Early nominations for 2007 Hall of Fame

[dlw66]

For consideration (in no particular order) -- feel free to amend, add, give a concern, etc.

Jack Kirby
Don Heck
Jim Shooter
Roger Stern
Tom Palmer
Sal Buscema
Neal Adams
Kurt Busiek
David Michelinie
John Byrne
Al Milgrom
Steve Epting
Rich Buckler

[The Night Phantom]

I’ll repost what I’ve already said in favor of Kirby and Stern:

nightphantom said:

[…] Jack Kirby. He’s co-creator; he remained with the series over the span of several defining issues; his work certainly has presence and style; and he even spills out of the artist category and into the plotter category due to the way he and inaugural inductee Stan Lee worked together. Jack is a tremendous choice.

[…]

How about Roger Stern? His lengthy run on Avengers brought in several recruits, including the amazingly efficient Captain Marvel, the mainstay She-Hulk, the classic Sub-Mariner, and the Avenger-you-love-to-hate Doctor Druid. He gave some resolution to Hank Pym’s departure from superheroing, ushered in the West Coast Avengers, made the Wasp into one of the team’s best leaders ever, and gave us the Vision’s takeover of the world and the Masters of Evil’s ultimate revenge. Whether plotting long arcs like the Olympus storyline or simply scripting characterization, Stern’s run was spot-on.

I’ve also commented on the problem of Byrne’s candidacy:

nightphantom said:

dlw66 said:

Boy, as good as John Byrne was on the Nefaria and Wundagore stories, that mess he made of the Vision will surely polarize some fans.

The Vision and, to a lesser extent, the Scarlet Witch (both in West Coast, natch). In my opinion, his writing on Avengers proper about that same time is somewhat lackluster and could therefore also hurt his case—apathy, this time, as opposed to controversy.

Busiek and Palmer are two creators I very much want to see in the Hall of Fame, but I’d prefer to see Kirby and Stern there first.

[redstatecap]

Stern and Byrne should go in together.

RSC

[dlw66]

So far creators honored are: Stan Lee, Roy Thomas, George Perez, Steve Englehart, and John Busema.

I would like someone to make a case for Kurt Busiek. A good follow-up would be to make his case over a David Michelinie, Jim Shooter, or Roger Stern.

Similarly, I'd like someone to give us some thoughts on John Byrne over Don Heck, or vice versa.

I would work under the assumption that Tom Palmer (my opinion) is the next strongest candidate to go in, based on overall body of work, tenure on the title, association with Thomas and Buscema, and work on specific relevant issues/arcs.

I just need someone to pair with him -- that's where you folks come in !

[Shiryu]

Al Milgrom ;D ;D ;D

Jokes aside, I think both Busiek and Stern should be there, they made the Avengers great(er) without resorting to team disbanding, costumes changed for the sake of changing and pointless stories. Artwise, Kirby definitely deserves it. He wasn't on the book for long, compared to people like Byrne, Perez or Buscema, but he gave the team the starting push.

[The Night Phantom]

dlw66 said:

I would like someone to make a case for Kurt Busiek. A good follow-up would be to make his case over a David Michelinie, Jim Shooter, or Roger Stern.

I think the follow-up would be relevant only if cases were made for those gentlemen. Above, I made an attempt for Stern; and earlier Boredyesterday said a little in Shooter’s favor (though capping it with support for Stern after all); but I don’t recall anything being said to support Michelinie’s candidacy. Surely, if these fellows are worthy of the Hall of Fame, it should be possible to give a fair idea of why!

[dlw66]

I will attempt to make this a summer project and post a case for each of these authors.

Does anyone know of a site that gives a specific creator's body of work? I've posted a link in the past for John Buscema, and Steve Englehart maintains his own. Anyone have a link for Stern, or Busiek, or others that list their contributions to the Avengers in terms of gross output?

[dlw66]

Oops - didn't take too long to find this for Roger Stern:

Marvel
Avengers # 1 ½

Avengers (Vol. 1) #189-191, 201, 227-279, 281-288

Avengers (Vol. 3) #51 (letter)

Avengers Annual #13-14

Avengers, West Coast (Vol. 1) #1-4

Avengers: Forever #3-12

Avengers: Infinity #1-4

Avengers: Solo Avengers #2-4

Avengers: Two: Wonder Man and Beast #1-3

Avengers: Ultron Imperative, The

Avengers-X-Men: X-Men vs. Avengers #1-4

Courtesy of the folks at members.aol.com/bestrogerstern/checklist.htm

[dlw66]

If I had to pick 5 strong candidates from the above comments, I would nominate for 2007:

Tom Palmer
Don Heck
Roger Stern
Jim Shooter
Jack Kirby (keep in mind -- he did many covers upon his return to Marvel in the mid-70's)

[Van Plexico]

The two "Musts" for me are Kirby and Shooter. But Shooter is more a personal thing, having to do with when I started reading (162).

I'm a little too close to the Busiek run, in a number of ways, to really look at it objectively. Anyone want to make a good argument here, that could persuade me it wasn't just "great" but "hall of fame great"?

I'm not saying it wasn't, remember-- I'm saying it's hard for me to think of it objectively, so I'd like some other perspectives.

[dlw66]

My opinion of the Busiek/Perez run is colored by the fact that what came immediately before, and with minor exceptions after, was just incredibly awful. I don't want to take away from what Kurt and George did -- it was certainly memorable and ultimately will go down as one of the top extended periods in Avengers lore. But I would agree with you, Van -- we're close to the run temporally and some of our voters' opinions may be skewed in light of personal attachments to Kurt. Objectivity, given any of these factors, is tough

I think a very strong case can be made for Roger Stern, based on the bibliography I've posted above, as well as Phantom's reference to one of his own posts (see the first reply in this thread). My leaning toward Stern is biased, though, in that he was writing the Avengers when I came back to comics in 1985.

Don Heck held the book together during a period of depowering. His art, combined with able writing by Stan and Roy, really set the tone for what would become Roy's and John Buscema's great run through the latter 1960's. Heck thus serves as sort of a bridge between Lee/Kirby and Thomas/Buscema. I say that, however, not meaning to detract at all from Don's draftsmanship which was, from approximately #19-#40 (including Special #1), very strong.

And of course Tom Palmer is out there. Who else gave the book its face in the 1980's and into the early 1990's? Palmer, that's who.

[dlw66]

I'm sorry -- I didn't address Shooter. Yes, his run was a high point akin, for me, to Englehart's run. Although I've taken him to task for what happened to Hank Pym under his authorship, I can't argue that some great stories came from his pen.