Researching the competition; or, why other books about visual rhetoric & composition demonstrate the necessity of one like mine.
When demonstrating the importance of historical context, it's considered bad form to get it wrong. For example:
Hal Jordan? Not the first Green Lantern.
Sinestro? Doesn't appear in Emerald Dawn.
Doctor Doom? Not the ruler of Latvia.
Wolverine? Not HIV positive. (How would that even work?)
"Raz Alcor"? Liam Neeson has two names in Batman Begins and neither one of them is that.
Since I'm not sure where to begin with this—I could just as easily complain about shoddy research and methodology as go full nerd—I'll come to a full stop and change the subject. A student essay addressed an offhand remark I made in class, about Dr. Manhattan being busted by Dateline NBC for sexing up underage woman, and inspired me to produce this:
More on that front shortly.*
*And positing the existence of DC characters in a Marvel comic in a post about somebody else's serial inaccuracies is, likely, a bad idea. But at least I know I'm wrong here. Those other guys? Not so much.