Iyo: The Most Underrated Or Underused Character In Comics

[Rapier]

Re; Angela Landsbury.

You think old Jessica Fletcher is bad, look at the MacMillans from MacMillan and Wife. He was the Police Commssioner and yet practically everyone they knew was murderer or a victim. What kind of people do they hang around with is what I wonder. In an interview, I recall Rock Hudson voicing his concerns that if the MacMillans didn't move, soon, the town they lived in would be depopulated. So they moved them the big city where it would take years to kill everyone.

MacMillan is a little before me, but that is pretty choice! TOO funny.

[Kristopher]

So, they killed Spoiler in a pointless and idiotic way. That's OK, because goodness knows that none of the comic companies need interesting character with lots of potential.

Morons.

[Chuckg]

There's a thread on CBR.com's "Rumbles" board (technically OT there, as the purpose of that board is to discuss "vs." fights with fictional characters according to our own loose set of scenario rules), that's spent the past several months having a group rant about certain undesirable trends and events in our funnybooks recently.

I called it "The Death Spiral of Comics".

[Hugh Neilson]

So, they killed Spoiler in a pointless and idiotic way. That's OK, because goodness knows that none of the comic companies need interesting character with lots of potential.

Morons.

Just quoted to keep the topic clear. Making all the characters functionally immortal removes considerable suspense. Assume two costumed members of the Bat Universe were slated to die in War Games. Orpheus and Spoiler both died as written, and you're in the room with the decision makers as the storyline is plotted out.

What two characters should die instead, and why are they better choices?

EDIT: This exercise should assume that the deaths of two characters is essential to telling a great story. I agree with comments that characters should not be killed of blithely, and other options should be pursued. However, for purposes of this exercise, assume the arc in question will be the highlight of comics in the 21st century, and will not work unless two characters die.

[Lord Liaden]

Actually, the Brother Blood from the Wolfman/Perez era couldn't have been brought back, at all. The one the Titans faced died, and his only direct heir was a daughter, thus ending the legacy aspect of the character.

If you don't mind, could you tell me more about when and how he died? My recollection was that he was still alive but amnesiac up until the birth of his daughter. I stopped following the Titans regularly shortly after that, so I'm not really that up on their later history.

(Not that dying ever kept a good comic villain from coming back.)

[Vigil]

Re: Hugh Neilson's post.

Hugh, I think you put your finger on the problem, exactly, but the question shouldn't be "what 2 characters should die?". Rather ir should be, "why do 2 characters have to die to tell this story?" "Isn't there some other we can tell it and be effective?"

Up here in Cowtown, I co-own a pro wrestling promotion and in the business we call stuff like killing charaters "cheap heat" since it has an immediate, visceral impact but has absolutely no substance or impact otherwise. It's the comic book equivalent of wrestlers blading themselves.

So, what I see is a failure of DC's editors to provide direction and to lead effectively. You just know that stuff like this wouldn't have happened when Archie Goodwin was at the bat helm.

Vigil

[Hugh Neilson]

Hugh, I think you put your finger on the problem, exactly, but the question shouldn't be "what 2 characters should die?". Rather ir should be, "why do 2 characters have to die to tell this story?" "Isn't there some other we can tell it and be effective?"

I think that question is also valid. However, if we decide that certain characters are sacred cows - they cannot be killed - then some of the suspense goes out of reading about those characters. We have that with many of the big guns now. They certainly won't kill Superman or Batman, will they? So, sometimes, characters die.

I recall Thunderbird in New X-Men being developed for the sole purpose of killing him off in his second appearance (which was to be Giant Size X-Men #2, and became X-Men #94 and #95) with the intent of sending the message that these characters are not invulnerable or immortal - and creating an air of uncertainty.

Up here in Cowtown

You mean DOWN THERE in Cowtown, right?

[Chuckg]

> I think that question is also valid. However, if we decide that certain
> characters are sacred cows - they cannot be killed - then [snip]

Behold, the fallacy of the excluded middle.

He says 'characters should not be killed off if there's another way to tell a good story available', and you immediately jump to 'we can't have everybody be sacred cows'.

[Hugh Neilson]

He says 'characters should not be killed off if there's another way to tell a good story available', and you immediately jump to 'we can't have everybody be sacred cows'.

And both are true.

For greater clarity, however, I have edited my "challenge post". And I note no one has any preferred picks for characters who should have died. [Oddly, for all the attention paid to Spoiler, I've yet to see anyone comment - positively or negatively - on Orpheus getting his throat slit.]

Tangential thought: I wonder how the Dark Phoenix storyline would be viewed today if Jean Grey had lived, as the original plot intended. Without the sacrifice, would the story have lost some of its "Classic" status? Would people have been as upset by "Jean Grey gets her powers back" as they were by "Jean Grey was actually alive in stasis"?

[Vigil]

Hey Hugh,

I hadn't noticed that you're up there in Edmo-town. I was assuming that most of thee readership of the forums are American so it's pretty much all up from there, lol.


You mentioned the problem of certain characters being held as sacred cows and, somehow, that that's bad thing. I beg to differ. I think it's a good thing. Characters should be sacred cows. Killing them should be such a rarity as to become almost unthinkable. I think that, as readers, we invest in characters; hopes, dreams, aspirations. They're there as idealization and as heroic touchstones which tie us into the mythical. To allow their wholesale, or even reatil slaughter is incredibly cyncial and, I think, undercuts the entire premise of comics. That's one of the multitidinous flaws of the Authority, a complete failure to understand the fundamental premise of the genre. The death of a hero should be a monumentous, transformative event. I t should have impact and consequence. Sadly, over the past 2 decades (especially given the influence of Image) it's become trivial. Now, it seems, if someone doesn't die it's somehow not an event...or even a story. And I think that's what's truly tragic.

Vigil

[Lightray]

Tangential thought: I wonder how the Dark Phoenix storyline would be viewed today if Jean Grey had lived, as the original plot intended. Without the sacrifice, would the story have lost some of its "Classic" status? Would people have been as upset by "Jean Grey gets her powers back" as they were by "Jean Grey was actually alive in stasis"?

I would have been left wondering "Why in the Heck did they name her 'Phoenix' if she's not going to come back from the dead?"

[Doug McCrae]

That's one of the multitidinous flaws of the Authority, a complete failure to understand the fundamental premise of the genre. The death of a hero should be a monumentous, transformative event.

So why is a 'monumentous' death the fundamental premise of the genre? The only characters I can think of that had meaningful deaths and stayed dead aren't really heroes at all - Uncle Ben and Bucky Barnes.

[megaplayboy]

So why is a 'monumentous' death the fundamental premise of the genre? The only characters I can think of that had meaningful deaths and stayed dead aren't really heroes at all - Uncle Ben and Bucky Barnes.

The Kree Captain Mar-Vell is still dead, though his son now bears his pseudonym. The original Thunderbird of X-Men 94 fame remains dead.

[Eyendasky80]

I'm not sure if we want to go in this direction because for comic fans, this is like politics and religion.

BUT: Why does it have to be so polar? Does every death have to be of epic event proportions? Is every death that isn't pointless? Can't we evaluate each story on its own merits regardless of body count?

My opinion (and I've heard this echoed by Pros or maybe I'm echoing them) is that comic audiences are maturing and the same escapist fantasy that pre-teens love regurgitated for the millionth time isn't going to thrill them for very long. So the industry is at a point where they must change or die. The industry has resisted this for years and we've seen a steady decline (dying) in comics as a medium. Now they're expirimenting with different kinds of stories, no longer catering to die-hard fans. Making their characters fallable and human. I believe that people who've made a strong attachment to the characters of these stories at a young age fear this change. There seems to be a contingent (usually a very vocal one) of people who, if they cannot recognize the story as something comfortable and familar, will cry foul no matter how well executed/written/drawn it is. It seems to me, they don't want to give it a chance.

I don't want to pigeon hole comics with the kind of mentality that limits them to children's entertainment. I believe they can run the entire spectrum of fiction, from iconic to human. Uplifting, tragic, funny, senseless, epic. I think comics can do all this and I'll lay my own personal favorites on the chopping block for a good story. It doesn't even have to be great and certainly not epic, just good. If I enjoy it, it was worth it.

The day comic books stop growing as a medium is the day I stop buying them. Because I've read all these stories before.

[red_eagle123]

So why is a 'monumentous' death the fundamental premise of the genre? The only characters I can think of that had meaningful deaths and stayed dead aren't really heroes at all - Uncle Ben and Bucky Barnes.

Barry Allen died, and damned but his death was momentous, and touching and he's still dead.