The Final Word on Infinite Crisis…?
Author: AF Duncan
July 7th, 2006
Interesting take on the much-debated mini-series from, of all places, the Village Voice:
In Infinite Crisis 4, Earth-Prime’s vindictive Superboy, angry over his prolonged incarceration and the loss of his loved ones and homeworld, picks a fight with DC’s current Superboy. Like The Simpsons’ Comic Book Guy, the villainous Superboy is a whiny, awkward loner, who stammers, “You’re ruining me!” as he battles a group of heroes. The fact that Superboy’s Earth-Prime represents the readers’ world confirms his status as a stand-in for the ugly side of comics’ audience.
Readers seem to have largely missed the subtext; indeed, a trip to DC’s message boards reveals a fan base validating Johns’s characterization with its vitriol. A typical comment reads, “Thanks . . . for making my heroes the most disgusting, childish, nasty, ridiculous people ever.”
The portrayal of Infinite Crisis’s villains reflects the comics industry’s contentious relationship with fans. The readers typified by the evil Superboy are fiercely loyal but resistant to change, much like the art form they love so dearly. DC finds itself forced to serve two masters: these fractious lifers and the children that were, in decades past, comics’ target demographic.
Read the rest here.
- Related Articles:
4 Responses to “The Final Word on Infinite Crisis…?”







July 7th, 2006 at 8:22 am
I don’t really know if there was any subtext to be found in IC (at least, intentional), but an interesting take nonetheless from a usually worthless rag.
July 7th, 2006 at 8:56 am
Ha ha! I’m not sure if I agree either, but I know, I can’t believe the piece actually kind of makes sense.
July 7th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
“Resistant to change”? It depends on what kind of change. And the change Infinite Crisis exemplifies is hardly a move away from the fanboys and toward regaining young audiences. How is routine mutilation and dismemberment supposed to be kid-friendly? If anything it’s merely a continuation of the industry’s quest to be “mature”. Sadly and ironically, this was all started by the British masters Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman in the 80s. The problem is, these stories have all the uninhibitedness of Moore and Gaiman, but none of the storytelling, sophistication or originality. That’s not being mature. If anything, it’s just a nasty, brutish sort of childishness.
July 8th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
Daniel,
Very well put. I tend to agree with you and D. Brooks in that I seriously doubt Johns et al had any subtext at all in mind when he wrote IC.