|
|
Post by dlw66 on May 19, 2009 14:27:08 GMT -5
It was asked a couple of days ago if there was a Silver Age writers thread -- since there is not, why don't we start one?
I'll kick it off with a couple of questions.
1) Any thoughts on Denny O'Neil, Steve Skeates, Tony Isabella, Gerry Conway, Bill Mantlo, and/or Cary Bates?
2) Was Silver Age Marvel the better off for all of their titles under the leadership of Stan and Roy, or was DC's system of titles being "family-ed" under individual editors better?
Discuss!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on May 21, 2009 15:32:25 GMT -5
Well DLW, I'll try to add my 2 cents to your thread.
I don't think I've read enough by O'Neil, Skeates, or Bates to say anything about them. I was primarily a Marvel reader and my exposure to their work had been limited. But as for Marvel writers of the late 60s/early 70s, I suppose the most influential would have to be Roy Thomas, as he went from being the heir apparent of Stan the Man in the writing arena to the editor in chief of the line. Roy's contributions are too numerous to describe here, but to tie in to your second question, I think Roy really was the one - not Stan - to bring along the second wave of Marvel, with Conway, Englehart, Wein, Wolfman, etc. From all I've read, Roy gave them a certain level of independence and creative freedom that seemed appreciated by those working for him. Despite that freedom, Marvel maintained a consistency, a look and feel, that I think must be attributed to Roy's shepherding.
I am sure others (where's Sharkar?) know more about DC's system and can remark on it!
|
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on May 21, 2009 16:02:23 GMT -5
Whoo! Thanks for the reply, Tana -- I was about to delete the thread on account of lack of interest!
RE: Roy the Boy. I agree with your assessment of his legacy as being the ushering in of Marvel's Bronze Age stable of talent. While I sometimes wonder if Thomas would rather be remembered for his writing as opposed to his editorial leadership, I feel it's the latter where the lasting mark for the company was made.
But speaking of his writing, I wonder if anyone would care to voice an opinion about the two most prominent titles he took from Stan: first The Avengers and later Fantastic Four. There were certainly some different dynamics involved in the two changes of scripter, and I think we have some good fodder for further discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 21, 2009 21:09:41 GMT -5
Oh, I'll jump in, too-- although I'm not as knowledgable as many, I think.
But, I'll still go with Roy Thomas. AS A WRITER he did indeed bridge that Stan Lee-to-other-folks period, and he accomplished it by deftly & accurately copying Stan's style (which I am still not a huge fan of all the time) at first, and then letting his own vision, voice, and style develope. I thought it was amazingly seamless while reading through the run. Roy even made liberal use of the adjective "nutty" that Stan seemed so ridiculously fond of.
After Roy, I'd go with Gerry Conway, because of the risks he took in introducing true, heartbreaking, real-world strife into the lives of the characters-- Gwen Stacy's death, Franklin Richard's brain death & the resulting marital troubles for Reed & Sue, and I think he may have written the poignant "Heaven is a Very Small Place" in the Hulk. Maybe not my favorite writer, but certainly a groundbreaking one.
HB
SAY! ON A COMPLETELY UNRELATED NOTE--!
How the dickens do I create the little boxed quotes that are so handy to use as a reference point? I can't seem to get the hang of that at all. . . . (sorry to be such a luddite).
HB again
|
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on May 22, 2009 6:54:03 GMT -5
Just some very quick thoughts on the writers mentioned. I love Denny O'Neil's JLA and Batman stuff from the 70's. I love Cary Bates' Legion of Super-Heroes stuff. Underrated, IMO. I like BIll Mantlo's stuff, though the only think I associate him with is the Micronauts. I guess he had long runs on the Hulk and Spectacular Spider-Man, but I was never into those titles. I can't think of a lot I've read by Isabella, though I liked his two issue Assassin story in the Avengers. I like Conway's JLA, Legion of Super-Heroes, and Batman/Detective stuff. I'm not sure I've read enough Skeates stuff to form an opinion of any kind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on May 22, 2009 8:24:22 GMT -5
SAY! ON A COMPLETELY UNRELATED NOTE--! How the dickens do I create the little boxed quotes that are so handy to use as a reference point? I can't seem to get the hang of that at all. . . . (sorry to be such a luddite). HB again You have two options. Either, click the "quote" link on the top right of the post you want to quote (only visible when you are logged in), then a new reply window will open with the quote already in place, and all you have to do is delete the lines you are not interested in quating. Or, copy and paste the sentences you want to quote in a new post, select the text and click the "insert quote" button which is just on top of the  emoticon (second from the right, second row of buttons). You can also do it manually, writing {quote} and {/quote} - with [ instead of { - at the beginning and end of the message to quote  I'm not really familiar with Skeates or Bates, and can't think to any O'Neil or Isabella comic off the top of my head, but I agree with the others that Conway has been instrumental in taking Marvel past Stan Lee. Now, while having all the titles under one or two people could have resulted in lack of innovation, in the end it kept things consistent, and the new writers still eventually managed to walk on their own feet. This being said, let's not forget "the Marvel way" of making comics, and the artists' role in plotting stories. While the writing itself probably was down to the writer only, the plotting and making of new ideas was very much a joined effort, so it's a bit tricky to discuss from a creative point of view. |
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on May 22, 2009 8:51:42 GMT -5
I can't think of a lot I've read by Isabella, though I liked his two issue Assassin story in the Avengers. I remember Isabella mainly for two things: Marvel's short-lived The Champions, which I liked back in the Groovy '70's, and Tony's Tips! in the pages of the Comics Buyers Guide. RE: the two-issue Assassin fill-in in Avengers 145-146 was such a disappointment to me! I've commented a few times around here (and I find that I am about the only one who didn't like the story) that it just really irked me that the dreaded deadline doom struck right in the middle of the very good Serpent Crown Affair story arc. IIRC, it was Christmas 1975, and I got Avengers #145 as a stocking stuffer. What the?!? Where the devil was the Perez art, and the continuation of the story I was reading?? And now we get Don Heck art? Not happy... So story aside (which I didn't think was all that great anyway once I'd recovered from my shock), the disappointment has always outweighed any other merits the story might have held. |
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on May 22, 2009 10:05:16 GMT -5
Tony Isabella seems like a nice guy - he answered some emails for me when I was working on an article - but for the life of me I can't really place him with a style or even a long run on anything. I know he's worked on Champions, Black Lightning (creator), I think he did some of the monster books, maybe including Tigra? But mostly I remember him as a fill-in guy.
I feel just like Doug regarding Avengers 145-146. I had a subscription at the time and I felt so ripped off by those two issues! This was at a period where George Perez was just hitting his stride, we had an exciting story going by Englehart, and then boom! - these fill-ins with a nobody villain, and Don Heck art from his declining years. I don't know what's worse - fill-ins like we had back in "the old days" or the long delays we often get with titles now.
|
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on May 22, 2009 10:39:46 GMT -5
But speaking of his writing, I wonder if anyone would care to voice an opinion about the two most prominent titles he took from Stan: first The Avengers and later Fantastic Four. Roy was better able to form his own voice and develop characters within the pages of the Avengers as compared to his work later on in the FF. Even though he followed Stan on both titles, what Stan had set forth with Jack Kirby was so firmly entrenched in Marvel canon -- after all, much of the MU was created within the very pages of that book! On the other hand, the Avengers had held Stan's attention for a significantly shorter period of time, and one could argue that Stan never made the investment in the characters of that book as he had with the FF. In addition, Stan's collaboration with Don Heck, while good at times, never approached the creative genius that was Jack Kirby's output. So, Roy had more freedom right from the beginning. He was able to continue the experiments with Hank Pym's powers, finally resulting in the creation of the Yellowjacket personna. He co-created the Vision with Buscema, changed the roster often, moved Clint Barton out of the Hawkeye suit and into the role of the second Goliath, made the Black Panther a major contributor to the team, and culminated his very lengthy tenure as writer with the classic Kree/Skrull War collaboration with Neal Adams. I would offer that his finest FF story was the Galactus 4-parter that ran from #120-123. Second would be the Hulk story (one of the truly magnificent Bronze Age Buscema covers as well) in #112. |
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on May 22, 2009 11:06:05 GMT -5
I can't think of a lot I've read by Isabella, though I liked his two issue Assassin story in the Avengers. I remember Isabella mainly for two things: Marvel's short-lived The Champions, which I liked back in the Groovy '70's, and Tony's Tips! in the pages of the Comics Buyers Guide. RE: the two-issue Assassin fill-in in Avengers 145-146 was such a disappointment to me! I've commented a few times around here (and I find that I am about the only one who didn't like the story) that it just really irked me that the dreaded deadline doom struck right in the middle of the very good Serpent Crown Affair story arc. IIRC, it was Christmas 1975, and I got Avengers #145 as a stocking stuffer. What the?!? Where the devil was the Perez art, and the continuation of the story I was reading?? And now we get Don Heck art? Not happy... So story aside (which I didn't think was all that great anyway once I'd recovered from my shock), the disappointment has always outweighed any other merits the story might have held. I bought both TPB's which contrain the entire run of The Champions. I'm very excited to read it, but I am insisting that I finishe re-reaading my Avengers first, so it will probably be a few months before I get around to them. As far as the Assasin story, I wasn't collecting comics quite yet, or at least not Avengers, so I have no bias against the story for ruining my Christmas! LOL SPOILER ALERT Also, the only thing I didn't quite like about it was the very end where the assassin's father shot the brother then himself. I do like thefact that the assassin was shot by her own men because they didn't recognize her, because she was so secretive that they never knew who she was. Some poetic jstice ther, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on May 22, 2009 11:10:45 GMT -5
I don't know what's worse - fill-ins like we had back in "the old days" or the long delays we often get with titles now. There were even a couple of instances where The Avengers had a delay and they filled it by reprinting an old comic! One was when they reprinted an Amazing Adventures issue with the Beast (before he was an Avenger) and Iron Man. I'd be especially annoyed at this if I'd had a subscription! |
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on May 22, 2009 13:31:02 GMT -5
I don't know what's worse - fill-ins like we had back in "the old days" or the long delays we often get with titles now. There were even a couple of instances where The Avengers had a delay and they filled it by reprinting an old comic! One was when they reprinted an Amazing Adventures issue with the Beast (before he was an Avenger) and Iron Man. I'd be especially annoyed at this if I'd had a subscription! I had my subscription then too, and I was annoyed!! I had really bad luck with that subscription!  The old "dreaded deadline doom" was in full effect! |
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on May 22, 2009 17:21:06 GMT -5
So is a long gap better from a subscriber point of view?
I can see the logic there, but there have been instances of filler issues turning out to be pretty good. The Avalon two come to mind for example, with Amergin, the Fomors and the Black Knight.
|
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on May 28, 2009 7:41:52 GMT -5
Jim Shooter fans/detractors will want to get hold of Back Issue #34 (and you should anyway, as that's the ish with Miss Tana Nile's Warlock article), as it has information on Shooter's Bronze Age career at DC and Marvel, from Shooter's POV.
I've said before, one of these days we'll get an objective look at all of the he said/she said that is the history of the comics industry. Reading this stuff is like working one of those puzzles where the image is very intricate, and the puzzle is printed on both sides -- but one side is 90 degrees off from the other side. A little frustrating, know what I mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by ultron69 on May 28, 2009 11:03:31 GMT -5
Yeah, the behind the scenes stuff in the comics industry is like a soap opera. Wasn't there a big p*ssing match between Byrne & Claremont (I may have one of the names wrong) that caused one guy to try and retcon the other guy's stories by coming up with the idea of Dr. Doom robots? I know Shooter has allegedly been involved in his share of dust ups, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on May 28, 2009 15:22:56 GMT -5
Yeah, the behind the scenes stuff in the comics industry is like a soap opera. Wasn't there a big p*ssing match between Byrne & Claremont (I may have one of the names wrong) that caused one guy to try and retcon the other guy's stories by coming up with the idea of Dr. Doom robots? I know Shooter has allegedly been involved in his share of dust ups, too. Oh yeah, there's definitely as much 'office politics' going on with the comic book set as anywhere else. That whole thing between Byrne and Claremont was I believe Byrne being unhappy with the way Claremont used Doom in X-Men after they stopped working together. IIRC, Byrne then did his own story where it explained that the Doom is Claremont's story had been a Doombot. I'm sure someone (Sharkar?) has the details. There's probably a thousand stories like that out there. And of course Shooter has been the center of controversy for years. As Doug says, it's complicated - all 'he said, she said' sort of arguments are - but the fact that so many people have had trouble working with Shooter leads me to believe the problem is more centered on him than them. And personally, when I requested an interview with him for another article I am writing, his response was less than courteous. So that only reinforced my belief. |
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Jun 4, 2009 8:31:59 GMT -5
Jim Shooter fans/detractors will want to get hold of Back Issue #34 (and you should anyway, as that's the ish with Miss Tana Nile's Warlock article), as it has information on Shooter's Bronze Age career at DC and Marvel, from Shooter's POV. I've said before, one of these days we'll get an objective look at all of the he said/she said that is the history of the comics industry. Reading this stuff is like working one of those puzzles where the image is very intricate, and the puzzle is printed on both sides -- but one side is 90 degrees off from the other side. A little frustrating, know what I mean? The Shooter article was quite interesting. I don't know how anyone could work at DC under the conditions he spoke of, particularly under Mort Weisinger. It just sounds like such a negative environment. I think Roy Thomas only lasted about eight days there himself, before he came to Marvel. I shudder to think what would've become of the Marvel Universe if Roy had stayed at DC! |
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Jun 4, 2009 10:40:41 GMT -5
Interestingly, the same Back Issue also includes an extensive history of Marvel's (and Shooter's) New Universe project. Shooter is quoted a bit, and often referred to in the story. It's somewhat of a mixed bag of perceptions of Jim. I am about halfway through the article, and what I am gathering is that the failure of the concept is due mostly to the change in hands of ownership at Marvel, and less toward editiorial or creators.
Although JR Jr. comes across BADLY in the story.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Jun 12, 2009 11:59:20 GMT -5
Interstingly, the same Back Issue also includes an extensive history of Marvel's (and Shooter's) New Universe project. Shooter is quoted a bit, and often referred to in the story. It's somewhat of a mixed bag of perceptions of Jim. I am about halfway through the article, and what I am gathering is that the failure of the concept is due mostly to the change in hands of ownership at Marvel, and less toward editiorial or creators. Although JR Jr. comes across BADLY in the story. Yes, the comments about John Romita Jr. hiding from Eliot Brown because he was behind on his deadlines were mind-boggling! I hate to say it, but I wonder if the fact that both his parents worked for Marvel, and his dad was one of Marvel's greatest artists, gave him an attitude? I've never read much about JR jr so I have very little to go on. |
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Jun 12, 2009 12:34:45 GMT -5
There is something about him on John Romita and all that jazz, but coming from his father is probably biased. It sounds genuine though.
|
|
emoticon (second from the right, second row of buttons).
The old "dreaded deadline doom" was in full effect!