"Collect the whole set!"

Just back from the post office, where I picked up an early birthday gift from my friend Colin, in Toronto: a copy of The Encyclopedia of Fantasy, by John Clute and John Grant. It's the companion text to The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, which I purchased several years ago.

Sadly, I lacked the foresight (and the extra cash) to buy them both at once, and when I decided that it was time to fill the gap in my little reference library, both the books had gone out of print. Colin managed to hunt down a copy of the missing volume online, and as such deserves a large vote of gratitude.

It's always a good sign when you open a book at random - I'm sorry, it's a reference text, I don't plan to sit down and read my Concise Oxford Dictionary from the start either - and the first thing you read makes you laugh out loud. The entry in question dealt with "quest coupons", which is a not terribly flattering but sadly accurate description of a certain approach to writing fantasy novels. It's also pretty much the entire raison d'être for World of Warcraft - go here, get this item, and that will allow you to go there and get that item, and so on. I was also amused to see that Monty Python deserved an entry - but, ignoring the surreal nature of the TV shows, what is Monty Python and the Holy Grail but an Arthurian fantasy?* Not to mention much of Terry Gilliam's oeuvre...

But I digress. I haven't discussed fantasy very much on here, so perhaps I'll take advantage of this opportunity and do a few posts on the topic. And Colin? Thanks again. Your choice of gifts was, well, fantastic.

- Sid

* I recall when the movie first came out, Baird Searles, the movie reviewer for The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, commented that in terms of art direction and style, Holy Grail would be a marvellous fantasy film - except for the coconut shells and so on.

Damn - I was hoping for Erica Durance.

I googled him (Princess was really impressed that he would approach one of the trainers at our gym), didn’t realize he was as famous as he is. Shows how much I keep up with TV culture. And I even have cable...

- Laurie Smith

Ooo ah, it looks as if Laurie is going to be training Justin Hartley, who plays the role of Green Arrow on Smallville! Now, I have to admit to not being an enthusiastic follower of the tale of Clark Kent's developmental years, although I do think that out of the various actors to tackle the role of Kal-El, Tom Welling is probably the closest to what I thought Superman might actually look like.

However, I have watched the show enough that I was one up on Laurie in recognizing the actor to whom she was referring. I suspect that I'm actually two up, since I'm somewhat willing to bet that she's never heard of Green Arrow, either. Not a big surprise if that's the case - GA is certainly one of the lesser-known characters in the DC Comics pantheon when compared to Superman, Wonder Woman or Batman.

The funny thing is that Green Arrow's lineage is almost as long as Batman's. Two years after the Caped Crusader made his debut in 1939, the world was introduced to archery wizard Oliver Jonas Queen, a.k.a. Green Arrow, another millionaire playboy/crimefighter whose early adventures bore a remarkable resemblance to those of Bruce Wayne. Apparently there was only so much demand for independently wealthy vigilantes, and Green Arrow and his array of trick bowshafts limped along in a lame-duck/backup feature/supporting role for almost 30 years.

In 1969 Green Arrow was unexpectedly re-invented as the social conscience of DC, and explored a variety of storylines dealing with issues such as poverty, racism, and political corruption. I say "unexpectedly" because for the most part, comic book characters have existed at a slight remove from the ebb and flow of everyday events. The original precedent was set by Superman, who conspicuously failed to fly to Europe and defeat Hitler during WWII.

This unusual approach to the character led to the production of what some consider to be one of the most ground-breaking storylines in the history of comics: the two-issue 1972 story dealing with the discovery that Speedy, Arrow's teenage sidekick, was addicted to heroin*. At the time, artist Neal Adams and writer Dennis O'Neill didn't think they'd even be allowed to run the issues, since any stories dealing with drugs were strictly forbidden under the Comics Code Authority, let alone stories that showed one of the heroes shooting up on smack.

Surprisingly, the CCA approved the comics, marking the first signs that the guidelines introduced in the 50's might not be as iron-clad as everyone believed them to be. The story received a substantial amount of media attention, and John Lindsay, then mayor of New York, sent DC Comics a letter of commendation.

Shortly thereafter, the title was cancelled, and Green Arrow returned to a supporting role in the DC universe. The shared Green Lantern/Green Arrow title was revived again in 1976, but GA proved less popular than GL, and the Emerald Archer was shifted off to supporting stories again.

Since then, Green Arrow has been through a constant revolving door cycle of redefinition and cancellation. In the past few years, the character has fallen prey to the same sort of look-he's-dead-look-he's-alive-look-it-wasn't-really-him silliness that I mentioned in my last post, to the point where I couldn't definitively determine whether the current comic book Green Arrow was both a) Oliver Queen and b) alive.

And the television version? Well, as I said, I really haven't followed Smallville in a consistent fashion, but from what I have seen, the television Green Arrow occupies much more of a leadership role than the comic book one. In Smallville, he's the formative influence behind the creation of the Justice League, and acts as a constant goad for Clark to accept his destiny as a hero. The writers have echoed the famous 70s storyline by having Oliver himself suffer from problems with addiction, and currently he controls Lex Luthor's financial empire. However, even with all of these elements, I somehow find the character to be lacking a certain degree of depth.

But let's look at this rationally - the part of Green Arrow/Oliver Queen is after all a supporting one, and as such may not offer Mr. Hartley all of the acting opportunities that the leading role would give him. And it could be worse. After all, he did an unsuccessful pilot for an Aquaman spinoff before getting the role of Green Arrow, and if you thought Green Arrow was an obscure character...

- Sid

*Okay, everyone who thought, "Hey, wouldn't it be funnier for a guy named Speedy to be hooked on amphetamines?" can go sit in the corner for a few minutes.

In business news: Disney buys Marvel Comics.

I have to admit that I don't follow current events very closely. I get the New York Times headlines via e-mail every morning, and watch The Daily Show when opportunity allows, but for the most part I'm more concerned about the day's weather than the price of crude oil or the latest death toll in Afghanistan.

But every now and then something of particular interest will sneak by, and I'll regret that I'm not paying more attention. As an example, I just found out that the Disney Corporation has recently purchased Marvel Comics for a price of four billion dollars, an event which certainly doesn't compare with the importance of updates on the economic crisis, but which has been the topic of much amused and/or horrified discussion in the fan community.

Personally, I no longer follow the comics scene closely, because about fifteen years ago I began to realize that both Marvel and DC were starting to run in circles in their attempts to maintain the various shopworn titles responsible for their success. There have been alternate realities, crossovers, character reboots, deaths and revivals, future versions of the characters, and a hundred and one other tricks designed to conceal the fact that they'd gone to the well once too often. Most people aren't aware that Marvel went bankrupt in 1996, but I have to wonder if part of that financial failure was based on too many other fans coming to the same realization that I had.

However, Marvel Comics hasn't really been a comic book company for some time. Ike Perlmutter, who took over after the 1996 crisis, owns the action figure company that had the licenses for the Marvel character line - note that Mr. Perlmutter isn't connected with publishing. What Marvel Comics represents in the 21st century is a huge storehouse of characters and plots that can be moved into other areas: action figures, Lego kits, t-shirts, video games, television shows, movies - I'm not even sure that it matters if they keep producing stories that involve ink and paper. (I suspect that the combined profits from the Marvel-based movie lineup since Spiderman 1 was released in 2002 makes the income from actual comic sales look like a joke.)

And that's what Disney is buying, the opportunity to add the Marvel lineup to its already monolithic array of merchandisable assets. All jokes about the Amazing Spider-Mouse aside, I don't think that Disney is going to do anything to alter the Marvel universe so that it matches the traditional view of Walt's approach to family entertainment. Why would they? All that really matters is that they get five cents every time some soccer mom buys a pair of Spiderman™ Underoos for junior.

Sadly, that also means that they won't do anything to change it for the better, either.

- Sid

P.S. the photocomp picture of Wolverine is just something I threw together for this posting, but for a comprehensive view of the horrifying hybrids made possible by the merger, have a look at the contest on Worth1000.com.