Elliot S! Maggin column

[Matthew E]

Has anybody out there read both Kingdom Come and Maggin's Kingdom Come novelization? (I've read the second but not the first.) I'm curious to know if he put any of his own ideas in there, or if he was just writing what was in the comic book.

[Lester C.]

Has anybody out there read both Kingdom Come and Maggin's Kingdom Come novelization? (I've read the second but not the first.) I'm curious to know if he put any of his own ideas in there, or if he was just writing what was in the comic book.

He put many of his ideas in, but he was simply expanding what was in the text. It makes sense, because a picture is worth a thousand words and Elliot had to describe all those Alex Ross drawn pictures that would not make its way into a narative.

Why you should really get the novel is that Maggin covered all the material that was evident but never explained. For instance we get the full story of Nightwing Starfire and their daughter in the book but never in the comic book.

Anyway if you do buy the book make sure you get the Hardcover as you get bonus full color exclusive Ross pictures.

[TimothyCallahan]

The Kingdom Come novelization never interested me since it wasn't "pure" Maggin. Is it worth my time anyway? (Note: I have no time.)

Also, this is the thread where you can talk all things Maggin! What do you think about his work? Does the Superman of the 1970s interest you? Talk it up.

[Matthew E]

I don't know if it's worth your time, but I'll say this: the Superman in the Kingdom Come novelization seems like the same Superman from Maggin's two novels. It feels a little bit like the third book of the trilogy. Could be just me.

I'm not sure how much Maggin I've read in comics form, really. Certainly I've read that Green Arrow story. Did Maggin write the one where it's revealed that Superman has been using superhypnosis to convince everyone that Clark Kent looks a little different from Superman?

[Lester C.]

The Kingdom Come novelization never interested me since it wasn't "pure" Maggin. Is it worth my time anyway? (Note: I have no time.)

Also, this is the thread where you can talk all things Maggin! What do you think about his work? Does the Superman of the 1970s interest you? Talk it up.

It's only worth your time if you want to flesh out the characters and events of Kingdom Come and The Kingdom. Then it's a must read but other than that it's just a decent novel by a man that has written much, much better work.

[SerbsInSpace]

The following was sent to Tim in an email, but he kindly pointed me in the direction of these forums to discuss the column. It's interesting to note how some of what I talk about here subsequently matched some of Steven Grant's theories regarding Superman, right here on comicbookresources:
http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=17947

Now, I've read your new cbr column, and I must say I have some problems with it. I feel it would've worked better if it was a part of a Superman blog. I get that you are a DC fan, and they're sure big on their own history, but disccusing Maggin's work seems to have relevance mostly to a small portion of fans.

It seems a kind of socially aware comic, post Stan Lee and Danny O'Neal, that marks but a footnote towards an ultimately uneven path for superhero comics, nowadays personified mostly by Judd Winick.

Superhero comics have a way of resisting broader themes and somehow eventually sucking everything down to talking about themselves and their own continuity. You say it yourself, when you point out that Maggin's themes were forced to be reduced to subtext in Silver Age Superman titles and the subsequent movie tie-in novels.

I guess the column would've worked better for me if it stopped short of analyzing the novels, and centered on the footnotes regarding Superman's history and Maggin's contribution I've heard about before. And while I admit that discovering the paperbacks was an interesting endavour on your part, comparable to finding Watchmen RPG adventure modules, it still strikes me as a slightly bizzare thing to be talking about.

Superheroes, as well as most commercial SF, work best visually and transforming them to written word fails to falsely legitimise the bright childish concepts at their core. In any instance, I feel that Silver Surfer fighting Mephisto in Stan Lee's old comics worked better, in that it both managed to fit with the characters and preserve deeper meaning, while staying firmly in the superhero genre.

Superman's enduring problem has been that after the numerious derivative characters were created, putting new spins on the concept of superhero he defined, his own tropes started seeming simplistic, and since then, DC has tried to revitalize him, usually with mixed results. I must say that All star Superman has been a rare example of a creator managing to stay firm on the things that made the character interesting and unique, while keeping him fresh and new. Most of the other stuff I read (Man for all seasons, John Byrne's reboot, Johns' run), with the exception of Supreme, was a bit tired and didn't work with me.

[SerbsInSpace]

The following was sent to Tim in an email, but he kindly pointed me in the direction of these forums to discuss the column. It's interesting to note how some of what I talk about here subsequently matched some of Steven Grant's theories regarding Superman, right here on comicbookresources:
http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=17947

Now, I've read your new cbr column, and I must say I have some problems with it. I feel it would've worked better if it was a part of a Superman blog. I get that you are a DC fan, and they're sure big on their own history, but disccusing Maggin's work seems to have relevance mostly to a small portion of fans.

It seems a kind of socially aware comic, post Stan Lee and Danny O'Neal, that marks but a footnote towards an ultimately uneven path for superhero comics, nowadays personified mostly by Judd Winick.

Superhero comics have a way of resisting broader themes and somehow eventually sucking everything down to talking about themselves and their own continuity. You say it yourself, when you point out that Maggin's themes were forced to be reduced to subtext in Silver Age Superman titles and the subsequent movie tie-in novels.

I guess the column would've worked better for me if it stopped short of analyzing the novels, and centered on the footnotes regarding Superman's history and Maggin's contribution I've heard about before. And while I admit that discovering the paperbacks was an interesting endavour on your part, comparable to finding Watchmen RPG adventure modules, it still strikes me as a slightly bizzare thing to be talking about.

Superheroes, as well as most commercial SF, work best visually and transforming them to written word fails to falsely legitimise the bright childish concepts at their core. In any instance, I feel that Silver Surfer fighting Mephisto in Stan Lee's old comics worked better, in that it both managed to fit with the characters and preserve deeper meaning, while staying firmly in the superhero genre.

Superman's enduring problem has been that after the numerious derivative characters were created, putting new spins on the concept of superhero he defined, his own tropes started seeming simplistic, and since then, DC has tried to revitalize him, usually with mixed results. I must say that All star Superman has been a rare example of a creator managing to stay firm on the things that made the character interesting and unique, while keeping him fresh and new. Most of the other stuff I read (Man for all seasons, John Byrne's reboot, Johns' run), with the exception of Supreme, was a bit tired and didn't work with me.

P.S. Sorry for the double-post, can't figure out how to delete this second message.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I get that you are a DC fan, and they're sure big on their own history, but disccusing Maggin's work seems to have relevance mostly to a small portion of fans.

Jack Kirby's work seems to have relevance mostly to a small portion of fans, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed - it means it should be discussed more!

[TimothyCallahan]

I pretty much completely disagree with everything Vanja (Serbs in Space) says here. Why is Maggin's work a "footnote"? I think I show how it's not.

And the novels are the culmination of the themes he explored in his comic book work -- the whole point of the column was to show how he transitioned from comics to prose and how interesting it all was.

Although I do agree that All-Star Superman is awesomely awesome. How about that issue #12? Pretty spiffy, eh? And very Maggin-esque!

[Lester C.]

I pretty much completely disagree with everything Vanja (Serbs in Space) says here. Why is Maggin's work a "footnote"? I think I show how it's not.

And the novels are the culmination of the themes he explored in his comic book work -- the whole point of the column was to show how he transitioned from comics to prose and how interesting it all was.

Although I do agree that All-Star Superman is awesomely awesome. How about that issue #12? Pretty spiffy, eh? And very Maggin-esque!

Maggin only a footnote if you go by his book sales numbers. However I’ve noticed that a book’s sales are a very poor description of its quality. Especially in the modern era where the number of readers is drastically down compared to years past where reading was a way of life rather than a hobby own engages in when one has nothing else to do.