The Fantastic Four was (and arguably is) The Great American Novel

[tolworthy]

I hold the extreme minority view that comics, at their best, are the highest form of art.* So I revised and expanded my web site to make that point. If I'm going to be wrong I think it is important to be spectacularly wrong. No half measures here.

http://enterthestory.com/comics/fantastic_four.html

or an easier to remember URL: http://enterthestory.com/comics
(and just click the top corner link)

My thesis is that The Fantastic Four, until issue 321 was The Great American Novel. It could be argued that issues since 321 are as well, but that's far more problematic position to take so I'm starting with the "easy" stuff. My central premise is that these stories EVOLVE NATURALLY. They are not planned. So long term structures are just as complex as real life.

My biggest surprise here is that I was totally wrong about Reed Richards. he's always been my favorite member of the FF, and I would angrily dismiss those modern writers who say he's a jerk. After all, look at all the heroic stuff he did! Look at "This Man This Monster!" Yet a closer analysis shows that he is BOTH hero AND jerk. And pretty extreme in both departments. Which is exactly what you'd expect from someone who focuses so intently on one area of his life. Even in FF51 he shows his darker side near the beginning. It's all very rich and layered stuff.

Please note that the commentary is not finished. I finally uploaded it because I realize it will never be finished: I am always finding new stuff. I don't expect everyone to agree with me (mainly because I change my mind so often) but I do want to make the point that these particular comics are rewarding to study.

Highlights (lowlights?) of the site:

* A montage from every issue
(to the end of 1988): even if you disagree with my comments (and feel free to!) you can enjoy reliving the first 321 issues.But note that I focus on character development, and often ignore the villain and surface plot completely.

* Controversial claims, such as...

FF251 was a suicide attempt:
http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-act4-FF251.html
and
Reed is a superb hero and scientist, but terrible leader (that's a running theme).

* Out-of-left-field observations, such as...

The Thing is genuinely handsome, and only feels ugly because of Reed's comments and actions - see examples in Act 2 and commentary to FF176 (http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-act4-FF176.html)
And
what has John F. Kennedy got to do with the early FF?
(See commentary to FF19-22 and thereabouts)
And
The FF story parallels Hamlet: http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff_shakespeare.html

* Improvements and additions to my existing pages, such as...

"why doesn't Ben jump?" http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff_thing.html#jump
and
"why does Reed's face change?" http://enterthestory.com/comics/Reed_Richards.html#face
and
"how exactly did the team get their powers? (it links to Arthur C Clarke and Carl Sagan)
http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff_o...origin-mystery

* Highlights from the letters pages
http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff_letters.html

* The simple formula for great comics
http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-howto.html

And much more. I've completed the first draft for Act 1, Act 2 (up to FF24), Act 5 (from FF304) and numerous individual issues in between. From now on I'll just add an issue or two whenever I get time and feel like throwing that time into a bottomless pit. And my opinions are always evolving, so nothing is set in stone.

Regarding issues after 321, my view on these is changing, and these issues will feature in later updates. My original view is "they are best avoided" because of the lack of continuity, but I was wrong. There's some great stuff after 321, but the continuity is very, very complicated. If FF1-321 is like the Lord of the Rings, then FF322-610 is like the Silmarillion: often hard work to read, with occasional very nice touches, not great for new readers but rewarding for obsessive fans.

Anyway, hope you like the site. Comments are encouraged: it would be great if this could become a hub for deeper analysis of individual issues, including alternate views. But I'm only online about once a week at present, so I apologize if don't respond or fix errors as quickly as I should. I tend to give the site a major revision about once every two years, and that breathless pace is likely to continue.

- Chris

*Why comics, at their best are the highest form of art: because images are good, text is good, and images plus text are better. More complex formats, such as video and software, either take too long to watch or have high barriers to entry. Plus I like them.

[Aaron King]

My thesis is that The Fantastic Four, until issue 321 was The Great American Novel.

I don't have time to read the whole thing at the moment, but I'm excited to get to it when I have some free time. I know you've been working on this for quite awhile.

[tolworthy]

Thanks. I keep finding typos and hard to follow parts, and honestly it will never be really finished. I hope the gaps and weaknesses don't detract from the central message that this story is worth studying as a single unit.

Maybe I'm just shallow, but I've read Shakespeare, I've read War and peace, I've read every word of the King James Bible, and I studied Film and Media at uni, and I honestly think the early FF has more to offer as a piece of literature: not because it's better, but because it's just as valid while being bigger, more fun to read, and more recent. We just need to get past the auteur theory that says "if the writer didn't intend an idea then the idea cannot be there."

Whether I can make that case convincingly is of course a different matter.

[Aaron King]

We just need to get past the auteur theory that says "if the writer didn't intend an idea then the idea cannot be there."

Whether I can make that case convincingly is of course a different matter.

I don't know that I'll agree with your thesis -- I love a lot of contemporary/post-WWII literature -- but I don't think my prejudice will detract from my enjoyment of your argument one bit, and I full expect to learn a thing or two along the way.

As for your case against authorial intent (as the above part in quotation marks is usually referred to), it's been taking some blows lately in academic circles. Most people will readily admit that not everything someone finds in a work was intended to be there. I'd suggest you do some poking around on authorial intent and reader response.

[destro]

I still can't really agree..but I'm having a lot of fun looking thru the site!

[tolworthy]

I'd suggest you do some poking around on authorial intent and reader response.

Thanks. I need to address that in more detail, as it's basically the foundation of my argument. That, plus Chabon's weaker argument that comics in general are "the great American novel." I wish I could find the original source for that quote, but it was the final quote in an essay by an academic so I conclude that it must be authentic.

My attachment to the reader-response thesis comes from my religious upbringing. I was raised in a very intense church and spent many years as a semi-professional apologist. Many people make their living at finding meaning in texts where other say there is no meaning, and the level of effort has to be seen to be believed. Since those days I have seen numerous academics whose attention to detail and their conclusions are far weaker, but they become highly influential. I don't see any difference between a good apologist and a popular academic: they use the exact same methods. Once could argue that the apologist has pre-formed opinions and the academic does not, but that breaks down on scrutiny. Anyway, when I heard of the "readable" and "writeable" theory (Roland Barthes? It was a long time ago) it described my experience. Its existence in poetry and art and non-fiction is well attested, so I find it hard to believe it does not apply to fiction as well.

In short, Oscar Wilde was right. Good art is a mirror, not a text book.

[LEADER DESSLOK]

I love your premise and want to look through it but speaking only for my own preferance, I DO consider the KIRBY106 (FFs 1-100 and the first six annuals) to be the GREAT AMERICAN SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL and there is no doubt in my mind. I eagerly look forward to reading the article you wrote which covers this period...

[tolworthy]

I love your premise and want to look through it but speaking only for my own preferance, I DO consider the KIRBY106 (FFs 1-100 and the first six annuals) to be the GREAT AMERICAN SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL and there is no doubt in my mind. I eagerly look forward to reading the article you wrote which covers this period...

Thanks - do you have any good quotes about eh Great Science Fiction Novel position? That would really fit well on my site. Regarding the classic era, I'm afraid that is so well appreciated already that I haven't done a lot of work on it - those pages have a lot of gaps. So far. But I did write a fair bit on 1-23 and various individual issues, such as FF50 and 51, e.g. http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-act1.html http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-act2.html http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-act3.html

And I use FF44 and 51 as examples of how to write a perfect comic, here: http://enterthestory.com/comics/ff-howto.html

As I said, this site will never be finished, there's always so much more to discover in the FF.

[Phil Maurice]

You've clearly done a tremendous amount of research and are passionate about your subject. Nothing (well, almost) would make me happier than to learn that you are right in your assertions. Good luck, and God bless.