From: tpjg9663@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Johnston)
Subject: Re: Jack "King" Kirby: ripped off by Marvel
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 04:39:10 GMT

larocqu@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (JOHN LAROCQUE) writes:

>In article <BzqL3L.A60@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tpjg9663@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Johnston) writes:


>Maybe you STILL haven't picked up the message. Please try rereading the
>above. By no means am I advocating Chaykin's view that comics are
>trash - but as far as I'm concerned, the scum I mention above
>(reread it) and Chaykin would get along just fine.

I see the point, I just don't see what your alleged new goal is.
The idea that Chaykin and some comics fans have the same view of
comics has come through, though I don't agree with this view.

>>We are not fanboys, and we are taking the medium seriously; we love
>>	and appreciate the medium.  
>>DC and Marvel have promoted certain garbage titles and poorly-done
>>	comics to the hilt.  

>Marvel and especially DC have made it very embarrasing for collectors
>like myself who buy comics for the art and stories, and not the latest
>media blitz or marketing campaign. And it is DC's view of comics that
>pilfers out into the newspapers, the whole idea that comics are for
>overgrown kids who forgot to grow up.

Embarassing in what way?  Are you mocked and jeered by friends and
relatives for your comic reading?  

>No, but I have covered a lot of bases. Are you aware how many "adults"
>still restrict themselves to the x-trash? Or complain about how Micheal
>Keaton isn't "macho" enough to play Batman 

There's no accounting for individual tastes.  How should we treat
those whose tastes are different from our own?  Shall we bludgeon
them to death?  Or maybe get them to read Cerebus or Ronin to
open their eyes to the vast potential of comic books?

>>I accept comics as an artform, and at the same
>>time accept that many comics creators work for Marvel & DC and
>>don't own the rights to the characters they work on.

>As much as we may enjoy their work, they will never be fully appreciated
>at the corporate Marvel/DC headquarters - and this includes artists for
>all tastes - from Sergio Aragones to Whilce Portacio to Rick Veitch.

If a creator doesn't feel appreciated at Marvel or DC, then he shouldn't
work there.  Hasn't Mr. Aragones done about 100 issues of Groo for
Marvel, now?  Surely he could find work elsewhere if he wanted.

>>>> Nope, I'm just going to read the books which entertain me, and skip the
>>>> rest. 

>>>Comics = pornography. I'm just going to "read" the porn mags which entertain
>>>me and skip the rest.

>>Versus reading all comics, even those you don't enjoy?  

>I am comparing YOUR view of comics to PORN, not advocating reading everything.
>Context, my man, context. Reread it if you can. 

And I am saying that your comparison is without basis.  I said this
by offering the behavior you seemed to be advocating, that of
buying all comics including those which I do not enjoy.  The basis of
your comparison seems to be that in both cases, comic books and
porn, one would only purchase and peruse those materials which
appealed to one.  Your comparison can be extended to almost all
products, and thus the comparison seems pretty damned worthless.

>>Comics are an artform.  Comics creators are adults who shouldn't sign
>>contracts they are not willing to fulfill.  

>To quote you out of context - which is fine if the tables are turned - are
>you praising the assembly line vision of comic books practiced at the
>Big Two. Pump it out, find writers and artists, and if they kick up a 
>stink, hire new ones who won't whine and complain.

I'm not praising the product, but I'm not criticizing the procedure.
I don't hold the same opinions of Marvel and DC that you do.  As for
quoting out of context, feel free, as long as the spirit of the quote
isn't changed by the context change.  Shortening the original post
is a good way to save bandwidth, IMHO.

>>>> Believe it or not, I have a lot of respect for the Image creators for
>>>> deciding to leave the guaranteed audience (and paychecks) of Marvel
>>>> and go out on their own.

>>>They didn't leave their audience. That's the whole point. They don't
>>>need the Marvel/DC corporate cartel to find it. And (if they manage

>>The Image boys may not have needed Marvel to find their audience,
>>but they sure did use Marvel in that way.

>Is that a PROBLEM? Marvel and DC practically OWN the superhero. Find a 

Not a problem; I'm just correcting you.  :-)

>[...]  Are we supposed to kiss their
>fragging feet because Miller and McFarlane and Jim Lee and Alan Moore
>all made it big at the big two. Who is worshipping at what temple here?

Don't know about you, but I'm not worshipping at any temple these days.
I enjoyed the works of Miller, Moore, McFarlane, etc. at Marvel and DC
and would not let feelings for those companies interfere with my
enjoyment of the comics produced.

>>My 'crack' about finding new titles was meant sincerely.  Some
>>creators are putting out quality material, and their work doesn't
>>deserve to be degraded simply because much of the mainstream comics
>>work currently being done is (to put it charitably) aimed at 
>>adolescents.

>No, but it is precisely those adults-acting-like-adolescents who are ruining
>the whole genre. It's almost pathetic, reading in the newpaper about all

**almost** pathetic?  **almost**?  It was pathetic without any 'almost'.

>the morons who went into "mourning" over Superman's death, or some lady
>in the comic shop who went and bought the Supermans for her kid and as
>some kind of investment. These people make me sick to my stomach. In the real
>world, comics are nothing more than kid's entertainment. And what they see
>of comic collectors, especially of the middle-aged fanboy who still 
>salivates at the latest Flash comic, is someone who refuses to grow up.
>They never see the comics that are really worth collecting - only the
>trash, and this is the picture of our medium that is fed by the distributors
>and most comic shop owners. "Buy your stuff, I just want your money" they
>say to the little kids in their shop. Sharks all of them. Do they really
>care about the medium or just the cash? 

OK; so your point is that Marvel and DC and comic shop owners
and distributors promote only the garbage titles, right?  This
is a point I agree with.  I've complained (perhaps overly much)
about the lack of quality of Alpha Flight #104 and the Superman
Death issues.  It's a shame DC and Marvel couldn't have put out
a better product to take advantage of all the hype, and attract
older, more literate readers into the comic book hobby.

>[...] Which is why, in the future, comic
>books really will be junk, trash, porn, blow-jobs and toothpaste. Just
>another corporate commodity aimed at kids. 

I don't agree that the quality of comics is going to decline from
its current level.  It's not as if the big 2 have been aiming for
quality these many years, and have suddenly decided to treat the
hobby as if it's for 12-year-olds only.  But despite the fact that
the largest audience targeted has been the 12-year-olds, some
good books have been published, and I don't see why more shouldn't
be published in the future.

Tom