Pomegranate and cranberry bran muffins might sound good, but....

-Greg Burgas suggests comics were better in the 1970s. Is there any other decade that gets shorter shrift than the 70s? Every other decade in (American) comic book history has an identity:

1940s-The Golden Age of superhero comics
1950s-EC Comics; Wertham, Senate hearings, and the Code; the golden age of romance comics
1960s-Wacky Silver Age fun; birth of underground comics
1980s-Event comics/crossovers; "dark" superhero comics are born; the independent publisher explodes onto the scene; the direct market begins to overtake the newsstand
1990s-Crap-tacular comics with stupid gimmick covers; rise and fall of the major independent publisher; the big speculator bust
2000s (so far)-Manga gains major ground, overtaking Marvel/DC in several categories; graphic novels begin to supplant the pamphlet format; probably a bunch of other stuff that will seem clearer in hindsight

The 70s, however, don't have such a clear identity. We often portray the comics industry in that decade as either an outgrowth of the 60s or a precursor to the 80s. There are some notable exceptions. Underground Comix were generally coasting along, seemingly content to nurse a hangover from the previous decade until Arcade, a wonderful anthology which reinvigorated several cartoonists, most notably Robert Crumb (and, IIRC, it's Alan Moore's favorite comic of all time). Yet it's often viewed as more of a bridge to the more important 80s anthologies RAW and Weirdo, both of which lasted longer and featured numerous young cartoonists in addition to stalwarts of the 60s Underground. Marvel and DC were likewise rehashing the previous decade until Claremont and Cockrum (with much help from Len Wein) reinvigorated the superhero team comic. But again, the new X-Men are often lumped in with the comics of the 80s, perhaps because it was so influential on the comics of that decade.

The horror comics of the 70s certainly get their due, particularly those appearing in b&w magazines. But why stop there? Mr. Burgas suggests the bizarre work of Jim Starlin as another touchstone of the 70s; I think we can give the two Steves, Gerber and Englehart, similar consideration. And yet! Can we not consider the comics produced by these men to be precursors of later trends? All three had a darker approach to superheroes than Stan Lee or Gardner Fox. And their epic, cosmic style (esp. Starlin's) might have presaged the event comics of the 80s. Okay then, what about Heavy Metal? Clearly a break from tradition, but one could argue that it set the stage for the early independent "ground level" type comic. Cerebus? Even more so. Jack Kirby's Fourth World? A continuation of the themes from his earlier work at Marvel.

So basically: there were many good comics published in the 70s, especially if you're into idiosyncratic superhero comics, Underground Comix, or horror. But I'm skeptical that the 70s will ever be considered a monumental epoch in the history of comics. Some important wheels were set in motion, but the industry didn't undergo any of the extensive changes (on either the art or business front) seen in other decades. So maybe it's not such a great crime that the 70s dwell in the shadow of the two decades bookending it, an island of humility between two oceans of conceit (I think that's how that saying goes).

-Hey Howling Curmudgeons--don't you guys have anything better to talk about? I mean, nobody else is complaining about The Confession (well, Graeme McMillan reviewed it, but at least it was a review rather than a bunch of "here's what should have happened"), perhaps because they flipped through it in the store, realized it was an extended monologue with a brief and pointless vignette appended, and decided it wasn't worth their time/money. But then again, Howling Curmudgeons reads like a typical wacky nostalgia blog, only someone took away their (communal?) scanner and it made them REALLY, REALLY ANGRY. Also, I assume "I keep getting tempted to write a fanfic version Civil War...." is a jocular rhetorical flourish, right?

-Will Joe Sacco be writing the foreword?

-Chris Allen Butcher expresses a few fears about linkblogging, a post so important I thought it deserved the widest possible circulation. (There will probably be about 20 other bloggers who beat me to this joke, but I consider it a matter of honor to run it anyway since I hadn't read any of those (hypothetical) blogs when I wrote this, plus I think I've added my own subtle twist.) Also: the stuff on Death of Superman? Newsarama message board quality, chief. (And no, I'm not referring to this.)

-I think I figured out why my blog was the top Google entry for "Asorbascon"--I'm misspelling it. And yet none of you have noticed/felt the need to comment on it. No need to break with tradition now!

-Outrage of the day: Michael Turner's cover to an upcoming issue of...Justice Society, I guess? Maybe Justice League? Anyway, outrage is expressed here and here, and probably a bunch of other places too. Well, it is a pretty crappy drawing. Does he have to draw every woman with a pointy little chin?

And I thought Turner signed an exclusive contract with Marvel during last year's convention season. Why is he still doing covers for DC? Let's try to contain him to just one company, okay?

The first cut is the loudest

-Our first Waver of the Bloody Shirt: Jonesy (it's what we called him in prep school). Oh Jonesy, why do you hurt the ones who love you? Also: 1994 called, and it wants its scanner back. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

-I was listening to Mastodon a few nights ago, and it occurred to me that they are totally the Grant Morrison of heavy metal. I meant to share this with you yesterday, but I forgot.

-Hey remember Chris Mautner's post on Newsarama Blog with the quote from Meth? The one from several days ago? People are still leaving comments on it, for now at least. Given the prevailing tone, I expect someone to eliminate this forum for discussion by midafternoon, EST. (EDIT: And that's just what happened!) In fact, I have a feeling all these comments are going to disappear into the ether soon, so I'll go into a bit more detail than I normally would. First up, a post by "fangirl":

"Groth’s brownshirts should have a field day with Michael Netzer’s take: 'Gary Groth has been a self-proclaimed extremist critic within the comics community for decades. Such a mission gives rise to actions of self-defense, on the part of his targets. When the sparks reach the level these have, it would behoove Mr. Groth to take responsibility for his own messengership rather than play the victim in need of community support. His targets are more the victims, in many cases, than he is.'”

Unfortunately fangirl didn't provide a link, and Google isn't really helping either. Still, based on what I'm seeing here, this is the current frontrunner for Dumbest Thing Anyone Has Said About Comics This Month. I'd love for Mr. Netzer to elaborate on that last sentence, assuming he can take time out of his busy schedule of tirelessly defending Ronee Bourgeois (perhaps the "fangirl" in question?) and helping Neal Adams change his legacy from "great artist" to "great artist who later became a depressing crackpot" (which presumably entails a lot of time spent arguing with actual scientists on wikipedia).

Also: brownshirts? When did FOE become the SDS? When you all went down to Berlin and joined the Ice Capades (ayyy-yeeeds)?

Another basically anonymous commenter going by the handle "NickW" calls Ellison a "geriatric old perv." I'm surprised the Newsarama legal team is letting that one stand. Same poster goes on to chide those offended by the Comics Journal's handling of certain stories: "[T]he comics world is this insular, little, inbred, pond that even a small pebble can make a big splash."

This leads to someone adopting the handle "Pity NickW" to claim Groth is driven by jealousy, which can apparently be blamed on his parents. The comment also compares Groth to Ann Coulter, thus convincing me it's the same person comparing Groth's admirers to fascists. Worst of all, "Pity NickW" suggests that Gil Kane might not have been any better than Don Heck. Remember that: the pro-Ellison camp is deluded to the point of thinking Don Heck is in Gil Kane's league, simply because Kane was a friend of Groth's. Awesome.

-From this week's Joe Rice Media Review, a rather baffling turn of phrase in a review of the current Ennis Ghost Rider (horse version) limited series:

"This book is like if my dad and I combined into one person and wanted only one thing."

I was just saying the same thing about Magnus, Robot Fighter just the other day. There might be other stuff worth pointing out, but I haven't read Shazam or Criminal yet and I forgot to buy The Authority altogether, so I only read the parts of the column dealing with stuff I had no interest in buying.

-Achewood has some suggestions for Sleestak.