Unca Cheeks Silver Age Comics Site: SlowSilverJLA3

Unca Cheeks the Toy Wonder's Silver Age Comics Web Site!

PANNING FOR SILVER

ON THE JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA . . . AND THE BIGGEST FOUR-
COLOR "GUNS" OF THEM ALL
[1]

It's nowhere near as easy as the very best writers out there (doubtless) make it look: this being "definitive" business.

In order to be counted as the "definitive" scribe (or even just one of the "definitive" scribes) for any given series or character, an author needs to more than simply ("simply," he says -- !) churn out his (or her) share of high-octane, four-color thrill rides, month in and month out. (Although that's certainly a significant factor within the overall storytelling equation, of course.)

It takes more than a ready, discerning ear for the variegated subtleties of human speech and interaction, as well. (Although just try turning the trick without having that particular rabbit tucked away somewhere in your hat -- !)

As much as anything, really: what's ultimately required -- right where the tire meets the proverbial tarmac -- is a keen and unwavering respect for the actual characters, themselves; an intuitive understanding and regard for the actual auctorial intentions of their respective creators...

... and (listen up, kids; this is Wisdom Imparted, here) the ability to extrapolate (or even re-extrapolate) something wondrous and new; without losing that aforementioned "unwavering respect" and/or "intuitive understanding and regard" for what's been done before.

Ladies and gentlemen: I have just described long-time comics scripter deluxe, Master Steve Englehart, Esq.

It's only fitting, I think, that we open up this multi-installment of the Silver (and Bronze) Age JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA with a few words from one of the few -- the very few -- men to "do" the whole JLA-type thing with the same flourish and heart as the late, lamented Gardner Fox; the League's justly-honored "Daddy," if you will.

Here's some more Wisdom Imparted, then.

UNCA CHEEKS: "It's 1960, and you've just been handed the assignment to come up with a "try-out" issue of THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD for a (potential) ongoing series -- working title: "The Justice League of America." (... and with you being so young, too -- !)

"You're given (comparative) free reign, insofar as team line-up goes:

ANY seven DC characters of the day...

" ... but: only seven.

"Query: do you pick the same original "five plus two"heroes (Aquaman; Flash; Green Lantern; J'onn J'onzz; Wonder Woman; plus -- occasionally -- Superman and Batman)? Or do you opt for one (or more) of the other character(s) within the DC Comics stable of said era (e.g.: Adam Strange; Captain Comet; Congorilla; Green Arrow; Robin; Supergirl; etc.), in place of one (or more), instead? And -- if so -- why?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "It's a tough question.

"What I might do now is not the same as what I probably would have done in 1960. That era evidently wanted the big heroes, the popular heroes -- it wasn't into rebels without causes as a mass market thing yet (witness the attempt at being hip, Snapper Carr).

"So I'd have probably picked the same crew, except I, being I, would have gotten deeper into their characters. The one that stands out is J'onn J'onzz, of course. Especially since the more DC-1960 approach would have been to pick Green Arrow. GA was a sort of first-and-a-half- string guy, but no more or less so than J'onn. The only difference was in their potential (though Denny found a lot in GA later). So it's interesting to me that they picked J'onn--but then never did much with him."

UNCA CHEEKS: "There is a minor (but vociferous) segment of comics fandom which holds to the position that teams such as the JLA work best with line-ups comprised chiefly (or entirely) of characters not "tied" or "beholden" to their own regular, ongoing series' ; that "characterization" for said protagonists can never be meaningfully advanced, in the same way that it can be (ostensibly) for characters appearing within the pages of the team's title, solely.

"There is a larger faction within the comics readership, however --

particularly as regards the JLA (as well as Marvel's THE AVENGERS) -- which feels that said teams best live up to their baseline premises when comprised chiefly (or entirely) of the "Big Gun" characters of their respective companies; and that it is this (more than anything else) which differentiates the JLA (or the AVENGERS) from the likes of -- say, the X-MEN, or the TEEN TITANS.

"Which of these views (if either) do you lean towards; and why?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "Personally, I prefer characters I can have a free hand with, but I also feel that since the JLA and the Avengers are *supposed* to have big guns, you have to have them. Marvel was always more successful at keeping the biggies "functional" in the team, but that was because that was Marvel's style anyway. (Then, when I revamped the JLA, I imported it.)

"But certainly it was Mantis/Wanda/Vision or Hawkman/ Hawkwoman/Red Tornado or Hawkeye/Mockingbird who drove most

of my stories."

UNCA CHEEKS: "An odd question, admittedly (in three parts, no less)... but:

"a.) What (if anything) do you feel the character of "Snapper" Carr

added to the original series conceptualization of the JLA?

"b.) Would said addition (if any) have worked as well, in your

estimation, if Gardner Fox had opted, instead, to utilize a pre-existing

comics "sidekick," instead? (e.g.: Thomas Kalmuku; Steve Trevor; Jimmy Olsen; Robin; etc.)

"c.) Is there (to your mind) anything the concept of the whey-faced and powerless "sidekick" might conceivably add to the storytelling "mix" of the JLA today; or is this an auctorial notion whose time has come and gone? And does any/all of this have anything to do with your "redemption" of the "Snapper" Carr character, re: the final story arc involving the super-villain known as "The Key"...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "a) I always liked him as an example of DC's 1950s approach to the 1960s. He was harmless (until I got him). Whereas Rick Jones had more personality but, being in a group with more personality, seemed more useless, not to say obnoxious.

"b) Well, I'm not saying any such addition worked well. But at least

Snap had no agenda, whereas Robin would have necessarily polarized

the team (here's me and Bats, there's the rest of them).

"c) Kurt Busiek found a useful use (so to speak) for a human onlooker

in MARVELS. But back then it primarily fit with DC's odd notion that

we'd rather onlook than be the hero. And sure, that was a major

part of the Key story: Snapper wanted to be, at long last."

UNCA CHEEKS: "During your tenure on JUSTICE LEAGUE, you introduced a character by the name of "Willow," who was a formidable hand-to-hand combatant; unfailingly spoke of herself in the third person; and was destined (ultimately) to serve as "madonna" to a being of unimaginable power.

"During your tenure on AVENGERS (prior to your JLA run), you introduced a character by the name of "Mantis," who was a formidable hand-to-hand combatant; unfailingly spoke of herself in the third person; and was destined (ultimately) to serve as "madonna" to a being of unimaginable power.

"Query: was Willow created because of a perceived need (on your part) to take care of some "unfinished business," re: the earlier Mantis? (That is to say: was there some aspect of the whole "madonna" thing you were never allowed to explore, over at Marvel?) Was it a more conscious, practical decision along the lines of: "... well... heck... it worked for one team book"...? Or was it simply a preference (on your part) for writing that particular sort of character, at the time...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "After I left Marvel, I was at a San Diego convention and a guy asked me, "Does this mean we'll never see Mantis again?" Being a feisty kinda guy, I then and there decided that we would. So: I created Willow.

"I had no agenda beyond that--no unfinished story, no preference for her over anyone else. I just wanted to do her again, and realized for the first time (since it was the first time I'd left a company) that under the "rules" I wouldn't be able to. So I changed the rules."

UNCA CHEEKS: "My personal favorite "bit" during your entire JLA tenure was Hawkman's lobbying for the inclusion of his wife, Hawkwoman, into the team's ranks; and the resulting friction this caused with some of the more staid "no-duplication-of-super-powers-ever" members, such as Superman.

"Was this -- along with the aforementioned "Willow" storyline, and your adding a much-needed dash of self-direction and impertinence to League member Wonder Woman -- a conscious attempt to explore the distaff side of the whole cape-and-cowl "thing," overall; or simply happy coincidence...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "It was a conscious attempt to make the women mean more, and it was a clearing out of those 1950s rules like "no duplications" (so, Gardner, how do we not have two Hawks...?).

"When I'd been at Marvel, I'd been told that Wanda's role was to throw a hex and then collapse. I couldn't see that then, and I couldn't see it at the even more dual-standard JLA."

UNCA CHEEKS: "Another 'odd' question... but: one I've always wanted to ask.

"There was a story during your tenure on JLA ("Carnival of Souls") which involved the characters jorneying to Rutland, Vermont; there to interact (briefly) with a parade of revelers, all dressed up as super-heroes.

"You also utilized the same in-joke/aside/what-have-you while writing Marvel's THE BEAST; and -- at various points during the same period -- so did writers Len Wein (again, for JLA); Gerry Conway (for THOR); Roy Thomas (for AVENGERS); and (I believe) Marv Wolfman AND Len Wein (for BATMAN). (There's even a "running gag" in several of these, in which all five writers stare on, disbelievingly, while a costumed super-villain steals the car in which they initially arrived -- !)

"How the heck did this whole weird, meta-fictive business get started, in the first blamed place...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "It started with Roy and Denny (and others) going to the actual parade and party, as described, and then writing about it.

"A year or two later, Len, Gerry, and I decided to take it a step farther and do a combination story. Obviously, Gerry and I could tie in BEAST and THOR; Len had to be extra clever to get his part in JLA. But we did

it."

UNCA CHEEKS: "Your (justly) lauded 'run' on JLA was a fairly brief one, all told; a year or so, give or take. (Especially when viewed in comparison with your far lengthier tenure, re: Marvel's AVENGERS.)

"Without meaning to re-open any old wounds (IF any, that is): was this due to editorial interference, on some level (i.e., not being allowed to

interpret the characters as you saw fit)? An instance of feeling -- soon

after taking on the series -- that it simply wasn't the "place" you wanted to be (as a storyteller), after all? Or some other factor, entirely...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "No--when I left Marvel, I intended to leave comics altogether, but I knew I needed some time to get the finances in order for the transition I'd have to make. So I told Jenette [Kahn] coming in that I'd only do a year for DC, but that I'd bring the company up to speed for her. She wanted me to do the JLA (which I was happy to do), I wanted to do Batman, and that's how it worked out.

"Julie Schwartz, as my editor, made very few editorial emendations to my plans, and they were always good ones."

UNCA CHEEKS: "Looking back: is there anything you wish you could have done with JLA that you simply never got around to doing? (e.g.: tie the series more closely to what you and Marshall Rogers were doing, simultaneously, over in DETECTIVE COMICS? Slip MISTER MIRACLE -- another character you were writing at the time, if memory serves -- into the series; either as guest-star or full member,

outright? Reform the character of "Mark Shaw" [former MANHUNTER; later, THE PRIVATEER]? Bring back Willow? Anything else, specifically...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "I always write with a feeling of where I want to go in the long run, but try not to plan too far ahead, because then you're stale by the time you get there.

"In this case, I knew I was only doing a year, so I had no plan or feeling about what would happen after that."

UNCA CHEEKS: "What is the one thing, above all else (in your estimation), that any writer absolutely MUST know, in order to "do" the Justice League right...?"

STEVE ENGLEHART: "Personally, I think you have to believe in the characters.

"If you choose to take the Snapper Carr approach and onlook you, by

definition, don't get as much pizazz as believing you are each and

every one of the characters. Believing in Batman obviously doesn't

mean you can only write comics, but not believing...well then, why

are you writing comics in the first place?"

UNCA CHEEKS: "Final query:

"You're stranded somewhere in the darkest, most God-forsaken bowels of Apokolips.

"You're being stalked by a frighteningly well-armed horde of ravening

Parademons.

"They're herding you, inexorably, towards Darkseid's palace...

" ... and you have absolutely NO way of getting back home.