The Early-Summer 2016 storyline in the Dick Tracy comic strip has involved an attempt by Notta Fallar to discredit Dick Tracy by making it appear as though he had engaged in an extra-marital affair with her. A sub-plot in this story has been about the increasingly strained romantic relationship between Notta and Blaze Rize.
Recently, Blaze encountered the undercover police officer Lee Ebony in her identity as "T-Bolt", and the two resumed their cordial relationship. On May 27th, Lee realized that Blaze and Notta were connected and offered to help Blaze escape from Notta by putting Blaze in touch with Dick Tracy.
I have found this story to be problematic.
First and foremost, Notta's revenge plan seems relatively toothless and ill-conceived. She arranged for Putty Puss to be released from his "nursing home" so that he could impersonate Tracy in the video that she was making. She did this despite the fact that Putty Puss is the MOST OBVIOUS SUSPECT for such an impersonation. Granted, she may have been operating under the assumption that Putty Puss would then go into hiding (or, ideally for her, be killed by Screwball), but regardless, it made the video extremely easy to debunk, which it quickly was.
Which brings up my second point of contention- Was the video the full extent of Notta's plan? It seems to have been, as readers have not been given any indication that there is a Step Two. Furthermore, by appearing as herself in the video, she immediately makes herself a target. She should have assumed that if Tracy re-captured Putty Puss (or possibly Blaze), the next step for Tracy would be to come after her. Why not just hire an actress (or an "escort") to appear in the video?
Of course, that leads to another issue here, which is What Was So Bad? It isn't as though Tracy was framed for a crime. At worst, he was implicated in an impropriety, having an intimate physical encounter with a woman who is not his wife and is a known felon. So what? If this led to Tracy being implicated in some ACTUAL crime that Notta had committed, or if it was suggested that he was covering up for her or assisting her in some criminal activity, THEN that would be grounds for public shaming and suspension from the police force. As it stands, though, he's only been accused of infidelity, and Tess clearly recognized the video as the sloppy frame-up that it was.
Another problem that I have with the story relates to how the players involved are portrayed. For example, the video gets sent to Wendy Wichel, who immediately puts it on the air. We don't see any attempt on her part to verify it's genuineness. Wendy, while she has been occasionally been portrayed as biased and sensationalist, has never been depicted as unethical. For her to make such a video public without performing her journalistic due diligence is out of character. A more compelling way for the story to unfold could have shown Wendy receiving the video and doubting its veracity, then contacting Tracy both as a warning and for comment. Then, another less scrupulous tabloid show/publication runs the story anyway (because why would Notta only send it to ONE media outlet?). This maintains Wendy's integrity but still gets the video out.
Similarly, Mayor Armstrong is depicted as an antagonist to Tracy, placing him on suspension as soon as the video becomes public. Again, the readers aren't shown any indication that Tracy has been accused of a crime or professional misconduct. Yet, Mayor Armstrong (who had previously been portrayed as supportive of Tracy and the police department) reacts immediately and harshly. Then, after the hoax is revealed, she is shown to be brooding in her office. No apology to Tracy, no acknowledgement that she overreacted. In my view, this damages the character.
Now, you might say "But a drama needs antagonists. There have to be good guys and bad guys." That's a fair point, and the Dick Tracy strip has never lacked characters who are outright Villains. The most compelling drama, though, often comes from characters who ALL think that they are doing the right thing, even though that puts them at odds. Consider this- Wendy keeps the video from going to public in order to confirm its veracity. She then gets "scooped" and loses face in the journalistic community. How does that affect her? Similarly, if Mayor Armstrong stands by Tracy in the face of public scandal, how does that affect her and her standing in the community, even if Tracy is eventually vindicated? Is she facing a difficult re-election campaign? Does she make any effort to explain to Tracy "I don't like doing this, but I have to for political reasons."? How does that affect her relationship to the police department?
These are all potentially interesting character developments that don't get explored. Frankly, I thought the whole video frame-up plotline was resolved too easily. We haven't yet seen an investigation into the corruption at the "nursing home" that allowed Putty Puss to be released, and the re-capture of Putty Puss was thuddingly anti-climactic. Personally, I was hoping that the confrontation between Putty Puss and Screwball would leave at ONE of them dead, but they were both taken into custody without a shot being fired (or either of them attempting to escape).
(There's also the matter of the ambiguity regarding Putty Puss' mental state. At times, he's barely coherent, speaking only in song lyrics. Other times, he's lucid, which begs the question of how much he is actually "crazy" and how much of it is an act. But that's never addressed.)
Which leaves T-Bolt and Blaze. As I mentioned, seeing people in the strip being depicted out of character is a common problem that I have these days. Too often, characters seem to behave based on what the story that Mike Curtis has decided he wants to tell requires of them, rather than how they had previously been portrayed. The most prominent example of this is Blaze Rize.
I get the distinct impression that Mike wants readers to see Blaze as an unfortunate victim of circumstance, caught up in schemes out of her control, manipulated by dark forces and torn between her desires for freedom and her affection for Notta (misplaced though it may be). However, this overlooks how readers were initially introduced to Blaze. She sought revenge for her sister's death, so she made a deal with a member of the criminal underworld to get the information that she wanted. She then tracked down and (presumably) murdered Flakey Biscuits. Since then, she has been beholden to other criminals (B-B Eyes, Mr. Bribery, Notta), and the readers are expected to feel sorry for her.
Well, I don't. She's shown no remorse for the murder that she committed (justified though some readers might consider it). If she REALLY wanted out of the criminal lifestyle, she could have gone to the police at any time and confessed to who she was and what she had done. But she didn't, so she doesn't have my sympathy.
Now, as of this writing (May 27th, 2016), it looks as though this is the path that T-Bolt will try to steer Blaze towards. However, at this point, I don't see who that benefits. Blaze hasn't been shown to have any special information about Mr. Bribery's whereabouts or activities. And there isn't anything significant that she could inform on Notta for that would be better than serving a sentence for murder. After all, what is Notta guilty of? Aiding and harboring an escaped fugitive? Defamation of character?
The entire relationship between T-Bolt and Blaze is problematic. During the Fall of the Black Hearts story, T-Bolt advised Blaze to get away from the criminal lifestyle. Shortly thereafter, the Black Hearts were dismantled and T-Bolt was taken into "custody". Presumably, she would have made a report to Tracy and the MCU about everything and everyone she had encountered while working for the Black Hearts.
Here's where things become dodgy-
If Lee DIDN'T tell Tracy about Blaze, then that's bad police work on her part, or dereliction of duty.
If Blaze DID tell Tracy about Blaze and Tracy failed to make the connection to the dead narcotics trafficker from several years ago, then that's bad police work on HIS part.
Keep in mind, Lee knows Blaze as "Blaze Rize". Lee addresses Blaze by her full name on May 24th, 2016. If Lee informed Tracy about her, the exchange SHOULD have gone something like-
Lee: "Another one of Bribery's higher-ups was a woman called Blaze Rize."
Tracy: "'Rize', you say? Now that's a name that rings a few bells. What did she look like?"
Lee: "Kind of petite. Short red hair, freckles, pointed chin. Multiple piercings in her ear. She tended to wear bow ties and pants."
Tracy: "All right, let's get Junior in here and work up a sketch. This could connect to a cold case..."
Now, this pre-supposes that Blaze actually DID kill Flakey Biscuits and that Tracy knows about it. But why wouldn't he? Biscuits was an important witness in a high-profile case. And when she was murdered, the FBI would (or should) have contacted Tracy to get his help in developing leads.
Of course, it's possible that Blaze DIDN'T kill Flakey Biscuits. Readers were never shown Blaze shooting the gun, and it hasn't been brought up since. It's entirely possible that Mike Curtis is keeping this revelation in his back pocket, waiting to reveal it at the time when he wants to redeem Blaze's character. Personally, I would consider that to be unsatisfying, and a bit of a cop-out. But, Mike obviously has his personal favorite characters that he wants readers to like, so he may find himself having to employ some narrative gymnastics to make that feasible.
Which brings me back to my point of character and motivation. At this point, I'm not sure what many of these people want. Notta wanted to publicly embarrass Dick Tracy, which she did, however briefly. Is that it? Does she not have a grander scheme in play? Blaze wants to escape her criminal life and the people who are manipulating her. Well, then why doesn't she do that? She's allowed to leave Notta's house to go to the laundromat, she could just not go back. "But she's in love with Notta!", you might say. Well, boo-hoo; Blaze has to deal with it.
And what does Lee want? Is her desire to protect Blaze (out of some poorly-explained sense of kinship) going to override her sense of duty as a police officer? Is there more to it than that? Will ANY of this aid Dick Tracy (our hero, America's greatest detective) in his goal of capturing Mr. Bribery?
It seems like the answer is "no". In fact, it seems like T-Bolt revealing to Blaze that she has a connection to Dick Tracy and the MCU will put T-Bolt's cover identity in jeopardy, rather unnecessarily. T-Bolt couldn't just follow Blaze back to Notta's home? Or arrange for her to be followed?
At this point, I don't have a lot of optimism. I find myself getting excited at the beginning of storylines, then quickly becoming less interested as the characters' actions make less and less sense to me.
I was intrigued by the tease about Haf-and-Haf, though...
No comments:
Post a Comment