PDA

View Full Version : Meeting #28: We Are the Walking Dead



JohnLees
Wednesday, May 19, 2010, 08:13 PM
Hey clubbers! A few days late is an improvement on several weeks late, but still, let’s get straight to business. The comic series we’ll be taking an extended look at for this meeting is The Walking Dead, the zombie saga from writer Robert Kirkman and (as of issue #7, with Tony Moore on art duties for the first 6 issues) artist Charlie Adlard. Now, unlike with The Sandman last meeting, where we just carried on chronologically from where we left off the previous time the series was featured, with The Walking Dead we’ll be skipping 7 whole graphic novels’ worth of content, picking up after the climactic events of the eighth volume, Made to Suffer, with what very much marked a new chapter in this story. By taking this large gap between volumes in our recommended reading, I hope to illustrate just how dramatic the changes these characters have gone through on their grim journey are, and hopefully to demonstrate that, even with all the worthy material that has come before, it is with these more recent volumes that it’s really become clear what this overarching narrative is truly about.









The Walking Dead was first discussed back in Meeting #12: Comics and Horror, with me qualifying this quote from Jesse Schedeen, from the IGN article “The Walking Dead TV Wish List”, by saying it was too early to talk about its relevance based on just the first graphic novel, Days Gone Bye:


Carl is a young boy whose gradual loss of innocence is perhaps the great tragedy of Walking Dead. It could even be argued that he, not Rick, is the most vital character in the story.


With these later volumes, we really get a fuller sense of the point Jesse Schedeen was making. The previous graphic novel came to a catastrophic conclusion, with the loss of the longstanding status quo of the prison home setting, much of the ensemble cast being killed off while the rest are dispersed, and the shocking death of Rick’s wife Lori and their newborn baby. So as the ninth volume, Here We Remain, opens, the dynamics of the book have been stripped bare, with the ensemble set-up giving way to Rick and Carl alone, a father and son out in the wilderness. And as Rick passes into a deep state of unconsciousness from an infected gunshot wound (or a deliberate overdose of antibiotics and pain medication, depending on your perspective) Carl is left to defend him, becoming the sole active character for a large chunk of the graphic novel. And so, for the first time in the series, Carl becomes the primary character driving forward the narrative. With his speech to his unconscious father over pages 37 and 38, we see how Carl has forced to transform from an innocent child to a hardened, resourceful survivor:


I don’t think I need you anymore. I was scared at first when you got sick – but now, I’m not. I’m not scared at all. I don’t need you to protect me anymore. I’m strong… I’ve grown up, I think, a lot. I’m not an adult yet, but close. Close enough. I don’t think you could protect me anymore anyway… I’m not a kid anymore. I’m not. So I’ll be fine if you have to die. If you died I’d be okay. Everybody dies… it doesn’t matter. So do it. If you have to. I’ll be dine if you do. If you die, I’ll be okay. I will.


Of course, these cold words are in stark contrast to Adlard’s depiction of the visuals, with Carl slumping onto the floor and sobbing as he says them. And later on, we see him take his words back as we see that, for all his attempts at bravado, he is still a frightened child. And this seems to be a dominant theme of Here We Remain: the tension between Carl’s innocence and the corrupting forces of the world all around him. The violent killing of three zombies across pages 32-34 is all the more disturbing for the fact that it’s a young boy doing the killing. And on page 24, when he thinks Rick is dead, his first instinct is to grab his gun and prepare to shoot his own father in the head to prevent him coming back as a zombie. And the book ends with Rick giving his son the warning, “You are not safe,” making Carl promise to never let his guard down, and be wary of even the other survivors in the group – a story beat that is coming back into play with current issues of The Walking Dead, with Carl unable to adjust to being a regular kid who plays with other kids in the relative safety of the new community the group have found themselves in.

An important turning point in this arc of Carl’s comes on page 17 of Volume 11, Fear the Hunters, with Carl being the one to take the action none of the adults are able to go through with: killing Ben, a young child the same age as him, because of his burgeoning homicidal tendencies. Of course, the irony of this – and the previous debate over whether or not a child killer should be treated the same as any other killer – is that Carl may be developing homicidal tendencies of his own. In the pivotal “confessional” scene of Volume 10, What We Become (which I’ll discuss in more detail later) Carl admits to being glad that he shot Shane way back at the climax of Days Gone Bye, and wishes he could have killed The Governor and helped his dad kill the attackers from the night before. And on page 74, he tells Rick, “I have thoughts… I’m scared if you knew the thoughts I had sometimes that you’d hate me.” This world is not only robbing Carl of his childhood – it’s gradually turning him into a killer.

As I said back in my list of the top 10 comics of the 2000s – where this series ranked #2 – The Walking Dead is ultimately the story about a father and a son, their paths intertwined. And just as Carl descends into darkness in these three volumes, so too does Rick. To once again rehash a quote from my earlier analysis of The Walking Dead, let’s take another look at Robert Kirkman’s take on Rick’s character development, from the writer’s introduction to Days Gone Bye:


With THE WALKING DEAD I want to explore how people deal with extreme situations and how these events CHANGE them. I’m in this for the long haul. You guys are going to get to see Rick change and mature to the point that when you look back on this book you won’t even recognize him.


Sure enough, the Rick Grimes of volumes 9, 10 and 11 is a very different character from the hope-driven hero of those early chapters, to the point where he even looks barely recognizable. Each of these graphic novels contains one pivotal sequence in further advancing this unnerving transformation from relatable protagonist to something far more sinister, and I’d like to explore each sequence in turn to see what it says about Rick.

In Here We Remain, the key moment for Rick comes after the sequence where Carl temporarily took over as the book’s main character. Rick begins to take control of the situation, begins making decisions, and we think that things might be returning to some semblance of normality (if you can use the word in the middle of a zombie apocalypse) for Rick, in spite of his wife’s death. He starts making contact with a woman from another group of survivors over the phone, and from this we get the sense the plot is moving in one direction. But on page 62, we’re taken on a drastically different direction when the woman on the other side of the phone line says, “Rick… it’s me. It’s Lori.” And we realize that he has been imagining these phone conversations. But even with this realization, Rick takes the phone with him when he and Carl move on, picking up the receiver and placing it against his ear whenever he wants to hear his wife’s voice, even though he knows it’s in his head.

So, is Rick going crazy? Or is this a justifiable coping mechanism for dealing with his grief? Maybe it’s a little bit of both. On the sequence across pages 104 and 105, Rick and Michonne exchange stories, Rick telling Michonne about how he hears Lori on the phone after she confesses to him about talking to her dead boyfriend when she’s alone. “So we’re both crazy,” replies a smiling Michonne in her usual succinct style. Bearing this in mind, Rick’s angry defense of Sophia on page 98 for convincing herself that Maggie is her real mother takes on a new dimension: he seems hurt and angry at Carl calling her “crazy” and “stupid” for this behavior, because it’s like him saying that Rick is crazy and stupid.

As you’d imagine from a graphic novel titled Here We Remain, this idea of how people cope with bereavement is a dominant theme throughout the volume. We’ve talked about Carl and Rick’s reactions, and touched on Sophia’s. The very first page features Michonne forced to finish off her zombified lover Tyreese, shedding a tear for him on the following page. Later we see Maggie learning of the death of her father and brother. In one of the more poignant moments of the book, we see Dale awkwardly try to bring up the issue of Lori’s death to Rick, mentioning that he can sympathize due to the recent death of his own wife. And looking back at Dale’s role throughout the series, it seems to me like he was set up as a kind of precursor to the experiences Rick was destined to go through – in the obvious visual sense, he too lost a limb, but on a deeper level, all those conversations Dale had with Rick earlier in the series about how horrible it is to lose a wife in this way and how Rick should be thankful he hasn’t had to go through it are given a shade of tragic irony. But though they have had this bond of shared experience, in these volumes we’re focusing on for this meeting we see a growing void between the two men, with Dale highlighting the reasons behind it on page 77 of What We Become:


And why not? Is it Rick? You don’t want to leave him? A few weeks ago… I might have agreed with you. I used to think I knew him. Would have called him my friend. Now? That man is something different. He scares me.


Rick has changed. Dale sees it, and with the events of Volumes 10 and 11, we see it even clearer.

The sequence I wish to discuss from What We Become is not just a pivotal moment for this volume, or for Rick as a character. It’s arguably one of the pivotal moments in the history of the series. And for my money, What We Become could possibly stand as the finest volume the series has produced yet. To get an idea of what the sequence is, and how important it is, just look at the cover of the graphic novel. It features a blood-covered wildman, lunging out at us with a savage expression on his face, as if ready to kill. It might take us a few moments to recognize this as our hero, Rick Grimes.

The sequence in question is the aforementioned “confessional” scene, but I’m also including the scene that precedes it and prompts this discussion the following morning between Rick, Abraham and eventually Carl. Starting on page 58, we get a sequence where Rick, Carl and Abraham – separated from the rest of the group on a journey out to Rick’s old home – are ambushed by a group of bandits, who attempt to rape Carl. In response, Rick kills the bandit holding him at knife-point, not with a weapon, but by biting into his throat and ripping out his jugular with his teeth.

Not only is this killing horrifyingly savage, but it’s also familiar. Flip back to the start of What We Become. The opening is a highly effective scene, where what at first seems like a flashback to happier times when Rick, Carl and Lori were a family is suddenly revealed to be a nightmare, with Lori turning into a zombie and tearing Rick to shreds (tellingly, in his dream Rick doesn’t struggle, simply saying, “I deserve this. This is what I deserve.” as Lori munches on his intestines). But specifically, look at the first panel on page 5, with zombie Lori biting into Rick’s throat. Now compare that to the first panel of page 62, as Rick bites into the bandit’s throat. Not only does each panel depict the same violent action, but even the angling of the panels are practically the same, reinforcing the parallels between the two moments. I instantly recall Rick’s “We are the walking dead!” line from the conclusion of The Heart’s Desire. We originally think of the zombies as the monsters of The Walking Dead, but now we see Rick turning into a monster.

Continuing with this theme, I found page 64 to be incredibly powerful, and disturbing. In the first panel, Rick – drenched in the blood of the man he’s just killed, gore dripping from his mouth – barely even looks human. If it wasn’t for the anger in his eyes instead of a white void he could easily be mistaken for one of Adlard’s zombies. Greeted by the sight of this monstrosity, the last remaining bandit drops his weapon, gives up Carl, and flees. But Rick chases after him, hunting him down, not stopping until he catches up with the would-be rapist, who is now pleading for his life. But Rick closes in on him with the knife, and makes the kill. We don’t see Rick dispatching this man (though the repeated "SHUKK! SHUKK" sound effect tells us all we need to know) and it’s all the more effective for taking place off-panel. What we see instead of the murder manages to be even more unsettling. For the last 3 panels of page 64, we see Abraham holding Carl, trying to keep him from seeing the brutality his father is capable of. But as we zoom in on the shot, we see Carl not only turning around to look, but doing so with what seems to be an expression of grim approval.

And this leads into the confessional scene. An early exchange between Abraham and Rick tells us a whole lot about what stage Rick has now reached as a character. Abraham remarks that, “You’re never the same. Not after what you did.” And in reply, Rick simply states, “You can fake it.” These three volumes we’re studying for this meeting are full of references by various characters about seeing glimmers of “the old Rick”, with his diplomatic leadership and can-do spirit. But this tells us what these glimmers are. He’s faking it. He’s acting like he thinks he would have acted if he hadn’t been changed.

From here, Abraham goes into a story about his wife and daughter being raped while his son was forced to watch, and the vicious revenge Abraham took on those responsible. What he did was so violent, that it forced his family to abandon him, which ultimately resulted in their death. One comment he makes brings up parallels to Rick’s situation:


They left because they were terrified to be around me. They saw me as no better than the ones I’d killed. Maybe they were right.


And this brings up an interesting idea. The Governor and his crew, and the recently-murdered bandits, they were awful people, but in battling them, did Rick and the other survivors have to become equally awful? I recall how The Governor’s rape of Michonne paled in comparison to the stomach-churning mutilation Michonne meted out on him for payback. This is an idea we’ll explore a bit further in a bit, but first let’s look at how Abraham acts while he recounts his story. He is ashamed, often tearful. Though our original impression of the character when he first shows up is that he’s a hardened killer and a potential threat to Rick, this scene shows just how much of his humanity, and in turn his vulnerability, remains. Contrast his demeanor with that of Rick’s, as he calmly, coldly recounts the various horrible things he’s done over the length of the series to protect those close to him. They seemed understandable actions at the time they were happening, but listed back to us here, we realize just how much more ruthless these deeds are than the ones that haunt and torment Abraham. It would seem that, despite what first impressions might suggest, it’s Rick that is the truly dangerous one in this pairing. Rick follows this up on page 73 with what I feel stands as a kind of keynote speech for what he has become:


You said some people… it was like a switch went off… one minute they were good people – then this whole thing started and poof – they’re monsters. Thing is, I don’t think that’s an entirely bad thing. You and me – our switches flipped. We’re doing whatever it takes – whatever it takes to survive and to help those around us survive. The people without the switch – those who weren’t able to go from law-abiding citizens to stone-cold killers… those are the ones shambling around out there – trying to eat us.


And here we see an open acknowledgement of this idea that’s been building, one that I feel has come to define the series. This is why I mentioned that What We Become is arguably my favorite volume of The Walking Dead to date, and that it is with these later volumes of the series that the true meat of the story becomes clear. The idea that it’s humans that are the real monsters, not the zombies, is hardly a revolutionary one. But the clever twist The Walking Dead has steadily put into place is establishing that the human monsters are no longer outside threats like The Governor, but these characters we’ve come to relate to and care about. Rick, Carl, and to varying degrees the other survivors, they’re the monsters now.

This is why I think The Walking Dead Compendium (a great package, by the way, highly recommended) chose a great point to end at with the conclusion of Volume 8. Because everything that has come after that tragic climax has been part of what is very much a new chapter in the history of this series. While everything that came in those first 8 volumes revolved around Rick’s struggle to rebuild some semblance of their old society, build a safe, stable environment for his family to live in, Volumes 9, 10 and 11 have revolved around Rick no longer striving to make life somewhat like the way it was before, but instead adapting to surviving as part of this violent new world of the dead, at any cost. The whole sequence with the group revisiting Rick’s hometown, stopping at familiar locations from Days Gone Bye such as the police station, feels, as Carl puts it, “Weird.” So much has changed since those early issues. It’s like Rick and co. don’t belong there anymore.

I think a perfect personification in this shift in the book’s identity is the character of Morgan Jones. Morgan first appeared back in Days Gone Bye as a kind of reflection of Rick: an honest, caring family man trying to protect his son. After that, Morgan is not seen again until page 82 of What We Become, when Rick returns to his old home. In the time since we last saw him, we discover that like Rick, he too has changed drastically. His son, Duane, was killed by zombies, and turned into a zombie himself. Rather than killing him, Morgan tied him up, and had been killing trespassers and feeding them to his son. And judging by his behavior throughout the rest of the volume, it becomes clear that Morgan is insane, much moreso than Rick and Michonne. Given how ruthless Rick has become, we might expect him to kill Morgan, or at least view him as a liability to the group’s safety, but instead he brings him back with the others, and lets him join the group. I think he makes this decision because, in a way, Morgan is still a reflection of Rick. He’s what Rick would become if he lost Carl.

Finally, we’ll turn our attention to Fear the Hunters, which as well as working as an enthrallingly perverse standalone story in its own right, also manages to build on the previously discussed revelations about our cast of survivors gradually turning into the true monsters of the book. For a series that is very much a longform narrative, it might seem odd talking about a particular graphic novel working as a standalone story, but taken on its own merits, Fear the Hunters is a brilliantly structured riff on the old “sting in the tail” story, almost like something from Tales from the Crypt. See, I remember the original marketing for this arc, back before it was released in single issue format. It was all about building up the mysterious Hunters as the big new threat in the book, trying to make us view them as highly dangerous, the next level of threat out there beyond the undead. And when we meet the Hunters – a group of cannibals – they are certainly not pleasant individuals. But what makes the story surprising is that these Hunters are essentially MacGuffins, a mere plot device used to help illustrate the true message of the story.

After 63 pages of build-up, we finally get to see the Hunters, and… well, they’re rather underwhelming. The big evil speech by ringleader Chris feels a little contrived, like he’s trying a bit too hard to be scary. And from there, their mystique quickly evaporates as the group is exposed as rather ineffective and even incompetent. Yes, they kidnap Dale and eat his one remaining leg. But Dale gets the last laugh, as he reveals that he has been bitten by a zombie, and on page 70, begins to hysterically taunt them about exactly what they’ve been eating:


I’m tainted meat! You’re eating tainted meat! TAINTED MEAT! TAINTED MEAT! HA! HA! HA! HA! TAINTED MEAT!!


And this is pretty much the last we see of smiling, calm, in control Chris. From here on out, the Hunters revert to steadily escalating degrees of panic and grasping attempts at damage control. Their attempts to scare the survivors and weaken their resolve feel pretty amateurish. Is it simply bad writing on Kirkman’s part? I don’t think so. I think it’s deliberate. We’re not just supposed to see the Hunters as not very dangerous. We’re supposed to see them as nowhere as dangerous as the survivors. When it comes to violence, the killer instinct… the Hunters aren’t even in the same league as our ensemble cast. As Rick says on page 88, “They’re f**king with the wrong people.”

And that brings me to Rick’s pivotal moment in Fear the Hunters. When Rick chooses to confront Chris, it’s almost hilarious how bush league Chris is in comparison, how hard he tries to be menacing, yet how less menacing he is than Rick, who for the most part is just quietly listening. And when the moment is right, Rick reveals that his meeting with the Hunters was in fact an ambush, with Andrea, Abraham and Michonne (and new arrival to the group, priest Gabriel, who remains a passive observer) surrounding the rival group and taking all their weapons. The fact that this is done efficiently, effortlessly, once again emphasizes how much more dangerous the survivors are. Chris’ pleas and promises to leave the survivors alone prove to be pointless, and across pages 112 and 113, we get an incredibly odd, unconventional double page spread, which is just a close up of Rick’s somber face as he says, “Hold him down.” I think giving this rather stationary, intimate moment a double page spread serves to underline the enormity of what is about to happen.

The next 6 pages are totally silent, and make up one of the most powerful sequences the series has ever featured. Across the first 2 pages, 114 and 115, we get a series of fragmented shots of puddles of blood, mangled body parts and used weapons. Then across pages 116 and 117, we get a shot in silhouette of the last (apparently disemboweled) corpse of the murdered Hunters being tossed on a fire, where the other bodies are already burning. And underneath it, a close-up of Gabriel’s terrified eyes, tears running down from them. Evidently, he had little idea of what kind of group he was joining. And finally, on pages 118 and 119, another double page spread, this time of Rick, Andrea, Abraham and Michonne (as well as the horrified Gabriel in the background), with the four of them appearing emotionless in response to the mass murder they’ve just committed.

This is not just a pivotal moment for Rick, but the group as a whole. This is what they have had to become to survive. They have all lost loved ones, and that has changed all of them. Fear the Hunters? No, but perhaps we need to start fearing the survivors.

The other pivotal development of Fear the Hunters is the death of Dale. After the funeral service, Rick touches on what role Dale played in the narrative on page 130:


Dale has me rethinking a lot of things. He resisted things that I deemed necessary. He wouldn’t allow himself to be completely changed by his surroundings. I thought that made him weak, but maybe I was wrong. Maybe he was strong to resist those urges. Maybe he was stronger than any of us to hold on to his humanity and refuse to let it go. What we’ve done to survive… sometimes I feel no better than the dead ones.


But on this note, this is why I think Dale had to die at the conclusion of Fear the Hunters. As mentioned earlier, up until this point, he had served as a kind of precursor for the path Rick’s life would take. But through all his suffering, Dale remained a decent, non-violent person, someone who avoided conflict where possible and clung onto the old standards and rules of a now-lost society. This new world didn’t change him. But it has changed Rick. He has gone past a point of no return, and so Dale can no longer stand as that marker for where Rick is headed. He’s headed down a far darker path. The whole group has. Dale would not have fit in amongst that double page spread of Rick, Andrea, Abraham and Michonne. The only function Dale could therefore serve was as a tether to the old ways, to that old world. And as sad as I was to see one of my favorite characters bite the dust, cutting that tether opens up some fascinating and disturbing plot possibilities for the remaining characters.

In the recent single issues that have since followed Fear the Hunters – soon to be collected in a graphic novel entitled Life Among Them – we see the survivors finding a new home amidst a community of what thus far seem to be ordinary, decent people. And the dynamic that seems to be building is that the survivors can no longer fit into a “normal” world like this, and perhaps the community has more to fear from the survivors than the survivors do from the community. Across Here We Remain, What We Become and Fear the Hunters, and soon into Life Among Them, we see this overarching story unfolding, of Rick, Carl and the others losing touch of their humanity, venturing past the point of no return and truly becoming the “walking dead” that the comic’s title refers to.

The AMC TV adaptation of The Walking Dead has been officially greenlit, with talented British actor Andrew Lincoln as Rick Grimes, and a season of 6 episodes is set to start in October. If the TV series stays true to what have emerged as the core themes of the comic, particularly over these three graphic novels, then I feel The Walking Dead will stand as a worthy companion piece to AMC’s other original dramas: Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Like those shows, The Walking Dead is a twisted examination of the American Dream, studying both the collapse of the family network and the moral decay of its protagonist. But The Walking Dead has zombies in it too.


Meeting #29
You demanded it, so here it is. As requested, the next series we’ll be taking a detailed look at is Dark Horse’s comic book continuation of the celebrated TV series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer. We’ll be looking at the first three graphic novels collecting what has been titled Season 8 of the Buffy saga, and using it as a case study in our discussion of what does and doesn’t work in adapting a TV series into a comic series.

RECOMMENDED READING:

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Long Way Home
Joss Whedon and Georges Jeanty, Paul Lee

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: No Future for You
Brian K. Vaughan, Joss Whedon and Georges Jeanty, Cliff Richards

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wolves at the Gate
Drew Goddard, Joss Whedon and Georges Jeanty


Meeting #30
Villains United
Secret Six: Six Degrees of Devastation
Secret Six: Unhinged

tiggerpete
Wednesday, May 19, 2010, 10:27 PM
wow, Walking Dead, what can be said of probably the most critically acclaimed ongoing series currently being released? all I know is what sets it apart from other zombie books (and there are many) is the strong characters and an attachment that you get to each and every character so that when something happens, and a character dies, you feel it, and it hits you hard. Kirkman is one of the most compelling storytellers in comics right now, and all I know is the praise and acclaim heaped upon Walking Dead is well deserved.

JohnLees
Thursday, May 20, 2010, 02:44 AM
wow, Walking Dead, what can be said of probably the most critically acclaimed ongoing series currently being released? all I know is what sets it apart from other zombie books (and there are many) is the strong characters and an attachment that you get to each and every character so that when something happens, and a character dies, you feel it, and it hits you hard. Kirkman is one of the most compelling storytellers in comics right now, and all I know is the praise and acclaim heaped upon Walking Dead is well deserved.

Well said. It really is the characterisation that sets it apart. Rather than just waiting for the inevitable cool gory death, we grow attached to these characters, and are genuinely saddened when they die. Dale was probably the death that made me saddest, as he had been one of my favorite characters from the very beginning.

LanternLight
Friday, May 21, 2010, 08:19 AM
Wrong thread, sorry...

JohnLees
Friday, May 21, 2010, 02:01 PM
I thought this was going to be an actual contribution - I got all excited! Curse you for your bait-and-switch!

LanternLight
Sunday, May 23, 2010, 10:03 AM
Holy hell! Three meetings in a row you say? Gasp, shock! What is the world coming to? This time you can purely thank our host for my involvement. Over a month ago, he recommended I buy the Walking Dead Compendium. Now the series had never really struck me as one I would enjoy, but I figured, John likes it, so what the hell. I went down to Borders yesterday, and picked up the Compendium (covers chapters 1-8), the fifth hardcover (9-10) and the eleventh TPB (11 of course). Now only the 9-11th chapters were on the list, but I didn't want to be lost, so in the past 36 hours, I read all 72 current issues of the series. At times it was brutal, painful, and almost unbearable to keep reading, but I won't spoil those middle issues nor the latest issues for those of you wanting to go play catch up.

What I will say is this. Last meeting, I said I couldn't think of another comic that showed such a personal development for its characters as Sandman. Well, Walking Dead has that in spades, almost on the same level. The changes the main characters have gone through is outstanding. It makes one wonder, if something like this happened what would we do to make it? Would we be able to do the things these characters are doing?

Thats the thing I like most about the Walking Dead, is that unlike every other piece of zombie fiction I've seen - and trust me I've seen an awful lot; a former roommate was a self-confessed zombie nut, even forced me to watch Flight of the Undead, god was that awful - deals with the outbreak, and immediately there after. This is the only one I can think of that deals with the ongoing survival after the cataclysm. As a psychology major, the will to survive intrigues me.

Rick is willing to do whatever he feels necessary to keep his family alive. Even so, he knows that the decisions he's making aren't ones he would normally make, and he questions his own humanity at several points. "This isn't the first thing to chip away at my soul until I wonder if I'm still human." Sadly, Rick's not the only one of the main characters who feels this way, as his own son interjects mere pages later: "I shot a man in the neck. I didn't like him much. I didn't like the way he acted around my mom. But he was nice to me... most of the time. Then he went crazy -- was going to kill my dad -- so I shot him... I'm scared if you knew the thoughts I had sometimes that you'd hate me." This devolution into primal instincts drives the story. The characters struggle to remain human in an inhumane world is the focal point the book is built around. These characters have been through so much, lost so much its horrifying.

My favorite character in the series is Andrea. Through the first volume and this reading we've seen her lose so much. In that first arc she lost her sister, her last bit of family she had, and after that she went catatonic for awhile. A lot happened to her between that reading and this one, needless to say there are stories behind her scars, but as we come into this reading she is all but married to Dale, a man old enough to be her father, but one whom she is deeply in love with, and it shows. Together they are raising the twins that once belonged to Donna and Allen, neither of whom have made it this far into the story. All in all, at this point she is one of the only characters to go the other way from the ferocity of the world. She has grown and developed into a powerful woman through the course of the book. Which just makes it so much more painful when it all unravels for her in the final volume of the reading. There are some moments that are extremely painful, for all the right reasons when experiencing fiction. The man I know who is best at those moments is Joss Whedon. He's made a good career out of those moments. One moment of his in particular left the deepest wound in my heart, but for those of you who have not watched Angel, I will put it in spoiler tags for you. The moment where Fred dies, and is replaced by Illyria is one of the most heartbreaking moments I've ever had with fiction. The episode title almost says enough "A Hole In The World." But if that doesn't, her last conversation with the man she loves does: Winifred 'Fred' Burkle: Would you have loved me?
Wesley Wyndam-Pryce: I've loved you since I've known you. No, that's not-I think maybe even before.
Winifred 'Fred' Burkle: I'm so sorry.
Wesley Wyndam-Pryce: No, no, no.
Winifred 'Fred' Burkle: I need you to talk to my parents. Th-they have to know I wasn't scared, th-that it was quick. That I wasn't scared. Oh, God.
Wesley Wyndam-Pryce: You have to fight. You don't have to talk, just concentrate on fighting. Just hold on.
Winifred 'Fred' Burkle: I'm not scared. I'm not scared. I'm not scared. Please, Wesley. Why can't I stay? Now, that may seem like a non-sequitar, but it's not. The Walking Dead has a moment that felt the same way to me, in a very similar situation. Andrea at Dale's bedside as he too is about to be replaced by a monster, literally brought tears to my eyes. "I need to tell you, I love you. I love you so damn much. You are my life. You are everything I've ever wanted in a man. I'm sorry if I ever did anything to make you think otherwise -- if you think I didn't take our relationship seriously. You're not too old, or too slow, you are perfect. I will be here when you die, with you, until the end -- whether you like it or not."

In this last volume, Andrea lost so damn much. One son, unable to cope with the horrendous world around them killed the other, and didn't know that he had done anything wrong. "Don't worry. He's going to come back. I didn't hurt his brains." When that seems like a normal thing to say or do in the world, there is so much that is wrong with it. Even more, when pages later, Carl does what he knows he has to do to protect the group and kills Ben, as though its normal was even more shocking. But in reality, it is normal in their world. Carl has spent the past year watching his father do that same thing over and over again, and almost like Ben, he has grown somewhat desensitized to it. However, unlike Ben we see him struggle with the aftermath of his decision. Now I will say this, as I was reading, I was conversing with another CBC contributor, and at one point called Carl a monster. I took it back, but the reason I did so was these two exchanges, with the art making his face so dark and ominous: "Oh, whatever -- he's just a crybaby. It's not like Ben and Billy were even his real kids! It's pathetic." and when his father confronts him: "Why would you say something so mean and hurtful?" "You forgot 'true'." "Damn it, Carl!" "He's weak. He's the opposite of everything we talked about with Abraham. He needs people like us to protect him -- and really, all he does is make things harder for us." Now at that point, I felt sick with what had become of Carl. That is until a few more pages in, when we see him alone, in the dark, unable to sleep with what he's done, tears streaking down his face. At that point I realized I was too quick to judge the boy, and felt like a monster myself for having done so.

Now I promised not to spoil the next couple of issues, but let me at least say this. It would be a disservice to Andrea after having spent so much of the post talking about her development if I didn't include this statement from her later on. I will wrap it in spoiler tags, so if you haven't read it yet, you can get the full force of it from the context in the issue. When Amy and I were living in the RV with Dale... Before you even made it to the camp, I realized my parents were probably dead. That was hard... Then I lost Amy. I felt so ALONE. It drove me into Dale's arms and I fell in love with him. Then Donna died... followed by Allen, and Dale and I were left to raise Ben and Billy. I had a family... I'm twenty-six years old... over the course of a year I inherited a family -- I grew up -- I loved the woman I became and the life I had. And now its all gone. I'm all alone... and all I can think about is how I'm that girl again. The girl I was... the one I didn't like. All I have left is you... All of you. You're the only things left to remind me of what I can be. The only things keeping me from being truly alone." Andrea's world crumbled around her, all in just a few days she lost everything, but she hasn't given up hope. I look forward to seeing where the upcoming months bring the survivors, as starting on Monday, this title goes on my pull list. Oh and don't worry, I'll be back next session too, as we already know my man-crush on Mr. Whedon.

JohnLees
Monday, May 24, 2010, 12:01 PM
72 issues in 36 hours!? I'm impressed! :eek:

I'm glad you liked The Walking Dead, LanternLight, especially since you were spending all that money on the basis of my recommendation! Thank you for taking the time to write such an in-depth response, too, for both this and The Sandman - the contribution is much appreciated.

I for one am glad you chose to make Andrea a major focal point of your analysis. I regretted not getting round to writing more about her in my original piece, so I'm happy you've opened up the possibility of discussing her a little more. She is also one of my favorite characters, as is Michonne. I appreciate how Kirkman isn't one of these writers who thinks a "strong female character" is simply an ass-kicker in a leather catsuit or a bikini with the build of a Playboy model. Instead, we really get strong female characters, not just in terms of their literal strength within the world of the story - with Michonne and Andrea skilled with a katana and a rifle respectively and thus assets to the group rather than damsels in distress - but in terms of their characterisation being strong too, with them having realy meaty roles and interesting character arcs.

Reading back through some older discussions of The Walking Dead elsewhere, I found it quite baffling that some detractors accused Kirkman of being a chauvinist or a woman-hater, citing Michonne's rape, Lori's murder and Carol's breakdown as examples of "Women in Refridgerator" syndrome and a general dislike of women. I don't agree with the analysis though. Just as much violence, if not more, is perpetrated against men as against women. And I think Michonne's bloody retribution against The Governor - which is almost all shown in gory detail, as opposed to her off-panel rape - was an example of Michonne giving a lot worse than what she got.

LanternLight
Monday, May 24, 2010, 01:04 PM
Keep in mind that those people who claim misogyny on Kirkman's part would be the same people that would claim the same of Joss Whedon. Joss is one of the most feminist men in the world, but still gets those claims, which is just another parallel between the two. I think the focus of the criticism is because they have these strong female characters, people are so used to them being able to get out of any situation, that when they don't, it seems like misogyny. Whereas, in the work of both Whedon and Kirkman, you see just as many men in the fridge as you do women. To use as my argument, I'll cite Dale and Xander. Dale, as we discussed before was an emotional centerpoint helping to drive the rest of the cast. That is vastly similar to Xander's role in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Both suffer crippling injuries in their respective stories, as Dale loses one leg to a bite, and Xander loses an eye to a psychotic priest. Neither of them let these injuries slow them down any at all, least of all Xander who starts cracking jokes about his as soon as he possibly can. The point of it is, that just because bad things happen to women, people shouldn't be so quick to jump out and start screaming about 'Fridge Syndrome', especially not in stories with an abundance of strong female characters.

BrandonBarrows
Monday, May 24, 2010, 01:55 PM
72 issues in 36 hours!? I'm impressed! :eek:

I'm glad you liked The Walking Dead, LanternLight, especially since you were spending all that money on the basis of my recommendation! Thank you for taking the time to write such an in-depth response, too, for both this and The Sandman - the contribution is much appreciated.

I for one am glad you chose to make Andrea a major focal point of your analysis. I regretted not getting round to writing more about her in my original piece, so I'm happy you've opened up the possibility of discussing her a little more. She is also one of my favorite characters, as is Michonne. I appreciate how Kirkman isn't one of these writers who thinks a "strong female character" is simply an ass-kicker in a leather catsuit or a bikini with the build of a Playboy model. Instead, we really get strong female characters, not just in terms of their literal strength within the world of the story - with Michonne and Andrea skilled with a katana and a rifle respectively and thus assets to the group rather than damsels in distress - but in terms of their characterisation being strong too, with them having realy meaty roles and interesting character arcs.

Reading back through some older discussions of The Walking Dead elsewhere, I found it quite baffling that some detractors accused Kirkman of being a chauvinist or a woman-hater, citing Michonne's rape, Lori's murder and Carol's breakdown as examples of "Women in Refridgerator" syndrome and a general dislike of women. I don't agree with the analysis though. Just as much violence, if not more, is perpetrated against men as against women. And I think Michonne's bloody retribution against The Governor - which is almost all shown in gory detail, as opposed to her off-panel rape - was an example of Michonne giving a lot worse than what she got.

The people who call "women in refrigerator" are generally the people who are so insecure about their own feelings that they can't be objective about anything involving violence and women. Violence involving women isn't, and shouldn't be, any more offensive than violence involving men. We're all human, right? We all have the right to be secure, correct?

They feign offense because they're not willing, or unable, to examine these depictions as storytelling because it makes them uncomfortable with themselves, and so they label it misogyny.

By the way, for those who don't know, the term "women in refrigerators" was coined by a group of fans and writers who felt Ron Marz writing Major Force's murder of Kyle Rayner's girlfriend (then stuffing her into a refrigerator) was done out of misogyny. Rather, I believe, this was done to show how vicious and brutal Major Force was. Would these fans have been as outraged if Kyle Rayner was gay and Major Force had killed his boyfriend? Or ignoring romantic relationships, if Rayner's father, or little brother or whatever male in his life you'd like to pick, was killed? Who knows? But somehow, I doubt it.

JohnLees
Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 01:03 AM
Some good observations, LanternLight and Brandon Barrows.

However, I don't want to completely sell short the "Women in Refridgerators" movement. It was started by Gail Simone, who I have a whole lot of respect for, who I believe originally came up with the idea to look at the alarming proportion of female characters who seemed to be introduced as "redshirts", existing only to get killed or brutalised down the line, and how there was a trend of female characters being defined by what's done to them rather than any actual personality. Her original idea wasn't against ANY violence being committed against ANY woman. She's had violent things happen to women in her own stories too, but not in a way that classifies as "women in refridgerators".

But other commentators have misinterpreted her "Women in Refridgerators" theories and applied them to situations where they aren't really apllicable, such as The Walking Dead.

BrandonBarrows
Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 02:00 AM
I think Gail Simone is more intelligent than the drones I referred to, though she was one of the driving forces behind the term, and she gained fame from popularizing the term, which lead to her career in comics.

She is a great writer, but sensationalism gets attention and it doesn't take long before someone runs with a sensational concept. Originally, the incident that the term was coined to describe was only one such in a list and while some of the examples may be valid, I think it's been blown out of proportion to the extreme.

Is there more violence against women depicted in comics? It depends on how you define violence. If it's any violent actions, then absolutely not by sheer fact that there are more male characters in comics than female characters. If you define violence as violent acts specifically against women (as unfortunately some people seem to), then of course that's what the people who subscribe to that definition are going to see.

But again, it comes down to numbers. As there are still more male characters than female characters, and the vast majority of those characters are heterosexual, they're going to have female mates. And what's the simplest way to show how nasty, brutal and evil a villain is? By crossing that unwritten line and involving the hero's loved ones in the violence. Those loved ones will by and large, by virtue of the numbers, be female.

The "red shirt" concept is poor storytelling regardless of how it's used, I think, and creating a character (any character, male or female) just to kill off counts against the story. If something bad happens to a character within the frame of the larger story, and it's organic, that's a different story (no pun intended), so to be clear, I'm talking specifically about creating a character JUST to depict them as a victim of violence.

If, on the other hand, a writer was consistently coming up with a new girlfriend/wife/lover for their hero specifically to kill them off in horrific ways then, yeah, that writer probably has some sort of problem with women. But most of the writers, and the examples called "women in refrigerators", I think are just falling back on a simple and easy plot device.

tiggerpete
Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 03:14 AM
I think Gail Simone is more intelligent than the drones I referred to, though she was one of the driving forces behind the term, and she gained fame from popularizing the term, which lead to her career in comics.

She is a great writer, but sensationalism gets attention and it doesn't take long before someone runs with a sensational concept. Originally, the incident that the term was coined to describe was only one such in a list and while some of the examples may be valid, I think it's been blown out of proportion to the extreme.

Is there more violence against women depicted in comics? It depends on how you define violence. If it's any violent actions, then absolutely not by sheer fact that there are more male characters in comics than female characters. If you define violence as violent acts specifically against women (as unfortunately some people seem to), then of course that's what the people who subscribe to that definition are going to see.

But again, it comes down to numbers. As there are still more male characters than female characters, and the vast majority of those characters are heterosexual, they're going to have female mates. And what's the simplest way to show how nasty, brutal and evil a villain is? By crossing that unwritten line and involving the hero's loved ones in the violence. Those loved ones will by and large, by virtue of the numbers, be female.

The "red shirt" concept is poor storytelling regardless of how it's used, I think, and creating a character (any character, male or female) just to kill off counts against the story. If something bad happens to a character within the frame of the larger story, and it's organic, that's a different story (no pun intended), so to be clear, I'm talking specifically about creating a character JUST to depict them as a victim of violence.

If, on the other hand, a writer was consistently coming up with a new girlfriend/wife/lover for their hero specifically to kill them off in horrific ways then, yeah, that writer probably has some sort of problem with women. But most of the writers, and the examples called "women in refrigerators", I think are just falling back on a simple and easy plot device.

to sum up, the women in refrigerators syndrome of writing can also be called laziness, as the writer is too lazy to come up with an original way to up the stakes for the hero

LanternLight
Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 08:11 PM
Some good observations, LanternLight and Brandon Barrows.

However, I don't want to completely sell short the "Women in Refridgerators" movement. It was started by Gail Simone, who I have a whole lot of respect for, who I believe originally came up with the idea to look at the alarming proportion of female characters who seemed to be introduced as "redshirts", existing only to get killed or brutalised down the line, and how there was a trend of female characters being defined by what's done to them rather than any actual personality. Her original idea wasn't against ANY violence being committed against ANY woman. She's had violent things happen to women in her own stories too, but not in a way that classifies as "women in refridgerators".

But other commentators have misinterpreted her "Women in Refridgerators" theories and applied them to situations where they aren't really apllicable, such as The Walking Dead.

Oh don't get me wrong, I don't think that WIR doesn't exist. I agree that Alex was unnecessary, but I disagree with people that make the same claims of Joss Whedon shows, or books like Walking Dead.

wiegeabo
Thursday, June 03, 2010, 05:39 AM
"If they ever try to make us leave, we'll just take this place from them and make it ours."

That line alone pretty much exemplifies how much things have changed from our group of protagonists over all this time. No more is it about establishing something good and trusting people enough to let them join. Now it's about survival, and taking what they need to live another day.

Before getting into things, I'd like to take a moment to curse our bastard of a host for addicting me to this story and adding another book to my already long reading list.:mad:

With that out of the way, I actually did what was asked and skipped over the issues after our initial read introducing us to Walking Dead. And pretty much from the beginning of the reading, I was beating myself up as the spoiler started pouring in. Mentions of Lori and her baby, names of people I didn't recognize, not knowing how Rick and Carl found themselves in their situation, not knowing about character who Rick and Carl meet up with and are glad to see. Hell, not knowing what happened to Rick's hand! It was all rather confusing, but only mildly distracting, if that makes any sense. And hearing about these things just made me want to read the skipped issues more, rather than less, especially to see how the present situation evolved, and despite knowing the tragedies that had already come to pass.

Because, indeed, our characters are far different from what they used to be. Rick is no longer a cop. No longer trying to make life work for everyone. All that matters is Carl, because that's all he has left. All that matters.

So, because of the gap, what do we see? We see long trusted characters who no longer trust Rick (like Dale). We see people who are far more damaged then they used to be. And in a zombie apocalypse, that's saying a lot. And we see desperate grabs at civilization; Dale wanting to make a life on the farm, traveling to Washington to find the government.

Yet, despite the search for civilization, we see the last vestiges of civility ripped away. A homicidal killer in the form of a child just starting to emerge. And the only one who can do what's necessary and good for the group is another child.

Whatever innocence may have been left in our little party is far gone. Carl is no longer a happy, but scared, kid living in a bad situation. He's had to grow up, innocence lost, hope gone. In fact, when he finally gets a taste of normal life in the neighborhood in the issues after the reading, it doesn't feel real to him. It doesn't feel like it's a normal life. And Carl even seems to hate it (Although I have a feeling it's much deeper than that. Maybe a form of guilt over being happy when his mom and sister couldn't be happy too.)

And humanity? Humanity, as we define it, is gone. Dead and left behind, little more than a rotting corpse. The zombies could even be a metaphor for their humanity. Something dead and lost, but still walking around, teasing and torturing our protagonists, and deadly to them whenever they get to close to it.

Now, after finishing the reading, I had no choice but to go back and read everything that was skipped over. Despite knowing what was to come, it was still fascinating to watch it all happen. And some great characters, and jaw dropping arcs, are introduced.

And yet, despite all these horrible things we witness, Walking Dead is an addictive read. Made all the more addictive in the facts that Kirkman creates characters you want to follow, stories you want to read, and rarely gives the reader a break between books.

Unfortunately, Walking Dead does fail in one aspect. It is not one of those books that you can skip ahead in the reading. Well, you could, but why would you want to? Too much happens, even during the lulls, and the present is very much built upon the past. It's not like a superhero book where, as long as you're not coming in during the middle of an arc, you can pickup in Superman or Batman's life without missing much (although you probably wouldn't want to do that right now either;)). But, fortunately, Walking Dead is a book where you don't want to skip ahead. And you look forward to seeing what grizzly fate next awaits our characters.

BrandonBarrows
Thursday, June 03, 2010, 02:07 PM
Unfortunately, Walking Dead does fail in one aspect. It is not one of those books that you can skip ahead in the reading. Well, you could, but why would you want to? Too much happens, even during the lulls, and the present is very much built upon the past. It's not like a superhero book where, as long as you're not coming in during the middle of an arc, you can pickup in Superman or Batman's life without missing much (although you probably wouldn't want to do that right now either;)). But, fortunately, Walking Dead is a book where you don't want to skip ahead. And you look forward to seeing what grizzly fate next awaits our characters.

That's not a failure at all. A story you can skip sections of without impact is a failure because it doesn't matter what came before. No over-arcing story means there's no long term planning on the writer's part, and a series of vignettes that are unconnected posing as an ongoing series don't make particularly compelling comics as far as I'm concerned. It's the main reason I stopped reading Spider-Man, and I've heard the same reasoning from a number of people. That and the quality of stories varied wildly, but that's a separate topic.

wiegeabo
Friday, June 04, 2010, 03:32 AM
I was using the term failure satirically. Walking Dead doesn't really have an failings. :D

wiegeabo
Friday, June 04, 2010, 03:43 AM
Oh don't get me wrong, I don't think that WIR doesn't exist. I agree that Alex was unnecessary, but I disagree with people that make the same claims of Joss Whedon shows, or books like Walking Dead.

I'm going to disagree. I don't think what happened to Alex was unnecessary at all. What Major Force did to her was a defining moment for both his character and Kyle. It clearly showed the Major Force was someone you did not **** with. I mean, before, you new he was a bad guy. But this level of brutality made him a force (no pun intended) to be reckoned with.

And it became a driving point for Kyle through out the years. Before, Kyle was a rather wondering artist, aimless with no direction. But Alex's murder changed all that. It gave him a purpose and he started living life rather than wonder through it.


As for WIR syndrome being a serious problem? Yes, it's a problem and should be avoided, but that goes for any senselessly brutal death for the sake of brutality (man or woman). If it naturally drives the story, then it shouldn't be an issue. Actually, if it does that, it isn't WIR. WIR just gets bandied about due to sensationalism. If all anybody ever talks about is WIR, then all anybody is going to hear about is WIR, no matter how infrequently it might actually be happening.

Joss Whedon is probably the master of walking the good side of that fine line between jaw-dropping deaths and WIR syndrome.

JohnLees
Saturday, June 05, 2010, 12:44 AM
"If they ever try to make us leave, we'll just take this place from them and make it ours."

That line alone pretty much exemplifies how much things have changed from our group of protagonists over all this time. No more is it about establishing something good and trusting people enough to let them join. Now it's about survival, and taking what they need to live another day.

Before getting into things, I'd like to take a moment to curse our bastard of a host for addicting me to this story and adding another book to my already long reading list.:mad:

With that out of the way, I actually did what was asked and skipped over the issues after our initial read introducing us to Walking Dead. And pretty much from the beginning of the reading, I was beating myself up as the spoiler started pouring in. Mentions of Lori and her baby, names of people I didn't recognize, not knowing how Rick and Carl found themselves in their situation, not knowing about character who Rick and Carl meet up with and are glad to see. Hell, not knowing what happened to Rick's hand! It was all rather confusing, but only mildly distracting, if that makes any sense. And hearing about these things just made me want to read the skipped issues more, rather than less, especially to see how the present situation evolved, and despite knowing the tragedies that had already come to pass.

Because, indeed, our characters are far different from what they used to be. Rick is no longer a cop. No longer trying to make life work for everyone. All that matters is Carl, because that's all he has left. All that matters.

So, because of the gap, what do we see? We see long trusted characters who no longer trust Rick (like Dale). We see people who are far more damaged then they used to be. And in a zombie apocalypse, that's saying a lot. And we see desperate grabs at civilization; Dale wanting to make a life on the farm, traveling to Washington to find the government.

Yet, despite the search for civilization, we see the last vestiges of civility ripped away. A homicidal killer in the form of a child just starting to emerge. And the only one who can do what's necessary and good for the group is another child.

Whatever innocence may have been left in our little party is far gone. Carl is no longer a happy, but scared, kid living in a bad situation. He's had to grow up, innocence lost, hope gone. In fact, when he finally gets a taste of normal life in the neighborhood in the issues after the reading, it doesn't feel real to him. It doesn't feel like it's a normal life. And Carl even seems to hate it (Although I have a feeling it's much deeper than that. Maybe a form of guilt over being happy when his mom and sister couldn't be happy too.)

And humanity? Humanity, as we define it, is gone. Dead and left behind, little more than a rotting corpse. The zombies could even be a metaphor for their humanity. Something dead and lost, but still walking around, teasing and torturing our protagonists, and deadly to them whenever they get to close to it.

Now, after finishing the reading, I had no choice but to go back and read everything that was skipped over. Despite knowing what was to come, it was still fascinating to watch it all happen. And some great characters, and jaw dropping arcs, are introduced.

And yet, despite all these horrible things we witness, Walking Dead is an addictive read. Made all the more addictive in the facts that Kirkman creates characters you want to follow, stories you want to read, and rarely gives the reader a break between books.

Unfortunately, Walking Dead does fail in one aspect. It is not one of those books that you can skip ahead in the reading. Well, you could, but why would you want to? Too much happens, even during the lulls, and the present is very much built upon the past. It's not like a superhero book where, as long as you're not coming in during the middle of an arc, you can pickup in Superman or Batman's life without missing much (although you probably wouldn't want to do that right now either;)). But, fortunately, Walking Dead is a book where you don't want to skip ahead. And you look forward to seeing what grizzly fate next awaits our characters.

Great post, wieg, thanks for the contribution!

Yeah, sorry if people didn't like me jumping ahead as far as I did, and I'm sorry for any spoilers that came about as a result. But rather than getting in a habit of simply going through a series chronologically like with the previous Sandman meeting, I thought taking a big jump to later in the series would create a different dynamic. Plus, I was trying to illustrate a particular point about how drastically the characters had changed since volume 1.

There was also the issue of when to pick up the series from. There was an obvious temptation to cover the Governor arc, to let our fellow clubbers experience quite possibly the vilest villain in comic book history. But I ended up settling for volumes 9-11, partly because these were the volumes that came after the Compendium that my friend had borrowed and I didn't have access to, but mainly because I felt they covered the most interesting ground thematically. But I'm glad you were encouraged to go and read the rest of the series anyway, as it's a series that's well worth reading.

You raise a good point about the loss of humanity, and the zombies representing a mockery of that extinct way of life. That's somewhat reminiscent of the speech from Rick I quoted where he talks about how it's the decent people who couldn't turn into killers when necessary that are the zombies now. Rick didn't mean his speech to reflect the points you raise, but looking at it bearing your comments in mind, that could certainly be a subtext.

Have people been following the development of Frank Dabaront's AMC TV adaptation of The Walking Dead? I for one am really excited about it. Check here for all the latest updates:

http://blogs.amctv.com/the-walking-dead/

As for the Joss Whedon column, sorry about the delay. I'm way behind on the reading, due to being so busy this week. I'll try to get it up for Monday.