Saturday, April 2, 2016

FIRE FROM HEAVEN

"True imagination is not fanciful daydreaming; it is fire from heaven."—
Ernest Holmes

It's been a while since I did one of my Imagination 101 writing workshops but I've finally cleared the schedule and set one up for July 15—17 in Kingston, New York. If you've got a creative fire burning in your soul, if you're hungry to write comics or animation or some great fantasy epic, I invite you to join us for three days of unbridled imagination. The details are right here. (And if you can't make the workshop, I also work with writers one-on-one.  See?  All the bases are covered.)  

77 comments:

  1. Kingston, New York is not Detroit, Michigan. You may need to buy an atlas.

    Its funny, I just found out that The Killing Joke is becoming an animated film. I can't help but wonder if that is why Going Sane's animated film pitch was turned down. Wouldn't that be funny, given the original premise for Kraven's Last Hunt being a Batman story was rejected so there wouldn't be 2 Batman GNs in one year?

    Jack

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the way it goes, I guess. I still hope that, one day, we can do GOING SANE as an animated movie.

      Delete
    2. As good as THE KILLING JOKE is, I prefer GOING SANE. I think it does a better job humanizing the Joker. It might be the ONLY story that truly humanizes him. That's the kind of task only a crazy writer would take on--but I'm glad you did!

      BTW, you and Jack will appreciate this. I read some of Gerber's early Man-Thing stuff on Marvel Unlimited last night. It was okay, but I gather the really good stuff is later. This is mostly Man-Thing getting involved with some kind of cult trying to defend the world from a demonic portal.

      I also read Gerber's final published work, THE INFERNAL MAN-THING. I did not expect that ending...

      --David

      Delete
    3. Thanks, as always, David, for your appreciation of GOING SANE.

      Re: Gerber. Keep going with the MAN-THING stories. I suspect you'll really enjoy them. As you know, some of my favorite comics ever.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, I haven't gotten to any of the Ploog stuff yet. I'll keep going!

      Best,

      David

      Delete
    5. I just straight up think that The Killing Joke is overrated. Even without comparisons. Grant Morrison's belief on it is funny though... and so wrong. Funny.

      Man-Thing's stuff starts picking up once they ditch the sword and sorcery stuff for the most part, which is after the FEAR issues, and I would say around Man-Thing #3, and starts to cook with gar at #5 of the eponymous series.

      Jack

      Delete
  2. In the new Weirdworld series there is a ruler named Jennifer Kale who rules the army of the Man-Things. That made me smile. Also, DC has announced that they will reveal the actual identity of The Joker in the new Rebirth reboot. I'm not sure how I feel about that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure, either, Douglas. I guess the proof, as they say, will be in the pudding.

      Delete
  3. Now, before I go to sleep, I will incite more nerd rage against me after I said the Killing Joke was overrated. While I did honestly and truly like Dark KNight Returns, I believe the Daredevil story, "Born Again" to be the best and most adult Frank Miller story. If the world followed my lead, that would be the one given to every person who wants to get into comics.

    Of course, while we are on the topic of Man-Thing, stories in that series like "Kids Night Out," "A book Burns in Citrusville," "A Candle for St. Cloud," and "Laughing Dead" showed the 70s had stories that were just as adult and well crafted as the so called coming of adult comics in the 80s. They were simply passed over for being allegorical or being blunt ab out the issue, yet still including the fantastic. Oddly enough that very thing would be applauded in Gaiman's Sandman. Strange. Why are comic readers so self-loathing in such respects? It almost seems like we want them to be branded as childish, especially since every decade seems to have "the comic series that made comics for adults."

    Jack

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you, Jack: Miller's work with Mazachelli (I hope I spelled that right) was fantastic. Powerful and emotional. I also loved their BATMAN YEAR ONE.

      Just reading the titles of those MAN-THING stories brings back warm memories of reading them. All classics.

      Delete
  4. I liked it better back in the day when they just made comics. Not comics for adults, or kids or left handed people. Just great stories told in a way that appealed to anyone who read them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know if a comic book CAN appeal to everyone, Douglas, any more than a movie or TV show can. Nothing wrong with kids comics, adult comics, a variety of stories and genres aimed at different audiences. That said, I think your point is right on the money in regards to mainstream comics. We definitely need more comics that appeal to a broad audience. That's the way Lee, Kirby, Ditko and the rest did it back in the 60's. Kids were reading them, college students were reading them, and everyone was enjoying them.

      Delete
    2. That time never really existed, because even back in the 50s EC comics wrote for adults, and even tried marketing to them after their issues with the Senate hearings.

      The fact is that no medium is aiming for only a wide audience, they all diversify. What's more there are some stories that are just above some age groups caring, I don't think most "adult" comics land there.. but work like Will Eisner's post-Spirit? Absolutely not for kids.

      As for broad appeal... well, that ssems to be what comics are doing and are losing money. I don't think it is the goal though, it is the methodology.

      It appears that all they do is scour the internet looking for what people say... mostly people who don't read comics. Then they write in a sort of condescending way or make it too obvious what they do. This is all in place of more common types of business practices, because apparently the term, "the comics business IS a business" is only applicable when fans complain and not when it comes to saving the industry.

      Okay... I got a tad off base there, I'll admit.

      The point is that what they should do is pick an age group to write to in terms o literacy. Usually tanagers are that people choose, and for good reason. Then you have other books in smaller number with adult aimed stories.

      At that point you just focus on writing good stories. People of all ages like good stories.

      I mentioned Daredevil Born Again, which is clearly an adult story. However, it ran in the normal DD book, and I doubt that would have happened if they thought it was only for adults.

      The point is while specializing stories is fine, but you have to realize that it won't sell as well. To keep it a float you need a baseline, usually at a teenage literacy level.

      Jack

      Delete
    3. Jack, I'm totally agreed that BORN AGAIN is a more 'mature' work than DARK KNIGHT RETURNS. Whether that makes it better or not, I don't know. It depends on what kind of mood I'm in. Miller definitely utilizes the nature of the respective characters in a way that accomplishes his goals to the fullest.

      I've been thinking about this a lot since the DD Netflix show, and I'm convinced that Matt Murdock is the most 'adult' character in mainstream comics. I don't mean that his stories are written in such a way to exclude younger readers, but merely that his thought process comes closest to that of living, breathing adults in the 'real' world.

      Take the specificity of his religious convictions, for instance. Matt is genuinely Catholic, and not the kind of Catholicism that occasionally pops up when a writer wants to give a character a crisis of faith. He is profoundly Catholic, with all the psychological, social and theological trappings that implies, the good and the bad.

      And while most heroes fall in the camp of either believing in the system or believing it's failed, Matt takes a much more complicated approach because he works on both sides of it.

      If Daredevil catches a criminal, whether it's Mr. Hyde or the Punisher, he'll be there the next day to defend them as Matt Murdock. So when he's lecturing Frank Castle about the system, there's an authenticity about it that other heroes lack. Matt is the one who will actually wade through the blood, sweat and tears to make the system work the way he believes it can and should, rather than having his man-servant cancel his appointments and sleep in.

      Of course, that specificity also tends to narrow the scope of the stories he fits in. Batman has a much broader template writers can work with.

      Take the religious question. There are some stories where Bruce Wayne appears to have vague, lapsed religious affiliations, some where he appears agnostic or indifferent, and others where his thought process about God is better detailed (ABSOLUTION is a standout in that regard.) But none of them are held as the definitive take.

      And of course, Bruce Wayne doesn't tend to deal with the 'civilian' side of the criminal question. The only exception to this has been his continued involvement in Harvey Dent's rehabilitation, and a really cool Scarface story from B:TAS. But Bruce Wayne gets to make a choice, where Matt doesn't. Defense work is his job and his calling.

      And just to be clear, I'm not arguing whether specificity or generality make a character 'better' or 'worse.' Batman and Daredevil just fill very different needs, and both are, in my opinion, the best at what they are.

      BTW, JMD, there's a priest who pops up from time to time in the DAREDEVIL Netflix series, and I think you'd really appreciate the kind of conversations he has with Matt about religion. They have a fascinating talk about whether the devil exists in the first season, and there's a funeral sequence in the second that's really poignant.

      Also, I must say I've always loved the paradox of a devout Catholic opposing evil by taking the form of a devil!

      Best,

      David





      Delete
    4. Great thoughts, David, as always!

      Was Miller the first one to bring the Catholic angle into the book? Because that was a huge expansion of the character.

      Delete
    5. I want to say yes, though I think his Irish heritage might have been mentioned previously? I can't recall if Battlin' Jack Murdock had ever been depicted with a crucifix in the early tales.

      --David

      Delete
    6. I suspect not in any stories that Stan wrote. I don't recall him ever getting into any specifics about character's religions.

      Delete
    7. I definitely don't think Stan would have specified--which is probably why Aunt May is now officially Protestant and unofficially Jewish.

      I was thinking more along the lines of one of the artists casually incorporating a crucifix on Matt's father in a flashback sequence, since Irish heritage was assumed if not explicitly stated.

      That said, I've googled images of Battlin' Jack Murdock from the early stories, and I don't see any crucifixes.

      --David

      Delete
    8. Well, it's always been implied that Matt got his heavy Catholicism from his mother the nun.

      And, yes, I've always seen Aunt May as the ultimate Jewish mother.

      Delete
    9. I think you're right about it being heavily implied that Matt inherited his Catholic faith from his mother, perhaps as a way of clinging to her memory, since she left him while he was still a baby.

      The most recent story about Sister Maggie, written by Mark Waid, revealed that she suffered from postpartum depression and left her family for fear of hurting Matt. It's wonderfully told, and got a lot of press at the time for handling the issue with sensitivity and respect. Maggie isn't disparaged in any way, but is seen as a hero for understanding her limitations and dedicating her life to others.

      There's an excellent mini-series titled BATTLIN' JACK MURDOCK by Zeb Wells from the early 2000s. I'm ashamed to say I don't recall the details, but I think Jack had a love/hate relationship with God and Catholicism, since Maggie's reason for leaving him in the series was that they had sinned by conceiving Matt. I can't swear by that, as it's been several years since I read it. I'll have to give it another look.

      --David

      Delete
    10. It's all pretty fascinating, isn't it? And, for all that, my favorite DD is the laughing, joking Daredevil of the Lee-Romita/Lee-Colan era. Of course, the very existence of Mike Murdock proves that Matt was heading for a massive crack-up.

      Delete
    11. Matt's crack-up wasn't even that far away from the Mike Murdock saga. He decided to stop being Matt Murdock and only be Daredevil in the early days of the Roy Thomas years.

      Its funny that people talk about Matt's joking around like it ended with Elektra's first appearance.

      Daredevil still would joke in the Miller years. He would crack wise during the Nocenti years, which were pretty dark in their own right. Even Bendis run had Matt with a bit of a sarcastic streak. Forgetting to make Matt a bit laid back and having at least a bit of a sense of humor is one of the worst mistakes a writer can make.

      Personally, I think Matt's Catholicism was enforced by his father because of HIS memory of Maggie. Weirdly though, whether the nun was really Matt's mother was left ambiguous for a while, remember Daredevil was going through some serious stuff when Maggie was introduced.

      That Waid story and Battlin' Jack are worth the reads.

      And Battlin' Jack wasn't the early 2000s, it was around 2007-08.

      Jack

      Delete
  5. I never considered Aunt May as Jewish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's all in your POV. Tom DeFalco and I have had conversations where he's related to Peter's Catholic guilt and I've related to his Jewish guilt.
      And that's what makes universal characters!

      Delete
    2. What about relating to the incredibly WASPy phrase, "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility." That may be the Waspiest phrase ever.

      All that having been said,Aunt May reminds me a lot of my Grandmother. There is a point i the Jewish column. However, I once made a joke to a friend of mine about my grandma doing the stereotypical, "Eat, eat, your too skinny" thing, and he told me his Polish grandmotehr did too. Come to think of it my paternal grandmother had a few stereotypical Jewish elements with my father and his siblings. She was German... and kind of Polish (its a whole thing). Maybe it is more of a generational thing, and Jews were just more open about it. I mean think about, until the latter half of the 20th century there were a lot of ways to die or get severely injured beyond repair. Not to mention food being less abundant.

      Maybe this is a larger concept in a similar vein as the idea of being truly Jewish is being the New York definition of Jewish.

      This seems to have opened a whole sociological can of worms here.

      Believe this though, there is definitely at least 50% WASP in Peter Parker.


      Jack

      Delete
    3. So does anybody know Steve Ditko's ethnicity and background?

      Delete
    4. According to this http://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=Ditko its English, Scottish, or Welsh.

      OF course, the question is how much of the character Ditko had a hand in. I read one of the very very very few talks he did about Spider-Man. IN it he mentioned all the things that were his idea. None of them pertained to personality or life situation.

      Jack

      PS wasn't a warped view of the whole power and responsibility thing how England filled their museums?

      Delete
    5. Yeah, but Ditko had a heavy hand in plotting those stories and thus delineating Peter's character. I'd love to know how much of himself he put in there: essentially where Stan left off and Steve began (and vice-versa).

      Delete
    6. Ditko didn't start with the heavy plotting until 20 issues or so in. Aunt May was pretty defined by that point.

      I would have yo go back and look to see what Aunt May did. It is especially complicated since Stan Lee had a history of adding and changing dialogue and thought balloons that MAY or MAY not have been intended.

      Jack

      Delete
    7. Ditko didn't get credit for plotting till 20 or so issues in, but I'm sure he had a very significant hand in the plotting of the book, just as he did with Doctor Strange.

      Delete
    8. But, how do you know? It's very likely Lee wanted to wait until he could establish all the characters. There is a really early Daredevil story that points out that Lee only provided the dialogue.

      Characterization was more Lee's bread and butter anyway.. That's what we are talking about. And it doesn't account for Lee's habit of not paying attention to the plans when it came to write those words.

      Of course we never really know because Ditko refuses to say one way or the other.

      That does remind me of a point about Daredevil and the X-men though. Namely, why two comics created by Lee, but at the bottom wrung and didn't reach highest popularity in the 80s and only one remained uninterrupted in publishing. It is really very simple

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-tDPbfrvNI


      Jack

      Delete
    9. In all fairness, doting mothers are universal, so I'm not sure how it became associated so strongly with Jewish culture. But for whatever reason, that's the association I tend to make. (Most recently, you have Beverly Goldberg.)

      Guilt is also pretty universal, so it's kind of funny that it's a quality everyone seems to claim as their own. Maybe it's because guilt is such a lonely burden to bear, and you can't imagine that any other culture or person feels it to the same extent.

      I think Brian Michael Bendis is Jewish, and wrote the Parkers with that in mind in ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN.

      All this said, I have no problem with the Parkers being Protestant. I've always seen myself and my family in their values as well.

      This 'controversy' would have made for a good conversation between Jerry and George on Seinfeld.

      --David

      Delete
    10. Good points, David—and now I want to see that SEINFELD episode!

      Delete
    11. One of the points you make, Jack, about Stan not paying attention to the plans even when someone else plotted the story, is one of the reasons I think those books are so interesting. There's an incredible push-pull between what Kirby and Ditko are putting on the page and what Stan is writing over that. Sometimes two different stories fusing together into something new.

      Delete
    12. There are a lot of words I would use to describe my mother, but I don't think doting is among them. Loving? Sure, but not doting.

      For that matter George Castanza's Mother was sure as Hell not doting.

      We seemed to have wandered from the more interesting point, that Spidey's whole catch phrase shows that he would be motivated more by duty than by guilt.

      Just remember though, Ben and Richard, absolutely WASPs. No one can be as square as Pete was in those early years and not be a WASP.

      Jack

      Delete
    13. I always saw Peter as Jewish when I wrote him, but, as noted, DeFalco always saw him as Catholic...the mark of a classic, and infinitely relatable, character.

      Delete
    14. It sounds like neither of you were writing him as Catholic or Jewish, but rather as yourselves. You just view those aspects as major parts of what defines you.

      I have a very different view of Spider-Man. He is the character that got me into comics. Despite the fact that other characters usurped him as my favorite, I still care about what happened. I was glad when he and MJ got back together in Amazing Spider-Man vol.2 #50. I was angry when the marriage was undone. I realized recently when I read a back issue I picked p that as lame as this sounds... I think of him as an old friend. IN the end, maybe that is what all the great writers REALLY view him as.

      Makes sense, he is often described as an every-man.

      Jack

      Delete
    15. Totally agree, Jack. I look at Peter not as a character but an old and dear friend.

      Delete
    16. So what your saying is that i should be the next writer on Spider-Man? No, no... okay, you twisted my arm. I'll do it. I'll even do it for less than they want, but only on the condition the comics come out on time.

      Go talk to your pals at marvel and tell them I'll do it. Man, you sure can nag a guy into submission. You win, Dematteis.

      I will say, I only occasional pick up Spider-man these days. After they undid the marriage it just didn't feel like Peter anymore. However, when I read your back-up in #700 and "Renew Your Vows," I thought to me self,"I missed you Peter. It's good to have you back."


      Jack

      Delete
    17. I am not a fan of the new hi-tech Spidey with all his money. I really didn't like when he was Doc Ock for a year or so. As I get older I find writers that I don't care for and just stop buying anything with their name on it. I also have writers I adore and search for their work outside of the two big publishers.
      A good example would be Sam Humphries. His work on the now defunct Avengers A.I. led me to Planet Hulk and, quite possibly the new incarnation of Green Lantern coming with REBIRTH. His event comic The Black Vortex was the first time in many years I bought an entire run of an event comic.

      Delete
    18. Haven't read any of the "hi-tech Spidey" stuff, Douglas—but I do have tremendous respect for Dan Slott. I think he's a terrific write and a very nice guy.

      Don't know Sam Humphries' work. Sounds like it's worth checking out!

      Delete
    19. I recommend Avengers A.I. to start. Great series that deserved many more issues.

      Delete
    20. Personally, I haven't read my ol' pal Spidey regularly (with a few very minor exceptions) since a little after they undid the marriage. As much as I head it, it wasn't that. They just felt like they were pushing the youth button a little hard, with the first page of the comic reading, "It is so unfair to show me macking on this chick."

      The whole youth angle they tried so hard to get with the dissolution of the marriage seemed self-defeated with the choice of writers.

      While, yes they were talented, they were also all in their 40s and 50s. So when they are told to really make it seem like he's young, it just came off as forced. Peter just came off as a caricature of who he was... and Mark Waid wrote one of those stories I believe. It just seemed that they wanted an idea more than a character.

      The only reason it worked for Gerry Conway to do it was because he was 18 at the time. Its not to say a middle-aged man can't write a younger character, but they should probably pump the brakes a bit.

      The few issues I picked up here and there didn't really feel like Peter (or Betty Brant for that matter). As I always say though, its their character and they can do what they want with him, and I can not buy it.

      Personally, I would recommend "Renew Your Vows." That is classic Peter Parker. Another good comics, though before One More Day, is a Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man comic by Peter David here is a link to a review http://spiderfan.org/comics/reviews/friendly_neighborhood_spiderman/005.html .

      I personally disagree with the writer's analysis, but it has a description of the plot

      Jack

      Delete
  6. I think it would be frustrating to put that much work into the art and plotting of a book only to have someone come along and add dialogue that you did not see when setting up the story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it WAS frustrating for Kirby and Ditko. That said, Stan, as both scripter and editor, saw the final responsibility for the story in his hands. And the tension between the sometimes opposing points of view is one of the things that made those stories great.

      In the end, it's about the relationship between the scripter and the plotter. When I work with Giffen, Keith knows, and appreciates, that I'm going to take the story in some unexpected directions. He likes that and then builds on it, surprising me in return. It's one of the things that's made our partnership work all these years.

      Delete
    2. Well yeah, but you two have that mind meld, shared brain thingie from together for so many years on such excellent comics. :)

      Delete
    3. Thanks!

      I think Stan and Jack had a mind meld, too, although it may have been more Unconscious than conscious! You couldn't make comics that great without having that kind of deep connection on some level.

      Delete
    4. In the end, that's probably a good thing. Stan knew characterization better than either Kirby or Ditko. I've read both of their non-Lee work. The characters are never as engaging.

      That isn't a slam on Ditko or Kirby... except for Kirby's Captain America. Lee just get people and how they tick.

      Jack

      Delete
    5. I don't think I've ever read anything Ditko wrote himself. Kirby, on the other hand, was a unique and idiosyncratic writer. His style could be off-putting, but when he was cooking—as he was on the Fourth World material—he was a powerful and moving writer. Could he do real people the way Stan could? Never. Kirby's stuff was very heightened and strange, but once you clicked into it, it took on a kind of mad, inspired poetry. At least it did on his best work.

      Stan was a very human writer, both in the direct emotions and the humor. His characters were always relatable and grounded. He had the knack—and adding that knack to the the brilliant things that Kirby and Ditko did took the work to a whole other level.

      Delete
    6. Kirby didn't create characters, he created archetypes. There is nothing wrong with that at all. He was all about the big picture. I like Kirby, but if I describe the Fourth World I describe the conflict, the events.

      Kirby's Captain America is a perfect example, especially since you can compare it to Lee's. There is a scene I remember very well from Lee's run after Kirby left. Captain America, for five pages, walks and reflects on the world he lived in and the one he lives in. He thinks about what he did and what he could have done different. Kirby had noe of that.

      He was too big picture, Kirby needed Lee to break it down to a human level. The very first appearance of the Fantastic Four was on a memo where he described the characters. The characters.

      Ditko's work tended to be more cerebral, he even would reject the concept of making decisions with any emotion involved. Often, he wanted to prove some point.

      There is nothing wrong with either of those concepts, it does mean that character was probably an after thought. Not where the majority of the effort was.

      Most importantly, Lee has a sense of drama on a primal level.


      Jack

      Delete
    7. Well, I don't think you can get more "primal drama" than Kirby. That said, we're lucky we had both of them...and that Stan is still with us.

      Delete
    8. I don't mean the drama was primal, I mean a primal, understanding. On the genetic scale he understands it.

      I'm especially glad Stan is still with us, because he was born the same year as my grandfather, and I don't want him going anywhere.

      The lack of use of use of Stan Lee for Captain America's 75th Anniversary is baffling.

      Jack

      Delete
    9. Stan's the same age as my father-in-law and I'm delighted that they're both still on the planet and charming as could be!

      Delete
    10. Fortunately though, for the majority of his work Stan plotted AND scripted, so the miscommunications were probably rare...ish.


      Jack

      Delete
    11. Co-plotted and scripted. Just about every story from every Marvel artist of the era underscores that point. Stan may have come up with the basic beats, but the artists fleshed out the stories, adding many details. Doesn't take away from Stan's achievements, but that's the way it was.

      Delete
    12. If you've never seen this CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN interview with Stan, form 1966, it's a good one where he gets into the mechanics of how the stories are put together. He talks specifically about Kirby doing most of the plotting on the book.

      http://kirbymuseum.org/blogs/dynamics/2012/05/08/stan-lee-interview-from-castle-of-frankenstein-12-1968/

      Delete
  7. I love Castle OF FRankenstein. Still have a few of them in a box somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wasn't a regular reader, but I remember buying that Stan issue off the rack in my local Brooklyn candy store when I was a kid.

      Delete
    2. Random thoughts about Stan's chemistry with artists on various books:

      --Ditko injected Spider-Man with an essential awkwardness, but I can't say I like the direction the book went as Ditko took more and more control.

      I think Jack is dead-on about Ditko and emotion, with the most glaring example being when Peter cold-bloodedly picked a fight with Betty to push her into Ned's arms and be done with it.

      If the book had continued in that direction, I doubt Spider-Man would be such a popular character. It was the Lee/Romita Sr. chemistry that perfected the tone of AMAZING SPIDER-MAN.

      They're the ones who made Peter a truly likeable character, so much so that you understand why the college gang liked to hang out with him even though he had a tendency to flake out on them for reasons unknown.

      Lee/Romita's Peter is a social creature, and the tension comes from having to balance his secret life with his relationships. And Peter is not a rational person, but tends to react emotionally to every crisis he finds himself in.

      Also, I think history has kind of shown that readers and audiences don't like Peter when he's being intentionally dickish. So it's understandable when he basically tells Harry to go to hell because Gwen died like five minutes ago, but not so much when he puts himself in a web cocoon and cuts his ties to family and friends because of robo-parents and clone stuff. And audiences tend to sympathize with Peter turning his back on the mugging in SPIDER-MAN 2, but not using Gwen to make MJ jealous in SPIDER-MAN 3.

      So as much as I respect Ditko's role in Spider-Man's creation, I've got to say the foundational aspects of the character aren't all there until Romita Sr.

      Because I tend to think with Ditko, we'd have gotten a lot characters intentionally alienating themselves from the world, rather than trying to find their place in it.

      --Lee and Kirby.

      Let's start with THOR, where Lee's grounded approach would have absolutely sunk the book. The first ten or so issues of THOR are terrible. The premise of a lame doctor who can transform into a god is promising, but he spends his time fighting aliens and commies. The problem is that Lee doesn't approach Thor as a real god. He's just another super-guy, and the magic hammer could just as easily be a scientific invention.

      The Kirby backup features are when things start cooking, the ones where he delves into Asgardian history. And then something weird happens and the book gets good.

      With absolutely no explanation whatsoever, Odin appears and we not only find out that Donald Blake IS a god, but that he's ALWAYS been one. Now you're cooking with gas!

      FF is probably the book where Lee and Kirby just seemed to click from the very beginning and get better for their entire run. Then of course you get the rift over Silver Surfer's true origin, and the very creative tension that makes them so brilliant tears them apart. But good grief, the first hundred issues of FF are the most consistently brilliant material they ever produced.

      Now getting back to Jack's point about Stan's knack for characterization and drama, I think ASM wasn't ever the best-written Lee book, but Spider-Man is his best character.

      --David


      Delete
    3. Spider-Man put himself in a web-cocoon and cut himself off from his family? What idiot wrote that?!

      Oh. Right. : )

      Very good points, David.

      I think, at its peak, Thor may have been...at least in terms of sheer imagination, sheer Kirbyosity, if you will...the best Marvel book of the 60's. Spider-Man (and, as I think you know, Lee-Romita is my favorite era, not to take anything away from Ditko) was character-driven storytelling at its finest and FF at its best combined great characterization with cosmic imagination. A perfect brew.

      Delete
    4. Hey, I wasn't going to name any names. :)

      THOR and FF strike me as very difficult books to write. I'm not saying writing Spider-Man is EASY, mind you, but I think the character is so well-defined that you can plug him into nearly any situation, and then let things play out from there. You don't have to come up with something brilliant to make the story work. He goes out to buy milk for Aunt May, hijinks ensue. Typical Parker luck!

      But with FF and THOR, brilliance IS the formula. You have to put the characters in situations worthy of Kirby's cosmic scope.

      It's kind of like the difference between writing SEINFELD and STAR TREK, or at least that's the way I imagine it. I guess I'll never know for sure until Marvel asks me to write them!

      --David

      Delete
    5. And now I want to write a SEINFELD-STAR TREK crossover comic:
      "City on the Edge of Constanza!"

      Delete
    6. Kirk falls in love with Elaine, fakes bar credentials because she's going through a phase where she's into lawyers, and calls himself Denny Crane. Spock makes up reasons why Elaine must die because even a Vulcan has limits, but "Denny Crane" comes up with a more creative solution, inciting events that will lead her to be arrested for failing to aid a carjack victim.

      The timeline is not changed in any way whatsoever....

      --David

      Delete
    7. Perfect! But you forgot the part where George eats some bad sushi, goes mad and almost destroys time itself! It's only a heroic stomach-pumping by both McCoy and Kramer that saves Creation!

      Delete
    8. The Kramer/McCoy matchup is GENIUS!

      --David

      Delete
    9. We're an amazing team, David: I see a major motion picture here!

      Delete
    10. You call Paramount, I'll call NBC!

      --David

      Delete
    11. What about having the Denny Crane persona being based on stereotypes Kirk believes to be true of the era in human history?

      Just a thought.

      Jack

      Delete
    12. That's a very serious, insightful and intelligent idea, Jack. It has no place in a story as stupid as the one David and I are talking about!
      : )

      Delete
    13. Not if Kirk doesn't learn a lesson. I mean he's hanging around with the Seinfeld crew... they don't exactly exude nobility. Maybe they even p[rove him right.

      Jack

      Delete
    14. Okay, that's in, too! This is going to be one amazing comic book! : )

      Delete
  8. When you have a minute, if you want to read something fascinating about the editor of Castle of Frankenstein, Calvin Beck; go here
    http://www.bmonster.com/horror29.html
    Reality is always stranger than fiction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Douglas: I'll check it out!

      Delete
    2. That was pretty fascinating, Douglas. Thanks for sharing it!

      Delete
    3. BTW, it occurs to me my comments might be misconstrued as minimizing the accomplishments of writers on ASM, which would NEVER be my intention.

      Maybe it would be more accurate to compare Spider-Man to tv detectives like Adrian Monk, where a lot of the joy comes from the character's reaction to the world around them.

      Peter Parker has always been my favorite Marvel character, and it really didn't matter what he gets thrown into, I just enjoy seeing him react. There are, to my mind, very few 'bad' Spider-Man stories, and the ones I'm not fond of generally involve him acting in a way I perceive to be out of character.

      I also think Spider-Man has stories whose brilliance equal anything that's ever been done with superheroes, like KRAVEN'S LAST HUNT, "The Boy Who Collected Spider-Man," the Sin-Eater Saga, "Nothing Can Stop the Juggernaut," the Harry Osborn Saga, "The Gift," THE LOST YEARS, and too many others to mention.

      Just wanted to clear that up, in the unlikely event that my passion for the character wasn't documented well enough! :)

      --David

      Delete
    4. Clear as a bell, David! No worries!

      Delete