From: hunter@cse.uta.edu (David Hunter)
Subject: Re: Grade Report: Justice League America #72
Keywords: DC, JLA 
Organization: Computer Science Engineering at the University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:33:12 GMT

In article <rawdon.727751541@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>The tone of the book is extremely dark, with Flash and Hawkman wearing mainly
>black costumes, Hawkman (the "world security chief") acting extraordinarily
>viciously toward villains (e.g., ordering Sinestro's arms amputated), and Atom
>deciding to nuke part of China when that country resists.  Only Green Arrow
>shows any sign of a conscience.

This is precisely why the book just didn't "work" for me.  I would have
enjoyed it, but at the point where Hawkman orders Sinestro's amputation
the story lost all credibility with me.  It would have been interesting
to see a story along the lines of "what if the JLA decided to run
things" but these characters were written to be so vicious and without
conscience that I couldn't identify them with the real JLA, so I lost
interest in the story.  This was just some evil guy wearing a Hawkman
costume, some evil guy wearing an Atom costume, etc.  

In my opinion, what made Marvel's "Squadron Supreme" series of several
years ago work so well, was just that the characters did not come
across as evil, but that they did have a conscience and had to 
struggle with the ethics of what they were doing.  You got the
impression they were *trying* to do good -- and I didn't get that 
impression with the characters in JLA #72.  

>So what the hell is going on here?

I have to admit that even though I didn't like the issue, I will pick
up the rest of the story to find out the answer to this question!

>Whatever happens, this issue is an exciting improvement over previous issues
>of JLA, which I think points up the fundamental flaw in the post-Crisis group:
>Without the various "big guns" of DC on the team, the Justice League largely
>loses its purpose.  This is why Dan Jurgens' run on the book, though
>essentially competent in writing and art, has been lackluster, and why the
>Giffen-Dematteis period, which was for the most part very poorly written, was
>basically not worth reading.

Here, here! Right on, Rawdon!

Ok, a lot of the original JLA stories were quite silly, but the book
had a luster and a sense of grandness to it that has never been
captured in any of its subsequent incarnations.  I would call the
Jurgen's version of the book "insipid" and the Giffen-Dematteis
books just plain "stupid".

>Kudos to this story go to colorist Gene D'Angelo, whose dark hues are
>essential to the tone of the story.

Yeah, the book was visually quite nicely done.

>On the other hand, I saw some glitches (which might have been intentional to
>create confusion, but I can't tell at this point):  I seem to recall that the
>SSOSV Star Sapphire was NOT Carol Ferris (as she was in this issue).  The
>Martian Manhunter wasn't a JLA member at the time this story might have taken
>place (one thing which makes me wonder if it DOESN'T take place in an
>alternate past).  Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Zatanna are absent from the issue
>(though if this is the post-Crisis version of the pre-Crisis JLA, then Wonder
>Woman wouldn't have been a member, and Hawkman would have been the JSA's
>version, though Aquaman and Zatanna should be about, as should Hawkgirl, I
>think).

Well, my impression is that DC continuity is so screwed up thse days
that noone up there really knows what's what.  You may be right
about the errors being intentional, but I would tend to doubt it.

>But, it's an enjoyable story, and definitely one worth picking up, especially
>for anyone nostalgic for the good old days of the JLA.

See my first paragraph.  I didn't get any feel of the old JLA at all ...

David Hunter
hunter@cse.uta.edu