My Criteria

[Michael P]

Since you asked so nicely...

First of all, I don't do a "10 best" list; I do a "ten favorites" one. I use the cop-out that I'm simply not qualified to judge the year's ten best comics, since I don't read nearly enough of them to judge properly. With that out of the way, though, I have fun doing some heavy thinkin' on just why I like those ten comics so much, and usually come out with a better appreciation of them than I had going in.

Anyway, here's what I set down for last year's group:

"1. The comic had to come out in 2007. For ongoing series, that's self-explanatory; any book that shipped an issue from January through October qualified. Limited series that shipped more than half their issues in 2007 also made the cut. For trades, it was a bit tricker. Obviously, trades released before this year that I didn't read until now didn't count, nor did trades collecting "classic" material. Some trades that shipped this year, though, collected mostly material from last year. Two of my favorite series, Fables and Y: The Last Man, only shipped one trade in 2007, both of which mostly collected material from 2006. That's why they're not on this list.

"2. I had to have read it. Duh. This disqualified Wonder Woman, since I haven't read most of the issues it published this year, and I can't really endorse Jodi Picoult and Allan Heinberg's work based on how much I liked Gail's, can I?

"3. I had to have paid for it. I read a lot of comics this year through loans from friends or in Barnes & Noble. But if I didn't eventually buy it, I obviously must not have thought it was very good. Some I did think were OK, but "OK" doesn't translate to "favorite."

"After that, it was all about cutting the list of comics I read down to ten. I could have gone farther. Some books had great writing, but lackluster or inconsistent art. (The frequent shifts and fill-ins on the X-Books disqualified Mike Carey's X-Men and Peter David's X-Factor, both solid mainstays throughout the year.) With others, I went with one book by a certain creator over another. I tried to be fair and well-rounded, or as much as I could be given my admittedly limited intake.

"In the end, I came up with six DC comics, three Marvels, and one webcomic that represent the most fun I had reading comics all year. I think that's a pretty good rubric. So, ten days left in the year, ten entries. In alphabetical order, my Favorite Comics of 2007. Regardless of whether or not you enjoyed them as much as I did, I hope you enjoy reading about them as much as I enjoy the writing."

[Drusilla lives!]

As an overly zealous "fan" interested in making a contribution to the classic comics forum, I recently started a group of "best of" lists regarding comic covers. Since it was initially done on a lark, playing off this years presidential election, I didn't have any criteria other than going through as many covers as I could from each era (gold, silver, bronze and modern) and picking a few that grabbed my eye. To these I did add a few personal "favorites" to round out the lists. Of course it wasn't comprehensive, nor inclusive of some well deserving artists. Basically, they were my picks, although I did make a point of including covers that were not my favorites... and after pondering this for some time I decided to add an alternate "Other" option to allow for "write in" candidates, which if the polls were successful would form the basis for the next years choices.

Well many people enjoyed the poll and voted for whatever... but there were some who were quite perturbed by not seeing certain artists represented. To the point where I really was at a loss for words. I think compounding this was the fact that someone in that forum already did some sort of "favorites" listing each year, although in a general way (not exactly regarding covers). But being a new member, I was unaware of this until it was made explicit in another thread. Now I think they're formulating their own "favorites" cover list.

What I find disturbing is that one particular "Einstein" keeps obsessing over the word "best" whenever he discusses his personal list of covers. I was very perplexed at this, but now I realize that he might be reading into something about the poll that I hadn't considered, nor had I ever intended... I didn't realize that someone might read into the idea as being fascist. I started the polls to have fun and get people talking about comic covers and this person is implying that I'm a neo-Nazi... a very distasteful label indeed.

After coming to this realization I may not want to do another poll. But if I did, I don't think I would change the name. Thinking about it, I could use terms like "Top Picks," "Favorites," "Nicest," etc., etc., etc., but in my opinion in this context they all convey the same idea, only they conceal intent better than others... an intent which is determined by the observer, not necessarily the author. In other words, if I'm a fascist to some extent, then at least I'm not going to delude myself by thinking that a simple change of wording is changing intent. IMO, "favorites" lists are fascist as well.

[Drusilla lives!]

BTW, if I were to do the poll again I was thinking of using these guidelines-criteria...

About the "Best Classic Comic Covers" polls/listings:

The "Best Classic Comic Covers" polls(*) are a group of year end polls giving interested CBR members a way to express their enthusiasm and appreciation for the comic book art form by voting for a "best" classic comic cover for each of five genres consisting of superhero, horror, sci-fi, war, and western. Whenever possible, candidate covers are to be chosen ahead of time by interested CBR forum members from a pool of covers created from past poll "write in" choices and/or discussion threads in accordance with the pertinent rules below, which are intended to promote "new faces" each year. The real and ultimate purpose of the polls are to have people see old covers (popular and obscure alike) and discuss and spark interest in them and the comic art form. That is, they are not intended to consist of lists of "favorites" (although each candidate cover will likely be a favorite of someone) but to strive to embrace all comic covers and theoretically give each a chance at being seen and a shot at being the best, if just for a year. Actually, there really is no "best" classic comic cover in my opinion, and hopefully that is reflected in the rules/guidelines and in the general spirit with which these polls are conducted and perceived. And hopefully we all have fun in the process as well.

General rules/guidelines:

(1) Candidate covers must be at least ten years old at the time of the listing.
(2) Each of the losing candidates will be ineligible for re-listing the following year, the winning candidate will be ineligible for re-listing for the two years following a win.
(3) Genre/themes are not rigid. For example, sci-fi covers can have a fantasy or "sword and sorcery" theme. Likewise, horror covers might have strong sci-fi or crime themes.
(4) Listings for each genre will consist of no more than nine candidate covers (or one less than whatever is the current poll limit imposed by CBR) and an alternate or "Other" option. Of the candidates, where possible at least one and no more then four will be from a given period (gold, sliver, bronze or modern) and within each genre no more than two covers from the same artist will be allowed.
(5) The winner (or winners in the case of a tie) in a genre is the candidate cover with the largest number of votes cast in it's favor. Votes cast for the alternate or "Other" option are not counted in this determination.
(6) When casting a vote for the alternate or "Other" option, if possible, please leave a "write in" choice in the form of a thread reply. These write in choices will form the basis for the pool of candidates to be considered for the following years poll.
(7) Polls start on or about Oct. 31 of the given year, and end on Dec. 31 of that year.
(8) Polls are to be multiple choice, anonymous and participation is optional. That is, you may vote in all, one, or none of the polls. You may also leave a thread reply (or not) regardless of whether you have voted or not... constructive suggestions and comments are always welcomed.
(9) These rules are always to be viewed as provisional and open to constructive modification.

(*) General Notice: Although I strive to incorporate cover candidates, suggestions and comments by all interested forum members whenever and wherever possible, these polls are currently created, maintained and the sole responsibility of myself. That is, they are completely unofficial. They are not and should not be viewed as reflecting the opinions or positions of the owners or management of CBR. Nor are they to be viewed as being supported by, or reflective of the views of all CBR forum members.

[Dennis]

I have mainstream tastes and what I think is the difference between the great comics and the merely good is how far the writer pushes the characters. Mainstream comics are about the celebration of narcissism and aggression. I think the best comics are about mentally ill characters pushing their insanity to new heights. They're about insane people with an insane idea. Examples:

Dark Knight Returns - Batman's big insane idea is this: "I can kick Superman's ass." This is actually his real mission in life, not that crime fighting bullshit. This is his last great adventure, what he has been training and trying to achieve for his entire life - to prove himself better than a god. For great comics, a character isn't merely doing his regular job, he has to accomplish this one great thing, this one loony impossible thing.

Watchmen - "I can bring world peace."

V for Vendetta - "I can take down the government."

From Hell - "I'm not just killing hookers, I'm a visionary giving birth to a new age."

The Authority - "We have to kill God."

Preacher - "I have to find God." or "I have to kill God."

That's why these stories have real endings, because once you've killed God, everything afterward is small potatoes. And in order to accomplish something great, you have to be obsessed. In All-Star Superman, we see Superman as his most obsessive - he's trying to be the most godlike, and the most human. This is the sunnier side of obsession; Superman is creating instead of destroying. Batman RIP on the other hand isn't a great story according to my definition of great comics. Final Crisis doesn't seem to be that great either. All-Star Batman might be, might not be - it's certainly loony, but Batman hasn't accomplished a damn thing yet...it's a very interesting failure, so is DK2.

I think we'll continue to see lots of good Spider-Man stories but not great ones. Spidey isn't on a mission, he's just merely doing his job. And he's quite content doing that job.

To sum up: obsession, narcissism, violence, perversity. Killing god, which means you're the new god.

[Drusilla lives!]

...
Dark Knight Returns - Batman's big insane idea is this: "I can kick Superman's ass." This is actually his real mission in life, not that crime fighting bullshit. This is his last great adventure, what he has been training and trying to achieve for his entire life - to prove himself better than a god. For great comics, a character isn't merely doing his regular job, he has to accomplish this one great thing, this one loony impossible thing.

Watchmen - "I can bring world peace."

V for Vendetta - "I can take down the government."

From Hell - "I'm not just killing hookers, I'm a visionary giving birth to a new age."

The Authority - "We have to kill God."

Preacher - "I have to find God." or "I have to kill God."
...

I haven't read any of these.

... Batman RIP on the other hand isn't a great story according to my definition of great comics. ...

I've read the Dini arc in Detective, thought it was a decent story... although I don't really consider that part of RIP.

... I think we'll continue to see lots of good Spider-Man stories but not great ones. Spidey isn't on a mission, he's just merely doing his job. And he's quite content doing that job. ...

I wasn't going to follow the upcoming "Character Assassination" arc but changed my mind after seeing some of JRjr's art work.

... To sum up: obsession, narcissism, violence, perversity. Killing god, which means you're the new god.

Writers with deity complexes... so what else is new? :)