[narfstar]

From previous post
Superheroes: Have a power or weapon that puts them beyond the normal.

Again this is my preference and feeling that characters like The Atom or Black Canary(pre-scream of course)  did not belong in the JSA.

[DOC]

Hmm interesting view, it never bothered me as sometimes if the super powered one was in trouble the non-super usually gets them out of fixes.

[JonTheScanner]

From previous post
Superheroes: Have a power or weapon that puts them beyond the normal.

Again this is my preference and feeling that characters like The Atom or Black Canary(pre-scream of course)  did not belong in the JSA.

Actually I'd argue that Atom did have super strength.  I recall him tearing a safe open in and early story and stopping a locomotive with a punch in a later story.  Roy Thomas tried to explain how his exposure to Thorium had done this later in his career, but the safe episode was in one fo the first 5 stories reprinted in the JSA All Stars archives.

[narfstar]

I think that the inconsistent Atom had more to do with the lack of concern for continueity that was prevalent then.

[paw broon]

If there was a set of questions to decide if a character was a super/costumed/masked hero or an adventurer or detective, would the following be any good for you?  I use this test on my obscure hero files.
If you can apply 2 of the following 3 the character is in:- 1) does character have a secret i/d.?
                                                                             2) does character have a power or powers?
                                                                             3) does character have a costume, mask or clothing setting them apart from the everyday?
A costume could be as simple as The Spirits Gloves and mask or Midnights or The Phantom Detective.
Applying this The  Phantom is in as a masked/costumed hero but Doc Savage, Don Winslow, Dixon Hawke are adventurers or detectives or crimefighters.  The same goes for all those masked cowboys, Black Bull, El Bravo, El Coyote etc, as they are costumed heroes set in a different time.  Same for many of the Spanish historical heroes.
But after all, it's just fun and I don't really mind powered heroes teaming up with nonpowered.  I just enjoy the costumes and crazy antics

[LastQuestion]

If we include technology as an element that can make someone "super" then we'd have to include the Sandman, as his gas gun gave him an advantage over common crooks, right?
I believe the Crimson Avenger also had some sort of special gun?

Paw Broon mention mystery men fighting in WW2, and how this didn't seem like a likely scenario, as they'd be fighting the might of Germany/Japan. 
I disagree with that opinion (sorry, not trying to start anything) because Germany was defeated by normal men (and Japan w/ the aid of a massive bomb designed by normal men).
Why couldn't a mystery man be effective in that field?
(DC actually did a great Elseworlds story called The Liberty Files that covered this era--better then most all the in continuity books they do too boot).
I always felt though, that the mystery men of that era were meant to stand in for the boys back home who couldn't go fight for whatever reason, and to also be "spiritual companions" to the soldiers in the field, so they felt that there was someone extra watching over them in the war zone.

As a reader, I like the idea of normal people fighting overwhelming greater-then-human foes and still wining--as long as its a well told "plausible" story. 
Granted, there are limits.

The timeline sort of goes from sleuth/detectives, ending with Superman/Captain Marvel and in between all sorts of "creative evolution" from to the mystery men, to the pulp heroes and into the costume hero era.
One hero can't be everywhere, and besides not everyone is going to read or like superman.
So you have to keep freshening up these old properties.
We see Batman getting smarter and tougher, and the shadow get more mysterious, and his villains getting more diabolical and crueler.
The Spider's adventures get more and more paranoid and he kills mountains of villains in each magazine.
Eventually Sandman starts dressing in a typical costumed hero fashion and later "begets" a 2nd generation version of himself w/ super powers.

And yet, after decades of reading these characters we haven't really gone beyond Superman.
Why?

As for the kid sidekick, yea more often then not ditch 'em!

[narfstar]

Heroes without powers are not super and should only fight street criminals not super criminals. Kid sidekicks without super powers were the dumbest thing in comics. Other than the Key and Buzzard. For those who never read some of my previous posts on these characters here is why they were the worst.
The Key had a key on a string he wrapped around crooks. The Buzzard's shadow looked like a buzzard and scared crooks. I thought the Key was the worst until I read the Buzzard.

[phabox]

I like the 'Everyman' idea behind the costumed mystery men myself, after all any normal guy could train himself like Batman/Mister Terrific/Vigilante/Green Arrow and co or maybe with a somewhat higher IQ come up with a gravity rod or wire-poon gun.

Not many average joes can be born on Krypton and rocketed to Earth as a baby !

-Nigel

[narfstar]

I put special weapons in the super hero category. And the appeal of training to be a mystery man may have been there for kids but I wonder about the adult audience reading it. There were so many with so little other than a costume and the even more crazy kid sidekick who would have been dead after the first case.

[John C]

Not many average joes can be born on Krypton and rocketed to Earth as a baby !

Maybe not Earth, but being rocketed (OK, shipped) to the New World to escape an imploding government, maybe a few more.

Personally, though, I've never had problems with any of the other "peculiar" elements.  Terrible writing is one thing, but the concepts themselves can go in any direction.

Kid sidekicks?  Well, sometimes.  Some make sense and some don't.  When you've read a few of the books that the early Golden Age writers must have read (I've recommended Mason's Tom Strong novels before), you start to see the idea that a kid can function as an adult in a new light.

The same goes for genre crossings in the "a detective/archer personally fends off a Martian invasion" vein.  As long as the story plays fair, I think it's fine.  The problem, though, is that most stories don't play fair.  The hero just...wins.  It's entirely possible for individuals to defeat overwhelmingly superior forces (the old Loompanics books described numerous entertaining real-world examples in their day), so a good story can be told, as long as it's not a head-on fight.

Likewise, I think the problems with teams don't stem from varying power levels so much as teams (in the comic book sense) don't really make sense to begin with.  What does the Justice League do, exactly?  They have a base (don't get me started on secret bases), lots of technology, and rules (heh--that's what I read comics for:  bureaucracy!), but they don't really have a goal that can't be accomplished more efficiently with a telephone chain instead.

In that, the early Justice Society seems to make more sense than anything that's come after.  "Someone called me with a weird problem, and it sounds like you guys would want to be in on this.  Let's get together tomorrow night, split a couple of pizzas, and figure out how to handle it."  The idea that you need regular meetings, official membership rosters, Monitor Duty rotations (as if the Spectre/Superman/whoever won't spot the problem before you get the phone call), and magic telepathic signal devices to function is far more absurd, to me, than teaming up the Atom with the Spectre.

I guess that might be a slightly different topic, though, than what you guys are talking about.

[narfstar]

Now I'm offended John. I love teams to get more for my money. And here you are raining on my parade with logic. Shame on you. Just because my logic suspension does not allow unpowered kid sidekicks does not mean it has to disdain teams. It will forever be your fault if I am unable to enjoy my JLA and JSA books.
You know I am just kidding. I will continue to ignore common sense and joyfully read JLA and Jsa (when the stories are good anyway) and continue to hate kid sidekicks especially Robin who ruined a perfectly good down and dirty kill the crook Batman.

[Yoc]

Narf must have liked the Batman when he still carried a gun.  Am I right Narf?

[John C]

Sigh.  All right.  We'll throw down.  But I'll warn you, I'm short, have no idea how to fight, and tend to vomit a bit when hurt.

Yeah, you better run!

Seriously, don't get me wrong.  I like the basic concept of having teams and many, many team stories, and have only recently come to realize that the trappings are, well, stupid.

I mean, how many stories start with a hero sitting around to answer a phone or watching the news on TV?  How many involve the heroes loitering about in full costume and armament in their secret, fortified, and inaccessible base of operations packed with fabulous technology that could, y'know, save lives?

(I blame the X-Men for the bunker fetish.  It almost makes sense to have a training facility, when you're a persecuted minority raising a paramilitary force, but doesn't quite work when you're the best of the best trying to make the world a better place.  Hiding doesn't seem to make a heck of a lot of sense in context, either.  Doesn't that just force villains with a grudge to kill civilians until you get the message?)

And today, it's even worse!  Back in the '70s, it was just the Justice League and Avengers in their personalized cushy chairs.  But how many times a year are we "treated" to yet another grouping of villains chatting around THEIR big conference table!?  Evil board meetings are, like, the climax of every crossover.  You know it's only a matter of time before half the issue of some book is taken up by Grodd giving a PowerPoint presentation.

My vision for a good team book would be for one of the sneaky folks to trail a villain and discover a serious plot that they can't or won't handle alone.  Then they call the other members.  They can hover in the air while they plan, or meet up at the local Applebee's, for all I care, as long as they get back to the story...

Oh, and don't blame Robin too much for Batman's wussification; logic blames the Joker.  Once Kane and Finger realized they had a hit on their hands, they not only needed to bring the clown back, but would need a reason to keep bringing him back.  By having Batman avoid killing, they could easily reuse villains without making the heroes look like losers every month for failing to stop anybody.  Now, it's just the guys at Arkham who look inept, and if you've ever visited a psychiatric institution...

But, I have to admit that I'm not too big a fan of killer heroes, personally.  Expedient measures might make for a good catharsis, but it's generally pretty bland storytelling and definitely fails to be iconic.

(In the real world, Batman would probably be forced to kill repeatedly.  But, then, in the real world, his secret identity would've been blown repeatedly by kids with camera-phones and pirated copies of Photoshop...)

[Yoc]

 
+1 karma for that one John.  Good line!

Evil board meetings are, like, the climax of every crossover.  You know it's only a matter of time before half the issue of some book is taken up by Grodd giving a PowerPoint presentation.

[narfstar]

I lean very strongly toward victims rights over criminals rights. Kill a killer and he won't kill again. Superman is the worst for not killing. I remember an issue where he faced Luthor commenting on how much harm he knew Luthor would do but would not eliminate him. Batman did the same with the Joker. I then think they have to take some responsability for all those that are hurt after. Read JLA/Hitman for a poingnant ending. Enough seriousness back how silly comics really are.

The absolute dumbest thing even beyond kid sidekicks is genius villains using multi-million dollar inventions to rob few thousand dollars. Not to mention the production and patent on the machines that would net them billions. Just think of the Fantastic Four's foe the Wizard with his antigravity discs as one example.

[John C]

I lean very strongly toward victims rights over criminals rights. Kill a killer and he won't kill again. Superman is the worst for not killing. I remember an issue where he faced Luthor commenting on how much harm he knew Luthor would do but would not eliminate him. Batman did the same with the Joker. I then think they have to take some responsability for all those that are hurt after. Read JLA/Hitman for a poingnant ending. Enough seriousness back how silly comics really are.

I see it slightly differently, probably, because I grew up (to the extent that I did) a bit later, when the Joker had random Byzantine plans that had no chance of success (and could only rarely end in anybody's death) and Luthor was pretty much just trying to irritate Superman.  Killing either of them would be outright petty.

Then the industry went through the Punisher-driven metamorphosis where heroes were brutal vigilantes who beat the stuffing out of the bad guys for what seemed to be little or no reason.  So I wasn't surprised that the villains became more dangerous--wouldn't you?

However, I think I most blame the Comics Code for the ineffectualness of the heroes.  After all, as I think I've mentioned before, there was a time not long ago when everybody in this country was considered responsible for upholding the law.  There wasn't any professional law enforcement (in fact, our great-grandparents, if they lived in the United States, probably would have been shocked at such an idea), and a victim would usually even have to hire his own prosecutor to try someone for an offense.

But after a certain point, this idea goes away.  The heroes don't see themselves as having the authority to do anything more than get in the path of bullets and maybe, MAYBE clock the guy who's about to kill thousands, to keep him still until the police show up.  Even when they've been vaguely deputized (how many lawsuits do you think the Gotham PDs saw for all Batman's warrantless searches, by the way?), they still only see their jobs as turning the crook over to the police, nothing more.

What's irritating is that, even though nobody really pays attention to the Code anymore, this idea is still lodged in as being a superhero.

Maybe it's a storytelling thing.  After all, we already know that the hero is going to win.  It's his book, and you don't generally snuff main cast.  So we know that Batman (for example) is never in any real danger of failure.  So killing...well, that's cheating, isn't it?  It'd be like finding out that Bill Gates has decided to counterfeit a couple of twenty dollar bills.

The absolute dumbest thing even beyond kid sidekicks is genius villains using multi-million dollar inventions to rob few thousand dollars. Not to mention the production and patent on the machines that would net them billions. Just think of the Fantastic Four's foe the Wizard with his antigravity discs as one example.

I won't talk about this, because it's tied up in a project I've been working on, but this is actually something I've given some thought, and often wonder if there's some more subtle reasoning involved.  From the perspective of the characters, I mean, and not the writers.  The writers clearly have no idea what's going on...