarecrow.  You also seem to be aware of that to a degree.  Because you've been dealing with irrational curmudgeonly old comic book fans does not mean that everyone who prefers classic comics is either irrational or curmudgeonly.  I happen to be a bit curmudgeonly, that I'll grant you, but I'm a pretty reasonable guy.  As to the question at hand, I don't see how what I choose to read really affects you or your own enjoyment of comics, but to clarify, I have nothing against change in comics.  In fact, I love a good, changing, evolving storyline and characters.  That's part of the reason I am loving the new TMNT book and the continued G.I. JOE book. 

You see, I do read modern comics, just not really superhero books.  In fact, every month or so I read several of the best comics I've ever read, but sadly none of them feature the Justice League.  I've given the New 52 a chance, and it disappointed me at pretty much every turn.  The characters weren't terribly likeable, the stories weren't terribly interesting, and even in the spots where there were exceptions, like the Flash and Aquaman books, I just couldn't help comparing them to the other books I was buying.  Every month TMNT and G.I. JOE were absolutely fantastic, and I loved those issues unabashedly.  Every month, I might enjoy Flash or Aquaman (and for about three or four months, JLA), but it was always with a quibble or a caveat.  Flash was good, but Grodd was really boring and one-note.  Aquaman was good, but the Atlantis stuff dragged.  Flash was good, but just when they approached something really interesting, they jumped ahead.  Aquaman was good, but every. single. issue. with the others made me feel like I'd just wasted my money.  Combine those reservations with the fact that DC, as a company, seems to hold my values and passions in contempt, and it became a pretty easy decision to drop the New 52 books one by one. 

I've never really resented change in comics as such.  I loved Ryan Choi as the Atom.  I loved John Stewart as Green Lantern.  What I resent, the element that leaves a bad taste in my mouth that I just can't shake, is the inevitable and reprehensible narrative gymnastics the companies go through to accomplish such changes.  If Ray Palmer had simply retired and acted as a mentor to Ryan Choi, I'd have been 100% on board.  If Batman retired and Dick Grayson took over the cowl, count me in (in fact, I really enjoy the Earth-2 stories with just such a premise).  If Hal had gone into space to have adventures and left John on earth (which I know happened at one point, but you get the idea), I'm sold.  Instead, Ray's ex-wife murders another hero's wife, and Ray runs off into the microverse or whatever.  Instead, Dick and Batman act like a pair of three-year-olds and storm off to their respective rooms (cities).  Instead, Hal goes nuts and murders all of his fellow lanterns.  I'm generalizing, but by the 90s, and especially by the 00s, mainstream superhero books had enough terrible baggage that I I couldn't really enjoy them.  I don't relish a universe where a supervillain can do something unspeakable to a hero's wife (or anyone else for that matter).  I don't really want to read stories set in a world where Batgirl gets crippled by the Joker.  I don't actually enjoy a setting where the characters I love are only actually changed by being tortured to the point of being unrecognizable.  Give me maturation and growth.  Build something up, don't just tear something down.

You see, that's what I object to, not change, but poor writers with so little imagination that the only stories they can come up with for this incredibly imaginative universe are those that torture the icons they claim to love.  I don't mind some suffering, and I understand that plot is conflict.  I am not unreasonable, but heroes should be heroic, and a setting that has as much wonder as the DC Universe should be a bit more hopeful, at least for my taste.

So, rather than read stories that annoy, sadden, or just plain disgust me, I think I'll spend time reading things that I actually enjoy, if it's all the same to you.  I've realized that there's an entire era of comics that I haven't really read, but are of a style and feature a setting that are right up my alley.  Why in the world wouldn't I want to read them?

[kkhohoho]

Well, okay. Sorry about how I came across; really, I am. I actually share similar caveats to you, come to think of it, though whereas you seem to be a large fan DC, for me, Marvel is my main 'verse. And in the later years of Marvel... hoo boy. The Vision, after he and Wanda settled down, had two kids, and seemed to actually be having a happy ending, but then got practically assassinated and replaced with a hollow intimidation of the original which took years to have any semblance of recovery from. The Scarlet Witch lost both of her kids, and then went crazy not once but twice, with the second time flat-out ignoring previous continuity to do so. Quicksilver was made crazy twice, Wolverine is headmaster of a school in one book while murdering his own son in another, 'Civil War' happened, etc. (In case you didn't read Civil War, two words; Fuhrer Stark.) So yeah, I can understand where you're coming from on that point.

But you know, with so many writers, crap like that is bound to happen, and later writers do their best to move on from that. Vision and Scarlet Witch still aren't back together, but in terms of their characters, they're where they used to be, and are slowly growing from there. Tony no longer remembers anything that he did during the horrific farce that was Civil War, so that's wiped off his record. And it looks like Wolverine is stepping down as headmaster of the school, which, considering what he did to his own kid, is probably the best decision possible. Come to think of it, what really bugs is that, instead of having meaningful change that sticks, there is instead only the illusion of change these days. Let's take the X-Men. The X-Men can never achieve peaceful coexistence because that would mean their series would have to end. Any major character who isn't Jean Grey is going to come back within a few years time, regardless of how much impact their death may have had. (Ironically, Jean's second death seems to have actually stuck; 10 years later, and she's still buried in the ground because the editors deemed her too powerful. Bleh.) And when they reduced the amount of mutant to around 200, it was only a matter of time before the proper status quo was restored, which happened back in late 2012. It's why I'm writing I'm own X-Men series; I want to create a series out of such a long-lasting, iconic property that actually has meaningful change, and, while being long in it's own right, still has a planned beginning, middle, and end, all planned out by one writer. (Me. ) I want an X-Men series that has meaningful impact again, but I'm just not seeing that. Even if it seems things have changed, any attempts to radically change the status quo are just going to get reverted eventually, so what's the point, really?

So, I guess I actually feel similarly to you on a lot of issues; I just keep on reading the modern Superhero comics rather than go back to earlier times, though part of that is because I've already read a lot of those 'earlier times', and I'm not one for rereading comics I've already read; not unless it's damned good. (Like the Phoenix Saga.) So... yeah, sorry about how I acted. All of those old fans were just really pissing me off, and for whatever reason, your post just set me off. Again, sorry.

[BentonGrey]

Kk, I appreciate and accept your apology.  I'm sorry that those types of folks have been giving you so much grief, and I certainly wasn't trying to do that.

Yeah, I'm more of a DC fan than a Marvel fan. *looks at the DCUG*  See, most of the Marvel comics I've read are from the 60s and 70s, and I love them.  Honestly, I've often wondered how JLA survived in the early days, because the Avengers book was so much better back in the Silver Age!  I've never really followed Marvel comics regularly, though.  I never bought The Avengers when I was a kid; it was always JLA, and that has continued into my adult buying habits.  Because of that, I have observed the terrible stuff that has happened in the Marvel U. from a distance, with distaste, but also without a whole lot of passion.  I completely sympathize with you on the Vision and SW saga, though.  Ohh man, that is awful!  You just want to smack some of these writers sometimes.  A single bad story can do unbelievable amounts of damage to a character.  Look at the death of Aquaman's son!  The Sea King has only NOW recovered from that, and it took the creation of a new universe to do it.

And you're absolutely right about the illusion of change.  Look at Bruce Wayne's death and Dick's tenure as Batman!  While I think that was a terrible ending for the character, if such a state of affairs had been earned in a better way, I would have been happy to see that change stick, but it was inevitably reversed.  This is also part of the reason I don't much care for the world they've created these days.

It's why I'm writing I'm own X-Men series; I want to create a series out of such a long-lasting, iconic property that actually has meaningful change, and, while being long in it's own right, still has a planned beginning, middle, and end, all planned out by one writer. (Me. ) I want an X-Men series that meaningful impact again, but I'm just not seeing that. Even if it seems things have changed, any attempts to radically change the status quo are just going to get reverted eventually, so what's the point, really?

You realize, this is EXACTLY my stated goal and inspiration for the DCUG, right? 

See, I haven't read all of the Bronze Age material.  It was mostly before my time, and that means I've got tons of untraveled worlds to explore.  I've read a lot of the seminal runs of the 90s and some of the 00s (like Morrison's JLA run), and even though I enjoyed plenty of them, even those usually came with a caveat for me.  Does anyone else wish they could go back and 'remaster' those books?  Like, when I read them, I think to myself, 'I'd like to go through and replace all of the 'hook-handed loser' Aquaman with classic Aquaman, or all of the ridiculous Red and Blue Superman with normal Superman.'  Yet, the Bronze Age stories that I haven't read mostly don't have that type of baggage, so I can get more unalloyed joy out of reading them.  Meanwhile, I edit my own little version of the DC Universe in my mods.

[kkhohoho]

^The way I see it, there used to be meaningful change in comics, but due to a combination of many series continuing to for decades, dozens of different writers, and -- espically when it comes to Marvel -- a company that has become so big that its desire to make money overrides good creative decisions at time. (And expounding on the problems with so many creators, what I like to see is 5+ year runs done by the same writer; 8+ year runs even more so. I personally think Claremont is the standard at this point, with a 16+ year run under his belt. These days, you're lucky if a run goes for over a couple years; sometimes, even just one.) And much of this is also part of the reason why I'm trying to look into comics from people other than the Big Two. I want to see longer runs with more creativity, consistency, and changes that matter. I'm thinking of getting back into Usagi Yojimbo; Hellboy seems pretty inyeresting; GI.Joe, while originally done by Marvel, takes place in it's own continuity and is mostly written by one writer; Geiman's Sandman, etc. And if that weren't enough, I think that the series at the big two have gone on so long that they're not sure what to do with the characters anymore. Over at Marvel. Captain America was stranded in another dimension for over a year, (both in the real world, and in-universe time,) Bruce Banner is working for Shield/The Government instead of the other way around, Tony Stark has been hopping about in space, etc. There's still some enjoyment to be had, but they're nothing like the original concepts behind each character and series, because the original ideas for the character have been done for so long that, quite frankly, they've run their course.

Honestly, it's gotten so bad that I feel I have to write my own version of one of Marvel's properties to get what I want to see -- to break the illusion of change -- but at the same time, I'm still against not liking change just because a given series or character is no longer what you grew up with, which seems to be many old fan's mundus operandi. And the attitude of all of these old fans is also what's starting to drive me away from the mainstream. (And by 'mainstream', I mean The Big Two.) Maybe if I pick up more indies, (like Hellboy, or Usagi again,) I won't have to deal with that sort of thing, or better yet, maybe I won't have to deal with a lot of the things I don't like about comics these days.