On DC and Marvel

20070610
(answer to the question are you "DC or Marvel?")

Marvel, definitely. At least at the turn of the 70s-80s, when I would read them. I can hardly tell the difference between a Superman from the 30s and a clone from the 80s. When I re-read the Marvel comics from the 60s to the early 80s, I see the cultural changes in the US society.

DC heroes were never-doubting, monolithic superheroes and supervilains meant for a good vs evil era. Each of Stan Lee's characters had more subtle weaknesses than an aversion for green meteorites. Good old Big Apple replaced Gotham and Metropolis, and the younger generation could eventually read about poverty, drugs, racism, sects, religious fundamentalism, social and political unrests...

But Marvel pushed too far the marketing, launched too many products, and turned into some kind of a boring sitcom factory during the eighties (except a few masterpieces by Chris Claremont, Frank Miller...).

DC top execs eventually did the right thing : they fired Superman and hired Marvel's Frank Miller to get at last something exciting out of Batman.

Precisions added :
- Beyond DC/Marvel, the ultimate masterpiece came from the UK (Alan Moore's "Watchmen").
- Come to think of it : DC could make something out of Batman because he was the most human character (no superpowers). And I liked the mention of MLB : I'm both Marvel and NL, the Yanks do have something of a DC league of superheroes, and I feel closer to more human losers (Peter Parker, Paul Auster, the Mets).