General Category > Comic Related Discussion
Dan Adkins
BobS:
ComicAttack.net includes full PDFs of Gary Groth's Fantastic Fanzine #10 and 12, Voice of Comicdom #17 (with original publication of Rich Corben's Rowlf - I highly recommend), and other mostly 1970s fanzines.
http://comicattack.net/category/cafeaturedcolumns/inkstains/
Thanks and a Hatlo's Tip of the Hat to JVJ who get me looking on the net for contents of Fantastic Fanzine. Only I'm Stump not Hatlo, and I rarely wear a hat.. (I should wear a hat geocaching and rockhounding.) Anyway thanks.
Bob
JVJ (RIP):
Always glad to help, Bob,
hat or no hat, it's wonderful the stuff you can find on the web if you look - well, at least I'm constantly amazed by it. Rudy Franke was a local guy (San Jose) and we used to run into each other at the shops. He sort of introduced us to Corben and that's how we got him involved in Promethean. Same with Jonny Chambers. Man, those were wonderful days.
Peace, Jim (|:{>
BobS:
--- Quote from: JVJ on August 26, 2010, 03:00:10 PM ---It was "Modern Collector's Review", Bob,
and was actually published in 1969 - my memory is also not to be trusted, it seems.
John Giunta did "Crom the Barbarian", not Conan, in Avon's Out of this World Adventures.
--- Quote ---
I don't remember Modern Collector's Review but if your article was from 1969, that could be where I saw the Manning-Adkins comparisons.
Who published MCR?
"Crom" is Conan's god in Howard.
Sci-fi / heroic fantasy fans would have recognized / do recognize Giunt's Crom the Barbarian as Howard's Conan only with name changed because of copyright.
Giunta did pulp illos as well as comic art.
Since you mentioned "plagiarism" via email to me, I'll remind that EC / Feldstein plagiarized Ray Bradbury. Bradbury collected some $$ from EC and gave 'em permission to use more of his stories (for pay).
I doubt that Russ Manning was upset with Adkins copying his art. Mike Royer copied it as Manning's assistant.
& Wally Wood encouraged Adknis (his assistant) to keep a swipe file (like apparently most comic pros do) and to copy whenever appropriate.
No need to reinvent the wheel. <grin>
--- Quote ---and ALL I "know" is how to use GCD, Bob. Just go to www.comics.org and click "Advanced Search" to get real answers to questions that you've been wondering about. No need to speculate or even try to remember. I sure as hell don't. Not when there's a definitive resource like GCD available.
You can stop guessing and look it up.
--- End quote ---
GCD isn't complete. For instance, I don't think it has artists for that From Here to Insanity we discussed.
Did you tell me GCD is a continuance of Jerry Bails' Who's Who (the original edition of which I do have and have accessible)?
Also, I'm VERY INTERESTED in Bob Kane ghosts, particularly the earliest ones.
Someone here claimed that from the 3rd Batman story (in Detective Comics #29?) Shelly Moldoff was a ghost artist.
I'd really like to see some documentation / corroboration of that claim.
I think I can tell the difference now between early Kane art and early Batman art inked by "Inky" Roussos.
Many if not most of the earliest Detective Comics Batman covers look to me like Roussos inked.
Remember that Warren (Creepy or Eerie) story about the supposed comic strip creator who ghosted out all the work to others to write, draw, and letter?
--- End quote ---
As for "significant" comic artists, I'll be happy to debate my choices any time you wish. All I ask is that things stay objective.
--- Quote ---
It's pointless to debate with you because you are so sure you know it all / obtain pure objectivity.
I don't believe anyone is totally objective -- this ain't pure science.
You'd be hard-pressed to PROVE that Bernie Krigstein is objectively a more significant/important/whatever comic book artist than R. Crumb, Art Spiegelman, Jean Giraud/Moebius, Rich Corben, etc.
I actually like Kim Deitch's comix better than Crumb's and Spiegelman's, but Crumb was the pacesetter. Yarrowstalks is probably where I first saw Crumb's stuff.
Or was Jack Jackson the original. His historical comix were significant and God Nose was supposedly maybe the first "underground comix".
But then "underground comix" arose out of college humor mags. (I wish I still had the paperback with college humor mag comics.)
Etc.
--- Quote ---Peace, Jim (|:{>
--- End quote ---
Peace to you too, Jim.
Bob
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
JVJ (RIP):
--- Quote from: BobS on August 27, 2010, 01:20:33 PM ---I doubt that Russ Manning was upset with Adkins copying his art.
--- End quote ---
But you have no way of knowing that for a fact, so it's your opinion. I can accept that, but I don't happen to agree with it.
--- Quote ---GCD isn't complete. For instance, I don't think it has artists for that From Here to Insanity we discussed.
--- End quote ---
The fact that it is incomplete in no way negates its usefulness for the data is DOES have.
--- Quote ---Did you tell me GCD is a continuance of Jerry Bails' Who's Who (the original edition of which I do have and have accessible)?
--- End quote ---
No, I never said or implied that because they are in no way related that I know of.
--- Quote ---It's pointless to debate with you because you are so sure you know it all / obtain pure objectivity.
I don't believe anyone is totally objective -- this ain't pure science.
--- End quote ---
If you say so, Bob.
Peace, Jim (|:{>
John C:
--- Quote from: BobS on August 27, 2010, 01:20:33 PM ---It's pointless to debate with you because you are so sure you know it all / obtain pure objectivity.
I don't believe anyone is totally objective -- this ain't pure science.
--- End quote ---
Ahem. While I agree with your stance that nobody is objective, I'll point out two things and then wander off for a while.
First, a lack of objectivity doesn't mean that fact shouldn't be the goal, nor should the work of people before be discarded as a starting point. Artists don't try to figure out anatomical proportions from scratch, and musicians don't invent their own scales, because it's a waste of time after (in their cases) many thousands of years of empirical experience accessible to them. If you're trying to get to the facts behind decades of history, it's just as much of a waste to ignore the people who have come before to study those very things.
Second, this is not the place for personal attacks. The forum wasn't put up for that purpose, I don't have the patience for that sort of garbage, and nobody else on staff here does, either. You seem like a good guy, Bob, but this isn't open for negotiation or more than one warning. If you don't like Jim or how he works, that's fine, but argue the work with evidence, not the person with insults. If you can't manage that, don't feel obligated to expose yourself to such an unpleasant human being, if my meaning is clear.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version