• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

drdroom

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,411

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by drdroom

    Which comic book artists are in your "Mt. Rushmore" ?

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    4 hours ago, tth2 said:

    It's a good criteria, although pretty tough on artists from the old days when writing and drawing were strictly bifurcated.  Also, if writing a story includes writing the dialogue, then I would argue that Kirby did NOT write his own stories.  It's painfully apparent from Kirby's dialogue in the 1970s and later that Stan wrote the dialogue for all of their great Marvel work.

    It's my criteria as well, so I'll offer a defense. The bifurcation only existed in comic books, and not even always there: see Jack Cole and Will Eisner. Kirby always wrote his own work from the beginning (and also wrote stories for other artists in the S&K shop). Stan's dialog & captions over the sixties work doesn't invalidate Kirby's writing claim on that work, come on! He thought up all the characters, everything they did and even approximately what they were saying. He's clearly the primary author of the books. For myself, it's hard to read Stan's writing as an adult. His repetition, bombast and a quality of condescension toward the medium dims the luster of Kirby's great period. 

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    Interesting to me how quiet the bidding is on the GA material comparatively. Is that just because GA bidders are old-school guys that don't show their hand until game day, or is GA really that far behind SA and BA in desirability?

    Overrated art?

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    4 hours ago, SquareChaos said:

     

    Thank God you added Jim Lee, I was beginning to think you hated guys named John... maybe you just hate guys with names that begin with 'J'  hm

    Yeah, exactly, unless it's Jack, in which case they are the best that ever lived. But that reminds me, Joe Kubert! I love him, but if the question is "overrated," you know, I think he might be just a tiny bit. Very limited facial expressions, and certain artistic solutions that he goes back to over and over again, a kind of repetitive feeling that guys named Jack are able to somehow avoid, despite being comparably prolific.(shrug)

    Overrated art?

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    John Byrne. No edge, no soul, his facial expressions are always wrong.

    John Romita. Solid mid-level comic hack. He stages well, is better than John Byrne, but never as good as prime period Don Heck.

    Post-1970 John Buscema. All his Conan work is more or less phoned in, like the scripts. The sketches are still great though.

    Jim Lee. His fetishistic rendering can't disguise his disinterest in the real human form. His facial expressions are more apt than Byrne's but even more limited.

    :D

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    Two Kats: There are two knockout GA splashes in the auction for my money, Wildcat by Krigstein and Black Cat by Kubert. Any guesses on hammer? Which one goes for more?

     

    PS, image add function doesn't seem to work in Safari, so if anyone wants to throw them up for me it will be much appreciated!

    Best of 2016 ..... Results are in

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    A quiet year for me, I could only muster four entries, all panel pages. There's a Colan Dr Strange 1/2 splash from the original run which is a TOTAL ACID FREAKOUT, a Windsor-Smith Conan 1/2 splash from the original run which REEKS WITH THE STINK OF SORCERY, and a Kirby Kamandi 1/2 splash from the original run which THROBS WITH RAW POWER.

     

    And then there is my out-of-left-field favorite: a 22 panel story complete in one page, drawn close to print size, by Mr. Steven Clay Wilson. I'm not much of an underground guy, but the (unusual for him) clear line, and the utterly relaxed pace of his cannibal picaresque have simply enchanted me. Adults only...

     

    http://cafurl.com?i=21756

     

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    As to whether Jack was "fleeced" by Marvel, apart from the art return issue, I think there is a strong argument that he was. I can't cite sources, but I've read several accounts, first and second person, stating Jack was promised a percentage of licensing for, for example, animation projects, and general verbal commitments that Jack would share in the success of the properties, and these promises were reneged upon by Martin Goodman, to Ditko as well, leading to the departure of Ditko in '66 and Kirby in '70.

    Moreover, Jack was from the beginning paid only for pencilling or layouts of the books he appears to have created from whole cloth, while Stan was paid the full scripting fee for books that Jack plotted (by Stan's own admission) and Stan wrote the finished copy for. By any rational definition, Jack did part of the writing of those books and was never paid for that work.

    Finally, there is Marvel's culpability in the falsification of the historical record regarding the creation of the core characters and settings of the Marvel universe. The world regards Stan as the genius behind this achievement, despite the fact that all the evidence points to Jack for the lion's share of the work. This deception certainly cost Jack money, though no one can say how much.

     

     

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted · Edited by drdroom

    There is also this: some artwork was apparently returned to Jack in the '70s, prior to either the Vartanoff warehouse inventory list (1980) or the Returned art list (1987).

     

    "In July of 1986, Marvel Vice President of Publishing Michael Z. Hobson issued a public statement telling the company’s side of the story: “Marvel has long been willing to give Mr. Kirby such artwork in accordance with its artwork return policy. In fact, Marvel returned hundreds of pages of artwork to Mr. Kirby under its artwork return policy during his last period of employment between 1976 and 1978, and Mr. Kirby signed all release forms submitted to him at that time. "

     

    http://www.tcj.com/kirby-and-goliath-the-fight-for-jack-kirbys-marvel-artwork/

     

    Was this just 70's art? Or did it include some '60s art? Was it ALL the 70's art?

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    Thanks. Robert Beerbohm tells a story about buying pages out of Kirby's trunk in the '70s. He got 200 pages for 20 bucks a page, which was a 50% volume discount.

     

    As to the '68 page, here's the list of pages returned to Jack by Marvel in the '80s.

    http://ohdannyboy.blogspot.com/2011/04/marvel-worldwide-inc-et-al-v-kirby-et_04.html

     

    In some cases a whole book is missing, so possibly any page from that book that turns up can be considered Kirby family property. Possibly. Other books are problematic because the number of pages returned to Kirby is given, but not which pages specifically.

    Next HA Auction !

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    Thanks for this, Moondog. Do you know if the Marvel page was '60s or '70s? I ask because I believe all Jack's '70s pages were returned. The only remotely plausible claim I can see on any of this (***not a lawyer***) would have to do with silver age pages not returned by Marvel.

     

    Here's a copy of the email from Todd Hignite to my friend who sold 2 Kirby pieces in the last auction. Rumors regarding this action have been floating around for awhile but it appears they're gaining some traction. He sold one Marvel page and one DC page.

     

    I hope this finds you well—and I hope you were satisfied with your results in our November auction. We’ve recently been approached by the Kirby family as they are actively investigating the provenance for all Jack Kirby artwork being currently offered on the market. So we need to investigate in as much detail as possible all artwork by Kirby we sold in our November Signature sale, including your lots. Would you happen to remember the sales history on the two pages (any receipts/invoices would be great as well)?

     

    Thanks a lot,

     

    My best,

     

    Todd

     

    Todd Hignite | Vice President

    HERITAGE AUCTIONS

    Pedigree trying to sell art now?

    in Original Comic Art

    Posted

    This is why its hard to trust Pedigree comics. I always try to trust them and every single time something shady goes down. 2 different times the entire auctions blacked out near the end. You always see books that supposedly "sold" in the last auction back up for sale. The funny thing is the last sales are reported to GPA. Here is an example:

     

    Origin of Captain America retold (from Cap to Nick Fury) in a fabulous Stan Lee story. The best existing and #1 CGC ranked example at 9.8 and BONE WHITE pages. This is easily the nicest copy we have ever seen and it is PERFECTLY cut with exactly straight cover alignment. Bone white cover too. Speaking of the cover, it is one of the best of the run courtesy of Jack Kirby and Syd Shores. The highest recorded sale of a NM/M example is $2,550 in 2009 and the last sale of a 9.8 copy is for $2,250 from our June, 2016 Grand Auction.

     

     

    From GPA: 2016

     

    (4) $2,250Hi $986Lo

    Jun-25-2016 $2,250 Cert# 1209165006

     

    If the sale in June was a bust, why report sale to GPA and then advertise bunk sale price to pump up the very same book? that just sold for 750.00 less 2 months later. This site is littered with this kind of BS ! If for any reason this is legit and can be explained away, its a tough pill to swallow.

     

    1209165006.jpg

     

     

    I don't concern myself with slabbed funnybooks, but it seems to me that this copy is not perfectly cut, the spine is pushed slightly around to the back, and moreover the staples are egregiously right of the spine. I bet I could find an equal or better copy at any large convention. (shrug)