Deconstruction and comics

[dupont2005]

No your argument is flawed. Kirby created countless quality characters/concepts that dominate comics today. The same cannot be said about Moebius yes you do seem like your trolling. I doubt you even own any Moebius comics for that matter lol.

What makes Thor better than any number of super heroes created between the 30's and 60's that didn't make it? Marketing, and that's absolutely it. What makes the super hero genre better than the horror, or western, or funny animal, or crime thriller genres? Really nothing, but marketing is why they dominate comics today. Marketing and corporate warfare basically outlawing a good horror comic for a few decades.

[dupont2005]

Eh, I figure creativity is about process, about finding the best way to express what you want to express and tell the story you want to tell. In that regard, Kirby was indeed excellent. But so were Moebius, Tezuka, et al. Honestly, at that point you're so high up the list, it's like arguing which god is the most godlike.

It is, but measuring how creative something is by how popular it is doesn't fly. Popularity is more often than not the result of marketing, or being whatever the opposite of creative is, achieving broad appeal. MAUS was creative. Avengers were just more super heroes in the middle of a super hero craze.

[cliffhanger]

Yes. Because Jack Kirby sprang fully-formed from an oyster shell with his art style wholly his own. He owes nothing to Alex Raymond, Harold Foster or a host of other newspaper adventure strip artists.

Well he was influenced but he also came into a style that was all his own that is easily the most imitated whether directly or indirectly.There is a big difference between that and drawing big eyes just because disney did it.

[cliffhanger]

It is, but measuring how creative something is by how popular it is doesn't fly. Popularity is more often than not the result of marketing, or being whatever the opposite of creative is, achieving broad appeal. MAUS was creative. Avengers were just more super heroes in the middle of a super hero craze.

Retelling real events in mouse drag is creative to you?OK. And the success of Maus had nothing to do with marketing lol. you guys are hilarious.

[cliffhanger]

There's more to creativity than producing characters. Dave Sim spent the majority of his career on a single character, but he's still one of comics' most creative geniuses. (Also one of its most batshit ones, but that's another topic.)

Please tell me your not talking about that cerebus guy....please. He didnt even draw his own backgrounds seriously.

[SteveGus]

Yes. Because Jack Kirby sprang fully-formed from an oyster shell with his art style wholly his own. He owes nothing to Alex Raymond, Harold Foster or a host of other newspaper adventure strip artists.

I wonder how many Kirby fans realize that he spent more than a decade drawing romance comics in a style quite unlike his silver age Marvel style. I actually find the Young Romance material more personally interesting, because good girl art interests me, and because he drew women with a variety of faces then.

The great thing about art is that you don't get the illusion of "progress" and the accompanying rubbish. You can't credibly claim that Hal Foster or Matt Baker or Wally Wood or Al Capp were less technically skilled or somehow more primitive or unsophisticated than any current artist.

[Ed Cunard]

Retelling real events in mouse drag is creative to you?OK. And the success of Maus had nothing to do with marketing lol. you guys are hilarious.

Or, alternatively, there's nothing more creative than people with superpowers solving problems by punching.

Please tell me your not talking about that cerebus guy....please. He didnt even draw his own backgrounds seriously.

Did his own inking, though.

[Paradox]

SteveGus surely doesn't think us ignorant?:

I wonder how many Kirby fans realize that he spent more than a decade drawing romance comics in a style quite unlike his silver age Marvel style. I actually find the Young Romance material more personally interesting, because good girl art interests me, and because he drew women with a variety of faces then.

He, with Joe Simon, actually invented the romance comic, no? So, yes, I at least was aware.

[Ed Cunard]

I wonder how many Kirby fans realize that he spent more than a decade drawing romance comics in a style quite unlike his silver age Marvel style. I actually find the Young Romance material more personally interesting, because good girl art interests me, and because he drew women with a variety of faces then.

The great thing about art is that you don't get the illusion of "progress" and the accompanying rubbish. You can't credibly claim that Hal Foster or Matt Baker or Wally Wood or Al Capp were less technically skilled or somehow more primitive or unsophisticated than any current artist.

Speaking of Sim, Steve: have you seen any of the GLAMORPUSS stuff? He does an entire breakdown of the styles of all those old cartoonists, emphasizing on the craft of what they were doing. It was pretty great reading.

[SteveGus]

He, with Joe Simon, actually invented the romance comic, no? So, yes, I at least was aware.

This is Jack Kirby. Doesn't look a thing like him either...

[Kees_L]

Look I luv Moebius but Azrach is just a guy riding a flying dinosaur. He's no way on Kirby's level of creativity in creating characters. Neither is this Tezuka guy he got his style hacking from disney ffs. Astroboy????? Gimme a break lol.

If you know anything of Moebius's Arzach then you know it is practically a silent comic, with no text and no pre-disposed context. Only the word or title 'Arzach' comes with the artwork and you can't even be sure whether that's the name of the dude riding the animal or either the animal.
Obviously this way of purely graphical narration offers a fundamentally different approach and likely a different reading experience than any Stan Lee kind of superhero comic.

Which would be allowed. Since Wally Wood or Eisner would read different from Stan Lee just as fundamentally. Both as either Gaiman or Moore or Crumb or whoever would be about constructing a narrative and continuity differently than how Stan Lee would.

And please google Tezuka if you wanna be discussing his work. The volume of what he made will rival if not bluntly trump the volume to what Kirby accomplished to do in a big way, purely quantitatively speaking.

[Paradox]

cliffhanger gets dismissed:

Well he was influenced but he also came into a style that was all his own that is easily the most imitated whether directly or indirectly.There is a big difference between that and drawing big eyes just because disney did it.

Ah, well, yet another on these boards I have to write off as "doesn't know what he's talking about". Have fun.

[Johnny P. Sartre]

Yep, this conversation is going no where.

I stand with what I said and if you're (cliff) to ignorant to actually see what these creators actually created--instead of cherry picking and using those picks as a way to encompass those creators works--then put me on ignore or drop it.

[Paradox]

SteveGus just shows varied skill:

This is Jack Kirby. Doesn't look a thing like him either...

Sorta but not. I can see Kirby in the guy's face and the blanket wrinkles. Back in the day, being able to draw only in your own "style" was a bit of a drawback, not the "strength and consistency" it's seen as today.

[Charles RB]

The original cover is so much more interesting.

Okay, that's funny. It's Batman's serious face that does it.

What makes the super hero genre better than the horror, or western, or funny animal, or crime thriller genres? Really nothing, but marketing is why they dominate comics today.

Also organised fandom growing up around superhero comics, IIRC.

(Kirby also did lots of horror, western, crime, war, romance and other comics, so in an alternate universe where the Flash didn't take off, someone's saying how he's a peerless genius for Boys' Ranch)