« Deep Tezuka | Main | What Am I Reading? »

November 24, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54fa9594588330120a6465d8a970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Son of Steranko:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Duncan

This is a really wonderful piece; I had thought Jog had perhaps taken the cake, re: Williams, but apparently not.

Oh yeah - yeah, as I recall, "jhw3" - as he styled himself - used to post on Barbelith and I believe he claimed his emulations of Adams, Chaykin, Gibbons, Lloyd, Sprouse, McGuinness, etc. all sprang direct from his own inspiration and not the script. (I believe the peeling off into underlaying nine-panel grids in the same story was also his own invention, primarily in tribute to Gibbons again.) It may be the case he was inspired to do so after the emulatory work on Seven Soldiers of Victory #1 (although IMO unfathomably, he sidestepped Frazer Irving for some Winsor McCay, there) and I'm not normally the sort to discredit Grant Morrison, but it may also not.

CharlesWHatfield

Thanks, Duncan! Glad you liked it.

Slow that I am, I didn't realize that Jog had posted on Williams a few weeks back. Always a pleasure to read what he has to say. I especially liked his focus on early and comparatively obscure examples of jhw3's work.

And, hey, a McCay riff in a superhero comic is always welcome. :)

The extent to which Seven Soldiers owed its pizzazz (if not coherence) to jhw3 was made apparent to me by Final Crisis. :(

Christian A. Dumais

Well done. Not enough can be said about what Williams is accomplishing with Detective.

Craig Fischer

You've convinced me to go out and buy these issues, CH. I've been a fan of jhw3 for a while, but I've avoided the DETECTIVE issues because I couldn't figure out how Rucka's penchant for naturalistic, noir-influenced narratives would mesh with 3's baroque approach. The implied answer in your essay is that their approaches probably don't mesh--you devote a lot less time to Rucka's story than to the blend of Moore's words with 3's art in PROMETHEA--but that it really doesn't matter, that 3's go-for-broke mimicry and experimental layouts are enough fireworks all by themselves. And now it's time for me to go burn my fingertips on some of those DETECTIVE pages...

Charles Hatfield

You got me dead to rights, Craig: I did spend more time on the content of PROMETHEA than on the content of DETECTIVE, even if wanting to write about DETECTIVE was the original impetus, or spark, for doing the post.

Jog writes interestingly

(see http://savagecritic.com/2009/10/review-of-batwoman-in-detective-comics_30.html for his post)

about jhw3's early work in horror comics, and what I inferred from Jog's analysis is that the horror stuff brought out more of the artist's sensibility than the superhero work he did even earlier. I think you can see evidence of this in the DETECTIVE run, in what I've called the "darkly suasive, occult quality" of the visuals, particularly in the sequences involving the half-human, half-beast characters, who jhw3 renders in a lushly textured style that differs from the book's default line-art style. At these moments Rucka's "naturalistic, noir-influenced" plot actually becomes more Gothic in feel, and bizarre.

What's interesting to me about this is that these far-fetched episodes would actually detract from the believability of the story-world if rendered in a standard, indifferent, or drably realistic style, but the sheer delight of watching jhw3 switch styles and layout strategies when these episodes come up (he uses jagged, irregularly-shaped panels for these bits) makes the sheer unbelievability of it all very pleasurable. A prime example of how art enlivens and sells even the barmiest ideas in comics (the Kirby effect!).

HokusKrokus

It's interesting how JHW3 gets compliments for emulating Mazzuchelli in Dectective Comics, but David Mack gets criticized for doing the same thing in New Avengers #39.

Charles Hatfield

In reply to HokusKrokus, I haven't followed New Avengers and therefore don't have an opinion about David Mack's contribution to that title. A very little Net research turns up accusations of "swiping" in New Avengers #39, but I'm not in a position to pass judgment on Mack's work there.

I'll simply say that swiping is very far from what I'm talking about when I talk about jhw3's work in Detective. Williams clearly analyzes and works through the surface mannerisms of whomever he is emulating, and, further, seeks to internalize their methods. This isn't a matter of direct swiping; it's a matter of devoted study.

Joseph Thomas

I just love those Detective issues, & I think a new issue comes out today (there was a preview/reviewy thing @ Newsarama of the latest issue). I've been consistently blown away by the meshing of story and art, though, so I'm surprised that you (Charlie) seem to think they don't riff on one another exquisitely (I think I read the Savage Critic piece you linked to--I didn't follow your link--and if I recall, he does a nice job of articulating just how synergistically the story and art blend).

Anyhoo, stop dissing Final Crisis. The art was definitely a bummer in some of the issues, &, no doubt, had it been drawn by someone of jhw3rd's ability it would have been a lot better (Morrison just NEEDS a great artist, doesn't he?), but it's still an amazingly subversive piece of superheroing, especially for an "event" book. Coincidentally, in preparation for a furlough day (can I read comics on a furlough day?), I grabbed up my FC issues, my Batman RIP issues, their prologue Black Hand run, the two issue Last Rites, & (whew!) the Gaiman Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader issues. Today I planned to sit down and read them all, in order (the Gaiman conclusion is sort of a non-Morrison cheat, but, hey, they're cool issues). I also grabbed what I have so far in Morrison's Batman & Robin series--which started off a cool, fun, kind of kitschy little hero book, and which has fallen off since old dough-face Quitely quit. I'll report back on my assessment when I'm finished. Anyway, it should be neat rereading FC in the context of all that Morrison Batman work.

Much love to you, Charles my boy. Give me a call sometime. I miss our unpredictably ranging conversations.
Joseph

Joseph Thomas

Btw, Charles, the term "treatise-cum" is more appropriate than you probably realized in relation to Moore's Promethea, although maybe inverting the two words might be even better (I won't endanger your blog's G-rating by typing out that inversion; you're welcome).

Charles Hatfield

G-rating???

Have you read Craig's take on "Cinema Sewer"? :)

CharlesWHatfield

Joseph:

"Anyhoo, stop dissing Final Crisis. The art was definitely a bummer in some of the issues, &, no doubt, had it been drawn by someone of jhw3rd's ability it would have been a lot better (Morrison just NEEDS a great artist, doesn't he?), but it's still an amazingly subversive piece of superheroing, especially for an 'event' book."

You dig FC, I know, because it reads like an experimental narrative disguised as a mainstream crossover book: an exercise in Burroughs' cut-up technique. And I don't dig FC so much, because I think it reads like...an exercise in Burroughs' cut-up technique!

Care to have a TB throwdown on this some day? You could be a guest blogger, man. Consider it, so you can tweak my reasoning at greater length. :)

I would agree, BTW, that Morrison gets inspired by good artists and that there's a world of difference between what he does with someone like jhw3 and someone like, well, whoever's drawing though B&R issues now (ick).

"...the Gaiman conclusion is sort of a non-Morrison cheat, but, hey, they're cool issues"

Difficult admission: I *hated* that Gaiman two-parter. The first part was tantalizing, but the second was navel-gazing, self-referencing, inwardly-spiraling, self-justifying twaddle (unusual for me to be so vituperative about a Gaiman book, but there you go). And the self-conscious positioning of that story as an analogue to the Moore/Swan/et al. "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" was just silly.

No comparison: the Moore was a much cooler piece of self-referencing, inwardly-spiraling etc... :)

CharlesWHatfield

"I'm surprised that you (Charlie) seem to think they don't riff on one another exquisitely (I think I read the Savage Critic piece you linked to--I didn't follow your link--and if I recall, he does a nice job of articulating just how synergistically the story and art blend)."

Hey, Jog lavished loving attention on the artwork and then said, in essence, that the total result was just "good" because the superheroing in it was standard stuff. I think I was actually more complimentary in that dept. that Jog!

Dig his closing comments:

"Rucka is a skilled writer, but so far here he's neither deep nor subtle... Because the writing and the art run close, one can't pass the other by much, and to me there's always some dissatisfaction. I'd still call it GOOD, though folks more tolerant than me of some blunt, familiar genre mechanics will rank it higher, I'm sure."

Nyeh!

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Who's Reading Us Where