Wrapped Up Like a Blog

Whenever I get my comics from the shop (I try to go every other week, stopping at Taco Bell afterward because, well, for me, comics and Taco Bell have gone together like chocolate and peanut butter ever since college), I put them in order. Like some of you, I read them in the reverse order of excitement, putting the ones that intrigue me the most at the bottom. But, since I like to (carefully) read a couple comics while eating those aforementioned tacos, I usually pick a title or two to bump up the list. More often than not these days, I pick titles that are fun. And, I must say, I am having more fun with Daredevil than any other super hero title right now.

I have a complicated history with Matt Murdock. I didn't pay much attention to him as a youth. When Frank Miller was writing what some consider the seminal DD stories in the 80s, I was reading Fantastic Four and paying little attention. My first real foray into Hell's Kitchen was when Kevin Smith took over the title in the 90s. I adored his work (perhaps I'll review it later), and I stuck with Daredevil afterward but, as the title got bleaker and bleaker, I gave it up. I am not the world's biggest B M Bendis fan, so I dropped it when he took over and have paid little attention to the title since. I heard some bad reviews of Shadowland but, as one of my favorite all-time writers, Mark Waid, took over the title, I started to hear that Daredevil was becoming FUN again, and he was acting more like a super hero. Finally, curiosity got the best of me and I picked up an issue.

I am glad I did.

As I said, this is my favorite super hero title right now. I love what Waid has done with Matt. Rather than ignore the "not-so-secret identity" issue, he makes it an ongoing plot point, sort of an in-joke for Matt, and an areas of assumption and confusion for others. He even acknowledges in dialogue how bleak Matt's life has been and he makes the blind lawyer/super-hero's new attitude a conscious choice on the character's part.

Waid also embraces the "Man without Fear" nickname, putting Daredevil in at least one situation per issue that would make Hal Jordan wet his pants (especially considering that, aside from his hyper-senses, Daredevil is basically a normal guy). And he makes DD a super-hero again, wisely tapping into, of all things, the Fantastic Four's rogue's gallery for enemies like Klaw, the Mole Man and, perhaps, Doctor Doom. I like when heroes face non-traditional villains (when it happens organically, not "Acts of Vengeance" style), and each conflict has made sense for Matt's journey and helped illuminate part of his character.

I also love that the plotting seems very classic. In a day and age when many titles are written with trade-paperback-sized arcs in mind, Waid has a nice mixture of one- or two- issue stories with ongoing subplots, both personal (and what a GREAT supporting cast, with the ever-present Foggy Nelson, and some new characters, plus a great spin on the Murdock/Nelson law practice) and super-heroic (the Megacrime megaplot is tremendous), making the book feel like the titles of my youth, even with mini-crossovers thrown in, seemingly by editorial fiat.

I had intended to review the latest issue, #14 here, but I got so carried away with my gushing about the title in general, that I'll save that review for tomorrow (but you can probably imagine how it'll go, I suppose). Stay tuned for that, plus reviews of the next two Before Watchmen titles and more!

On the podcast I co-hosed, After LOST, we would recommend movies and TV shows and games to our listeners. One popular game among the hosts of the show was Apples to Apples. a game I used to full effect when I taught. In that game, a judge must decide which noun (common or proper) goes best with a particular adjective. A similar game that I recommended is called Life's a Pitch. The game is similar, but it matches up objects (some quite whacky) with unusual situations. If you play with the right people, the game can get rather PG-13, perhaps even R-rated.

Well, Cards Against Humanity, billed as "A Party Game for Horrible People," is just that. And, assuming you play with people who don't mind blue, scatological, and sometimes close-to-the-edge-of-bad-taste (and beyond) humor, well, it's a game that starts at R rated and soon goes way beyond.

Each player gets 10 white cards which have nouns, ranging from "Men" to "Mecha-Hitler" to things I cannot mention here and, really, I am a bit surprised anyone even THOUGHT of, never mind decided to put in a party game. Like the games above, the judge rotates (the game requires at least three players and says it can be played with up to 20, but that seems excessive. Also, it suggests a 17+ age group, but again, your tolerance levels may vary). The judge pulls a black card that has a situation with one, two or even three blanks. They could be common phrases like "Maybe she's born with it. Maybe it's _____" (the winner in my game? MICROPENIS. That gives you an idea of the level of class involved), or "In a world ravaged by ____, the only solace is in _____" ("Poorly timed Holocaust jokes" and "Glenn Beck with a fishhook in his scrotum" is a possible combination).

If you are disgusted by this, the game is not for you. If you are intrigued, well, give it a shot. I cannot fully convey the bizarre range of cards, nor the hilarious combinations that will ensue. In one round, I laughed so hard I nearly passed out, which is not hyperbole. I liked the game so much I bought it on my smartphone in mid-play.

I may be a bad person for loving it, but it made me laugh. And, well, at least I know the people around me were just as bad. Or worse. After all, I came in third...

To read more about it, click here.

So... here's the thing...

I RARELY talk about politics or religion, either on Facebook or in person. There are a LOT of reasons for this, but the primary one is, well, my ideas are pretty darn out there. There's an old joke that, if your opinions piss off everyone, you're probably on to something. Guess what? If I let people down the rabbit hole of my beliefs I would, indeed piss them off. To be frank, it's one of the biggest areas of conflict with my ex-wife (I probably could have kept my mouth shut more often. I am learning).

So here is ONE problem with every single difference of opinion that humans face: if two people disagree about something, there is little point in discussing it because, when you get down to the basics, they are BOTH right. I can explain this in length sometime, but the issue is, even if there are two seemingly diametrically opposed points of view out there, they are both right. Some of that has to do with the subjectivity of the universe and existence, some of it has to do with the fact that most disagreements are really about the wrong thing. People argue about the sleight of hand when they should be focusing on the trick itself.

And, really, I think that is an issue. People want to argue about certain topics, and their points of view are affected by hubris and personal biases and lack of perspective. So when people are arguing topics that they feel are important, I get frustrated and, in order to lay out my point of view, I'd have to go into a long and convoluted discussion about my view of the universe, existence and humanity, and that is not what most people want. So really, when I take a hot button issue and tell people they all agree and should stop arguing, they get mad. When I tell them they are arguing about the wrong things, they get mad. And when I say that they are both right AND both wrong, well, that takes a lot of words to justify.

But I'll spare you this for now. Keep in mind, though, if you hear some thoughts coming from the mouth of a certain world-weary 900 year old detective, remember that she is a LOT more like me than her goofy, jokester CT sidekick...

Do you dig abandoned buildings? Some people might think it is creepy to be interested in such a topic, but it's something that intrigues me. In fact, a good friend of mine pointed me in the direction of a website that showed six different abandoned buildings that would make great super villain lairs. Well, I was looking for a spot that the bad guy in my latest pulp project could call home. What do you think of this?


Pretty cool, eh? It's called "No Man's Land," located near the Isle of Wight. It is going to be the setting for "Lynn Lash in... The Island of Misfit Minds."

And, if I have time, I am going to write a "Black Hat" story for another anthology. If I get to it, check out THIS supervillain lair...


No hints about that story, but of course... details to follow!

Now THIS is more like it.

I was a little bit lukewarm on the first issue of Before Watchmen (Minutemen #1), but I really dug Silk Spectre #1. In college, I wrote an academic paper about Watchmen for my Critical Methods class, but thinking back, I focused so much on visual imagery and symbolism and other tropes of the medium, but I put little to no attention on the characters. In a lot of ways, Watchmen works because the characters are archetypes, and the deconstruction of those archetypes (the Gadgeteer, the Vigilante, the Godlike one, etc.) is the point. There is a lot less characterization than there could be. And some characters get more than others. We learn more about the history, say, of Jon Osterman and Walter Kovacs than we do Laurie Juspeczyk. She is, in many ways, just a decoration, a female character to round out a checklist and be the object of affection for Dr. Manhattan and Nite Owl.

But now, thanks to Darwyn Cooke and Amanda Conner, we get more characterization of Laurie in these 22 pages than we got in all 12 issues of Watchmen. We know Laurie had a troubled relationship with her mother, but we see that nicely laid out here. But we get a lot more than that. How did her mother's fame and infamy affect Laurie's social life? What did the other kids think? The girls and the boys? How did the teenage Laurie rebel against her mother's iron grip? What crazy things did Sally do to train her daughter? We get glimpses of Laurie's life and answers to these questions, many of which I never would have even asked before. In a lot of ways, this comic is reminiscent of a 60s era teen romance title, and that WORKS. There is a dearth of those books on the shelf now, and I, for one, would love to see more.

The art is strong as well. Conner uses the famous nine-panel grid to make the book feel familiar and part of the Watchmen family. But she plays with it, just as Gibbons did, and she evokes a lot of the same images that we saw in the original miniseries, starting with a familiar image manipulated through the first 3 or 4 pages to beautiful effect. Her Laurie and Sally look familiar and the other characters are well drawn and fit into the world perfectly.

I loved this issue and I cannot wait for more. As before, I will grade these titles on how close they are to midnight (the perfect issue). I say this one is ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT. Well done. Let's hope the Comedian can follow this act!

Earlier, in reviewing The Walking Dead: Rise of the Governor, I spoke of some of the dangers of prequels. This first installment of the Before Watchmen series does not suffer from any of those issues (at least not yet). It does, I think, have a DIFFERENT problem. It suffers from the need to give us a page (or four) of background on each member of the Minutemen.

In some cases, we don't learn any new information on the characters, in some cases we do get some extra added depth. I found the sequence with the Silhouette particularly illuminating (er, no pun intended), and the sequence with Nite Owl was particularly dynamic, but I felt that we learned precious little new info about Silk Spectre or the Comedian, and especially Dollar Bill. I would have preferred a tighter focus, perhaps more on Nite Owl himself or Captain Metropolis, since he was instrumental in bringing the team together. I do like the mystery afforded to Hooded Justice as well as the tidbits about Mothman, but still, it felt like Cooke was obligated to jam all of them in the first issue.

As for the art, I think Cooke's still gels well with the retro feel of the title, with a 40s vibe. I also liked how he paid homage to the style of Watchmen without trying to ape Gibbons too much. The first two pages and their recurring and evolving images was a nice touch, as was the use of some of the motifs from the original series, from the use of clocks and time to direct references. The framing sequence that hinges on Nite Owl and his unpacking and discussions with his editor was a good callback to the original title and does a nice job tying the disparate elements together and tethering it to the existing property. I am interested in the origins of the group and exploring characters we don't know as much about (like Silhouette and Mothman) so I hope that's where the story goes.

As for the rating, I rate it in minutes to midnight, the closer the better. I give this one 3 minutes to midnight. Not a bad start, a little cautions but still decent. Silk Spectre review comes tomorrow!

When I trace my roots as a writer, I think about when I was a kid, scrawling crude comics in a notebook, but more than anything, I believe my secret origin as a writer came from Dungeons & Dragons.

When I started playing in 8th grade, I just had a player character. I was probably a thief, though I don't really remember. I do recall playing a bard early on (I love the rogues, what can I say?) But soon after we started the guy who was the Dungeon Master decided it was too tough a job and, in an effort to keep the group going, I stepped up and grabbed the reins. Though I occasionally stumbled, I never let those reins go for the next decade or so.

Working as the DM really helped me develop a lot of muscles I would use later on. I wanted to have a campaign that was sweeping, that existed in a larger world where the adventuring party could play a big part in local and later worldwide events. I tried to have political intrigue and even some X-Men style fear of the other in a conflict among races. Heck, I even grabbed some of those X-Men and made them into a psychic thieves guild! I was not beyond cribbing from favorite works, with an assault on a Death Star like floating castle/fortress, and even an NPC I controlled that was a Gummi Bear (Strummi Gummi, another bard, who had skills in herbology and brewing!).

It also helped me with character development, as I made NPCs of all stripes: nobles, merchants, villains and allies. But most of all, it made me flexible. My players ALWAYS took pride in doing things I did not expect, like getting into bar brawls, burning down inns and collecting viscera from defeated creatures. Each time I had to fly by the seat of my pants and come up with challenges and resolutions. THAT was a lot of fun, looking back, though at the time I probably whined about it.

I have a lot more thoughts on the game and my time in the trenches, which I can share more, but the reason I am writing this today is that I am diving back into the game. I am Dungeon Mastering again and I am excited about it. It may cut into my writing time BUT... well, I am going to try out new characters and ideas in my campaign that may or may not end up in novels and stories in the future.

Now, where did I put those 10-sided dice...

Okay, I don't normally do this, but I am going to have to talk about what people like to call "spoilers" (I'll get into a rant about that term some other time). I'll spoil the heck out of the book, the comic and, for some bizarre reason, the TV show Caprica (and maybe another prequel or two). You have been warned and whatnot.

So, the challenge, I think, in writing a prequel is to write something that, if it stood on its own, it would be complete. It should also work as a part of the whole, whether the works are taken in the order they were created (with the prequel coming later) or the proper chronological order (with the prequel coming first). This seems like a pretty difficult task. As we can see, creating a prequel (like the Star Wars flicks) that have no surprises can leave the audience dissatisfied, but, in my opinion, creating twists for the sake of shock value is a mistake.

Take Caprica, for instance. It was a prequel to Battlestar Galactica. On BSG, there was a character names William Adama. The show Caprica details a family, the Adamas, 40 years or so before the events of BSG. There is papa Joseph and his son William. So we think we are seeing the childhood of the Admiral character on BSG. But (this is the spoiler alert) Willie DIES on the show! Shocker! But then, soon thereafter, Joseph has ANOTHER son named (you guessed it) WILLIAM. Surprise! To me it felt like an unnecessary cheat, put in there merely to surprise an audience that thought it had a handle on what was going on. Well, Rise of the Governor pulls a similar trick.

It has other flaws, too. First, it's told in the present tense, which is a bit annoying at times. Second, the timing is off (at least for me). In the comic, because Rick is out of commission for a time when society is collapsing, it's pretty much already the zombie apocalypse. And, even though the main characters in RotG are going through the early stages, the world is still already fallen apart for them. This kind of bugged me. Finally, it was tough to get interested in this group of survivors and their plight. It seemed like more of the same stuff we'd actually SEEN Rick and company already go through. There wasn't a lot of new and exciting material here.

Then there is the TWIST.

SPOILER WARNING AND WHATNOT

So in the comics, the Governor is also known as Phillip Blake, and he is a nutjob, killing and raping and being generally cruel and violent. In the book we have Phillip Blake, tough and edgy, a leader prone to violence, and his brother Brian, who is wimpy and indecisive. We also have Phillip's daughter, Penny (and we know that the Governor keeps a small child zombie as a pet, so we are waiting for her to turn) and two other male friends. Well, we seem to be watching Phillip Blake become the man we know as the Governor... until he dies with about 30 pages left in the book. Then, finally, the meek brother Brian has an epiphany (like Anakin in front of Palpatine, I suppose) and he decides to get tough and violent. Oh, and to CALL HIMSELF PHILLIP.

Really?

If you have read it, I want to know what you think. If you have not, and you avoided spoiler warnings, I also want to know what you think...

Interested in the connection between graduation, sunscreen, algae and Batman? Click here. Or perhaps you are looking for the best apps for graduates of kindergarten through grad school? Then click here.

Read more about the collaboration between movie directors, comic writers, Yahoo and Liquid Comics here.

No review today as such, but I am planning to review the first two issues of the Before Watchmen series (Minutemen #1 and Silk Spectre #1). But before I undertake that task, I thought I'd speak a little bit about the elephant in the room. It is large and grey and wrinkly...

Sorry, old joke. But there are two aspects of this project that I think are worth addressing. First is the controversy about creating more content with Alan Moore's sacred text.

As a creative person myself (check out my books here, he said, shamelessly self-promoting) I can understand how someone would be frustrated at the way a large company treated the fruits of my creative labor. But the fact of the matter is, DC owns the characters and can do as they please. Moore may hate that, but he has no legal leg to stand on, as far as I can tell. We are all aware of people who have gone to the creative well and seen it come up dry (did anyone really like the Gone with the Wind sequels). Now in many cases, these works have been done after the death of the original artist while Moore is still alive and beardy. And then there are the public domain characters we have seen in so many iterations (how many versions of Holmes have we seen?) Again, though, the legal issue is different (and Moore himself used these kinds of characters in his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). Besides, Moore wanted to take the Charlton characters and do with them as he pleased, and someone had once created those characters. I see this as at least somewhat similar. Anyway, from my perspective, Watchmen will still exist as a perfect, self-contained unit of comic book excellence. These issues can be read and enjoyed or just as easily ignored. I choose to read them and see if they are any good on their own merit.

The second issue has to do with the nature of the prequel. I am reading the Walking Dead: Rise of the Governor novel, which is a prequel, and I have seen prequels for Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Battlestar Galactica and more. A writer of a prequel is somewhat trapped. Everything that happens has to conform to what comes later, so there is not a lot of wiggle room for free-form developments. Although there are certain cheats that writers can use (when I write about this soon, I'll spoil a big point from the BSG prequel CAPRICA, so be forewarned), these can often come across as cheap and annoying tricks to keep readers guessing. It's a tough box in which to be trapped, so I am curious to see how it plays out. I think the advantage for this property is the chance to focus on characters. As much as we learned about the history of the heroes in Watchmen, really, they were not fleshed out characters. If the Before Watchmen project wants to go down that road, I think it'll be a success.

Next up: My review of MINUTEMEN!

As a kid, I really, really dug the Defenders. What a truly bizarre collection of characters: high on power and egos, low on teamwork. The Un-Team was a group of misfits, a kings, aliens, mystics, brutes and others, drawn together to fight each other -- and the enemy. Creators have made attempts to bring back the old magic, perhaps none so on point as Matt Fraction, though, going so far as to bring back the 70s style footers. He has three of the classic members, Dr. Strange and Namor plus the Silver Surfer, and two newbies, Iron Fist and Red She-Hulk (as an aside... really? That is really her code name? Oh, Betty...) The team is in the midst of an ongoing mystery regarding some heavy-duty, powerful artifacts that connect some Marvel history and personal history for the characters themselves.

For this issue, my rating system is based on Defenders recruits in the 70s and 80s, in order of coolness... 1) Manslaughter 2) Hellcat 3) Gargoyle 4) Nighthawk 5) Valkyrie

THE ART: So, we have the Dodsons, Terry and Rachel. And we have the Black Cat. It was inevitable, I suppose. And their art on Felicia is great, cheesycakey but in a fun way, and they seem to be having fun with her infiltration and theft mission in this issue. In fact, though it is a secondary plot in the story, it takes over in many ways, as these sections have a nice variety of camera angles, nicely dynamic movement, and a featured character that looks right. The Defenders, on the other hand, don't always look right. Namor and Stephen, especially in the longer shots, look different from the way I think they should. The pair does a nice job with some of the tripper elements (kudos to the Soul-shaped Silver Surfer), but their Wakanda is not well realized, cropped off by tight panels and too much character focus, though the two-page spread of Wakanda's neighbor is intriguing, if not detailed enough. All in all, not my favorite choice for artists for this book, they look nice in places but don't quite fit, like Patsy Walker (2/5)


THE STORY: Again, this issue is split in twain for me. The bits with the Black Cat are light and fun. I love heist stories (can we get Felicia another mini? Or an ongoing? If Selina Kyle can have a series, I think Marvel she-cat can, too). Her trial is fun, especially the cross-cutting with the group that hired her and her brash use of the Satan Claw (nice to see THAT, too). The other plot is not quite as great. I like the ongoing mystery, and I like the politics between Wakanda and its neighbor, but I am bugged by the fact that the FF visit Wakanda this month as well and the two stories don't seem to match. The trippy dream sequence is a little TOO trippy for my tastes, and, in the end, this feels like the set up for the next phase of the story, but I am suitably intrigued for that, so I'd say this issue is mysterious enough to intrigue me, hoping for a payoff soon, like Gargoyle (3/5)


Coming soon, I look at BEFORE WATCHMEN

I love me some BKV. Runaways was my favorite Marvel title of the last 20 years, and Y: The Last Man was my favorite title PERIOD of the last 20 years. I also enjoyed Ex Machina and Brian K Vaughan's work on LOST. So I have missed his monthly comic work, and now I am ready to review his latest: SAGA.

(The Rating will be based on characters from Runaways, from least to best: 1) Alex 2) Molly 3) Chase 4) Karolina 5) Old Lace)

THE ART: Reading a lot of comics like I do, there seems to be a few styles that are "stock" or "standard." After all, I the art on most superhero books follows certain tropes, as do other common comic genres. But there is a dearth of galaxy-spanning, fantasy, war, sci-fi fairy tales. So I am happy to gauge Fiona Staples' art on its own merit. And, for the most part, it works here. She is forced to draw some pretty fantastic creatures (Robot gentlemen with television heads (often engaged in "adult activities") unicorn-horned women, massive dinosaur/technology beasts). For the most part, she manages it well. Her strength, though, is in crafting the main characters, the two lovers at the heart of the story, are recognizable and show great emotion, which is really the glue that holds the story together. Where she loses points, though, is in backgrounds. She skimps on the background details on a lot of panels, which is too bad because there is such a chance for world building in this issue (or universe building more like it!) so having skimpy backgrounds is a minus. Still, her art is pleasing and intriguing, much like Lucy in the Sky herself, Karolina (4/5)


THE STORY: Each of the titles I mentioned in the intro is a "high concept" idea. They posit worlds just like ours but with a single twist: a New York where there is one man with super powers. A group of teenagers whose parents really ARE supervillains. A world where there is only one man. So each world is familiar, but for the deviation and we get to see truths about our lives in the characters presented. Well, characters seem at the heart of SAGA as well, but the world could not be more different from ours. And that is the struggle of the first issue. When we have time with our characters, two lovers in the archetypal Romeo and Juliet roles, the story shines, fueled by the strength of the narration, which tethers the emotions and makes the story personal. When it gets away from itself, though, is in the universe building. There is a LOT to digest in this issue, with a galaxy spanning conflict, two main alien races plus many others, politics and technology and fantastical creatures and bounty hunters... it's a bit overstuffed, and when the focus moves away from the lovers, it gets bloated and I kept wishing it would come back. With a project this ambitious, I suppose the writer has to jump into the deep end of the universe at some point, but I think it was a bit too much to cram into the first issue. I am intrigued enough to read more (based mostly on the main relationship), but I am hoping BKV can rein in the giant story soon to keep my interest. The first issue, overall, shows a lot of promise but isn't quite there yet... a lot like CHASE (3/5)

Here is the issue, in the modern comic book market, with reviewing individual issues. There are, it seems to me, fewer and fewer "Done in One" issues out there. (this month's X-Factor #237 is a nice exception, though even it is steeped in what has happened and what is to come). Therefore, reviewing a single issue of a comic can feel like reviewing just one chapter of a book. But I am of the opinion that a strong comic issue should stand on its own even when being part of a larger saga. The latest issue of Fantastic Four (#607) does not do that, feeling -- to me at least -- like only the beginning of a story. How, then, does the ever controversial issue #10 of Batman rate as a single issue?

(my rating for this will be on a scale of Robins, from least to greatest (in my opinion): 1) Damian Wayne 2) Stephanie Brown 3) Jason Todd 4) Tim Drake 5) Dick Grayson

And, for this comic especially, I will give away a MAJOR plot point that appears in the issue, so you have been warned.

The Art: First of all, I really dig the cover. For those who have been following the Court of Owls storyline in the comic will recognize the iconography of the shadowy wings and the crushed egg. Others who are not familiar (and, as I like to say, "every comic is somebody's first") will be intrigued by the seemingly simple image which has many layers. I have been happy with Capullo's art, for the most part, throughout the series. I live the jaw he gives Batman, for one thing, and I love the small touches in his art, like the Owl mask cracking as Batman presses it against the bars (a good Hitchcockian image as well) on page 3. His splash page of the deceased Court is creepy/cool as is his imagery in the children's hospital. The sequence with "Lincoln" and Batman is VERY cramped, with lots of small panels depicting small actions, and, in some cases WAY too much expository dialogue crammed in, so it seems like the whole reveal is rushed and crowded (more on that in the discussion on the writing). Plus, I did not love the "Owl-Armor" design. Maybe when I see it in action, I'll feel differently about it. Still, it was a consistent (if not flashy, like issue #5) and satisfying. Much like TIM DRAKE (4/5)


The Story: So, here is where I have a bit of a problem reviewing a piece of a story. After all, the big reveal in the issue (turn away if you don't want to know!) is that "Lincoln" is Bruce's long-lost younger brother, Thomas. The reason I have a problem talking about this now is that, well, this is what we believe at this moment in time. We might find out he is from another Earth (the Owlman/Thomas Wayne/Earth 3 (or 2 or the antimatter universe or whatever), or we might find out he is lying, or a robot, or a clone or any number of things. So when people react to this revelation, they are, I believe, reacting to an incomplete revelation. Still, what we see here is pretty disjointed. We get a bit of an anticlimactic ending to the Court of Owls saga (they all killed themselves? hmmm) and a few shots of Bruce pondering the puzzle. It was nice to hear of his training with Ducard and some insight into his methods as a detective (and, is it me, or should THIS title have been Detective Comics and THAT could have been Batman?). But once Bruce tracks down the clues (and, we are with him as he goes), the sequence between him and Lincoln (or Thomas) is painful. Thomas wants Bruce to speak his name and, by the third or fourth iteration, so are WE. It's hard to tell if Bruce is being stubborn or if he does not really know or if he is trying to block out the truth he suspects. I suppose more will come out when he faces down with Owlman (or whatever he'll be called) next time. Again, it's a bit of an unfinished piece, much like the taken-too-young Jason Todd (3/5)


I'll be sure to review issue 11 next time!

This is the first in a new series of semi-regular comic reviews. I am going to tinker with the format as I go, so if you have any feedback about the comics I review, or the way I do it, I am happy to hear all input!

Since this challenge started with a call-to-arms from Tom Brevoort, I thought I'd start with one of his books. Plus, Fantastic Four was my favorite title as a youth (the Byrne era of the comic made me a fan of the medium for life) and, as the first title of The Marvel Age, it seems like a good candidate for the first book of the WULACR Age. So, here I kick things off with a review of Fantastic Four #607.

The ratings for this title will be based on a scale of FF replacement heroes: 1: HERBIE 2: Ant-Man 3: Crystal 4: Spider-Man 5: She-Hulk

(note: I have decided that, after each review, I'll rant a little about my thoughts on the context of the issue and its place in comics history. Call it my Cranky Old Man Rant).

ART: I am a sucker for Karl Kesel. I have loved his work for decades, and whenever he has a hand in an issue's art, I am predisposed to like it. Here he works with Giuseppe Camuncoli, whose work I don't know nearly as well. There are some nice touches in the art, such as on page 2 when Reed is getting off the plane and he stretches his neck slightly. Perhaps he had a small kink in it from the flight, or he was subconsciously trying to see more of his surroundings. I also like on page 19 as Reed stretches his arm up with a light stick. Again, a nice character moment as he is showing his curiosity as he and T'Challa walk through the archaeological site. Reed is a good litmus test for artists, as they can go overboard with his stretchiness (or his likeness to The Professor on Gilligan's Island). I also like the portrayal of T'Challa himself, who looks strong and regal and proud. Kudos, too for the likeness he bears to his ancestor, as depicted on 11. There are some issues I have with the art, however. The children in the Foundation are hard to tell apart, especially with their matching uniforms (when I can't tell Alex Power from Franklin, that is a problem). And, in the flashback sequences, the added Egyptian symbology in the gutters is distracting (and the layout in these sequences is an issue). Finally, the last splash page falls short. It seems like the art is supposed to convey a great revelation or cliffhanger, but it does nothing to whet my appetite. All in all, the art is acceptable but not spectacular, just like CRYSTAL (3/5).


STORY: I love me some Black Panther. When handled well, he is a very interesting character, with his combination of ancient tradition and modern technology, his mix of intelligence and strength. He is well handled here. Exploring the history of the Panther legacy is interesting, and I like the connection between the heart-shaped herb and Egyptian mythology. Also, T'Challa's explanation of why his country is not in financial distress (and the way he cavalierly explains that to a Reed, cutting through the American's assumptions is well done, too). But there are some issues with the plot as well. Bringing the kids to Wakanda, while a nice excuse for a field trip, seems unnecessary. Reed didn't even seem to have a good idea as to why he was headed there, so it seems odd that he would bring children with him. And they ended up fighting... undead creatures?.. which put the kids in jeopardy. This sequence struck me as odd as well, as it seemed like an excuse for a little action and was, at this point, unexplained. Finally, the issue felt like a set up, and a poor one at that. I am not even clear as to what the mission is for the distaff members of the crew, so that is dissatisfying. The story today is a let down, like the Scott Lang Ant-Man (2/5).


OLD MAN RANT: I have some issues with Wakanda now. First, the marriage of Black Panther and Storm. Just because they are the only two prominent African heroes in the Marvel pantheon does not mean they need to be together. That match always bothered me. And the vibranium plot seems silly, as I fully believe it will be back in the equation quite soon. I also prefer my FF without the litany of kids (don't get me started on the existence of Val. Sue's miscarriage in the 80s was such a good story, and Val's very existence rubs me the wrong way). Also, the Panther is involved in a storyline with the Defenders this month, so those issues always bother me, since the stories don't seem to match up at all.

That;s it for my first review. How do you rate me? Do I at least get a Medusa, or maybe a Power Man?

A couple of different ideas are converging in my head right now. The first is a challenge, the second is a trend.

Recently, Tom Brevoort, editor extraordinaire at Marvel Comics, tweeted about how disappointed he is in the quality of comics reviews out there. He says that reviewers don't seem to know enough about the craft and don't seem to be critical enough (he is also looking for an assistant editor. I told him to call me). So I consider that the tossing of the gauntlet, so I am picking it up. I go to the comics shop every two weeks, but I rarely post reviews (I did for the first batch of New 52, but not much since then). Now, though, I am going to do so, starting this weekend.

That brings me to the other trend: prequels. I have been reading the Walking Dead novel, The Rise of the Governor, which is a prequel to the comics series, so I'll be reviewing that. I am also reading the Before Watchmen comics, and you can certainly bet I'll be reviewing those. With each of these, I'll be giving some background and broader insights on the properties as well, as well as insights into the nature of prequels and some of their pitfalls.

Now, I have to get back to reading Defenders and Action Comics. Reviews to follow!

If you are a Road Warrior who relies on a laptop, smartphone and tablet to work remotely, anywhere and everywhere, you should read my tips on the best cloud storage options and how to find free Wi-Fi!

I live in CT, where I have lived most of my life. It's not the most exciting state in the union, but it's the home state of my family and I have become accustomed to it. Some people choose their states of residence due to work, school, loved ones or other factors but the truth is, some states are better than others. I asked a few Facebook friends to tell me the best and worst aspects of their home states. Here are a few of the (printable) responses:

My catchphrase, such as it is, is "Here's the Thing." It may not be the best, but it's mine. Here are a few catchphrases from my Facebook friends that tickled my fancy. At least the ones that are suitable to print. Do you have a catchphrase?

• "is it morning already?"
• "it's like watching a bunch of chimpanzees trying to hump a doorknob"
• Spoon! 
• Something that big, should have hair on it.
• "put down that gun and drink your lemonade!"
• It wasn't me !!!!
• There goes the neighborhood.
• Don't just sit there like a dumb animal.

This is a topic that has been on my mind recently: genre specialization. Some readers I know tend to stick to one genre. They love romance or historical fiction or sci-fi and that is IT. But some readers will check out a mystery today, a war novel tomorrow and a family drama the next day.

And the same goes for writers too, I suppose. When I look at my Amazon Author Page right now, I see five different entries in a few different genres. I have a couple paranormal fiction/urban fantasy entries, a horror story, a good old fashioned pulp story and a collection of dark realistic fiction. Moving forward, I have more entries ahead in each of these genres, but I also have to projects in the hopper in the young adult and sci-fi genres.

So, I ask you, as a reader, do you prefer to stick to one genre? Do you prefer writers who stick to a single genre? And fellow writers, what is your preference?

I have lots of rituals. Probably too many to be healthy. One of those is a travel ritual. I prefer to read Agatha Christie books when traveling. I think it started when I was a bit of a younger man and I was first in my AC kick. The books were the right size to be  easily portable, they were interesting and engaging. I had a habit of bringing specific books (And Then There Were None and The Murder of Roger Ackroyd specifically) with me, but I'd read those often enough. I recently started picking up some of the titles I hadn't read (used bookstores for the win!)

So on this trip I brought A Cat Among Pigeons. It was one of the last Poirot books, and for that reason I dug it. As much as I love the diminutive Belgian, his idiosyncrasies did get to be a bit much after a few dozen books. So in the later stories, when Poirot only came in at the end to wrap things up, a little of him went a long way. That was the case in this tale.

I loved the fact that it took place at a girls' boarding school, and that it traced its intrigue back to the tumultuous Middle East (a fake country, of course, but it was nice to see Christie's take on those lands and contemporary politics). All-in-all, some fun characters, a brisk and engaging plot, and enough small twists to keep us on our toes. Even in her last few books, she still had the touch.

I hope I can say the same someday. And I wonder if people will get their fill of Misty Johnson and her idiosyncrasies someday...

In college, my buddy Swamp Thing and I came up with an observation about movies. The threshold for acceptability varies with the method of delivery. If I have to go to the theater and pay a bunch of money, the movie better be darn good. If I have to go to the video store and rent it, it better be pretty good. If I can access it on HBO, on my couch in my pjs and not pay anything extra, I'll tolerate a much weaker movie. What, then, is the quality threshold for an in-flight flick?

Well, on my way to Las Vegas (a review on THAT later), JetBlue let us access the on demand movies for free. So I caught two of them: This Means War and John Carter.


This Means War is NOT my kind of movie. I don't usually dig the formulaic romantic comedy, which is exactly what this is. But I figured it would be a pleasant movie to have on as I read my Agatha Christie. But, even though it was awfully difficult for me to picture two men fighting over Reese Witherspoon (and I grow tired of Chelsea Handler in the whacky friend role), I found myself interested. That is mostly due to the performances of Captain Kirk and Bane. Chris Pine is handsome and charming, and Tom Hardy, who was SO good in Inception, is earnest and fun. And that is the main selling point: the two male leads look like they are having fun. The movie has a safe ending, with an escape clause for the big choice that gives everyone a happy ending, but it was a decent way to spend a couple cramped hours next to a coughing woman.

Now John Carter (NOT of Mars, Apparently) is more in my wheelhouse. I read one of Burrough's stories about JC (not a coincidence, I imagine) in my youth and I enjoyed it. It has sci-fi excitement and classic pulp style. And the movie had all of that. I think the commercial failures of the film came from marketing (a lousy title, a tough product to explain to people in short bursts), because I enjoyed it. Taylor "Gambit" Kitsch was great as the high-jumping Civil War vet, the alien characters were endearing or frightening as need be, and the overarching themes and analogues about civil wars, ecology and politics made for some high-concept thoughts among the action and fun. I wish I'd seen it in the theater...

I have been against interleague play in Major League Baseball since the Yankees traded George Costanza to Tyler Chicken. Seriously, I am an old-fashioned crotchety fan. I stopped watching the All-Star Game when they made it "mean something" and I do not watch interleague games. HOWEVER, if interleague play is here to stay (and, with the Astros moving to the AL next year making two 15-team leagues, we'll have interleague play every day) MLB should take a page out of the NFL's scheduling playbook. With uneven divisions (one with six teams, one with four) and "rivalry games," the MLB interleague schedule is awful. Teams don't play each other with any rhyme or reason. But, if baseball expands by two teams, they can have a PERFECT schedule for every single year, with emphasis on division games, traditional three game series, home and away balance AND feature games against teams of similar records. See below:

(note: I just list the teams by division. I don't want to give my opinions about realignment now). So here we have it...

Each League has 4 divisions of 4 teams. (N, S, E and W is fine. Or name them after players for all I care.)

Here is a sample schedule for a team from the NL East:

Play each other team in the NL East 18 times: Three 3-game home series. Three 3-game away series. (54 games)

Play each of the other 12 teams in the National League 6 times: one 3-game home series, one 3-game away series. (72 games)

That takes care of 126 games, leaving 36 remaining. Here is one plan for those 36 games:

Then ONE NL division per year is FEATURED. This year the NL East plays NL West, next year the South, the following year the North then repeat (for example). The NL easy plays 4 extra games against each of those 4 teams (2 home, 2 away. Can be worked into 4-game series or played as 2-game series). 16 games.

Each NL East team then plays 4 extra games against the teams in the other two NL divisions with corresponding finishing position from the previous year. The 2013 3rd place NLE team plays the 2013 3rd place NLS and NLN teams in their 2014 schedule. Again, 2 home and two away games, which can be part of 4-game series or 2-game series. (8 games).

The interleague games rotate as well. The NL East will play each division in the AL once every 4 years. Three games per team, 2 series at home and 2 away. So you host an AL team once every 4 years. (12 games)

There are other ways to deploy these 36 games. If you want to focus on interleague play, you can play 24 games against them and remove the extra 12 games against similar finishers, for example. If you want to play MORE games against teams who finished in the same position, you could add games there as well. The idea of expansion is not popular now, but I think it is the only way. MLB needs to look to the NFL for guidance. 32-teams and 162 games works. Let's make this happen.

I am very excited to be part of the Pulp Obscura movement. I have always loved pulpy characters, from old radio dramas to comic books to spy and adventure novels. So when I was given the chance to write NEW adventures of lesser known characters from the heyday of pulp, I jumped at the chance. And the Eagle was a FUN character to write. A super-spy working for the US government in the years before the Second World War, Jeff Shannon was a master of disguise and America's greatest secret weapon. I had a blast writing an adventure for him, travelling to Greece in 1939 on a mission of great importance to his country and the world. Check out an excerpt below and then check out the whole anthology, which features six great all-new stories!

Twelve writers have been selected to bring two classic characters created by an iconic Pulp Author to life once more in two new anthologies from PULP OBSCURA!

Pro Se Productions, a premier New Pulp Publisher, announced in February plans to publish, with the permission of the Lester Dent estate, new tales featuring Dent creations Foster Fade (also known as the Crime Spectacularist) and Lynn Lash as a part of its PULP OBSCURA imprint. PULP OBSCURA is a line that Pro Se, in conjunction with Altus Press, a leading Publisher of Pulp Reprints as well as the Publisher of The Wild Adventures of Doc Savage written by Will Murray, produces that features new stories based on rather largely unknown and forgotten heroes and villains from Pulp’s Golden Era. Although many of these characters, such as Thunder Jim Wade, the adventure hero featured in the most recent PULP OBSCURA volume from Pro Se, are currently in the Public Domain, Pro Se PULP OBSCURA to include licensed characters, the first two of which were creations of the literary legend that many consider the best Pulp Author ever.

“It's truly amazing that Pro Se is a part of this,” Tommy Hancock, Partner in and Editor in Chief of Pro Se Productions, "and the credit for that goes to Matt Moring from Altus, Will Murray, and especially the Heirs of Norma Dent. Pro Se is extremely proud to announce that the writers for both a Lynn Lash collection and a Foster Fade collection have been selected. 

"I was both amazed," said Hancock, "but also not really surprised at the interest these two characters garnered when we asked for proposals. The call we put out for these books garnered more interest and proposals than the entire PULP OBSCURA line we recruited for last year did (That project is made up of 34 different writers). It was difficult and a challenge picking the best twelve, six for each book, but we feel like we have the stories and writers that will definitely both pay homage to the Pulp genius of Lester Dent and reintroduce these great characters to a modern audience.”

According to Hancock, the writers for THE NEW ADVENTURES OF LYNN LASH are-
CHUCK MILLER
RP STEEVES
TEEL JAMES GLENN
ANDREW SALMON
JIM BEARD
TIM LASIUTA

The Writers bringing the Crime Spectacularist into the 21st Century in THE NEW ADVENTURES OF FOSTER FADE include-
DERRICK FERGUSON
BARRY REESE
H. DAVID BLALOCK
DAVID WHITE
AUBREY STEPHENS
ADAM GARCIA

Both books are slated for a late summer/early fall release and will be released in conjunction with a volume collecting the complete original stories of both characters from Altus Press.

“This,” Hancock stated, “is the reason that PULP OBSCURA exists. To not only shine light on characters that have been completely forgotten and now live in the Public Domain, but also to serve as a way for Pulp characters created by well known authors to come out of the shadows of more successful creations, such as Doc Savage, and to stand on their own, to chart new ground in fiction in the 21st Century. These two characters were crafted by Lester Dent himself and are being used with the permission of the heirs of Norma Dent. For this to be the first foray into licensed properties for the PULP OBSCURA imprint is truly an honor. And don’t think this is all you’ll hear about it before the books come out! There'll be more about these two awesome collections soon!”

For more information on Pro Se Productions, go to www.prosepulp.com andwww.pulpmachine.blogspot.com. For further information on PULP OBSCURA, go towww.pulpobscura.net. To discover the wonderful world of Classic Pulp as well as New Tales, such as the Wild Adventures of Doc Savage by Will Murray, go towww.altuspress.com!

He is the Nation's Ace Troubleshooter, the Country's Amazing Master Spy! Jeff Shannon is The Eagle- America's Ultimate Secret Agent! And He Flies Again in six all new stories in THE NEW ADVENTURES OF THE EAGLE, the latest PULP OBSCURA release from Pro Se Productions, in conjunction with ALTUS PRESS!

PULP OBSCURA, an imprint of Pro Se Productions, a leading New Pulp Publisher, in conjunction with Altus Press, a top Publisher of both New Pulp and Classic Reprints, that features rare and largely unknown Pulp characters from yesterday featured in brand new stories written by Today’s New Pulp writers! THE NEW ADVENTURES OF THE EAGLE is the third Pulp Obscura volume since the line debuted!

From Japan to Berlin, from Paris to Moscow, from London to Washington D.C. and all points between and beyond, his reputation for facing the most dangerous opponents, taking on the most difficult missions is well known. The Eagle's Mission: To Wage a One Man War Against America's Enemies and those Who Threaten Liberty Across The Globe! From Out of the Past Comes New Tales of One of Pulp's Forgotten Heroes! Pro Se Productions in Conjunction with Altus Press Presents a New Volume in its PULP OBSCURA line! Bringing Adventures and Heroes Lost in Yesterday Blazing to Life in New Pulp Tales Today! Thrill to Six Sensational Tales of High Powered Adventure, Heart Stopping Thrills,and Death Defying Action from Nick Ahlhelm, Teel James Glenn, Lee Houston, Jr., Ashley Mangin, Bobby Nash, and R. P. Steeves! And featuring a stunning cover by award winning artist David L. Russell and fantastic design work by Sean Ali!

Join Jeff Shannon as he fights against the foes of freedom in fantastic new adventures! PULP OBSCURA PROUDLY PRESENTS THE NEW ADVENTURES OF THE EAGLE! From Pro Se Productions in conjunction with Altus Press! Pro Se Productions- Puttin' The Monthly Back into Pulp!

Get THE NEW ADVENTURES OF THE EAGLE today at http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Adventures-Eagle-Volume/dp/1477577653/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1339075461&sr=8-1 and www.prosepulp.com and www.pulpobscura.net! And coming VERY soon in all ebook formats!

Also debuting on the same day as this new Pulp Obscura volume is THE EAGLE OMNIBUS from Altus Press! Jeff Shannon, Special Agent for G-2 Secret Service, is better known throughout the world by his other moniker: the Eagle. Featuring all five of the Eagle’s published stories, plus two related stories, these classic espionage stories have never been completely reprinted before... until now. Featuring an introduction by Tom Johnson, this is a must have for Pulp Fans! Get yours today at
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1618270257/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=altpre20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1618270257 or at http://www.altuspress.com/projects/the-eagle-omnibus/ !

I am up to 20,000 hits on the blog. I don't know what that means, but w00t for me!

When I talk about the difference between the medium of film and that of the novel -- and how to do each one right -- I usually fall back on One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Ken Kesey's book is amazing, and he uses the medium quite well to convey the inner workings of his narrator, the Chief. In the film version, the director wisely focuses on character, and the conflict between McMurphy and the nurse, banking on two great performance to carry the flick. Each one works in its own way.

It's easy to think of Cuckoo's Nest when looking at It's Kind of a Funny Story. Both the book and the movie are about 15-year old Craig and his trials and travails dealing with clinical depression and a stint in a mental hospital. The tale wisely name checks Cuckoo -- to avoid that would be a mistake given the subject matter -- and it follows in the footsteps of the seminal work, with a book that focuses on the interior of Craig's mind while the movie focuses on great performances.

I watched the movie first, and greatly enjoyed the performances. Zach Galifianakis is perfectly understated as former drug addict Bobby, while Keir Gilchrist anchors the film with a nuanced performance as Craig. But Emma Roberts steals the show as the mysterious, alluring and liberating soul of the ward, Noelle. The movie version is taut and focused on Craig's journey inside the walls of 6 North, and we experience that journey with him.

The book does an excellent job of getting in Craig's head as it is told in the first person. We hear his thoughts and inner monologue, which includes an R. Lee Ermey-style drill sergeant in his brain. We also get to see a lot more of his journey from map-drawing child through driven and focused middle schooler, down the spiral of depression, landing him in 6 North. The book takes 440+ pages to breathe life into Craig and many of his fellow patients, and we really get to learn about his internal struggle in great detail.

The book and movie, perhaps, both end on a bit TOO shiny and neat a note, but perhaps that is forgivable in an author who wants to preach hope and focus on a young adult audience. The reality of the experience is real and honest, so that goes a long way. I recommend this flick and book to anyone with mental health issues, or anyone who loves someone with a similar condition...

I have always said that I want to be an astronaut, a comic book writer or a game show host. My love of game shows started early, and I spoke of it briefly when Dick Clark died (I knew him as the mediocre host of the Pyramid shows first and foremost). And one of my favorite shows as a kid was Family Feud.  There was a reason I cajoled my family into trying out for it a while ago! That was the show I wanted to host more than anything. I mean, the host's name was RICHARD for gosh sakes!

It was a fun program, and even as a kid, I could play along with it. And the host was cool and funny, with a great accent and he kissed the ladies. Plus, he probably got as many free Tootsie Roll pops as he wanted!

Then, when I found out he was NEWKIRK FROM HOGAN'S HEROES, it blew my mind. My tiny brain could not fathom that the funny British dude on the WWII POW comedy (which I adored. I walked around screaming "I know nothing!" like Sgt Shultz throughout my childhood. Nowadays, it still applies) was the same guy as the host of my favorite game show. It was huge moment in my child hood and I loved Richard Dawson even more.

Later in life I saw Dawson try and return to Family Feud, unable to capture lightning in the bottle twice. And I have seen him on Match Game quite a bit. I see his personality as classically 70s, the kind of suave chauvinism that would not play today, but made him an icon then. Other hosts have improved on the FF hosting style (I currently love Steve Harvey, and I dug Richard Karn's style, too), but Dawson was one of my first game show idols and an icon from my youth. Hopefully, he'll find a secret tunnel under his bunker in heaven so he can come and go to the earthly plane as he pleases. But if anyone asks, "I KNOW NOTHING!"

I was not alive in 1962. I did not see the futility of a .250 winning percentage. I did not get to say "We'll land a man on the moon before the Mets win the World Series." And I did not get to gloat when the moon landing turned out to be just three months before the Amazin' Mets took the title.

But I have been a Mets fan since I was a child. I watched the heyday of the 80s and the ups and downs on the 2000s. I saw some great wins (1986 NLDS, a Piazza walkoff in the 10th as I sat on the visitor's dugout) and some low points (Vince Coleman, Anthony Young, Mo Vaughn... I won't go on).

But one truism I held as an eternal fact: the Mets would never have a no-hitter. The Diamondbacks and Devil Rays -- franchises that were in their infancy -- had been to the promised land of no-hitdom, as had almost every other franchise (Padres and Mets, sad and lonely together, were the only ones). I watch a lot of Mets games, and it became a running gag with me and other Mets fans. The pitcher gives up a hit in the first inning and I'd say "we won't see a no-hitter today."

I would get excited if a pitcher took a no-no into, say, the sixth. But ultimately I was always disappointed. Until last night. The Mets were facing the World Champs, a franchise that had bedeviled the Amazins in the mid 80s and in 2006.

In the 8th I started to get excited. Santana had thrown a lot of pitches but I knew Collins wouldn't take him out. He'd have a chance. In the ninth, I called my dad, the biggest Mets fan I knew. I took to Twitter and FB and counted down. A couple fly-outs and a full count later, it happened. Swing and a miss. After 50+ years and 8,000+ games, the Mets had a no hitter.

Let's toss another one today, shall we?

This book fascinated me. If you have read this blog, you can tell that I am interested in books and mental illness. Toss in a dash of history and it's a great formula for me.

The premise of the book, A First-Rate Madness: Uncovering the Links Between Leadership and Mental Illness by Nassir Ghaemi, is that mentally normal leaders are fine in times of peace and prosperity, but mentally ILL leaders are needed in times of crisis. The qualities that result from mental illness -- depression, mania or bipolar disorder -- creativity, perseverance, resilience, and empathy, are required of leaders in times of political, economic or martial crisis.


The author takes a look at a series of leaders, from William Tecumsah Sherman to Abe Lincoln, from Gandhi to Martin Luther King, Jr., from JFK to Ted Turner and others. For each leader, he examines the symptoms, course and treatment in an attempt to establish the illness. This does get a little tedious after a while, but it did tell me a lot about these people  that I did not know (King and Gandhi's suicide attempts, Kennedy's health problems, etc.). Afterward, he attempts to show how each figure was shaped and molded by his condition and how it ushered in greatness.


He also chooses other leaders who do not fit the above profiles to further illustrate his point. He looks at General McClellan, Richard Nixon, Tony Blair and George W. Bush as examples of mentally healthy leaders who fail in times of crises. He also looks at Hitler, who was bipolar and how his conditioned greatly worsened after his drug abuse got out of control.


I am not an expert in psychology, though I do have some knowledge, nor am I an expert in all of these historical figures (though I do know a lot about FDR), but the book kept my interest. As a person with a mental illness, I'd like to think I have what it takes to be a great leader if need be, but maybe it makes me a biased reader. Either way, the book is a quick read and well written, but I recommend it to anyone interested in history or the mind or both.