My new Tumblr about comics!

Over the course of almost the last year, I've been reading a lot of comics on my hand-me-down iPad. Whenever I saw a page or panel that looked really cool, had a good message, or had something I thought was worth critiquing, I took a screenshot of it with the intent to share it here with you guys, the only people I know who might actually care about comic book stuff. But since I had trouble getting the files from my iPad onto my PC, I ended up hording them on my iPad until I had waaaaaay too many to share on this forum.

My solution is to create a new Tumblr site (Do they call them "Tumblogs" or something?), which I have named "Prime Panels" until I can think of something better.

Here it is: PrimePanels.tumblr.com

I upload the images from my iPad to Tumblr and save the posts as drafts. Then I get on my PC and add tags and comments as warranted before posting them. Some images will be posted without comment, while others - especially the ones with theological implications - will be followed by a paragraph or more. Those ones will take the longest to post, of course, because I often have trouble keeping my thoughts precise.

Hopefully I can keep this endeavor up until I've caught up to what I'm currently reading.

I'm also thinking about mirroring all or some of my posts to my MeWe page or the CGC MeWe page. MeWe makes a pretty good place to post stuff like this, too.

Sounds cool, Reed.
I'll check it out.

Dude, this sounds great!

How often do you post? I don't see dates on them.

Paeter wrote:How often do you post? I don't see dates on them.

Since I have so dang many screenshots right now, I can post multiple a day or whenever I think about it/have time. Would it be better to post only on certain days of the week?

Huh, you're right. I don't think it automatically dates posts. That's dumb. I guess I'll have to date them myself. I suppose I could move things over to Wordpress, but…I don't want to. It's too much work, and I'm kind of sick of Wordpress right now.

AGoodReed wrote:Would it be better to post only on certain days of the week?

I remember hearing years ago that content posting is more likely to be followed if it is predictable. So that may help. But I was just curious about how long you'd been doing it and if you had settled into consistency yet.

AGoodReed wrote:I suppose I could move things over to Wordpress, but…I don't want to. It's too much work, and I'm kind of sick of Wordpress right now.

I would say that Tumblr is probably the correct tool for what you're doing. It has a built-in social audience, and Wordpress is more suited to text-based blogs and dedicated websites. Annoying about the lack of post dates, though. I wonder if that can be configured.

AdamCollings wrote:

AGoodReed wrote:I suppose I could move things over to Wordpress, but…I don't want to. It's too much work, and I'm kind of sick of Wordpress right now.

I would say that Tumblr is probably the correct tool for what you're doing. It has a built-in social audience, and Wordpress is more suited to text-based blogs and dedicated websites. Annoying about the lack of post dates, though. I wonder if that can be configured.

I've looked through the settings and can't find any way to turn dates on. It's possible that I could choose a different page theme and they would be included, but there are only maybe two themes I like that are free, and the one I chose looks the best for what I'm doing, I think.

I've got so many things to post, I'm considering just filling up my queue and having it post three times a day on weekdays. Would that be overkill? My main goal is more to share this stuff with you guys than to gain a following, though I do like to turn some of them into Gospel presentations. I'd like for those to get more eyes on them.

EDIT: I found an OK theme that shows the publishing dates, so I switched it.

You have an interesting approach, Reed. I appreciate the teasers, the single panels. I do want to see more of your thoughts about them, even if it's "I just liked the imagery". The "Catching Up" post is neat but left me scratching my head as to what made it stand out to you. All in all, I like what I see.

I like MeWe as a platform, as well.

mindspike wrote:You have an interesting approach, Reed. I appreciate the teasers, the single panels. I do want to see more of your thoughts about them, even if it's "I just liked the imagery". The "Catching Up" post is neat but left me scratching my head as to what made it stand out to you. All in all, I like what I see.

I like MeWe as a platform, as well.

Ah, I kind of figured it was self-explanatory. It just shows the innocence of Wonder Woman. Though now that you've got me thinking on it again, I might return to it later and write a bit about how none of us can work our way into "goodness."

AGoodReed wrote:

mindspike wrote:I do want to see more of your thoughts about them, even if it's "I just liked the imagery". The "Catching Up" post is neat but left me scratching my head as to what made it stand out to you.

Ah, I kind of figured it was self-explanatory. It just shows the innocence of Wonder Woman. Though now that you've got me thinking on it again, I might return to it later and write a bit about how none of us can work our way into "goodness."

See, I didn't get that at all. I think I read WW Rebirth a long time ago. Is that the one where Batman and Superman stumble on Diana bathing (?) and Bruce is so overcome he steps up and kisses her? I also seem to remember that in that story Diana was forged from the clay of a Lazarus Pit. But I could be conflating things or it may be the Mandela Effect. Either way, the single half-page didn't give me enough context to get the same thing you did from it - another reason I wanted to hear your thoughts.

I follow History of the Batman on Instagram and Londyn does something similar. She posts images, and then just a sentence or two of explanation of its significance.

mindspike wrote:

AGoodReed wrote:

mindspike wrote:I do want to see more of your thoughts about them, even if it's "I just liked the imagery". The "Catching Up" post is neat but left me scratching my head as to what made it stand out to you.

Ah, I kind of figured it was self-explanatory. It just shows the innocence of Wonder Woman. Though now that you've got me thinking on it again, I might return to it later and write a bit about how none of us can work our way into "goodness."

See, I didn't get that at all. I think I read WW Rebirth a long time ago. Is that the one where Batman and Superman stumble on Diana bathing (?) and Bruce is so overcome he steps up and kisses her? I also seem to remember that in that story Diana was forged from the clay of a Lazarus Pit. But I could be conflating things or it may be the Mandela Effect.

Ew. I don't think so. I can't remember what actually caused them to meet, but I'm pretty sure they all stayed in costume. I think it was a situation where Batman and Superman were fighting some monster or villain, and Wonder Woman showed up and finished it off for them. Then they talked with the help of the Lasso of Truth because Diana didn't speak English yet.

And I've never read anything about her birth being related to the Lazarus Pit.

Turns out the story I was thinking of was "Batman / Superman / Wonder Woman: Trinity" a 3-part miniseries by Matt Wagner and Dave Stewart from 2003.

Issue 2 contains this scene, and the next issue has Hippolyta telling Diana that it is ancient magic. Issue three is also the one where Bruce is overcome by his visit to Themyscira and kisses the bathing Diana. And then she decks him.

mindspike wrote:Turns out the story I was thinking of was "Batman / Superman / Wonder Woman: Trinity" a 3-part miniseries by Matt Wagner and Dave Stewart from 2003.

Issue 2 contains this scene, and the next issue has Hippolyta telling Diana that it is ancient magic. Issue three is also the one where Bruce is overcome by his visit to Themyscira and kisses the bathing Diana. And then she decks him.

Oh! I remember that book. I checked it out from the library when I was in the U.S. in 2019, but I'd also checked out several Rebirth books as well, and after reading those, I wasn't really interested in any out-of-continuity books. I never finished it.

AGoodReed wrote:Oh! I remember that book. I checked it out from the library when I was in the U.S. in 2019, but I'd also checked out several Rebirth books as well, and after reading those, I wasn't really interested in any out-of-continuity books. I never finished it.

Well, you're in luck! In the wake of DC Omniverse, DC Comics has basically given up and declared that every story ever written is now part of DC Continuity and it's on the reader to figure out how it all works out.

On one hand, I approve of this approach. It validates the relevance and importance of the stories I love. It gives me a universe where Barry Allen grew up in a healthy relationship with both parents alive and well instead of having a tragic backstory. It gives me a universe where Hal Jordan succumbs to a very human grief instead of the influence of a malevolent alien force. It gives me a future where Superboy (Clark Kent) adventured with the Legion of Super-Heroes.

On the other hand, it makes things really difficult to talk with fans about comics history unless you are keeping it on a purely real-history perspective and not trying to untangle just how a given character fits into a given story.

But as Heath Corson, writer of the Batman Unlimited movies, once said, "Every generation deserves its own Batman."

mindspike wrote:

AGoodReed wrote:Oh! I remember that book. I checked it out from the library when I was in the U.S. in 2019, but I'd also checked out several Rebirth books as well, and after reading those, I wasn't really interested in any out-of-continuity books. I never finished it.

Well, you're in luck! In the wake of DC Omniverse, DC Comics has basically given up and declared that every story ever written is now part of DC Continuity and it's on the reader to figure out how it all works out.

On one hand, I approve of this approach. It validates the relevance and importance of the stories I love. It gives me a universe where Barry Allen grew up in a healthy relationship with both parents alive and well instead of having a tragic backstory. It gives me a universe where Hal Jordan succumbs to a very human grief instead of the influence of a malevolent alien force. It gives me a future where Superboy (Clark Kent) adventured with the Legion of Super-Heroes.

On the other hand, it makes things really difficult to talk with fans about comics history unless you are keeping it on a purely real-history perspective and not trying to untangle just how a given character fits into a given story.

But as Heath Corson, writer of the Batman Unlimited movies, once said, "Every generation deserves its own Batman."

Oh, yeah, I knew that. I've read Dark Nights: Death Metal.

I don't know how I feel about it, but I think I lean toward the negative. If history is based solely on each individual's perception, how can anything be true, you know? And I know these are fictional stories and characters, but within their world, things have to be true or else there's no real stakes to anything, and if there are no stakes, why should I care?

AGoodReed wrote:If history is based solely on each individual's perception, how can anything be true, you know? And I know these are fictional stories and characters, but within their world, things have to be true or else there's no real stakes to anything, and if there are no stakes, why should I care?

I get it. Part of the problem is that we are conditioned to think historically because we live in a linear world. Batman and Superman are not real people. They do not live in a real, linear world. They are literary constructs. Not only do they not have to be consistent from story to story, I believe it's actually impossible to expect any kind of prolonged consistency when a single character is handled by multiple writers and editors over an extended period of time.

When we think of Greco-Roman mythology, we draw largely from Bulfinch. But from whom did Bulfinch draw? There is no such thing as a set canon of mythology from that culture. Tracing those stories back to Bulfinch's sources reveals no organized and systematic record; it reveals a diverse set of stories that differ from each other and sometimes contradict each other. In a way, DC and Marvel are creating a modern mythology, stories and characters that capture a snapshot of the culture of their time.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is a positive thing. I predict we will see a more structured approach evolve, if only for the purpose you mentioned, allowing characters to have consequences and real stakes in their stories. But I don't think we are going to see a singular "canon". I expect DC will use the same approach Marvel is, setting books within several continuities. But even that seems sort of loosey goosey.

I don't expect the cartoons to be perfectly representative of the comics. I don't expect the movies to portray the same stories. I don't expect the novels to match the source material very accurately. And I don't expect that anything Geoff Johns does will respect or validate characters that I value. It actually feels good to have been given "permission" by the publisher to disregard stories that I dislike.

==============

Completely separate Geoff Johns rant:

I was a dedicated Wally West Flash fan, until Johns took over the book and everything changed tone, direction, and theme.

I was a dedicated Kyle Rayner Green Lantern fan, until Johns gained editorial power and canceled the book in favor of a Hal Jordan "Rebirth".

I loved Superboy, Impulse, and Young Justice. All of these books were canceled in favor of handing Johns a new Teen Titans title. The first thing Johns does is to make dramatic changes to the character of Impulse so that he is more like the classic Kid Flash. The second thing he does is to change Superboy's origin, powers, and character design so dramatically that you could reasonably argue it's an entirely different character.

Coincidence?? Hmmmm..........

mindspike wrote:

AGoodReed wrote:If history is based solely on each individual's perception, how can anything be true, you know? And I know these are fictional stories and characters, but within their world, things have to be true or else there's no real stakes to anything, and if there are no stakes, why should I care?

I get it. Part of the problem is that we are conditioned to think historically because we live in a linear world. Batman and Superman are not real people. They do not live in a real, linear world. They are literary constructs. Not only do they not have to be consistent from story to story, I believe it's actually impossible to expect any kind of prolonged consistency when a single character is handled by multiple writers and editors over an extended period of time.

When we think of Greco-Roman mythology, we draw largely from Bulfinch. But from whom did Bulfinch draw? There is no such thing as a set canon of mythology from that culture. Tracing those stories back to Bulfinch's sources reveals no organized and systematic record; it reveals a diverse set of stories that differ from each other and sometimes contradict each other. In a way, DC and Marvel are creating a modern mythology, stories and characters that capture a snapshot of the culture of their time.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is a positive thing. I predict we will see a more structured approach evolve, if only for the purpose you mentioned, allowing characters to have consequences and real stakes in their stories. But I don't think we are going to see a singular "canon". I expect DC will use the same approach Marvel is, setting books within several continuities. But even that seems sort of loosey goosey.

Yes, keeping all that stuff straight over hundreds of writers since the late 1930's is a ridiculous request. And I do think that each individual comic series sort of being in its own continuity can work, especially for people who only read one or two books regularly. It would certainly have made things easier to justify during a lot of the stuff I've been reading lately, with so many characters doing so many different things across multiple titles. It might just be easier to assume that every writer follows his or her own idea of continuity, and just lean into that. (Of course, Brian Michael Bendis alone has kind of muddled up Superman's immediate continuity all by himself, writing two different storylines in both Superman and Action Comics that can't logically be happening at the same time.)

Maybe things will get sort of meta and every character will remember their own current histories, but they'll also remember the crises and what happened before them. They'd have to acknowledge that they're all basically immortal, though.

mindspike wrote:I don't expect the cartoons to be perfectly representative of the comics. I don't expect the movies to portray the same stories. I don't expect the novels to match the source material very accurately. And I don't expect that anything Geoff Johns does will respect or validate characters that I value. It actually feels good to have been given "permission" by the publisher to disregard stories that I dislike.

No, I don't expect that, either. But I also think movies and TV shows following the comics is a different issue. I do want each episode of a show to be consistent with the continuity of the rest of the show, but I don't really care if they follow the continuity of the comics or movies.

mindspike wrote:Completely separate Geoff Johns rant:

I was a dedicated Wally West Flash fan, until Johns took over the book and everything changed tone, direction, and theme.

I was a dedicated Kyle Rayner Green Lantern fan, until Johns gained editorial power and canceled the book in favor of a Hal Jordan "Rebirth".

I loved Superboy, Impulse, and Young Justice. All of these books were canceled in favor of handing Johns a new Teen Titans title. The first thing Johns does is to make dramatic changes to the character of Impulse so that he is more like the classic Kid Flash. The second thing he does is to change Superboy's origin, powers, and character design so dramatically that you could reasonably argue it's an entirely different character.

Coincidence?? Hmmmm..........

Someone pointed out to me a long time ago that the people in charge of both DC and Marvel (at the time we were talking about it) had grown up with certain characters being a certain way, and so now that they were in charge, they were changing things back to the way they remembered them. Geoff John and Dan DiDio liked Barry Allen as the Flash, Hal Jordan as Green Lantern, etc., so they were bringing them back to the forefront at the expense of Wally West and Kyle Rayner, respectively. Over at Marvel, Joe Quesada believed that Spider-Man shouldn't have ever gotten married, so he found a way to make him single again (and if you really want a rant, get me going on that).

Reflecting back on that recently, I realized that when people from my generation started taking over DC (and Marvel), they could start putting things back to the way they were in the 90's. But maybe, and hopefully, the people currently in charge are thinking more of the bigger picture than Johns, DiDio, and Quesada.

A lot I could add, but work is crazy now so no time. The highest priority preference for me, in this new era, would be for writers to re-present the elements of history they want to pull from when relevant to a given story, and do it generously (extended flashback panels or an entire flashback issue) so we know as readers what version of DC legacy they are pulling from. Since we won't know which version of continuity "counts" on these rules, they will need to show us, each time, in order for us to care about the current story they want us to care about.

If they take this approach, I'm game. My memory is bad anyway. So when something gets retconned, I often don't notice the conflicting details and can usually say, "yeah, okay, I can choose to remember it that way".

In some ways, it's canonizing what we as readers already know and do, as I think Winston was getting at. We like certain takes on characters and so we emphasize those in our head-canon and try to forget what we don't like. As long as their focus is on good stories dealing with what is happening now, for the most part, (and they present again any back history they want to pull from when appropriate), then I'm totally ready for this approach.

Paeter wrote:A lot I could add, but work is crazy now so no time. The highest priority preference for me, in this new era, would be for writers to re-present the elements of history they want to pull from when relevant to a given story, and do it generously (extended flashback panels or an entire flashback issue) so we know as readers what version of DC legacy they are pulling from. Since we won't know which version of continuity "counts" on these rules, they will need to show us, each time, in order for us to care about the current story they want us to care about.

If they take this approach, I'm game. My memory is bad anyway. So when something gets retconned, I often don't notice the conflicting details and can usually say, "yeah, okay, I can choose to remember it that way".

In some ways, it's canonizing what we as readers already know and do, as I think Winston was getting at. We like certain takes on characters and so we emphasize those in our head-canon and try to forget what we don't like. As long as their focus is on good stories dealing with what is happening now, for the most part, (and they present again any back history they want to pull from when appropriate), then I'm totally ready for this approach.

Okay, that's way better than I could have put it. Let's do that.