From: sarwate@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Sanjiv Sarwate)
Subject: Re: Popularity in Comics (was Liefield Throws Tantrum)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:33:41 GMT

wmorgan@stsci.edu (Windsor A. Morgan) writes:

>In article <1992Aug20.140145.16334@ryn.mro4.dec.com> midnight@mdnite.enet.dec.com writes:


>>Okay, gents/ladies, I give up.

>>Did Rob Liefield beat up your collective sisters, or something?  Did he insult
>>your grandma?  Does he make obscene phone calls to your local pastor?  Does he
>>hang cute little bunny rabbits by their ears?  What?  What?

>>I'm fairly baffled by the constant (CONSTANT) barrage of
>>insults/commentary/etc. thrown this man's way.  It seems like its a requirement
>>in these parts to utterly bash Liefield to death.

>I think it is a combination of (1) they are jealous of him, (2) most
>people who purchase his work (and the other Image creators' work) do
>not seem to even look at what is inside the cover, (3) it is "in" and
>"cool" to not like him, and (4) Image comics are "popular".

Liefeld is the definitive fanboy artist/writer.  He has a large cult which
follows him slavishly, buying anything with his name on it, singing his
praises.  Now, this could also be said of the fans of Gaiman and Sim, but
it takes a brain to actually appreciate Gaiman and Sim.  Liefeld's work is
mostly on Twinkies for infantile intellects (read: X-books), and, when measured
on almost any scale except the fanboy scale, is atrocious.  Bad dialogue, bad
characterization, mediocre art, the list goes on and on.  

If it were "in" and "cool" not to like him, then he wouldn't be selling as many
books.  He is so "in" it is disgusting.  And, yes, he is popular, since most
comics are written to appeal to adolescent minds. Excuse me if I happen to
think that comics, to be good, should be written at a level a little farther
above Dick and Jane than Liefeld's books are.  

If Liefeld made no pretensions about being a "serious" writer working on 
"deep" themes, and never tried to convince anyone that he was working on a
cohesive plot or that his dialogue was worth anything, I might respect him more
than I do.  

>I was at the San Diego Con last week, and I marveled at the number of
>creators on panels and by themselves who just dismissed the Image
>creators and their work.  It seemed people were scared of what comics
>could become if most creators became like the stereotypical Image
>creator.  The company has been around for less than a year, and has
>only produced about five or six comics (I'm not sure).  That is no
>reason to be scred or frightened of a comic company.  Sure, they've
>been popular, but issue #1's by popular creators *always* have been
>popular.  I say, give it time before you begin to bash them.

These guys have an established record.  It's not as though these guys are
coming in from nowhere.  Liefeld has a trail of bad books and butchered  
characters (which, admittedly, were already in pretty bad shape), and it seems
fair to come to an initial assessment of the man's creative talents based on
those books.  A good writer can take old characters and breathe new life into
them, and maybe even take them where they hadn't gone before.  Look at Moore's
run on Swamp Thing, Morrison on Animal Man and Doom Patrol, Miller on       
Daredevil(esp. Born Again) and Batman (both Dark Knight and Year One).  
This is what good writing is all about. I don't know if Marvel edited Liefeld
down so much that his real work didn't show, but having seen Youngblood, I
don't think he would have done such a good job anyway.

>I see the same thing with the Marvel X-books.  Many people have lookd
>upon them with disdain.  We have put them into a ghetto, called
>rec.arts.comics.xbooks, so we don't have to look at them anymore.

>I don't say I am immune to this.  I have rarely read an X-book
>precisely *because* they are so popular (and I didn't like the work
>most times I *did* read them).  I don't care for Wolverine or Ghost
>Rider or the Punisher (or Lobo in the DC books) *because* they are so
>popular.  The Con had a T-shirt with Lobo's face on it.  I would have
>purchased a shirt if it had Ken Steacy's poster on it, but I couldn't
>bring myself to wear (much less purchase) a Lobo T-shirt.

Well, to return to an earlier point, I rate Lobo slightly above the Marvel
heroes you mention simply because the writers on Lobo generally do not even
pretend that they are doing deep plotting and meaningful character development.
They don't even try to give you the impression that Lobo has many dimensions.
The honesty in that kind of approach rates highly with me.  

>Well, I'll get off the soapbox.


>-- 
>'Verily, there be no leader as wise as the Vision!'
>                         Windsor Morgan (wmorgan@stsci.edu OR NHT@PSUVM.BITNET)
>                         Space Telescope Science Institute
>                         Baltimore, MD   21218
-- 
Sanjiv Sarwate		sarwate@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu	SANJIV@UIUCVMD
"The next day, the former Prime Minister accepts his first job since leaving
the Executive Mansion; cleaning out the inn's stables.  He notes that the two
occupations are not, essentially, dissimilar."  
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc