What do you think?
Rate this book
Superfolks
Before there was Watchmen, there was Superfolks....
David Brinkley used to be a hero, the greatest the world had ever seen—until he retired, got married, moved to the suburbs, and packed on a few extra pounds. Now all the heroes are dead or missing, and his beloved New York is on the edge of chaos. It's up to Brinkley to come to the rescue, but he's in the midst of a serious mid-life crisis—his superpowers are failing him.
At long last this classic satire that inspired comic books like Watchmen and Miracleman is back in print. It's a hilarious thriller that digs deep into the American psyche.
David Brinkley used to be a hero, the greatest the world had ever seen—until he retired, got married, moved to the suburbs, and packed on a few extra pounds. Now all the heroes are dead or missing, and his beloved New York is on the edge of chaos. It's up to Brinkley to come to the rescue, but he's in the midst of a serious mid-life crisis—his superpowers are failing him.
At long last this classic satire that inspired comic books like Watchmen and Miracleman is back in print. It's a hilarious thriller that digs deep into the American psyche.
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
20 people are currently reading
654 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews
December 7, 2008
Considered to be the original “retired superhero” tale, the inspiration for more well-known works like Watchmen and The Incredibles. Too bad it sucks. Mayer’s sense of humor seems to be based almost entirely around bad puns, and on naming his main characters after famous people. (Our protagonist: David Brinkley.) Not only is this not funny, it’s confusing: when someone like Richard Nixon is mentioned, who are we then supposed to assume he means?
There’s also just something…unpleasant about this book. Little nuggets of sexism and racism that I’m sure Mayer would say are part of the “satire,” but which just made me feel icky. So while this book may be groundbreaking, personally, I’d rather break in the opposite direction.
There’s also just something…unpleasant about this book. Little nuggets of sexism and racism that I’m sure Mayer would say are part of the “satire,” but which just made me feel icky. So while this book may be groundbreaking, personally, I’d rather break in the opposite direction.
September 16, 2011
This novel was out of print for quite a long time, and it almost reached legendary status amongst comics readers: several respected writers named it as a major influence on their work, e.g. Kurt Busiek and Grant Morrison. I'm willing to take their word for it, i.e. I believe them when they say that it was groundbreaking at the time it was first published, and it may well have inspired several people to reinvent the genre. However, looking at it now it's a bit embarrassing, so if you just read the stories it inspired then you won't be missing much.
One of the odd aspects to this book is continuity. Right from the first page, it directly refers to DC characters like Batman and Superman; more specifically, it says that they're dead, so this is apparently set in an alternate version of the DC universe. At the same time, the lead character is clearly an analogue of Superman, so why not just come out with it? Similarly, it's blatantly obvious that "Captain Mantra" and his sister Mary are really Captain Marvel and Mary Marvel, so why separate them? It would have made more sense to go down the Squadron Supreme or Watchmen route, i.e. don't refer to the existing characters at all and just whistle innocently if anyone points out similarities between them and your brand new characters.
It's described as a satire, but it was written in 1977, so I think a lot of the targets are a bit dated now. If you read it as a straight story, there is an interesting premise in there. As a historical artifact, it's noteworthy, but I can't really recommend it.
One of the odd aspects to this book is continuity. Right from the first page, it directly refers to DC characters like Batman and Superman; more specifically, it says that they're dead, so this is apparently set in an alternate version of the DC universe. At the same time, the lead character is clearly an analogue of Superman, so why not just come out with it? Similarly, it's blatantly obvious that "Captain Mantra" and his sister Mary are really Captain Marvel and Mary Marvel, so why separate them? It would have made more sense to go down the Squadron Supreme or Watchmen route, i.e. don't refer to the existing characters at all and just whistle innocently if anyone points out similarities between them and your brand new characters.
It's described as a satire, but it was written in 1977, so I think a lot of the targets are a bit dated now. If you read it as a straight story, there is an interesting premise in there. As a historical artifact, it's noteworthy, but I can't really recommend it.
April 11, 2011
This novel is touted as being the precursor to the more realistic (or at least grittier) and less purely heroic portrayal of superheroes that swept through comics in the early- to mid-1980s. Out of print for over two decades, Mayer's book was reprinted in 2005 with a (slightly inaccurate) foreword by Grant Morrison and blurb from Stan Lee, Paul Dini, and Kurt Busiek to help draw in current comics readers. Clearly, all of this worked on me.
Superfolks is self-consciously gonzo and wacky in a very '70s fashion, and there are aspects of the novel that remind me of the silliness of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea's Illuminatus! trilogy although without the same level of either excess or daring. Mayer posits a world where all the superheroes are dead or missing except one, a Superman analogue who is teasingly never named. Most of the other characters are named, however, and frequently with the names of celebrities and famous figures fictional and true. The protagonist's secret identity is David Brinkley, the stripper with a heart of chrome is Lorna Doone, a jailhouse guard is Bill Buckley. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's not.
The premise of the novel is that this lone remaining superhero is in the midst of a mid-life crisis, pining for his former glories that ended when he began experiencing patches of weakness. His powers are diminished, and Brinkley languishes in suburban self-pity. Until, of course, he's called to action by a new wave of turmoil in his beloved New York. Woven into this plotline are conspiracies, histories of other heroes, political commentary, and social satire.
The novel has its moments, to be sure, but I suspect that if it hadn't been about superheroes--currently and strangely fashionable again in a second postmodern resurgence--it never would have been reprinted. It's better read as a document of its time than as some profound and lasting statement on any of the themes it glancingly treats.
Superfolks is self-consciously gonzo and wacky in a very '70s fashion, and there are aspects of the novel that remind me of the silliness of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea's Illuminatus! trilogy although without the same level of either excess or daring. Mayer posits a world where all the superheroes are dead or missing except one, a Superman analogue who is teasingly never named. Most of the other characters are named, however, and frequently with the names of celebrities and famous figures fictional and true. The protagonist's secret identity is David Brinkley, the stripper with a heart of chrome is Lorna Doone, a jailhouse guard is Bill Buckley. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's not.
The premise of the novel is that this lone remaining superhero is in the midst of a mid-life crisis, pining for his former glories that ended when he began experiencing patches of weakness. His powers are diminished, and Brinkley languishes in suburban self-pity. Until, of course, he's called to action by a new wave of turmoil in his beloved New York. Woven into this plotline are conspiracies, histories of other heroes, political commentary, and social satire.
The novel has its moments, to be sure, but I suspect that if it hadn't been about superheroes--currently and strangely fashionable again in a second postmodern resurgence--it never would have been reprinted. It's better read as a document of its time than as some profound and lasting statement on any of the themes it glancingly treats.
February 22, 2017
If someone described to you a book that was an influence on the superhero deconstruction stories of Alan Moore and Grant Morrison (among others) in a satirical style that was not unlike Kurt Vonnegut, what kind of book would you imagine? A funnier "Watchmen"? A sort of proto-"Marvelman"? An "anything goes" style of absurdity that leaves a distinct roadmap for later projects like "Doom Patrol"? A work that skewers superheroes and all that cliches that come along with 1970s genre stories, from the point of view of someone who didn't spend their life in comic books? All of those things sound kind of awesome in their own way and I'm sure anyone reading that description that can probably envision their own equally fascinating variants on those themes.
I just don't feel like this is the book that people would come up with.
Its interesting because this book has been trumpeted by people whose writing and sometimes opinions I respect, people like Grant Morrison and Kurt Busiek (Stan Lee gets a blurb too but since he's nonstop Captain Positive his testaments are the kinds of things I chuckle indulgently over with a "oh, bless . . .") so its clear that even in a world where people like to hold up obscure things as awesome simply because they're obscure, a number of people who later found careers in writing comic books have read this and found it to be worth talking about. And from a historical standpoint it is, because it is probably one of the earliest attempts at deconstructing the superhero genre.
But beyond the historical aspect, I don't think there's too much else to recommend here. Maybe I've been spoiled over the years by more sophisticated deconstructions like the aforementioned Moore's, maybe my taste runs more toward the grittier tone that he and the writers who followed him often took . . . but I went into this knowing it wouldn't be on par with something like "Watchmen", if for nothing else writing a book about superheroes without the benefit of the madcap visual madness the best comics are capable of is like trying to take in an art museum where the colors have been removed from all the paintings. Most of the elements are there but its not quite the same.
So I expected an embryonic effort in that regard and in fact didn't even expect to be blown away, especially as its clear that its not a serious deconstruction. What I didn't expect was an embryonic take on writing a novel entirely, like someone had mailed out a first draft that was written to give their friends giggles and somehow got published by accident. There are moments but its just . . . not professional.
I can see where comic professionals have responded to this over the years. The ideas are there. The basic premise, of a retired superhero dealing with the aging process and no longer being a superhero has to come back and fight a menace from his past one last time, is something that hadn't been done before in the comic book world, not when characters like Superman and Batman had been going for nigh on forty plus years by the time this book was published, still as ageless as ever except for the occasional meaningless "imaginary story". Its vision of a world where all the other superheroes are dead or retired is something new and sprinkled throughout are moments of real invention, where its clear the author is clearly thinking through the implications of what he's started and taking to conclusions that veer between logical and satirical but at least have some weight to them.
So yes, the core of the ideas are worthy. Its a shame the presentation is so gosh darn amateurish.
Right from the start its clear we're in for a bit of a lark. Mayer lists a number of superheroes that have died over the years, most of them famous names, Batman, Superman, the Lone Ranger that clearly were real in this world. Even the mention of Snoopy being shot down could be taken as the author having some fun with the concept and setting the scene (don't fret too much about the lovable beagle's demise, he shows up at least twice later) so there's no any huge red flags.
Then you find out that the hero's name is David Brinkley. Yes, like the broadcaster. And he comes from the planet Cronk, the substance of which that can hurt him is called Cronkite. It goes on and on like this throughout the entire rest of the book, with characters either being actual pop culture figures from that time (his neighbor is Kojak, and not just someone named Kojak but the actual Telly Savalas character) or taking their names from pop culture figures (his parents on Cronk were Archie and Edith, while his Earth parents who adopted him were Franklin and Eleanor). There seems to be no satirical reason for this or a kind of commentary about the world that Mayer is making, time after time he just seems to find it funny, unless its some meta attempt to force people to make connections that aren't quite there. And while its not uncommon for real world figures to appear in superhero stories of this type (let's not forget that Richard Nixon was still President in "Watchmen") this barrage of names seems to have no thought process or rhyme or reason to it, he just does it because it can. But it makes the story read at times (and by that I mean "often") like bad fan-fiction, something posted online without having been seen by an editor or heck, anyone who might have said "maybe this isn't as clever as you seem to think it is". It does come across as something that my peers in high school would have read, full of smirking references to in-jokes that would make people in the know giggle while confusing everyone else.
But even I could overlook that kind of thing (as difficult as that is since he does it on nearly every page) if the book wasn't so tonally all over the place. The overall plot has a skeleton of a thriller around it, with a crime crisis on NYC forcing Brinkley to consider going back into action despite his cozy domestic existence and gradually withering powers. There's a conspiracy afoot to bring him about in the open so he can be killed and its possible the whole thing is being orchestrated by an old enemy who's pulling the strings. There's flashbacks to old memories, a brief and memorable visit with a hero in an asylum, some nice scenes of Brinkley learning how to do things again like fly.
Unfortunately for every time when you start getting sucked into the world of the novel Mayer goes and proves that he has the same plotting skills of a five year old telling you what they want for Christmas and the coherency of someone who hasn't slept for a week and is being forced to recount the thematic intricacies of a Dostoevsky novel. Scenes whiplash from giggly punny humor to serious superhero contemplation to a teenage level of smuttiness, often within the same page. But instead of being delirious and giving the reader a sense of anything goes, it feels like Mayer is simply making things up as he goes along without any regard to whether logic should apply. Brinkley blunders through the novel without any regard for how the dots might connect, with plot twists appearing and being discarded with wild abandon, and left field circumstances arriving so often that the whole book might as well be titled "Left Field".
Maybe its supposed to replicate the craziness of Golden Age comics but for a new era. I could understand that to some extent. But a book where Snoopy literally appears twice (as well as Charlie Brown to reprise his "duckey and horsey" punchline from an old strip), where a fairy godmother comes out of nowhere just because, where a character is orally pleasured by a famous literary character in the next to last chapter for no apparent reason, where a brother and sister in a deathtrap decide incest is the best escape route, on top of all the other stuff I've mentioned causes the novel to veer from what it thinks is "crazy fun wackiness all the times" to utter incoherence.
And the frustrating part is that the serious stuff is decent enough that you wish he had either gone that route or jettisoned the more dramatic moments and gone full gonzo with the over the top stuff. As I said, the entire concept is fascinating, and he's got a variety of really inventive moments peppering the book. The revelation of the ultimate foe and the conversation they have at the climax is worthy. The relationship between the hero and his family is touching in its sincerity. The explanation for how Brinkley might be losing his powers is clever. For someone writing in pure prose Mayer has a good grasp of superhero fight dynamics, with a battle between Brinkley and a Plastic Man stand-in harnessing the nutty logic of the book to good effect finally, with Brinkley discovering a solution that makes sense with the world he's dumped into. Even his ultimate decision is handled sensitively, with a seriousness the rest of the book merely flirts with.
It makes for a weird, weird experience that thankfully will probably only last for a short while (I managed to read it in less than two hours) but its not even weird in a mind-bending or endearingly goofy way. Its just uncomfortably weird, like a person you meet on a train who insists on telling you this rambling and embarrassing tale and expecting you to respond the whole time like its a work of utter genius. Even its fans probably don't apply the "genius" tag to this book but after reading it I wonder if they're responding more to the novelty of the kernel of the novel's concept and by what the novel has spawned, directly or indirectly. As a superhero book its awkward, as satire its clumsy, as humor its often the exact opposite and while the overall effect may be of someone who is writing purely for their own pleasure Mayer was unable to convey even a fraction of that pleasure to the reader. If not for the famous comic writers who keep mentioning it every so often I think it would justly fall through the cracks as a minor curiosity of its era, which is about what it deserves. If any of the stories I've read and liked over the years in this vein were influenced or inspired by this book, I can only imagine it came from one of those writers reading this novel and after finishing, sitting back and thinking, "Gee, I'm pretty sure I can do better than this."
I just don't feel like this is the book that people would come up with.
Its interesting because this book has been trumpeted by people whose writing and sometimes opinions I respect, people like Grant Morrison and Kurt Busiek (Stan Lee gets a blurb too but since he's nonstop Captain Positive his testaments are the kinds of things I chuckle indulgently over with a "oh, bless . . .") so its clear that even in a world where people like to hold up obscure things as awesome simply because they're obscure, a number of people who later found careers in writing comic books have read this and found it to be worth talking about. And from a historical standpoint it is, because it is probably one of the earliest attempts at deconstructing the superhero genre.
But beyond the historical aspect, I don't think there's too much else to recommend here. Maybe I've been spoiled over the years by more sophisticated deconstructions like the aforementioned Moore's, maybe my taste runs more toward the grittier tone that he and the writers who followed him often took . . . but I went into this knowing it wouldn't be on par with something like "Watchmen", if for nothing else writing a book about superheroes without the benefit of the madcap visual madness the best comics are capable of is like trying to take in an art museum where the colors have been removed from all the paintings. Most of the elements are there but its not quite the same.
So I expected an embryonic effort in that regard and in fact didn't even expect to be blown away, especially as its clear that its not a serious deconstruction. What I didn't expect was an embryonic take on writing a novel entirely, like someone had mailed out a first draft that was written to give their friends giggles and somehow got published by accident. There are moments but its just . . . not professional.
I can see where comic professionals have responded to this over the years. The ideas are there. The basic premise, of a retired superhero dealing with the aging process and no longer being a superhero has to come back and fight a menace from his past one last time, is something that hadn't been done before in the comic book world, not when characters like Superman and Batman had been going for nigh on forty plus years by the time this book was published, still as ageless as ever except for the occasional meaningless "imaginary story". Its vision of a world where all the other superheroes are dead or retired is something new and sprinkled throughout are moments of real invention, where its clear the author is clearly thinking through the implications of what he's started and taking to conclusions that veer between logical and satirical but at least have some weight to them.
So yes, the core of the ideas are worthy. Its a shame the presentation is so gosh darn amateurish.
Right from the start its clear we're in for a bit of a lark. Mayer lists a number of superheroes that have died over the years, most of them famous names, Batman, Superman, the Lone Ranger that clearly were real in this world. Even the mention of Snoopy being shot down could be taken as the author having some fun with the concept and setting the scene (don't fret too much about the lovable beagle's demise, he shows up at least twice later) so there's no any huge red flags.
Then you find out that the hero's name is David Brinkley. Yes, like the broadcaster. And he comes from the planet Cronk, the substance of which that can hurt him is called Cronkite. It goes on and on like this throughout the entire rest of the book, with characters either being actual pop culture figures from that time (his neighbor is Kojak, and not just someone named Kojak but the actual Telly Savalas character) or taking their names from pop culture figures (his parents on Cronk were Archie and Edith, while his Earth parents who adopted him were Franklin and Eleanor). There seems to be no satirical reason for this or a kind of commentary about the world that Mayer is making, time after time he just seems to find it funny, unless its some meta attempt to force people to make connections that aren't quite there. And while its not uncommon for real world figures to appear in superhero stories of this type (let's not forget that Richard Nixon was still President in "Watchmen") this barrage of names seems to have no thought process or rhyme or reason to it, he just does it because it can. But it makes the story read at times (and by that I mean "often") like bad fan-fiction, something posted online without having been seen by an editor or heck, anyone who might have said "maybe this isn't as clever as you seem to think it is". It does come across as something that my peers in high school would have read, full of smirking references to in-jokes that would make people in the know giggle while confusing everyone else.
But even I could overlook that kind of thing (as difficult as that is since he does it on nearly every page) if the book wasn't so tonally all over the place. The overall plot has a skeleton of a thriller around it, with a crime crisis on NYC forcing Brinkley to consider going back into action despite his cozy domestic existence and gradually withering powers. There's a conspiracy afoot to bring him about in the open so he can be killed and its possible the whole thing is being orchestrated by an old enemy who's pulling the strings. There's flashbacks to old memories, a brief and memorable visit with a hero in an asylum, some nice scenes of Brinkley learning how to do things again like fly.
Unfortunately for every time when you start getting sucked into the world of the novel Mayer goes and proves that he has the same plotting skills of a five year old telling you what they want for Christmas and the coherency of someone who hasn't slept for a week and is being forced to recount the thematic intricacies of a Dostoevsky novel. Scenes whiplash from giggly punny humor to serious superhero contemplation to a teenage level of smuttiness, often within the same page. But instead of being delirious and giving the reader a sense of anything goes, it feels like Mayer is simply making things up as he goes along without any regard to whether logic should apply. Brinkley blunders through the novel without any regard for how the dots might connect, with plot twists appearing and being discarded with wild abandon, and left field circumstances arriving so often that the whole book might as well be titled "Left Field".
Maybe its supposed to replicate the craziness of Golden Age comics but for a new era. I could understand that to some extent. But a book where Snoopy literally appears twice (as well as Charlie Brown to reprise his "duckey and horsey" punchline from an old strip), where a fairy godmother comes out of nowhere just because, where a character is orally pleasured by a famous literary character in the next to last chapter for no apparent reason, where a brother and sister in a deathtrap decide incest is the best escape route, on top of all the other stuff I've mentioned causes the novel to veer from what it thinks is "crazy fun wackiness all the times" to utter incoherence.
And the frustrating part is that the serious stuff is decent enough that you wish he had either gone that route or jettisoned the more dramatic moments and gone full gonzo with the over the top stuff. As I said, the entire concept is fascinating, and he's got a variety of really inventive moments peppering the book. The revelation of the ultimate foe and the conversation they have at the climax is worthy. The relationship between the hero and his family is touching in its sincerity. The explanation for how Brinkley might be losing his powers is clever. For someone writing in pure prose Mayer has a good grasp of superhero fight dynamics, with a battle between Brinkley and a Plastic Man stand-in harnessing the nutty logic of the book to good effect finally, with Brinkley discovering a solution that makes sense with the world he's dumped into. Even his ultimate decision is handled sensitively, with a seriousness the rest of the book merely flirts with.
It makes for a weird, weird experience that thankfully will probably only last for a short while (I managed to read it in less than two hours) but its not even weird in a mind-bending or endearingly goofy way. Its just uncomfortably weird, like a person you meet on a train who insists on telling you this rambling and embarrassing tale and expecting you to respond the whole time like its a work of utter genius. Even its fans probably don't apply the "genius" tag to this book but after reading it I wonder if they're responding more to the novelty of the kernel of the novel's concept and by what the novel has spawned, directly or indirectly. As a superhero book its awkward, as satire its clumsy, as humor its often the exact opposite and while the overall effect may be of someone who is writing purely for their own pleasure Mayer was unable to convey even a fraction of that pleasure to the reader. If not for the famous comic writers who keep mentioning it every so often I think it would justly fall through the cracks as a minor curiosity of its era, which is about what it deserves. If any of the stories I've read and liked over the years in this vein were influenced or inspired by this book, I can only imagine it came from one of those writers reading this novel and after finishing, sitting back and thinking, "Gee, I'm pretty sure I can do better than this."
Read
August 6, 2014So, obviously I'd heard mutterings of this before, but it was when it became the latest front in the Grant Morrison/Alan Moore DUEL OF WIZARDS that I got motivated to pop it on the old wishlist. Morrison's contention, as I recall, being that Moore had not sufficiently acknowledged his borrowings from Mayer in his major early works. Well...no. The Moore works of which I was reminded here were not Watchmen and Miracleman, they were the charming minor pieces 'Pictopia' and 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' - both lovely, but hardly the stuff on which Moore's legacy rests.
First off - yes, this brings a dose of 'realism' to superheroics, but given there's no such thing as an objective take on reality, 'realism' describes an awful lot of styles. This is the 'realism' of the postwar American novel - it's worth noting that as well as comic book superheroes grown old and giving up, the cast here also includes Holden Caulfield and Portnoy in respectable middle age. Plus Snoopy, plus Ronald McDonald, plus various figures from seventies American politics whose relevance I'd never have grasped if I'd read this pre-Google. The tone is larger than life, satirical - closer in many ways to Mad magazine superhero parodies than Watchmen-style realism. I should note, though, that while I don't generally buy into the British literary establishment's love affair with that particular school of novelists, it worked here: perhaps because of the subject matter, I could go along for the ride with Superfolks in a way I couldn't with, say, Herzog.
Second - just as Morrison argues, with some justification, that Moore overstates Moore's own status as a unique forerunner, so Morrison himself in turn exaggerates the unique prescience of Superfolks. I have a paperback anthology called simply Superheroes which came out the next year, collecting many stories - some new, some recent, some dating back to the forties - which likewise bring a dose of realism to the heroes (the most famous is Larry Niven's essay Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex). Marvel's early comics, in their own clumsy way, had tried to do something similar in the early sixties, and DC had got in on the act in the early seventies when Green Arrow's kid sidekick became a junkie. I'm sure the jokes and Tijuana bibles go back to the first years of comics' so-called Golden Age. Humans can't help but dream of something better - hence superheroes. Then when they see something better, they equally can't help making jokes about that superman's knob.
Still, even if I read this book for the worst of reasons - drawn into a feud between two of my favourite comics writers - that's another sale for a book which definitely deserves them. About which I realise I've said very little directly, but then just as I came into it broadly ignorant of the plot, of anything bar the most basic premise, so in my turn I wouldn't want to give too much away.
First off - yes, this brings a dose of 'realism' to superheroics, but given there's no such thing as an objective take on reality, 'realism' describes an awful lot of styles. This is the 'realism' of the postwar American novel - it's worth noting that as well as comic book superheroes grown old and giving up, the cast here also includes Holden Caulfield and Portnoy in respectable middle age. Plus Snoopy, plus Ronald McDonald, plus various figures from seventies American politics whose relevance I'd never have grasped if I'd read this pre-Google. The tone is larger than life, satirical - closer in many ways to Mad magazine superhero parodies than Watchmen-style realism. I should note, though, that while I don't generally buy into the British literary establishment's love affair with that particular school of novelists, it worked here: perhaps because of the subject matter, I could go along for the ride with Superfolks in a way I couldn't with, say, Herzog.
Second - just as Morrison argues, with some justification, that Moore overstates Moore's own status as a unique forerunner, so Morrison himself in turn exaggerates the unique prescience of Superfolks. I have a paperback anthology called simply Superheroes which came out the next year, collecting many stories - some new, some recent, some dating back to the forties - which likewise bring a dose of realism to the heroes (the most famous is Larry Niven's essay Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex). Marvel's early comics, in their own clumsy way, had tried to do something similar in the early sixties, and DC had got in on the act in the early seventies when Green Arrow's kid sidekick became a junkie. I'm sure the jokes and Tijuana bibles go back to the first years of comics' so-called Golden Age. Humans can't help but dream of something better - hence superheroes. Then when they see something better, they equally can't help making jokes about that superman's knob.
Still, even if I read this book for the worst of reasons - drawn into a feud between two of my favourite comics writers - that's another sale for a book which definitely deserves them. About which I realise I've said very little directly, but then just as I came into it broadly ignorant of the plot, of anything bar the most basic premise, so in my turn I wouldn't want to give too much away.
May 7, 2013
I had been looking for this book on and off for quite a long time, now. You see, once upon a time, when I was but a young lad of 13 or 14, I stumbled across a copy of it in my local library. It made quite an impression. Unfortunately, that particular edition of the text had been released under the title "Everyman," which meant that my subsequent efforts to find it were doomed to be fruitless, until I finally managed to Google the right combination of the few bits that I actually remembered correctly and turned up a reference to the rerelease under the new title.
It's beginning to show its age, but for a 35-year-old work it's held up remarkably well. It is a broad farce in the older tradition, so there's a lot more fourth-wall breaking, name-dropping (all of the city cabs are apparently driven by Bella Abzug), self-insertion (Mayer himself appears very briefly as a random staffer in the newspaper office) and references to other properties (DC comics, Snoopy, etc.) than you'd see in a more contemporary work. But for all of that, it still conveys the basic premise of a superhero who's grown older, settled down, and started wondering about his relevancy and usefulness in a way that many of its imitators never quite managed. For example, Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns may edge it out in terms of grim realism and socio-political commentary, but in terms of actually getting inside the head of the protagonist, I'd still have to go with Superfolks. Admittedly, the prose format does allow for more development, but still. Definitely worth reading for a comics fan, but possibly not a permanent purchase.
It's beginning to show its age, but for a 35-year-old work it's held up remarkably well. It is a broad farce in the older tradition, so there's a lot more fourth-wall breaking, name-dropping (all of the city cabs are apparently driven by Bella Abzug), self-insertion (Mayer himself appears very briefly as a random staffer in the newspaper office) and references to other properties (DC comics, Snoopy, etc.) than you'd see in a more contemporary work. But for all of that, it still conveys the basic premise of a superhero who's grown older, settled down, and started wondering about his relevancy and usefulness in a way that many of its imitators never quite managed. For example, Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns may edge it out in terms of grim realism and socio-political commentary, but in terms of actually getting inside the head of the protagonist, I'd still have to go with Superfolks. Admittedly, the prose format does allow for more development, but still. Definitely worth reading for a comics fan, but possibly not a permanent purchase.
November 6, 2010
A satirical look at the life of a retired superhero. The book was written in 1977, so some of the humor is dated, but i got a chuckle out of much of it, especially him running into flying doghouses with a french-speaking dog.
I think if you go into it looking more for the humor in it than the overall plot, you might have a better time. Things seems to just sort of wrap up quicker than i expected.
I think if you go into it looking more for the humor in it than the overall plot, you might have a better time. Things seems to just sort of wrap up quicker than i expected.
January 22, 2017
Characters: 3*
Plot: 3*
Universe: 3*
I know this is a cult favorite of many people and I did enjoy it, but just didn't fall in love with it.
Plot: 3*
Universe: 3*
I know this is a cult favorite of many people and I did enjoy it, but just didn't fall in love with it.
September 16, 2014
This is reminiscent of the Roger Rabbit novel. The author has found this then-untapped, rich field for parody. He then sets out to develop the friction between the real world and the subject. But something about it feels unprofessional. I can't tell you what, but it does.
I think part of it might be the author's decision to place the characters in the world of DC Comics without authorization which lends itself to a weird feeling that the important name-brand heroes are too important to show up. This is heightened by the fact that the main character is a trope-for-trope double for Superman.
A couple of the twists are inventive. Once in a while a joke hits the mark.
The author obviously tried to overcome his naming problems by relying on names from other media, but it freights all of his characters with unrelated baggage and confuses the story.
I think part of it might be the author's decision to place the characters in the world of DC Comics without authorization which lends itself to a weird feeling that the important name-brand heroes are too important to show up. This is heightened by the fact that the main character is a trope-for-trope double for Superman.
A couple of the twists are inventive. Once in a while a joke hits the mark.
The author obviously tried to overcome his naming problems by relying on names from other media, but it freights all of his characters with unrelated baggage and confuses the story.
April 24, 2013
I saw this in a store once upon a time, flipped through it, thought it was good and I'd buy it when I had money, and then it was gone. But due to the Magic of the Internet, I eventually found it again and read it.
It hasn't aged well. Funny-name jokes rarely work on me. So calling "Kryptonite" "Cronkite" isn't that funny to me, even thought I know who Cronkite was.
But it had some really good moments, particularly when it wasn't trying to be funny. And the ending actually was moving.
It hasn't aged well. Funny-name jokes rarely work on me. So calling "Kryptonite" "Cronkite" isn't that funny to me, even thought I know who Cronkite was.
But it had some really good moments, particularly when it wasn't trying to be funny. And the ending actually was moving.
April 18, 2016
This was supposed to be a great "classic" satire read for the comic culture. It was satire, way to much of it, with every page in the book overdone with satire. I don't think 3 paragraphs went by without some pun or name dropping. To me it seemed that the writer's efforts at satire diminished the story rather than enhanced it. Overall is a disappointing read. Not recommended
October 9, 2007
A funny little spoof of the superhero world which occasionally abandons its humor for more serious matter, and that's when it falls apart.
The ending is totally convoluted and incomprehensible.
Still, the good stuff is really good.
The ending is totally convoluted and incomprehensible.
Still, the good stuff is really good.
Read
January 14, 2013Sometimes there are books that shift entire genres enough that they feel strip mined when you read them late. Superfolks was like that for me - all that was left was the strange use of celebrity names.
June 19, 2013
It was okay. Probably better in the 70s when all the references were current. Now it reads as a very dated novel. Liked the basic concept though.
Read
June 19, 2014This book forever twisted my brain for fiction. Probably set me up for HST, Alan Moore, and Warren Ellis to come later.
February 17, 2024
An early work of superhero deconstruction that was once a cult curiosity but has now been rediscovered, Mayer's book is a really enjoyable read but with some regrettable engagement issues for contemporary audiences.
Mayer's book begins as a mad magazine style pitch: what if superheroes got old and fat too? The book takes this idea about as far as it can while also giving us a genuinely affecting and effective superhero narrative. Mayer's book takes golden age superheroes of an optimistic era of American progress and exceptionalism, then strands them in the nihilistic wastelands of the 1970s. As the novel begins, we are told that almost all the superheroes are dead, gone, or crazy. And then there's his Superman stand-in, now just living his life as his "alter ego" in the wastes of suburbia, paying bills, raising kids, and regretting the inexplicable loss of his powers.
Then something changes and this hero embarks on a new journey, back to a NY largely abandoned to crime in order to penetrate a devious conspiracy at the highest reaches of government. There's an effective plot here that would make a good comic, including a well-thought out explanation for our hero's inexplicable weakness and a great fight in the upper reaches of space. It concludes with a poignant and actually kind of moving ending.
Along the way, we get a lot of knowing winks and nods to the pop cultural landscape, a good deal of humor, and a lot of pessimistic commentary on the death of the American dream at the end of the 70s. It's quick, fun, and as I said, surprisingly moving at the end.
So why do I think this one is going to stay a curiosity? Well, Mayer's book is regrettably a product of his time. While this kind of zany genre mashup is a product of the 70s in a good way, he also goes in for the kind of gleefully un-PC humor that was endemic to the era. Think National Lampoon, or Chevy Chase saying the n word on SNL. Nowadays, we have a different understanding of what's acceptable for different folks to joke about. Thus, a humorous scene where David (just realized I didn't name him until now) tests out his super vision after years of disuse only to accidentally reveal a sixteen year old baby sitter having sex--and then struggling to look away--would probably get this book labeled as pedophile apologia. Harder to defend, however, are the racial bits including one or two uses of the ultimate slur (even if one did make me guffaw due to its outrageous unexpectedness). And then there's the nonconsensual gay blowjob...nope definitely not getting by Gen Z with this one. Ah well, still a fun read even changing standards shocked me a little here and there.
Mayer's book begins as a mad magazine style pitch: what if superheroes got old and fat too? The book takes this idea about as far as it can while also giving us a genuinely affecting and effective superhero narrative. Mayer's book takes golden age superheroes of an optimistic era of American progress and exceptionalism, then strands them in the nihilistic wastelands of the 1970s. As the novel begins, we are told that almost all the superheroes are dead, gone, or crazy. And then there's his Superman stand-in, now just living his life as his "alter ego" in the wastes of suburbia, paying bills, raising kids, and regretting the inexplicable loss of his powers.
Then something changes and this hero embarks on a new journey, back to a NY largely abandoned to crime in order to penetrate a devious conspiracy at the highest reaches of government. There's an effective plot here that would make a good comic, including a well-thought out explanation for our hero's inexplicable weakness and a great fight in the upper reaches of space. It concludes with a poignant and actually kind of moving ending.
Along the way, we get a lot of knowing winks and nods to the pop cultural landscape, a good deal of humor, and a lot of pessimistic commentary on the death of the American dream at the end of the 70s. It's quick, fun, and as I said, surprisingly moving at the end.
So why do I think this one is going to stay a curiosity? Well, Mayer's book is regrettably a product of his time. While this kind of zany genre mashup is a product of the 70s in a good way, he also goes in for the kind of gleefully un-PC humor that was endemic to the era. Think National Lampoon, or Chevy Chase saying the n word on SNL. Nowadays, we have a different understanding of what's acceptable for different folks to joke about. Thus, a humorous scene where David (just realized I didn't name him until now) tests out his super vision after years of disuse only to accidentally reveal a sixteen year old baby sitter having sex--and then struggling to look away--would probably get this book labeled as pedophile apologia. Harder to defend, however, are the racial bits including one or two uses of the ultimate slur (even if one did make me guffaw due to its outrageous unexpectedness). And then there's the nonconsensual gay blowjob...nope definitely not getting by Gen Z with this one. Ah well, still a fun read even changing standards shocked me a little here and there.
March 23, 2018
This is a new printing of Mayer's 1977 novel about a middle-aged superhero who comes out of retirement due largely to plot to kill him. Fellows like Kurt Busiek and Grant Morrison are on record as being heavily influenced by it, and I found this copy at the CBLDF booth at NYCC, so it seemed a nice means to getting a book that tempted me and giving to a cause I support.
It's a solidly written novel, with clear, easy to read paragraphs. I found myself wishing for a little more complexity in some of the phrases, but I can't really fault Mayer's choices - the story flows quickly and easily and pulls you in.
The hero, David Brinkley, is immensely likable, yet extremely flawed. His powers began to wane eight years ago (and wait 'til you find out why!), so he simply hung up the cape and devoted himself to his wife and daughters. Now, New York's police are laid off due to the city's bankruptcy, rioters are on the loose, and he is needed. Essentially, it's a story about a middle-aged guy who can no longer do the things that he was once able to do. It's extremely witty - for example, when Brinkley uses his supervision to peek through the clothes of attractive women, he constantly walks into things - thus, enhancing his image at a klutz and being karmically repaid for his lack of respect for privacy.
Mayer fills the book with pop culture references, sometimes to the point of distracting from the story. The plot against Brinkley makes sense and seems completely believable, and then the reveal of the mastermind just takes it to a whole other level of greatness. Alan Moore's definitely been inspired by this book too.
The weirdest thing about the book is how puerile much of it is. Mayer fills it with the most adolescent sex stuff, and I'm not sure if it is just designed to titillate the reader or if it is some deeper commentary on the inherent adolescence of superhero fiction.
Regardless, it's a very entertaining novel that reads quickly and comes recommended.
It's a solidly written novel, with clear, easy to read paragraphs. I found myself wishing for a little more complexity in some of the phrases, but I can't really fault Mayer's choices - the story flows quickly and easily and pulls you in.
The hero, David Brinkley, is immensely likable, yet extremely flawed. His powers began to wane eight years ago (and wait 'til you find out why!), so he simply hung up the cape and devoted himself to his wife and daughters. Now, New York's police are laid off due to the city's bankruptcy, rioters are on the loose, and he is needed. Essentially, it's a story about a middle-aged guy who can no longer do the things that he was once able to do. It's extremely witty - for example, when Brinkley uses his supervision to peek through the clothes of attractive women, he constantly walks into things - thus, enhancing his image at a klutz and being karmically repaid for his lack of respect for privacy.
Mayer fills the book with pop culture references, sometimes to the point of distracting from the story. The plot against Brinkley makes sense and seems completely believable, and then the reveal of the mastermind just takes it to a whole other level of greatness. Alan Moore's definitely been inspired by this book too.
The weirdest thing about the book is how puerile much of it is. Mayer fills it with the most adolescent sex stuff, and I'm not sure if it is just designed to titillate the reader or if it is some deeper commentary on the inherent adolescence of superhero fiction.
Regardless, it's a very entertaining novel that reads quickly and comes recommended.
February 3, 2023
There were no more heroes. Kennedy was dead, Batman and Robin were dead, Superman was missing, presumed dead. The Marvel Family was dead, struck down by lightning. The Lone Ranger was dead, found with an arrow in his back after Tonto returned from a Red Power conference at Wounded Knee. Even Snoopy was gone, shot down by the Red Baron over France.
When you read the first 2 pages of Superfolks with the above information you just know this is not your ordinary superhero novel. The world created by Robert Mayer is a mix of reality, original imagination with a dose of the 1970s superhero genre all mixed in. Characters from TV, popular culture, entertainment and sporting personalities appear, names just dropped into the text, some having more to do than others. Kojak for example is a neighbor of David Brinkley, the most powerful superhero of all time who has not been seen in his superhero persona for 8 years. The city has gone to hell and there is an underlying plot surrounding global disarmament and getting rid of the one superhero who can do anything or could when he was last seen.
There is more than a passing similarity to the story of Superman, along with the alien planet origin, weakness to a substance from that planet, his alter-ego is a reporter, but it takes the story to when "Superman" is older, married with kids (Not to the Lois Lane equivalent) living in the suburbs, his powers diminished over time.
This book is an enjoyable read. Definitely a product of the 1970s and not for the kids or anyone offended by adult content. The style is crisp and with all the references sometimes you find yourself stopping to remember where you may have heard the name before as some are obvious, some not so.
If you like your superhero stories a bit more adult and a bit more on the amusing side, then try this one.
When you read the first 2 pages of Superfolks with the above information you just know this is not your ordinary superhero novel. The world created by Robert Mayer is a mix of reality, original imagination with a dose of the 1970s superhero genre all mixed in. Characters from TV, popular culture, entertainment and sporting personalities appear, names just dropped into the text, some having more to do than others. Kojak for example is a neighbor of David Brinkley, the most powerful superhero of all time who has not been seen in his superhero persona for 8 years. The city has gone to hell and there is an underlying plot surrounding global disarmament and getting rid of the one superhero who can do anything or could when he was last seen.
There is more than a passing similarity to the story of Superman, along with the alien planet origin, weakness to a substance from that planet, his alter-ego is a reporter, but it takes the story to when "Superman" is older, married with kids (Not to the Lois Lane equivalent) living in the suburbs, his powers diminished over time.
This book is an enjoyable read. Definitely a product of the 1970s and not for the kids or anyone offended by adult content. The style is crisp and with all the references sometimes you find yourself stopping to remember where you may have heard the name before as some are obvious, some not so.
If you like your superhero stories a bit more adult and a bit more on the amusing side, then try this one.
August 6, 2021
For today's audience... this could be re-titled. "NOT ANOTHER RETIRE SUPER HERO MOVIE" and everyone should perfectly understand what they're in for. (even though it's one of the first "Retired Super Hero" genre/tropes). It's a trashy, over the top, funny, but not THAT funny. Quite juvenile actually.
It's got amusing ideas. I give it that.
I don't understand all the references, and reading this long after it was written and long after its time. The references that I understood weren't that funny. I wondered if its was meant to be "shocking" at the time. It seems to use a lot of "shock value" to compensate for good writing.
It's one "deep thought provoking idea" is....
Underneath this super hero facade lies and everyday, middle aged man, stuck in rut, passed his exciting hey day but instead coping with the nihilistic, meaninglessness of life, mortality, which can all be fixed with some good ol' family time reminding you what life's about.
Apart from that it's just weird over the top humour and action, some raunchiness and... It could've been better really.
It's got amusing ideas. I give it that.
I don't understand all the references, and reading this long after it was written and long after its time. The references that I understood weren't that funny. I wondered if its was meant to be "shocking" at the time. It seems to use a lot of "shock value" to compensate for good writing.
It's one "deep thought provoking idea" is....
Underneath this super hero facade lies and everyday, middle aged man, stuck in rut, passed his exciting hey day but instead coping with the nihilistic, meaninglessness of life, mortality, which can all be fixed with some good ol' family time reminding you what life's about.
Apart from that it's just weird over the top humour and action, some raunchiness and... It could've been better really.
September 5, 2021
Superfolks deals with the twilight days of the stars of its world. One hero watched their partner die and is now in a mental institution, another turned their famous gun on themself, a loyal Indian sidekick turned on his hero and killed him, one begs for change outside the news building, another drives a cab, the girl next door grew up to work in a strip club, the Lois Lane of this tale is rumored to trade favors for the stories that made her famous, our hero is married with children and lives in the suburbs. Most of the legends have been tarnished by rumors of corruption and sexual impropriety after their death eclipsing the memory of their heroism.
The hero of our story is met by self doubt and declining powers. Once an alien superior to all around him our hero has come to see that every man has a secret identity of a sort; spending their days in professions they often detest to earn the chance to pursue their passion. Riding the train our hero sees each watch and vest timepiece measuring the loss of time as they trade their lives for small moments of freedom.
The hero of our story is met by self doubt and declining powers. Once an alien superior to all around him our hero has come to see that every man has a secret identity of a sort; spending their days in professions they often detest to earn the chance to pursue their passion. Riding the train our hero sees each watch and vest timepiece measuring the loss of time as they trade their lives for small moments of freedom.
August 19, 2025
This was so close to 5 stars. As a first effort in the deconstruction of superheroes, it's amazing. and there's some real poetry in some of the self reflection and existentialist thoughts on superheroes. As a satire, it even has some great funny bits and references in it. But the fact that it yanks you directly from these meaningful insights to gay or race jokes is such a tonal whiplash that you can see the author actively fighting with himself as a comedy satire and a deconstruction.
It's a great read, and if it had stuck with some of the themes and thoughts on the third to last chapter through to the end, it would have earned it's five.
That said, you can see the bits where Alan Moore and others injected the more lurid sex stuff into their writing - nothing screams grown up serious like psychosexual issues.
Honestly, though? I really liked it. It's worth the read if only to see a precursor to the adult wave of comics of the 80s.
It's a great read, and if it had stuck with some of the themes and thoughts on the third to last chapter through to the end, it would have earned it's five.
That said, you can see the bits where Alan Moore and others injected the more lurid sex stuff into their writing - nothing screams grown up serious like psychosexual issues.
Honestly, though? I really liked it. It's worth the read if only to see a precursor to the adult wave of comics of the 80s.
September 12, 2017
Fascinating story and a great plot, but I got pulled out of it a lot with the Mad Libs-style satire.
"[Superhero's name (color)] lived as mild-mannered [70s celebrity]. He arrived on Earth from the planet [News Reporter], sent there by [Famous Fictional TV Couple]."
A lot of it seemed ham-fisted and could have used the opportunity to make parody names. The secret identity of Indigo, David Brinkley, could have been David Drinkley and added an extra layer of the comic book alliteration we have come to enjoy.
That aside, the plot of an aging superhero who was once a god among us mortals and how he copes with the true danger of "Can I withstand one more battle saving the world?" was insightful and urged me to keep turning pages. I'm always a fan of "one last job/quest" stories and in that respect, this book delivered in spades.
"[Superhero's name (color)] lived as mild-mannered [70s celebrity]. He arrived on Earth from the planet [News Reporter], sent there by [Famous Fictional TV Couple]."
A lot of it seemed ham-fisted and could have used the opportunity to make parody names. The secret identity of Indigo, David Brinkley, could have been David Drinkley and added an extra layer of the comic book alliteration we have come to enjoy.
That aside, the plot of an aging superhero who was once a god among us mortals and how he copes with the true danger of "Can I withstand one more battle saving the world?" was insightful and urged me to keep turning pages. I'm always a fan of "one last job/quest" stories and in that respect, this book delivered in spades.
April 7, 2025
Although this weird and offputting book played some role in the postmodern super heroics of Alan Moore’s Miracleman and Watchmen, that’s selling it short. Some of the psychological spandex angst Moore skillfully mined for popular consumption is certainly here, but this is much closer to Robert Anton Wilson’s 70s-era absurdity — the prose style is almost identical, down to the character naming conventions, as if an AI had farted it out — albeit with an oddly satisfying mystery and final act that not only redeem the entire book but compel me to recommend it. Not for everyone, but for those who enjoy such things, this is a minor classic that deserves cult status and not the “well, it isn’t Watchmen” derision seen here (of course it isn’t — this came out in 1977 and is something quite distinct).
August 1, 2019
I recently heard that Robert Mayer had passed away and had never heard of him or this book. I was intrigued when I heard how much it inspired other comic book writers of an era that I moots admired. I can see so many similarities here and given it was written in 1977, means Robert was ahead of the pack. Unfortunately, time has not been kind as some of the writing and media references are dated. I can see the Incredibles, Miracleman among others while I read this. It can be funny, but it can also be racist (though I don't think the writer was trying to be such) and some of the sex scenes are not appropriate for younger people. I definitely enjoyed this story, but graded it down due to being out of date.
January 19, 2025
Admittedly I only picked this up because Morrison made the claim that Moore had also been inspired by this book in his work so I did go into this looking for those seeds of superhero deconstruction and yeah they're in here. Feels ahead of its time in that regard, it could've been released as a late 80's comic and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference from anything else around that time period. Humor is really hit or miss but honestly that is more so because I didn't notice the joke or lack the context to make it funny but it doesn't really detract from the story for me. I did like the book and felt it was an entertaining read but I'm not sure you're going to get much out of it if you're not already a fan of capeshit and looking for seeds of the future "gritty" takes on superheroes.
June 17, 2018
Like many others, I found out about this novel through the introduction to the Astro City collection Astro City, Vol. 1: Life in the Big City, and was determined to find a copy and read it.
It is definitely a book of its time, and someone that doesn't know much about the 70's may not get the many references. I enjoyed it, but it was more satire than I was expecting, so my enthusiasm is tampered a bit. I understand if others feel it is a bit dated, but that didn't concern me, as I read books in the context of when they were written.
It is definitely a book of its time, and someone that doesn't know much about the 70's may not get the many references. I enjoyed it, but it was more satire than I was expecting, so my enthusiasm is tampered a bit. I understand if others feel it is a bit dated, but that didn't concern me, as I read books in the context of when they were written.
October 25, 2023
I know this is a big favorite of a lot of folks but I am afraid it just did not float my boat. The naming of characters after famous people gets old very quickly and meant more in the time it was written than it does now. With this and the silly humor the whole thing come across as a long schoolboy essay. Maybe it has got some historical relevance - I don't know and don't feel inclined to find out.
The story itself is flat, boring and confusing to follow. There is a bit towards the end where it starts to show promise then it just falls flat again.
Maybe interesting to some students of literature but I really cannot recommend it.
The story itself is flat, boring and confusing to follow. There is a bit towards the end where it starts to show promise then it just falls flat again.
Maybe interesting to some students of literature but I really cannot recommend it.
January 7, 2019
Para comenzar a entender Superfolks y no hacerse bolas, hay que saber sólo un par de cosas: Alan Moore la ha tomado casi completa como base para Watchmen. De cabo a rabo. Tan sólo ha saltado la parte donde se menciona que los grandes superhéroes (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, etecé) están muertos.
Es humor 100%, no hay estudios sociológicos ni filosóficos. Hay parodias y menciones a eventos que pudieron o no pasar.
También a considerar: publicada en 1975.
Recomendable si eres fan de comics.
Es humor 100%, no hay estudios sociológicos ni filosóficos. Hay parodias y menciones a eventos que pudieron o no pasar.
También a considerar: publicada en 1975.
Recomendable si eres fan de comics.
September 21, 2020
This is a prose novel from 1977, about a super hero undergoing a mid-life crisis. As I understand it, this is a highly-regarded book that's considered a predecessor to stories like Watchmen. For me, though, a lot of the jokes haven't aged well, and the world-building is a weird mix of real people and fictional characters. (To pick just one example, Kojak--yes, that Kojak--is married to Gloria Steinem, who inexplicably, has given up feminism.) Still, comic book fans might want to check it out, because of it's unusual status in the history of super heroes.
June 11, 2024
J’ai mis un temps fou pour lire ce bouquin. Non pas qu’il n’était pas bien, mais il y avait beaucoup d’interruption tout au long de cette lecture : quelque chose comme 200 notes explicatives.
Ce n’est pas la seule chose qui m’ait ralenti.
J’avançais bien dans les chapitres où on suivait David Brinkley.
Les chapitres qui m’ont le moins plu sont ceux avec les méchants.
J’ai un avis mitigé quant à cette lecture. Il y a de bonnes choses et de moins bonnes.
https://psylook.kimengumi.fr/2024/06/...
Ce n’est pas la seule chose qui m’ait ralenti.
J’avançais bien dans les chapitres où on suivait David Brinkley.
Les chapitres qui m’ont le moins plu sont ceux avec les méchants.
J’ai un avis mitigé quant à cette lecture. Il y a de bonnes choses et de moins bonnes.
https://psylook.kimengumi.fr/2024/06/...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews