DC more fantastical than Marvel?
Mar 19, 2020 16:55:21 GMT -5
Roquefort Raider, Prince Hal, and 1 more like this
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2020 16:55:21 GMT -5
Growing up, I was more of a DC fan than a Marvel fan. Not in a negative way, I just gravitated more towards DC. I did like both, though. I mean, who doesn't love the likes of Spidey and Iron Man?
I doubt I knew what the word "fantastical" meant as a kid. I do now. And for me, while Marvel was the semi-realistic "world outside your window", DC was this fantasy realm so far removed from reality that I probably had more fun exploring it. For various reasons.
It's only a small thing, but the fictional cities helped. Gosh, my stepdad's Reader's Digest book had photos and articles about New York City. I could read about it at any time. But DC had Metropolis, Gotham City, Star City, Smallville, etc. As small as such things are, and maybe I didn't realise it at the time, the fictional cities were a small facet in allowing me to totally immerse myself in the experience of DC's world.
I think the prevalence of magic also made it more fantastical. Sure, Marvel had some magical characters and themes, but DC seemed to have more.
My reading of DC was not just about the era I grew up in (80s). A lot of 80s UK annuals featured 70s reprints. If I attended a jumble sale, I would see old copies from the 50s to the 60s. And DC seemed totally unpredictable in its fantastical nature when compared with Marvel. I mean, you weren't gonna pick up an Iron Fist comic and see an "Imaginary Tale" where Iron Fist has married and passed the torch to his son. You weren't gonna pick up a Spidey comic and read about Mary Jane being turned into a werewolf while Spider-Man rushes to find a cure. Whereas, with DC, that's exactly what you would find with back issues/reprints. I'd see a picture of Batman in the Stone Age or Lois Lane riding a broomstick. Or Jimmy Olsen turned into something (stop messing around with potions, Olsen!). So there was definitely a fantastical nature to DC that one couldn't get with Marvel.
The problem with a topic like this is its simplicity - and lack of nuance. Of course, there have been fantastical Marvel tales. And there is magic within the Marvel Universe, Dr. Strange is proof of that.
And, believe me, none of the above is a criticism of Marvel. Different is good. I wouldn't want to live in a world where every cereal tasted the same. I wouldn't have wanted Marvel to be DC, nor would I have wanted DC to be Marvel. As a wrestling fan, I want federations to be different. I don't want a cookie-cutter approach. So when I think about the Silver Age comics I've read, I'm pleased that DC and Marvel had different approaches.
Briefly, off-topic, I do find, as I work my way through "Essential" and "Showcase" volumes, that Marvel's Silver Age approach lends itself better to binge-reading. With sub-plots galore, and character-driven stories, I can easily binge something like "Essential Spider-Woman Vol. 2" (my current book). With DC's "Showcase" volumes, however, it's usually one story at a time. They are fun, but not as character-driven. I would tire of binge-reading very quickly if I tried to read 6-7 "Jimmy Olsen becomes..." stories in a row.
That aside, though, I appreciate the differences of the publishers. If Marvel was the nutritious meal, DC was definitely the delightful dessert. That's a poor analogy, I know. I definitely think, though, looking back that I could lose myself more in DC's Silver Age issues. And the bizarre nature of it made it a lot more fantastical. Marvel was great, no doubt. But it was ordinary (relatively speaking). Spider-Man's titles were fantastic, but you knew that if you picked up seven issues, they'd feature covers of Kingpin battling Spidey, Spidey exhausted against Goblin, etc. If you picked up 6-7 DC titles, you just knew you'd see something like a genie, witch or merman Batman on the cover!
I doubt I knew what the word "fantastical" meant as a kid. I do now. And for me, while Marvel was the semi-realistic "world outside your window", DC was this fantasy realm so far removed from reality that I probably had more fun exploring it. For various reasons.
It's only a small thing, but the fictional cities helped. Gosh, my stepdad's Reader's Digest book had photos and articles about New York City. I could read about it at any time. But DC had Metropolis, Gotham City, Star City, Smallville, etc. As small as such things are, and maybe I didn't realise it at the time, the fictional cities were a small facet in allowing me to totally immerse myself in the experience of DC's world.
I think the prevalence of magic also made it more fantastical. Sure, Marvel had some magical characters and themes, but DC seemed to have more.
My reading of DC was not just about the era I grew up in (80s). A lot of 80s UK annuals featured 70s reprints. If I attended a jumble sale, I would see old copies from the 50s to the 60s. And DC seemed totally unpredictable in its fantastical nature when compared with Marvel. I mean, you weren't gonna pick up an Iron Fist comic and see an "Imaginary Tale" where Iron Fist has married and passed the torch to his son. You weren't gonna pick up a Spidey comic and read about Mary Jane being turned into a werewolf while Spider-Man rushes to find a cure. Whereas, with DC, that's exactly what you would find with back issues/reprints. I'd see a picture of Batman in the Stone Age or Lois Lane riding a broomstick. Or Jimmy Olsen turned into something (stop messing around with potions, Olsen!). So there was definitely a fantastical nature to DC that one couldn't get with Marvel.
The problem with a topic like this is its simplicity - and lack of nuance. Of course, there have been fantastical Marvel tales. And there is magic within the Marvel Universe, Dr. Strange is proof of that.
And, believe me, none of the above is a criticism of Marvel. Different is good. I wouldn't want to live in a world where every cereal tasted the same. I wouldn't have wanted Marvel to be DC, nor would I have wanted DC to be Marvel. As a wrestling fan, I want federations to be different. I don't want a cookie-cutter approach. So when I think about the Silver Age comics I've read, I'm pleased that DC and Marvel had different approaches.
Briefly, off-topic, I do find, as I work my way through "Essential" and "Showcase" volumes, that Marvel's Silver Age approach lends itself better to binge-reading. With sub-plots galore, and character-driven stories, I can easily binge something like "Essential Spider-Woman Vol. 2" (my current book). With DC's "Showcase" volumes, however, it's usually one story at a time. They are fun, but not as character-driven. I would tire of binge-reading very quickly if I tried to read 6-7 "Jimmy Olsen becomes..." stories in a row.
That aside, though, I appreciate the differences of the publishers. If Marvel was the nutritious meal, DC was definitely the delightful dessert. That's a poor analogy, I know. I definitely think, though, looking back that I could lose myself more in DC's Silver Age issues. And the bizarre nature of it made it a lot more fantastical. Marvel was great, no doubt. But it was ordinary (relatively speaking). Spider-Man's titles were fantastic, but you knew that if you picked up seven issues, they'd feature covers of Kingpin battling Spidey, Spidey exhausted against Goblin, etc. If you picked up 6-7 DC titles, you just knew you'd see something like a genie, witch or merman Batman on the cover!
