RoR: Forum

Post-Ditko versions of the Question have moved starkly away from Ditko's Objectivist ideal. The only creator who's come close to capturing the essence of Ditko's creation is Frank Miller, but even he strayed from Ditko's template. Beware of latter day versions.

Gotta love that Ditko:

Post 1

Sunday, June 5, 2005 - 5:46pm

I'd definitely have to admit that the ethical influence faded after DC bought the character, but the O'neil/Cowan version stands on it's own merits. The plots were great and it really followed Vic's personal development. It was also coupled with some of the best coreographed fight scenes I've seen in comics (Rick Maygar is actually a trained martial artist), and the brave stance of working completely without sound effects (no *BAM* *ZIP* *POW*). which I think actually connects better with a reader's mind than a written word can. A good example would be in an early issue you see one of the villains picking up a chain and since you're not "reading" the words "clank" "changle" your mind actually hears the sound of chains rattling. But if you're looking for an Objectivist hero in that version you will be disappointed.

The new version is utter rubbish though (which dissappoints me because I'm a huge fan of some of Rick Veitch's earlier work).

Needless to say this one gets my sanction

---Landon

Post 2

Friday, July 15, 2005 - 5:23pm

For anyone interested, there's an excellent four page Question story by Darwyn Cooke in DC Comics' Solo #5, August, 2005 . Cooke stays true to The Question's Objectivist roots as the faceless moral avenger responds to the events of 9/11 in his own inimitable manner. I believe Ditko would be proud.

Post 3

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 12:54pm

I'm going to have to check this out. Thanks for the heads up.

---Landon

Post 4

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 3:03pm

!!!!!

:)

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 3:05pm

Bob, maybe you can answer this...why is the Question faceless? Is it supposed to represent objectivity without emotions or subjectivity clouding judgement? Or is it simply to hide his identity (or both)? It looks cool at any rate.

Post 6

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 6:59pm

Joe, unless Ditko explains it himself, I can only speculate. In other words, I don't know. :-)

Post 7

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 7:36pm

I came up with a theory when I was about halfway through section 2 of "Atlas Shrugged"... The part where Reardon is eating at the Wayne Faukland with Dannager (sp) and he thinks about the fact that he "might go to jail... with no more moral significance than he might get hit by a bus." The way I always took it was that Vic was firecely proud of his action as The Question... but those actions were against the law so he had to disown them... if he couldn't take credit for them no one would.

But the Wikipedia entry on the Question actually covers his origin and the nature of his mask better than most other sources. Apparantly the material comprising it was invented by Dr. ARISTOTLE Rodor (or Tot as he was called during Denny O'Neil's run). Much like the devices in Batman begins it was designed as an artificial skin for medical purposes, but it proved toxic when exposed to an open wound... but works perfectly as a mask for a vigilante reporter. =)

Post 8

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 8:05pm

AHH....very cool.

Have you seen the DC DIRECT Question figure? It's the same design as the cover Bob posted, with a removable facemask. I stopped collecting, but I had to have that one. (Ok, and the Firestorm figure.)

Post 9

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 8:11pm

It's hard to stop collecting, isn't it...

Post 10

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 8:13pm

I have that figure right on my desk (next to a Spirit and a Creeper figure no less).

It's good to have old Vic looking down on me as I write.

---Landon

Post 11

Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 8:28pm