TWILIGHT GUARDIAN #4 (OF 4)
Review by: MacAoidh
What did the
iFanboy
community think?
75
Pulls
Pulls
Avg Rating: 4.4
%7B%22comicdate%22%3A%222011-04-20%22%2C%22comicid%22%3A27399%7D
Users who pulled this comic:
- AlanMooresBeard
- Alfred
- alorge
- Andrew
- Atnor
- azrael1981
- BatStewie
- BBretall
- blueenvelope
- BobG
- Bogle1RH
- conor
- cubsmodano
- Demo916
- dhartjr25
- Duraflametree
- einstein399
- emberwistle
- erikduane
- FloydLawton
- GiantRaven
- gollygosh03
- grizly
- Heroville
- Hoobeiss
- j206
- JackAcid
- jackietam
- Jamez
- JayEll
- jessidee
- JGG
- JNewcomb
- JohnCorrigan
- jramsey1
- jtorrance
- kaonohi
- Kartoffelkopf
- kennyg
- KevinAB
- LadyTartan
- Lawless
- lifesend
- LRecio
- MacAoidh
- Marbles
- Maukingbird
- misterckent
- mmtic
- ohcaroline
- optra08
- Osyris
- Pace
- PaulAllor
- piscespaul
- PotatoPope
- PozrDu
- PraxJarvin
- quenbyh
- r3v
- RadConsv
- RedMoses
- RipperSix
- RogueWarrior76
- Spidey1313
- supershock
- TheChosen
- thuyghe
- TommyC
- tomobrien20
- TroyH
- ungaro
- vadamowens
- wangman31888
- yavinmoon
All users who pulled this comic
Hide users
Users who reviewed this comic:
art SIDDHARTH KOTIAN
cover KEU CHA
Size: 32 pages
Price: 3.99
This review contains spoilers, click here to read
I finally read this last night and I'm sorry Mr. Hickman, but I was very disappointed with it. I'm left with a slightly sour taste after such a great run.
I don't think the father, daughter meeting and the dad's back story revealed anything we hadn't known or went anywhere interesting at all. It seems like an enormous waste. As a lesser gripe I'm not even convinced his back story even makes sense, although this can be explained by his mental state as you so repetitiously point out: like daughter, like father.
In fact, and I realize it (probably) wasn't meant this way, but her dad, and his comic, was an awfully simplistic, crude and even insulting caricature of Mr. Ditko. And this is a tribute! Don't think I am a objectivist, very far from it! That said, the key to 'taking a stance' in fiction or satire as you are here, maybe unwittingly, is to, in the vein of GK Chesterton, write the opposing viewpoint with as much passion and fairness as you can, to give them their due.
It could be said that this probably isn't the point of the comic, and I'm being caught up over thinking a bit of fun. Certainly all the otherwise very good comic book sections are possibly just as exaggerated. The problem for me comes from it being so closely tied to a specific person; this could be seen as bordering on slander. However, the biggest problem of all that I struggled with is the point of any of it in terms of the comic. To once more highlight how our twilight avenger, and one might say her lack of emotional development, cutely mirrors that of Rorscach or clearly Mr. A, as if it wasn't blatant enough anyway to anyone with some familiarity of those characters? Life isn't as simple and solvable as she sees it, just as the ending points out.
And the issue did end in an interesting position, albeit one that almost necessitates your editorial to see where you're coming from. Although, the dusk devil feels slightly rushed; it lacked any heft, comes out nowhere, and ties into nothing. I feel it could have been handled more subtly in the background or left out altogether, as per as 'the complexities and mysteries of life'! But I suppose again, that's on purpose? Life isn't a neat three-act story, or any kind of story, but it's our perspectives that construct our reality, and the meanings of its events.
Clearly got me thinking anyway! Looking forward to more 'Twilight Guardian & Cat' sometime.
Story: 3 - Good
Art: 4 - Very Good
Art: 4 - Very Good
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Some rights reserved.
And all my formatting is gone! Doh. Sorry folks.
Sorry it didn’t grab you as much as some folks, Mac. I’d go into detail about some of what you talk about, but I’d rather not ruin it for those who haven’t read it yet (though if you’d like to discuss it in private, that’s no problem). The only thing I’ll say is that my viewpoint is not in opposition to objectivism…as you put it, “far from it”… 😉
Interesting! I’d absolutely love to hear more and understand what your intentions are, but I won’t push you. I’m sure you have plenty of stuff to do, and I’d hate to take more of your time. Although, if you want you can reach me at polmacaoidh@gmail.com. 😛
Most of all thanks for reading, and at least considering my thoughts; I clearly only have a partial view of where you’re coming from. And don’t think I’m not a fan any more. I obviously feel passionately enough about your work to write such a long spiel when I don’t think I agree with its direction, but I am nobody to tell you how it should be!
In fact, I’m still trying to track down a copy of issue 0, but the trade will be out soon anyway!
Actually, I’m glad that you did, Mac. I’ve already posted a thread on Facebook about it that has spawned a lot of interesting comments, and I’m thinking about doing a piece about it for my column at Newsarama.
Here’s one of the things that I find most interesting: literally less than two days before you posted your review, I heard from a big fan of the TG comic who was very disappointed that I had used TG #4 to “preach” my pro-objectivism politics! So depending on who’s reading it, I’m either doing a crude, insulting, slanderous hatchet job on Ditko and his philosophy, or I’m using the comic as my pulpit to proselytize the gospel of Rand! Ha! It’s really amazing what two pages out of an eighty page story can bring out…sort of a…(wait for it)…Rorschach test, might we say? 😉
And I think it’s probably because politics are such an inflammatory topic. I assume it is, because no one accused my Punisher-type parody in TG of being an indictment of gun violence, or my British/Vertigo parody of being a scathing criticism of boiled meats and dark beers!
I’m just happy you recognized it as a parody of Mr. A. What I’m afraid is that far too many comic fans these days are unfamiliar with Ditko’s objectivist stuff, which, while not as accessible as his mainstream work, is the best example of his ART in its pure form, unrestrained and unedited. Believe me, I’m the last person in comicdom who would ever take a shot at Mr. Ditko and his work that has meant so much to me.
Anyway, though, thanks so much for your comments, and the fact that you went into such depth with them. It means a lot, sincerely.
Oh, and if by “issue 0” you mean the Pilot Season issue, if you don’t want to wait for the trade, you can read it here: http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?gid=594
Oh nice!
I’ll keep an eye out for some more postmortem thoughts in your column.
Did we read the same comic book? I thought this was an amazing conclusion to a fantastic comic (probably my favorite series of the year so far). I thought we learned exactly as much as we needed to about the relationship between the father and daughter, especially since I’m not even sure that her father was ever even in her house (chew on that notion for a while). Even if he was, though, I’m not sure what “didn’t make sense” about it. As far as the objectivism, I think you’re reading a great deal into it that isn’t there. It seemed to me to simply be an allusion to Ditko’s Mr. A comics, which made sense given the reclusive nature of her father (assuming he’s real). I’m also not sure why you think she’s emotionally undeveloped. She an adult woman, dealing with her various issues, and by the end of issue #4 we see that what she is, above anything else (even a possible dangerous criminal, something else to chew on), she’s still a hero (depending on your definition, which is what I think the comic is about, at least partially). I also loved that the Dusk Devil doesn’t appear until the last couple of pages, and he’s nothing like what we think he is (and the placement of the one panel of “action” in the whole storyline was perfect). I thought this was just a brilliant comic with great art and writing. I hope we get to see a recurring series of the character.