I *DO* give a rat's ass about Dr. Strange!

[deClench]

With laser-like focus, I zeroed in on the one thing from Steven Grant's column that made me scream in anquish -- "there's little indication many existing comics readers give a rat's ass about Dr. Strange, something sales on DR. STRANGE projects have borne out practically forever."

Having only *just* returned to comics after a decade or more hiatus, I immediately looked for the figures that I loved best-of-all. For Marvel, this was the Hulk and Dr. Strange. I'll have the chance to see how the Hulk stands the test of time, but where is the good doctor? Then I read this column and was floored. Does everyone hate Dr. Strange? I can't imagine anything I would like to see more in comics than for Marvel to do a proper run on Dr. Strange. I just picked up Ms. Marvel because of his appearance; though I must say there's something lacking so far in his portrayal.

Is it that the creative teams haven't been able to achieve the quintessential Dr. Strange? Or that nobody can agree what that is? Or does everyone simply hate Dr. Strange? Is it the dated costume? I'm terribly curious about this.

[badMike]

I love Dr. Strange. I have an old Pocket Books collection of old Stan Lee/Steve Ditko Strange Tales (which Steven called the first graphic novel), that I totally dog eared as a kid I read it so much. And I loved the Roger Stern/Peter Gillis run in the mid-'80s (which turned into Strange Tales).

But I don't read mainstream superhero comics anymore, so no I wouldn't buy a new series anyway. The doctor was never an a-list hero, but I always thought he was cool. Then again, my favorite hero has always been Thor, another notorious c-lister.

[Gingold]

I think Dr. Strange occupies a group of characters that includes the Silver Surfer, the Spectre, Atom, and Dr. Fate- characters that everybody likes, but have never had much luck in sustaining an ongoing series.

[berk]

I'm another Dr.Strange fan, but as far as I can tell, nothing interesting's been done with the character since Englehart in the early 70's. Still a concept and a caharcter with huge potential, but until the right person(s) get(s) a shot, it doesn't matter. Even that might not be enough; you can have a good cxreator and a great concept, but in the current atmosphere at Marvel it might not be enough - witness Neil Gaiman's desecration of Kirby's Eternals.

[NatGertler]

To whom do you give the rat's ass, and what do you expect them to do with such an object?

[bartl]

I'm another Dr.Strange fan, but as far as I can tell, nothing interesting's been done with the character since Englehart in the early 70's. Still a concept and a caharcter with huge potential, but until the right person(s) get(s) a shot, it doesn't matter. Even that might not be enough; you can have a good cxreator and a great concept, but in the current atmosphere at Marvel it might not be enough - witness Neil Gaiman's desecration of Kirby's Eternals.

The problem with Dr. Strange becoming a big seller, in my opinion, is that he is too removed from reality. When he started out, the reader was learning the mythology as he was; now, it requires an investment by the reader to catch up, and, frankly, I can't see new readers getting sufficiently interested.

Now, this is not to say that one can't make a Dr. Strange series popular; however, to do so would require so much retooling of the character that one might as well just create a new character.

On the other hand, I could see the following scenario: the suits at Marvel say, "Hey, the last Harry Potter novel is coming out. This is going to create a vacuum in the market. Don't we have some magic kid, what's his name? Dr. Strange? A kid doctor? What is it, some sort of Doogie Houser thing? Well, get something ready for market that'll appeal to the kids. Use Dr. Strange. Give him a young sidekick or something, and make the sidekick the main character."

[badMike]

witness Neil Gaiman's desecration of Kirby's Eternals.

What does that mean? Is the book bad? This was the one superhero book I was considering getting (as a trade).

[badMike]

To whom do you give the rat's ass, and what do you expect them to do with such an object?

Fry it up in a pan with bacon grease. Or play badminton.

[CaptChucky]

The first issue of Neil Gaiman's Eternals seemed pretty good to me. I say, give it a chance, if you're interested in a Gaiman version of Kirby characters. There were a lot of fun bits in the first issue. Nearly 40 pages at nearly 4 bucks seems like a bargain, especially for this level of work.

[badMike]

The first issue of Neil Gaiman's Eternals seemed pretty good to me. I say, give it a chance, if you're interested in a Gaiman version of Kirby characters. There were a lot of fun bits in the first issue. Nearly 40 pages at nearly 4 bucks seems like a bargain, especially for this level of work.

I'll have to wait for the trade. I can't follow regular series anymore. In addition to Gaiman, I'm interested in the JR,Jr. art. I liked his run on Thor.

[MichikoS]

"there's little indication many existing comics readers give a rat's ass about Dr. Strange, something sales on DR. STRANGE projects have borne out practically forever."

Blame the zeitgeist. Strange was very big in the psychedelic '60s and baroque '70s, when people were into "expanding their consciousness" and social mores were changing. There was much more interest in Eastern religion and philosophy, magick, and an acknowledgment of non-Christian epistemologies.

Today the pendulum has swung back to a more materialist, conservative and orthodox social order. Dr. Strange isn't a character who fits in well with this kind of thinking.

But times change, and Dr. Strange's time will come again. So says the All-Seeing Eye of Agamotto!

Michi

[berk]

The problem with Gaiman's new Eternals series is that it isn't really concerned with the Eternals, or with trying to think and write about them on their own terms: it's about the Marvel Universe and trying to make the Eternals fit into it, an approach that works directly against the spirit of Kirby's original concept.

Regarding Dr.Strange, I think there have been some very creative magic-related series in recent years - Promethea and The Invisibles come to mind - but those books have been very personal works created by writers who were themselves heavily involved with actual magical practise. But today's Dr.Strange is just another superhero, hobnobbing with Captian America and Reed Richards. IOW, there isn't really anything very magical about the character any more. His "magic" comes across as just another "superpower." A good writer might be able to change that, but I doubt such a writer would be given the opportunity to do so at today's Marvel; and he/she would probably prefer to write their own character anyway.

[Mick Martin]

I think in recent years Doc has worked best as a supporting character. These days, he's usually not the hero who charges headfirst into battle. He's more like Professor X, in that he works behind the scenes. I'm not saying that's how he should be depicted, or that it's the only way he can be depicted, I just think that's been the status-quo for a while now. He's like a Giles (from Buffy) for the rest of the MU. And I think readers have gotten used to seeing him that way, and so the idea of a Doctor Strange series may seem odd.

One problem is that he's kind of limited as far as the specific kinds of adventures you can write for him. I think a big part of the appeal of Batman, for example, is that you can throw him in just about any kind of adventure story. He can tackle mobsters, hunt vampires, go on cosmic adventures with his JLA buddies, fight in martial arts epics, whatever. Strange, on the other hand, is confined the magical stuff.

I think another problem is that I think both writers and fans are kind of confused about exactly what his role is. He's the "Sorcerer Supreme." Okay. But what does that mean? Is that just a fancy way of saying "bad-ass magical mofo," or does he have a more specific job description? I think there probably used to be a more precise idea of what that entailed, but it's been lost.

I remember reading an interview at Newsarama where Quesada said he had a problem with Strange in particular, and magic-based characters in general, because there weren't enough set-in-stone rules about magic in the MU.

I completely disagree, I think it's the exact opposite. I think there are too many rules and it's lead to a stagnation of the character. Strange is drawn THIS way and his powers manifest THIS way and they look like THIS when he uses them.

I think in handling Strange, Marvel could take a page out of Peter Jackson's book. In the LOTR behind-the-scenes stuff, he talked about how he wanted to handle Gandalf's powers with more subtlety, without all the flashy fx of most Hollywood fantasy stuff. I think if Marvel writers found more interesting ways of Strange using his powers, it could be really cool. He could definitely do with more Sandman flavor.

And as much as I usually balk whenever someone says a character necessarily needs an appearane change, I do think Strange's costume could use some updating.

[deClench]

I think in recent years Doc has worked best as a supporting character. These days, he's usually not the hero who charges headfirst into battle. He's more like Professor X, in that he works behind the scenes. I'm not saying that's how he should be depicted, or that it's the only way he can be depicted, I just think that's been the status-quo for a while now. He's like a Giles (from Buffy) for the rest of the MU. And I think readers have gotten used to seeing him that way, and so the idea of a Doctor Strange series may seem odd.

One problem is that he's kind of limited as far as the specific kinds of adventures you can write for him. I think a big part of the appeal of Batman, for example, is that you can throw him in just about any kind of adventure story. He can tackle mobsters, hunt vampires, go on cosmic adventures with his JLA buddies, fight in martial arts epics, whatever. Strange, on the other hand, is confined the magical stuff.

I think another problem is that I think both writers and fans are kind of confused about exactly what his role is. He's the "Sorcerer Supreme." Okay. But what does that mean? Is that just a fancy way of saying "bad-ass magical mofo," or does he have a more specific job description? I think there probably used to be a more precise idea of what that entailed, but it's been lost.

I remember reading an interview at Newsarama where Quesada said he had a problem with Strange in particular, and magic-based characters in general, because there weren't enough set-in-stone rules about magic in the MU.

I completely disagree, I think it's the exact opposite. I think there are too many rules and it's lead to a stagnation of the character. Strange is drawn THIS way and his powers manifest THIS way and they look like THIS when he uses them.

I think in handling Strange, Marvel could take a page out of Peter Jackson's book. In the LOTR behind-the-scenes stuff, he talked about how he wanted to handle Gandalf's powers with more subtlety, without all the flashy fx of most Hollywood fantasy stuff. I think if Marvel writers found more interesting ways of Strange using his powers, it could be really cool. He could definitely do with more Sandman flavor.

And as much as I usually balk whenever someone says a character necessarily needs an appearane change, I do think Strange's costume could use some updating.

I think that Batman allusion was interesting as I am mentally putting the Doc in the role of "cosmic detective" -- a pan-dimensional Sam Spade. Building from your comments, I think it would be interesting to take him away from the superhero fisticuffs with the Avengers and Defenders, make his magic a little less flashy, and YES, revamp his costume. I remember a Dr. Strange title from the early 90s(?) illustrated by Guice that portrayed a more interesting and gritty Steven Strange.

I don't think they need more rules for magic. They just need a great writer (that's all :) ). As much as I loved Sandman, I would hate to see the Doc simply try to immitate its formula for success, but I would love to see it written at that level of excellence. Hope springs eternal.

[DoubleShot]

It would help if they put out something else with him besides a retelling of his origin and keep him away from projects like the last Defenders series.

I always liked Dr. Strange but the current people working for Marvel either don't know how to handle the character or are too afraid to be inventive with him. A safe Dr. Strange book is just going to always be boring. You have to make it weirdly mystical. A Max book would be the best way to go.

Sadly, I don't think we will see a decent Dr. Strange book until the current Marvel team changes.