The Virgin Read: Wake Her Up When You're Done Fixing Comics, She Said She'll Have Some Free Time

A Red Mass For Mars # 2
Written by Jonathan Hickman
Art by Ryan Bodenheim & Marty Shelley
Published by Image Comics

Let's put it this way--it's a little harder then usual to give this comic a true "Virgin" critique.  This ain't your regular comic book--well, as far as my definition of a "regular comic book" goes.  Whereas something like Achewood, another out there piece of comics, was so in its own camp that I found myself completely "unqualified" to even try to explain why it was funny, now all I can tell you is that this one, Red Mass For Mars, is so far into the realm of science fiction that I don't think I'm capable of responding to it in any objective way.  My personal reaction to science fiction keeps getting in the way.

I'm not a big science fiction gal.  I love that Battlestar Galactica show--but there's so many sci-fi books, movies and television shows that have never even remotely appealed to me.  Thing is, that has be a little bit stumped.  Why do I like some sci-fi, but not all?  Sure, I could say it's all down to "good" or "bad" writing, I could make up something about structure--but after a little reflection, I think it has merely to do with what's relatable to this reader, this viewer, this customer.  Battlestar Galactica appeals to me--I think--because despite it's futurism, it deals with comprehensible relationships, concepts like war, as well as vaguely relevant social issues.  The science, if there is any true science, is out of my grasp, yes, but it's never completely over my head.

After reading Red Mass For Mars, I tried out some more exploration on the internet.  I checked out the writer, Jonathan Hickman, and ended up at his web page and message board.  I just wanted to see what fans had to say about the story--and I found it fascinating.  Here I am, post read, lost in the feeling that I get when something just completely failed to grab me.  (I felt like the art was great when it came time for spaceships and futuristic objects, but it wasn't that great when it came time to deal with faces.  The story left me bored, when I wasn't lost entirely.  And while I could have gone back to re-read portions of it, to  figure out the order and differences between Earth 2115, Earth 862 and Luna 2116, to grasp how all these different characters tied together--I just didn't have enough initial interest.  I had some It's Always Sunny from last week to check out, I wanted to cook some dinner, eat the dinner--look, I don't want to say I had better things to do.  But I did have better things to do.)

And then I found this post on the message board, and that's where I saw the significant difference between me and who this comic is probably for.

From now on, I demand that ALL comics contain the following elements to be acceptable:
1) Take place in Future
2) a post-apocalyptic future with at least two billions of people dead
3) has a super hero who is super strong & can fly
4) has a protagonist who is super smart, rich, and can see into future
5) has a sweet flashback to the past
6) and another sweet flashback to an Alien invasion
7) introduces/features MORE superheroes
has British comedic relief, and/or mocks Canada
9) has Space Travel
10) with a giant Alien armada (artist must draw at least 1,000 space ships)

Seeing this list of prerequisites got me thinking more about science fiction, so I started looking around for that, and ended up with this little nugget of info after googling "science fiction characteristics."

1) Science fiction is often based on scientific principles and technology
2) Science fiction may make predictions about life in the future.
3) Science fiction often deals with aliens or with life on other worlds.
4) Science fiction can comment on important issues in society.

And now I've found my problem--number one and number three.  Now, I'll bet that if you really go with all the plausible science, you bring these four things in well, and you're a good writer, that's probably going to thrill a fan of the genre to their core.  I bet it's the way about Andrew Lloyd Webber's Jesus Christ Superstar.  (There's plenty of other musical examples I could name, but I'm going to leave it with that.)  I'm still amazed, thrilled even, that Webber was able to do something so exceptional with music and that story--to truly create it, with music.  On top of that, it's not even "safe" music, it's rock.  I can't get how I feel about that show into words--but that's because I'm a dyed in the wool music theater geek.  I'll bet it's exactly the same feeling when a true science fiction fan reads the best of the field.

Here's the thing though--if you know someone who hates musical theater--someone who thinks it's the "cheapest and most tiresome form of entertainment available," then they're probably going to be able to hate the best possible piece of musical theater.  If you can't get through that door, then it doesn't really make a difference whether it's a good or bad example of the genre.

No, I didn't enjoy this.  But then again--I don't know that it would've been possible for me to in the first place.  For what it is--I'm sure it's fine.  It's just not what this girl was looking for.

-Nina Stone, 2008

Comments

[Brian Nicholson]

When I read you quoting that message board post, I assumed the original writer was being ironic. Clicking through, I am not so sure, and am leaning towards "oh, wait, that is a real person, who I would never ever want to be around."

And I'm someone who reads things that are kind of science-fiction-ish.

I get the feeling this is more about someone hitting cliches, and would not approach the best of science fiction.

[Kenny]

Nina,

I'm an absolutely huge, unabashed Jonathan Hickman fan. Honestly, though, I could not recommend his work to most people in good faith. He's often dense just for the sake of being dense and his worst ideas involve superheroes, so if both things aren't your cup of tea, then yeah, I can't imagine this being a pleasant read. Good review, though, as always!

[Matthew J. Brady]

Very interesting commentary. Now I want to try to think of some sci-fi that you might like. There's always Philip K. Dick. And Kurt Vonnegut isn't really thought of as a sci-fi writer these days, but a lot of his stuff fits into the genre (Slaughterhouse-Five or Cat's Cradle are good). Oh, or Ursula K. LeGuin's books, especially The Left Hand of Darkness. That one could be defined as "speculative anthropology" or something, without any rayguns or anything.

But yeah, if you're not predisposed to like the genre, you might just be weirded out by most of it. Myself, I love the innovative exploration of scientific concepts, but there's gotta be more than spaceships and stuff; it still needs to be good writing, like any other genre. But when a writer can tell a compelling story that uses science well, I love it. I just read Neal Stephenson's Anathem, a 900 page book that was almost completely about scientific theory; it was awesome. So take my word with a grain of salt.

[JM Ringuet]

I recommend you check out 'Transhuman', another book from Jonathan Hickman that is also science fiction but completely opposite to 'Red Mass' (two completely different styles and divergent point of views from the SAME writer).

[Matthew J. Brady]

By the way, for anybody who doesn't know, JM Ringuet is the artist on Transhuman. Just figured that was a bit of information that might be useful.