Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

X-Force in the New York Times

Matthew Fluxington

16:32 / 16.03.02

(thanks to Jim Treacher for the heads up)

the text in full:

quote: March 17, 2002

Books in Brief: 'X-Force'
By KEN TUCKER

They're an odd, self-consciously neurotic bunch, one that includes a superhero with skin so unbearably sensitive to others' bodies that their rapid heartbeats or ''the saliva rushing around their mouths'' induces despair -- he plays Russian roulette each evening with a revolver beside his bed. Among their number is also a wolfish boy -- a student of Harold Bloom's -- who is ''able to tear through steel walls with his teeth and claws,'' and there's a peeved African-American whose skin emits flesh- and metal-melting acidic sweat. He declares, ''I'm a black mutant. In this country, that's like being black with a little black added,'' and believes the superhero business is -- well, business: ''Internal conflict. Struggles for ascendancy. Personal enmities. Isn't that the kind of thing that keeps people interested in us? I mean, we can't be fighting bad guys all the time.'' Proceeding from the assumption that given a world containing scores of superheroes, at least one bunch of them will prove to be media-manipulating cynics, we are offered ''X-Force: New Beginnings,'' a witty blast of media criticism disguised as a garish spin-off of ''X-Men.'' The writer Peter Milligan assembles a bickering team of mutants who negotiate the TV rights to their rescue of Boyz R Us, a teen-pop group taken hostage. The heroes, as drawn by Mike Allred and inked by Laura Allred in bright, primary colors, are stiffly posed with few facial expressions (frowning anger, teary woundedness) -- a parody of bad comic-book art whose ugliness becomes astute when combined with Milligan's merciless view of humanity. The members of X-Force are celebrities not for the occasional good they do, but merely for dominating the news. As their callously corrupt advisor, Coach, says: ''That's what's so great about today. No one remembers anything any more.'' Harold Bloom couldn't have said it better.

Um, "a parody of bad comic-book art whose ugliness becomes astute when combined with Milligan's merciless view of humanity"?

Wow. I wonder what Mr. Tucker would think if he realized that it wasn't a 'parody' so much as a homage, and that Allred's art, nor its sources are really 'bad comic-book art'...

ONLY NICE THINGS

19:13 / 16.03.02

Well, he'd probably think, "And yet I am writing reviews for the New York Times, and those in a position to correct my mistake are not."

Pretty much inevitably, people who write for the mainstream press are likely to make slips when examining alien cultural objects. The price one pays for discussion and consumption of comics among a wider audience is that some of them will not be able to pick up on the cunning reference to Rob Liefeld in X-Force 125, or have an opinion on whether Ditko or Stan Lee deserves to be credited with the modern Spiderman.

Matthew Fluxington

19:25 / 16.03.02

Yeah. You're right.

In the big picture, that's a really good review, and even that negative bit is rationalized in a way that makes it sound quite appealing. It's certainly nice to see the comic being discussed positively in a book review read by a great many people who might really enjoy it... this is the sort of thing that could cause a minor spike in sales for that book, which is fantastic.

ONLY NICE THINGS

19:39 / 16.03.02

Howling Milligan fanboy that I am, I am up for anything that gets him more readers...

Robot Man Reformed

21:14 / 16.03.02

Even "and inked by Laura Allred?"

And someone please tell me there is a forum for Milligan a'la Barbelith, 'cause I'm such a Millifan.

The Natural Way

07:41 / 18.03.02

Whilst I get your point, Haus, I just can't stand that authoritative tone journos take, even when talking about "alien artefacts" - it's annoying. Concede a little ignorance, journofucks.

07:50 / 18.03.02

Or perhaps-- 'read critically, you stooooopid consumer'

07:55 / 18.03.02

Assuming Ken Tucker is actually ignorant of comics and X-Force, Runce. For all I know he's a dribbling fanboy who does recognise that if he's going to get a piece on comics in a mainstream journal he's going to have to pitch it to a general audience.

Even if he doesn't know anything about comics as such, if he's an intelligent enough guy I'm sure he can pick up the basic premise of X-Force from reading the book. It's not exactly rocket science, is it?

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

08:12 / 18.03.02

Hmmm...not quite my point, Runce. Factual errors by the journos as a result of an absence of "industry background" (and hey, I have no clear idea what the influences on Allred are) are obviosuly unfortunate, but by the same token you cannot expect comics to grow as a medium if you have to get your milk-stinking fatbeard badge before you get half the references. So, I would not recognise a hilarious parodic insertion of Keith Giffen into a crowd scene, and didn't immediately think "Bwaha! Liefeld!" when Spike was talking about somebody owning the X-Force name.

Does that a) impair my enjoyment of the comic and b) make me an unqualified reader? To put it another way, how much of a comic exists outside the comic but within the non-specific monolithic entity of "comics"?

[ 18-03-2002: Message edited by: The Haus of Horror ]

11:53 / 18.03.02

Tucker's been a reviewer for 'Entertainment Weekly' for quite some time. And 'EW' has been surprisingly suportive of comicbooks for such a mainstream publication.

This was in the SUnday 'New York Times' book review section, right? Lots of people read that.

The Planet of Sound

12:44 / 18.03.02

I just hope that Mike Allred isn't crying into his Madman T-shirt at the moment. I wonder if Ken Tucker has ever heard of Lichtenstein?

Matthew Fluxington

12:44 / 18.03.02

Tucker also writes for NPR Fresh Air. He's no dummy.

You've got to look past the two little errors and realize that those errors were still positive points that he was making supporting his case that people should read this book. The New York Times has a great deal of critical weight, and positive reviews of books of any kind from the NY Times normally results in a sales spike.

I would not be shocked if most every comic shop in NYC sold out of the X-Force trade paperback this weekend as a result of that review.

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

12:52 / 18.03.02

quote:Originally posted by The Planet of Sound:
I just hope that Mike Allred isn't crying into his Madman T-shirt at the moment. I wonder if Ken Tucker has ever heard of Lichtenstein?

The stupid ignorant fucking Yankee has probably never even been to Europe, much less Lichtenstein.

13:34 / 18.03.02

...or indeed that its spelt Liechtenstein.

(hee-hee! Couldn't resist!

)

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

13:51 / 18.03.02

The country is, the pop artist isn't.

That's sort of one locus of the humour.

Ahem.

[ 18-03-2002: Message edited by: The Haus of Horror ]

Patrick Neighly

16:34 / 18.03.02

If a non-fan like Ken Tucker finds Allred's art "ugly" even though fans eat it up, doesn't that say less about Tucker than why modern comics don't sell?

I mean, I adore Allred and X-Force both, but what pleases a fan and what pleases a mass audience are two different things entirely.

16:44 / 18.03.02

You *do* realize how insufferably elitist that sounds, Mr. Neighly?

ONLY NICE THINGS

16:51 / 18.03.02

I'm not sure it does. "Elitism" is a reading that is only valid if one assumes that the fan is better-equipped to appreciate the comic, a viewpoint that I am increasingly unconvinced by.

It's interesting, for example, that on that incomprehensibly crappy discussion on the Comicon board, somebody says that the "photo-realistic" style of comic art is a fanboy-pleasing dead end, whereas Allred's cartooning is more accessible because it refers back to things like Lichtenstein, or more precisely shares the same sources as Lichtenstein, and has fewer intricate bits of dialogue with the complete developmental study of comic art.

On a personal level, for example: I don't know exactly what the general opinion on the artwork of "X-treme X-men", but for me it is utterly alienating...

Matthew Fluxington

17:07 / 18.03.02

I don't think what Patrick said was elitist - it just notes that some art is more accessable than others.

Allred's art is fairly accessable, but I think that it's very difficult for most people to figure out where he's coming from - is being ironic by drawing this way? is he being reverrent? Particularly in a comic as hip to irony as X-Force, it's understandably hard to make the call without having an understanding of Allred's larger bibliography.

Likewise, a lot of the artists whom appeal to the fanboy fatbeard element, like the Kubert brothers, Todd McFarlane, and Sal Larocca (that guy who draws X-Treme X-Men) are deeply alienating to those who aren't a part of that world. Where the average Comicon/X-Fan type of reader sees 'beautiful art' in Larocca's pages, most people just see a tasteless, poorly designed, poorly colored mess.

I would be very interested in what a large-scale researched evaluation of what kind of comic book art appeals to different demographics... I'm really not sure what the results would be like. It'd be surprising, I'd bet.

17:23 / 18.03.02

Maybe this is why comics need to be taken out of the comic shops and into the galleries where the belong- that way each issue could even have an individual plaque that tells everyone what it means...

Patrick Neighly

23:32 / 18.03.02

You *do* realize how insufferably elitist that sounds, Mr. Neighly?

Elitist? If a medium that once supported millions of readers per title now is lucky to garner 100,000 for the top-selling book, I don't think it's elitist to wonder if it's not because what comic fans want bears no relation to what a mass audience wants when it comes to fiction.

I'm a huge fan of Allred. But I also understand where he's coming from, the odd combination of irony and joy that fuels his style. If someone isn't equipped with that background - someone like Ken Tucker, perhaps - it's easy enough to see why he or she might see it as "ugly." Or to put it another way, Jack Kirby looks crap to modern eyes out of context.

My point I suppose is that Tucker's X-Force review demonstrates to me the disconnect between fandom and the wider potential audience. I don't think this is elitist, or even particularly radical. All of the "great works" of the medium are almost impossible to appreciate by a mass audience not steeped in comics history. Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns and any other deconstruction - which is what X-Force after all is - rely on a strong sense of comic book norms to work effectively. The way fans and non-fans percieve comic art is related.

Patrick Neighly

23:38 / 18.03.02

Likewise, a lot of the artists whom appeal to the fanboy fatbeard element, like the Kubert brothers, Todd McFarlane, and Sal Larocca (that guy who draws X-Treme X-Men) are deeply alienating to those who aren't a part of that world.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the opposite might be true - that the bizarre popularity of Spawn outside of the normal comics readership (and I will go so far as to say that perhaps more than even Sandman, early Spawn demonstrated an odd ability to attract non-comics readers) and the huge sales figures on McFarlane's Spider-Man and Jim Lee's X-Men runs show that this sort of art - what we elites would call crap - is precisely the sort of thing that is accessible to the outside world.

I'm willing to entertain arguments to the contrary, however! (And yes, I accept that a portion of those sales were driven by speculators.)

20:41 / 20.03.02

But wait a mintue.

Was this in the Times or the Times' Book Review?

Matthew Fluxington

09:06 / 21.03.02

quote:Originally posted by Patrick Neighly:
early Spawn demonstrated an odd ability to attract non-comics readers) and the huge sales figures on McFarlane's Spider-Man and Jim Lee's X-Men runs show that this sort of art - what we elites would call crap - is precisely the sort of thing that is accessible to the outside world.

But that is hardly a mainstream market. Slightly larger, yeah - but it's not adults and females. I don't think it can be taken too seriously.

09:06 / 21.03.02

quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Horror:
The country is, the pop artist isn't.

[ 18-03-2002: Message edited by: The Haus of Horror ]

[Shit. I always thought Roy Lichtenstein was with an 'e' too. That'll learn me.]

<<sound of gunfire as I shoot meself in the foot.>>

er..... Yeah? WELL FUCK YOU. I've got two books and a film to my name......

Gah.

Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?

09:06 / 21.03.02

And a plank?

09:06 / 21.03.02

...Land Rover, Shurely?

22:33 / 23.03.02

aynways, I believe the idea that Allred´s art is a parody of bad art is not something the author really felt but rather something he used in his writing cause he hoped it would make him look smart and equipped with expert knowledge of comics art history. he´s a journalist, but is it typical?