The Non-Fan's Perspective: WONDER WOMAN

I've decided that the term "non-fan" is clunky and I don't like it. But I can't think of any ready alternatives. I've heard "civilian" tossed about here and there, but that sounds vaguely creepy, like I'm part of some weird comic fan militia. And it doesn't help that it seems to be a pet word of John Byrne's. So "non-fan" it stays, I guess.

Well, anyway, for the week under discussion in this installment of The Non-Fan's Perspective, the class read WONDER WOMAN: GODS AND MONSTERS.

Conversation that occurred in the minutes before class:
SOME GUY: Are there any Political Science majors in this class who are going to completely tear into this book?
SOME OTHER GUY: Actually, I'd think if anyone would have issues with this book, it would be Classics majors.

Ah, good times, good times.

Surprisingly, the overall reaction to this TPB was positive; the class liked it for the most part. I'd have thought Greg Potter and Len Wein's wordiness would be hard to get into for non-fans.

I was also surprised when a few people opined that the gorgeous George Perez art was only mediocre (as one person put it, "eh") but, as I quickly realized, I shouldn't have been. I remember that when I first encountered his style (in his run on Avengers with Kurt Busiek), it left me lukewarm, too. Yeah, it was detailed, but so what, I thought. That didn't automatically make it good.

These days, I see that the level of detail is only the tip of the iceberg as far as the merits of Perez art go, even if it's the trait the fans harp on the most.

These days, I love it. But for whatever reason, I didn't when I first saw it. I guess it's just one of those styles.

The first several students to criticize GODS AND MONSTERS (all men) all prefaced their comments with something along the lines of, "I like Wonder Woman, but..." This was odd, as similar disclaimers where nowhere to be seen when the class discussed other characters. One of the facilitators totally called it when he said to the class, "No one's going to think you're some horrible misogynist just because you don't preface your comment with that." After that, it stopped.

The facilitators asked the Classics majors in the room for their opinion of the portrayal of Greek myth in the book. But it turns out either there weren't any or, if there were, they chose to remain silent.

However, a bunch of students who were not Classics majors chose this point to object to the portrayal of Herakles. They didn't like how unheroic he was here, how he was a villain of the piece.

What the heck. Who would have thought Hercules had so many fans among American college students. Is this the work of Kevin Sorbo or something?

The facilitators said that they had originally wanted to include more trade paperbacks starring woman superheroes in the course (GODS AND MONSTERS was the only one), but they found that most of them starred reformed or borderline supervillains. They felt there was a disturbing message buried underneath that, an implication that a woman needs a man to "set her straight," so they didn't include add of those characters to the reading list.

Is this true? I was going to, at this point in the entry, pull up both DC and Marvel's shipping lists for this month (and make no mistake, the course basically did limit its purview to the Big Two) to look for this trend. But it's getting late, so I'll edit it into this entry tomorrow. Or go through it in a separate entry.

Anyway, the facilitators then brought up the Women in Refrigerators website, explaining the whole thing. None of the fans in the class tried to refute it, though one guy argued the portrayal of women in comics was getting much better, citing Wildstorm and Image as groups he felt were particular trailblazers in this area. His examples of specific titles? Fathom and Gen13. And possibly one other I'm forgetting. Anyhoo...

Oddly enough, the facilitators had no idea Gail Simone was a comicbook writer. ("I think she's a journalist," one of them said.) This is especially odd when you consider that they almost certainly found out about Women in Refrigerators from the Internet, and even the most cursory of web searches would turn up the fact that Simone writes comics. In fact, I just typed "gail simone" (*without* the quote marks) into Google. The first result is a Wikipedia entry, and right below it are the words, "Gail Simone is an American writer of comic books..."

Like I said, weird.

The discussion about the portrayal of women in comics drifted to one about racial minorities in comics. Again, nobody tried to refute.

The Non-Fan's Perspective: THE HULK

This time, it's all about Week I've-lost-count of the Superheroes in Comics course, for which we read THE INCREDIBLE HULK: RETURN OF THE MONSTER.

When the facilitators gave a brief, streamlined run-through of the Hulk's publishing history, they understandably tried to keep things simple by entirely avoiding the topic of his multiple incarnations. Then, they raised the floor for questions, at which point the following scene occured:

Man raises hand
FACILITATOR: "This better not be a question about the other Hulks."
RAISED HAND: "It's not."
FACILITATOR: "Okay."
RAISED HAND: "What's the story behind the grey Hulk?"
FACILITATOR: "I just told you not to ask that!!"

And in case any of you are the type who can't stand a story incomplete, the questioner, if I recall correctly, responded with, "I didn't know he was one of the other Hulks!" Interpret that as you will.

Opinions about this trade were amibivalent and mild, decidedly an overall "Eh."

There was some discussion about whether Bruce Banner's efforts to escape capture by the military are heroic or moral, given that there's the danger of a Hulk rampage as long as he's free. All of the arguments in the character's defense were offered somewhat uncomfortably, and there was significant support behind the idea that no, he in fact is not acting morally.

I couldn't find much in the way to justify his behavior myself, which surprised me because I've never considered Banner's behavior to be unethical before. This led me to wondering why that was, why I've been rooting for the poor, pressed-on guy all this time... and it came to me: In the past, the Hulk never killed any innocent people. Well, he never did that in this one TPB either, but the facilitators had mentioned how later trades firmly painted the red on his hands.

And that changes everything.

Which lights the way to my opinion that the Hulk as a character simply doesn't work if he's killed anyone of the non-villain variety. Once he's done that, the reader can't root for Bruce Banner anymore, not if he stays on the run, consequently knowlingly putting lives at risk. When the tanks edge in and surround the Hulk, something's wrong if it's the tanks the reader is championing. But enough; I don't want to side-track. The title of this entry's The Non-Fan's Perspective, not APLOMB's Perspective.

There were a lot of laughs when the facilitators mentioned that the Doc Samson character, like his Biblical namesake, wields strength dependant on his hair length. This reaction, too, surprised me. Is it really much sillier than the rest of the wacky science found in superhero comics? Apparently... yes?

Oh, and it'll come as a surprise to no one, I'm sure, that most of the students did not know of the existence of any version of the Hulk beyond the simple-minded, green one. This even went for, surprisingly enough, one young man who could recite chapter and verse for all the Marvel books that contain X somewhere in their title. I mentioned him far back in my first entry of this series. This guy knew in his heart the *Summers* *family* *tree*. One time, someone asked him whether the character Havok ever had his own series, and I heard firsthand as he went into a thorough answer involving the words "leader of X-Factor" and "Mutant X" and god knows what else. I don't keep track too much of Marvel's mutant fiefdom, but he sounded like he knew the stuff but good. Hunh.

And... fin. The next entry will be up sooner or later, and I proclaim its topic WONDER WOMAN: GODS AND MORTALS.

The Non-Fan's Perspective: Miscellaneous

I'm titling this entry of The Non-Fan's Perspective "Miscellaneous" because it covers Spider-Man, the (Ultimate) Fantastic Four, and the JLA, but none of them to the extent that referencing them in the title wouldn't be misleading.

As I explained in the previous entry in this awkward excuse for a series, this installment covers not one but two classes of the course. For the first, we read SPIDER-MAN: THE DEATH OF GWEN STACY. For the second, each student had his/her choice between ULTIMATE FANTASTIC FOUR: THE FANTASTIC (say that three times fast) and JLA: TOWER OF BABEL. I'm covering both classes in this one entry because, from my subjective point of view, the Spider-Man trade didn't generate enough interesting comments from the other students to warrant its own chapter.

The student response to that one can be boiled down to "I didn't like it, but I respect it," whatever that's supposed to mean. I also learned that lots of casual fans don't read the credits, as there was some confusion over whether Stan Lee or Gerry Conway wrote the issues collected within. ("Both," that is the answer.) Darn it all, am I the only person who has a borderline OCD need to read the credits box whenever it shows up? Seriously, even when I *know* a trade paperback has the same writer and artist throughout, I still can't help but skim through those cursed rectangles *every* *time* they shows up. And it's as annoying as it sounds! Aaah...

There were a couple of people who made remarks along the lines that, by all rights, they *should* have found Peter Parker whiny and "emo," but they didn't, for reasons they couldn't pinpoint.

Also, there was some back-and-forth over whether or not Spider-Man should be held responsible for Gwen Stacy's death after one of the facilitators brought up the neck-snap theory/fact. Interesting that even the non-fans were making statements about how he couldn't just let her fall because "that's not what a superhero does."

According to the facilitators, a bunch of the students who picked the FANTASTIC FOUR trade wrote in their reading responses that they were confused by the discrepancies between it and the Fantastic Four movie -- namely the differences in the origins. I, however, am personally convinced most of them were feigning said confusion just to give themselves something to fill up their mandatory reading responses with.

I find it hard to swallow that *any* American could be so unfamiliar with the concept of adaptations taking liberties with the source material. Heck, even when I was in grade school, I remember discussing with a friend the differences between, of all things, "cartoon Swamp Thing" and "live action Swamp Thing." (At the time I didn't have the slightest inkling he was a comic book character. Heh.)

I didn't read the FANTASTIC FOUR trade, so if there was any further discussion of its contents, I don't recall it.

As for the JLA book... After reading it, a number of the students were left with the impression that Batman was some sort of League leader or something, with the others as his underlings. Hee. I can see how reading TOWER OF BABEL in a vacuum could lead to that line of thought.

Honestly, there really wasn't much discussion of either trade because a goodly portion of the class that week was spent on an activity where we made up superhero teams out of pre-existing characters. "Democratic education," good people: the education that is anything but.

We were divided into groups for the activity, each one concocting its own super-team. I don't remember most of the results, but one particularly amusing creation was the team formed to bake a giant pie to sate Galactus's hunger and consequently spare the Earth. The members were the Human Torch (to bake), the Flash (to gather ingredients), Aunt May (for her culinary talent), and one or two other individuals I'm no doubt forgetting.

Aah, I suppose you had to be there.

Of Scholarship and Sequential Art

In case any of you are curious, here are the comic book-related courses available in my college's "democratic education" program this semester:

The Physics of Superheroes
"Everything you need to know about physics can be learned from comic books. The purpose of this course is to examine and understand superhero abilities through the application of elementary physics principles. This is your opportunity to learn physics the fun way. Please visit the course website for more information."

*Accurate* science in superhero comics? Where's the fun in that?

While I have no interest in enrolling in this course, I might sit in on one or two classes just to see what it's all about.

Superheroes and real-world physics. Huh.

Batman as American Mythology
"This class studies Batman as a form of legitimate literature. We will study Batman through 3 perspectives: history of Batman, psychology of Batman, and Batman’s place in America’s mythological canon.

"You don’t have to be a Batman guru (nor do you have to be familiar with him at all!), so whether you’ve memorized every issue or have only seen three episodes of “Batman Beyond,” you’re all eligible. Any necessary readings will be assigned (for a DISCOUNT at Comic Relief!!!!!!!!!), and necessary movies/episodes will be shown in class.

"At least once a week, we will show an episode or movie in class.

"PS. This is the final semester this course will be offered with any of the original, founding facilitators."

This course spends over 50% of its total classtime watching Batman cartoons/movies. They spend more time doing so than not. If you're someone living in the local area, feel a burst of pride at knowing this is your tax dollars at work.

Don't get me wrong, the facilitators for this class are cool folks. It's not like there aren't other democratic education courses just as lax. The fault is with the democratic education program and its low standards.

Comic Book, Manga, and Graphic Novel Techniques
"Every week will deal with a different aspect of the comic book-making process.

"We will go over basic concepts in the history of comics, script writing, basic drawing skills, panel continuity, character design, penciling, inking, lettering, cover art, and other stuff too.

"The final project is to MAKE your own 12-page comic book. There will be short 1-page assignments throughout the semester. These will be intermittent and painless, we promise.

"Class meets once a week, for 90 minutes. The first half hour will be lecture/discussion, with the rest of the time opening up for working on your comic and getting peer input. The idea is to create a friendly environment where aspiring comic book writers/artists can share their cool ideas with each other and bring an idea to fruition.

"Also, this class has optional readings that will be made available at Comic Relief for a discount price."

Superman as American Mythology
"Created in 1938, Superman has grown from a simple comic book character to become one of the greatest pop culture icons in the world.

"This DeCal will explore the characters 68 year history with special emphasis being paid to the characters development, the political and social movements that influenced the character and the philosophy behind the Man of Steel.

"Class will meet on Monday and Wednesday, and every Wednesday will include a media presentation.

"This class is great for the Superman novice as well as the comics afficienado. Readings will include Superman comics by Siegel & Shuster, John Byrne, Jeph Loeb, Brian Azzarello, as well as the Pulitzer Prize winning novel The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay by Michael Chabon."

I don't know how you can consider yourself a proper Superman class when you don't include Busiek and Immonen's SUPERMAN: SECRET IDENTITY on the reading list.

Bookworlds: Neil Gaiman's The Sandman
"Enter the Dreaming. If you know what that means, want to find out, or just want to earn 2 units reading some of the best fantasy graphic novels ever written, come join us in BookWorlds: The Sandman. This semester we will explore the world of Neil Gaiman’s award-winning series. Originally released in 80 issues from 1988 to 1996, The Sandman chronicles the stories of Morpheus, the personification of Dream and one of the Endless."

Why in Murphy's name is this course listed under Integrative Biology?

I might sit in on one or two classes of this one, too.
***
And this has nothing to do with superhero comics...

Bookworlds: Animorphs: The Ethics of War
"The epic book series has finally come to Cal! We’ll discuss the series; how it portrays warfare, ethics, and heroes; and think about the books’ place in literature. There will be character studies, moral debates, and a guest lecture or two. Relive childhood memories or read the series for the first time, all are welcomed. Join us as we discuss and honor one of the greatest book series of all time!"

...but there's no way I'm not taking this class. I *loved* the series when I was growing up. No, scratch that. I still love it.

The Non-Fan's Perspective: DAREDEVIL

This entry of The Non-Fan's Perspective is going to be fairly short, as are future installments most likely. I'm finding that I can't remember as many noteworthy incidents from the later classes as I can for the earlier ones. Whether this is because my own interest waned over time as the freshness of it all faded so that I paid less attention, or simply because there weren't as many interesting comments later in the semester, I can't decide. Whatever the cause, the effect exists.

Anyway, for Week Five we read Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli's DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN. Most of the students thought that out of all the TPBs we'd read up to that point, it was the best one yet. I strongly agreed. Frankly, I'm surprised Miller had it in him to write this. I mean, there are actually moments of genuine heart-touching human warmth in this book. How did that happen, yeah?

I *do* like some of Miller's other works, but none of them contain the sort of powerful, inspirational moments that dot this story. When Ben Urich says out loud, "Matt Murdock"... Man. Honestly, I wish Miller would write more in this vein instead of repeatedly mining the "mean people being mean to other mean people because it's a mean world" framework he loves so much. (Not that I don't enjoy some of his stories of that type either; I'd just like more diversity is all.)

One guy asked whether Spider-Man or Daredevil was first published, stating that clearly one must have "ripped off" the other. His reasoning was this Daredevil story featured the Daily Bugle in a prominent role, the Kingpin, and a villain discovering the hero's identity, all elements that can also be found in Spider-Man stories. Heh.

Apparently, despite how much my fellow students generally liked BORN AGAIN, there *were* numerous complaints about Captain America's sudden appearance in the final chapter. Well, maybe "complaint"'s too strong a word, but it definitely brought about head-scratching. Not being as familiar with how Marvel actualizes its shared universe, the surprise appearance in the last act of a character who was previously not so much as even mentioned and having that character play a pretty vital role... well, it seemed odd to them. And it kind of is, isn't it? Heck, I'm sure some of them didn't know that Marvel's character lived in a shared universe in the first place.

The next TPB we read was SPIDER-MAN: THE DEATH OF GWEN STACY. However, there was almost nothing that happened during that week's class that I feel like writing about, so I'll lump it with the TPB we read after *that*, which was either JLA: TOWER OF BABEL or whatever the first ULTIMATE FANTASTIC FOUR trade was called. (Each student only had to read one and got to choose which.)

The Non-Fan's Perspective: GREEN LANTERN

And welcome to Entry Three. It's occurred to me that it'd be more accurate to call these entries "The Fan's Perspective on the Casual Fan and Non-Fan's Perspective," but that fatigues the tongue a tad. Oh well. For the week currently under discussion, the class read GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN.

As I walked into the classroom, some of my fellow students who also arrived early were chatting about the Green Lantern mythos with the facilitators. And what one guy said confused me. He was explaining some background but all the information was completely off. I was wondering just what on Earth was going on until I realized it: He was conflating Katma Tui and Jade into one character and thought they were the same person. Then it all made sense.

Thinking about, I suppose they do *kind of* look similar if you take each from the period she were wearing the standard Green Lantern Corps uniform. I mean, they both have dark hair and inhumanly-hued skin, so if one were to forget what the colors were and only remember that they're unusual ones... Okay, no matter what angle I look at it from, it's still a pretty strange mix-up.

Well, moving onto classtime proper... Wow, they *really* didn't like this one. So, to recaputilate: The Non-Fan's Opinion -- THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN - Eh, BATMAN: YEAR ONE - Yay, EMERALD DAWN - Nay. According to the facilitators, the student response to EMERALD DAWN was predominantly negative, something reflected in the class discussion. What's funny was the nature of the criticism. A number of people expressed their distaste towards the "politics" of the Green Lantern concept; they detected an unhealthy ideology inside. They found the character of Hal Jordan and the GLC concept as a whole as very "American," in the bad sense of the word. There were comments about about moral relativism and how the Guardians of the Universe have no right to enforce their values onto other cultures. Certainly an amusing discussion to watch, have to say.

Heck, one guy even talked about how he saw the color green as a metaphor. As he put it, the Guardians are trying to spread morality, but it's only their culture's morality, a filtered light (one color) instead of white (all colors). Personally, I find that a pretentious interpretation, but at the same time a small part of me finds it neat.

A secondary target of criticism was the absurdity of, well, *all* the story's science. A bunch of students just found it too much, really. I suppose the Green Lantern concept does require a sizeable scooping of suspension of disbelief, doesn't it, even by superhero standards? And oh yes, you can bet the phrase "weakness to the color yellow" was uttered. Personally, I always liked that bit; it works really well in terms of visuals.

The following week's trade paperback was DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN.

The Non-Fan's Perspective: BATMAN

May I present Entry Two of "The Non-Fan's Perspective." I've begun making use of Blogger's label system, so now we can click on the "non-fan's perspective" tag/label to access the previous entries.

Last entry was about Week 2: Superman. This one covers Week 3: Batman. I'll be doing the entries in chronological order, or at least I will until I start forgetting what order we read the assigned TPBs in.

The Batman trade the facilitators chose was YEAR ONE. I'd already read it a couple of years back, so I didn't bother re-reading for the course. From what I remember of it, it was quite good, with some impressive, impactful wording inside the narration boxes, but it also dragged somewhat towards the end. Maybe that had more to do with the mood I was in, though.

Anyway, opinions about the David Mazzucchelli artwork were very mixed among the class. Some thought it was terrific. That came as no surprise. Others absolutely hated it. That did come as a surprise. Yeah, I don't get it, either.

Paralleling the previous week, the class discussion wandered to whether Bruce Wayne or Batman is the real identity. I can't say it's a topic that holds much interest for me; it seems to be little more than an issue of semantics. Various students brought up the same few points that come up whenever this question hits Internet fandom.

One student, seemingly familiar with the Batman movies, asked whether it was the Joker or Ra's Al Ghul who was Batman's arch-nemesis. The facilitators responded that it really depends on who you ask, but I'm not sure I agree with that. Surely, it's the Joker?

Heh, if Ra's Al Ghul really was as prominent as the Joker, I'd probably be able to enjoy Batman stories a lot more. A centuries-old eco-terrorist who runs a group called the League of Assassins? That guy's just plain cool.

Another student asked the much more *interesting* question, "So I hear Batman knows how to use magic?" Still not sure what that was about.

Also discussed was whether or not Batman's a superhero. I have to say, this surprised me. I would have thought this was a question only fans would ever discuss, a topic restricted to people who can no longer see the forest for the trees. I mean... it's Batman. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, y'know? In my opinion a person claiming Batman's not a superhero is focused too much on the small details and not enough on the big picture, which is behavior in the domain of fans. I was really surprised that non-fans could see the cape, the skin-tight costume, the secret identity, the costume, the crimefighting, etc. without the word "superhero" immediately stamping itself into the brain.

That's that. The next TPB we read was GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN. And I'll be keeping to the intended roughly weekly schedule now.

The Non-Fan's Perspective: SUPERMAN

And off we go... Entry One in my recollections of the reactions of the students in the "Superheroes in Comics" class I took last semester. I'll do one entry for each week of the class, I think. We read one TPB each week, so that also means one TPB each entry. And remember, most of the class was made up of either casual fans or folks who weren't fans at all. I explained the thing here.

The facilitators made our first assignment the "The Death of Superman." Why, I have no idea.

It was actually the first (and only time) I read it. I'd never picked it up earlier because the plot didn't sound all that interesting. Superman and some monstrous heavy punching each other back and forth? Okay, but where's the hook? And now that I've read it? Well, on the one hand, I found it as tedious and boring as I thought I would, but on the other, I had to read it all in one sitting (so I could turn in my response paper on time), and that couldn't have helped matters. This is the type of arc definitely *not* suited for the trade paperback treatment. Maybe if I read it as it was intended to be... who knows? Also, it wasn't *quite* as single-stranded as I'd been lead to believe, what with that little kid, the other teenage kid, and all that other stuff surrounding the slugfest.

As for everyone else's responses, I was surprised by how warm the reactions were. They weren't particularly taken by it, but they by no means hated it, either. The reaction was a neutral "thumbs-sideways" one. If anything, I'd have thought non-fans would dislike it even more.

In the course of the class discussion, the whole "Is Clark Kent or Superman the real person?" question came up, as well as the Kill Bill scene that seems to be inevitably referenced each time this thing rears its head these days. What's interesting is that everyone thought of Clark Kent as the mild-mannered milquetoast of Pre-Crisis days, not as the bolder John Byrne version. This despite everyone in the room being born in the mid-80s. This is something I noticed in my own history with the character. I was born in '85, the Superman I was exposed to -- in the comics, in the Lois & Clark TV show -- was the Post-Crisis one, but I never noticed this guy I was seeing wasn't cowardly, wasn't a clutz! The idea of the timid Clark was just so ingrained in my mind that I filled in those traits myself. It wasn't until I read an article somewhere about the changes Crisis made to Superman that I realized, "Oh yeah, he *hasn't* been acting like that." (I'm ashamed to admit it might have been in Wizard, but in my defense I was a little kid.)

Seeing that others shared my misperception, I wonder if Byrne's leading-man-Clark was simply doomed to failure. Clark Kent, milquetoast, is simply so much embedded in Americana that people will see him that way no matter what, especially when he's still wearing glasses and a tie. He looks the part, so it is any wonder if people think he plays it, as well?

Also interesting: Even though everyone had the Pre-Crisis Clark in mind, some in the class still thought Clark was the real personality, not the Metropolis Marvel.

When the facilitators discussed the Justice League's (made up of Blue Beetle, Booster Gold, Fire, Ice, Bloodwynd, and Guy Gardner) role in this story, they actually called them "the fake Justice Leauge" and said we'd be reading about the "real Justice League" later in the semester, by which they meant Waid's Tower of Babel arc. Whoa, what? I reiterate that these guys were born in the mid-80s. I didn't realize fans of my generation bought into that sort of rigid hierarchy. I mean, less-popular characters were already filling up the roster by the time we were *born*.

Let's see, what else? Oh yeah, one non-fan asked about the lack of villains with alter egos. It's something I hadn't really thought about, but it's true, isn't it? Obviously, most super-villains *can't* have secret IDs because the authorities know who they really are, but that's only writer's fiat, right? Why aren't there more archaeologist-by-day, thief-by-night types? There are non-costumed crime bosses along these lines like the Kingpin, but where are the cape-sporting, masked types who keep day jobs?

And now for something that has nothing to do with the Action Ace: I'm watching a re-broadcast of the PBS Celtic Woman concert as I type this, and I have to say... they should never show audience reaction shots for something like this. Each time they do, it's just so... I can't describe it... it's just too much. I'm putting this here because, well, I'm all alone in my home right now so where else am I going to communicate it?

The Non-Fan's Perspective

Last year, I enrolled in a "Superheroes in Comics" class at the college I'm attending. It was part of the college's "democratic education" program, the same program that's delivered to the world such illustrious courses as "Introduction to the Rubik's Cube," "The Simpsons and Philosophy," and "Elvish." These courses are taught by "facilitators," (i.e. fellow students) though each has its own faculty sponsor, and yes, they are worth actual units that count towards graduation. The class was populated by a nice mixture of both fans and non-fans.

Anyway, I was really surprised by what my fellow fans in the class knew and didn't know. My main exposure to other fans had been online, where we tend to know about characters all across the board. Well, there's segregation along company lines, with DC fans who know little about Marvel and vise versa. Still, if you bump into a Flash fan on the web, chances are he'll at least have general knowledge of the other DC Universe characters, if not of the more minute details.

Not the case with my classmates, though. They'd mention the most obscure bit of trivia one moment and then demonstrate unawareness of a much more common fact the next. For example, there was one guy who could recite chapter and verse of the minutiae of X-Men continuity, able to fully explain the Summers family tree... and he asked one day, "Did the Hulk used to have intelligence?" There was one woman who knew who Dr. Fate was and even mentioned his propensity for ankh-shaped energy effects, and she asked if the Golden Age Green Lantern wears a helmet. Some people who held Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Waid in high regard had no idea Gail Simone worked in comics (though they knew her name from the Women in Refrigerators site, interestingly enough). So on and so forth.

Make no mistake, I'm not criticizing these people for having obsession unequal to mine, not shouting "false fan" or anything like that. (That should go without saying, but I've seen folks in online fandom cop just that attitude.) But I am genuinely slightly boggled as to how these people come about. How does someone get to the point where he knows about the Wally Wood/Power Girl breast size urban legend, yet not know that the JLA's archer is named Green Arrow? (That's a real example!) You'd think anyone as immersed in fandom circles to know the former would have at some point learned the latter, right? This species of fans isn't all that common in the circles of Internet fandom, yet it was the only kind I met in the class. Is this the true face of the fans of superhero comics? Is it a more accurate representation of the majority readership than what we see on message boards and the comics blogalaxy?

In the coming weeks, I'll probably be intermittently writing about the class's reactions to the TPBs we were assigned. It was fun to see things from their fresh eyes, or at least it was for this long-time reader who long ago lost the ability to see the forest for the trees.

First up, when I get around to it: "The Death of Superman." One of the facilitators, upon assigning it to us, actually said, "It's a classic." Yeah. I couldn't tell if he was being ironic or not.