When I was at Lerner Newspapers, I wrote a column on the most maligned superhero ever, Aquaman. I decried the fact that Aquaman had gone in and out of press, while other superheroes stayed relevant and even expanded their presence onto the big screen. As another insult, Aquaman writers gave him a harpoon for a hand in an effort to jazz up the character.
Recently, on the Howard Stern radio show, while staffer Steve Brandano gave a report on San Diego Comic Con, Stern mocked Aquaman saying that none of the attendees would want to be Aquaman if they could be any superhero. Then Stern stated that Aquaman was useless and couldn't do anything to help the water problem caused by the oil spill.
I was surprised to hear that from Stern, a noted superhero and comics fan. I would think the usually-creative Stern could see the potential in this for Aquaman. Stern fell victim to the same narrow-minded thinking which has caused the Aquaman character to stagnate while others flourish.
The BP oil spill could actually make a great story (and storyline) for Aquaman. It could show Aquaman actually solving world problems instead of just "telecommunicating with fish" as Stern mocked. Aquaman could be shown using his powers differently (perhaps even with a new twist).
I realize Stern's joking was just a throwaway addition to the Comic Con report, but still he dropped the ball on this one, the same way Aquaman's writers have dropped the ball. Am I the only one who sees the potential in Aquaman? Am I going to have to write the next chapter in the life of Aquaman?