news from Frank Brunner

[vaillant]

It's always a pleasure to see a 5 year old thread necroed. Even more thrilling is watching people who don't know mess from Shinola denigrate one of the legends of the industry.

You will forgive me, I wasn’t here five years ago.

 

Those comments on Doctor Strange were so superficial (and pretty pointless) that I resurrected the thread to underline a point, the ability to conjure Dr. Strange unique atmospheres through the artwork. A thing which is not OT, as the thread was about Frank Brunner's art.

I could have done so by starting a new thread, but I didn’t see the need for it.

What we have got have been two pages of so called "comments", instead.

 

I would like to understand from where statements like "have a right to comment" or "have a right to have an opinion" originate. A "right" is a thing that presupposes a dignity. Comments without quality have no rights whatsoever IMO, they just derail a good discussion.

 

Objectively judging an artist's skills has little to do with "taste": I can appreciate an artist, even a great artist, which I may not like, for many reasons.

 

Thanks to ucleben for taking the time to state what should be obvious, but evidently is no longer so obvious. His one is an "opinion" and as such a positive contribution to the discussion.

[mackenzie999]

I’ve always regarded the measure of a comic book artist as creator...appreciate great artists more than I do great “drawers”.[/b]

 

Dali once compared himself to Picasso, stating that Dali was the technically better painter but Picasso was exponentially more creative (I think he's half correct; if you've ever seen PP's sketchbooks he was capable of almost daVinci-like drawing when he wanted). So, is that essentially what you are saying? Other comic artists might be better draftsmen but Ditko was more creative? I don't know.

I have tried very hard to see what others see in his work, and I just don't get it. At first I thought the awkwardness was intended to mirror Peter Parker's, but it seems to be in most of the work he does (I admit I am fairly ignorant of the entirety of his career, being mainly familiar with his early Marvel work). Try as I might though, I just see clunky, amateurish hack work. Enough people revere his work that there must be something there that I am just not capable of seeing, but my art cred is pretty significant and I suspect a lot of the love he gets is emotional attachment to early Spidey (although I find the absolute earliest Spidey, the cover of AF15, crushes anything I've seen by Ditko).

 

So there it is. I am open minded enough to admit it is entirely possible it's me who is lacking here, and if you or anyone else feels like educating me, post some pages that show his true greatness. Impress me. So far I haven't been.

 

I know I am trampling an icon and am inviting abuse, and I'm completely fine with that. Especially if you're funny.

[Logan510]

Is the quote in your sig mocking Tarantino or do you believe it?

[mackenzie999]

Is the quote in your sig mocking Tarantino or do you believe it?

 

I'm not well-versed enough in the history of Superman to say for sure, but I doubt Supe's intent behind the attributes of Clark Kent was his own private joke saying we all suck. I just find Tarantino's interpretation to be amusing. I'm not a huge Tarantino fan but he certainly has his moments.

[Unca Ben]

I’ve always regarded the measure of a comic book artist as creator...appreciate great artists more than I do great “drawers”.[/b]

So, is that essentially what you are saying? Other comic artists might be better draftsmen but Ditko was more creative? I don't know.

I will address this point first, the merits of Ditko's drawing will have to wait for another post.

 

I think you are looking past the point I made: the measure of an artist as a creator, not just an artist good with a pencil (and I do believe Ditko was very good with a pencil). You have an art background so you’re familiar with drawing and design; concept creation vs. drawing skills.

 

Ditko created the bulk of the ASM cannon in only 39 issues, and after 50 years it is still in use today. I respect Stan Lee, but I submit that Steve Ditko was a primary creative force behind Spider-Man during that time.

 

I say this because after Ditko left the title, during the rest of Lee’s initial run, the creative output in terms of new characters and designs dropped significantly, though Lee worked with no less than 4 artists from ASM 39 through 100. These artists were Romita, Heck, Buscema and Kane.

 

Seventeen supporting characters were created during Ditko’s 39 issue tenure on ASM. These characters are unique from each other both visually and behaviorally, in the way Ditko conceived and drew them:

Peter Parker, Uncle Ben, Aunt May, J.J.J., John Jameson, Flash Thompson, Liz Allen, Betty Brant, Anna Watson, Mary Jane Watson (as a continuing off camera “gag’), Curt Connors, Frederick Foswell, Ned Leeds, Prof Warren, Norman and Harry Osborne, Gwen Stacey.

 

Eighteen antagonists for Spider-Man were created during Ditko’s tenure. Most of these villains are visually striking in their conception and design and remain virtually unchanged in 50 years:

Chameleon, Vulture, Tinkerer, Dr. Octopus, Sandman, Lizard, Electro, Big Man, Enforcers, Mysterio, Green Goblin, Kraven, Scorpion, Prof Smythe/ Robot Spider-Slayer, Crime-Master, Molten Man, Looter, Prof. Stromm.

After Ditko’s tenure on ASM, with Lee still writing, here are the new characters created:

ASM 39-100 (62 issues):

 

Three new supporting characters in 62 consecutive issues:

Robbie Robertson, Randy Robertson, Capt. Stacey. Did I leave anyone out?

 

Eight new antagonists in 62 issues:

Rhino, Shocker, Kingpin, Man Mountain Marko, Silvermane, Prowler, Kangaroo, Schemer.

 

That’s thirty-five characters during Ditko’s 39 issues, compared to 11 new characters in the following 62 non-Ditko issues.

 

To continue even further: (why not?)

 

For another 200 issues, from ASM #100 – 300, with dozens of writers and artists involved, there were only 11 new supporting cast characters of note (12 if you include Jean DeWolff from an ancillary Spidey title):

Sha Shan, Glory Grant, Mamie Muggins, Marla Madison-Jameson, Barton Hamilton, Debra Whitman, Lance Bannon, Gayle Watson, Nathan Lubensky, Madame Web, Kathryn Cushing.

Many of these have come and gone, while Flash, Betty, Liz, J.J.J. et al will live on...

 

…and 17 noteworthy villains: and 2 of these 17 were Green Goblin derivatives

Morbius, Richard Raleigh, Man-Wolf, Jonas Harow, Hammerhead, Punisher, Tarantula, Jackal, Black Cat, Calypso, Hydro-Man, Hobgoblin, the Rose, Jack O’Lantern, Puma, the Venom Symbiote, Silver Sable.

 

I’m going to leave out the Gibbon, Mindworm, Grizzly, Cyclone, Mirage, Will-O-theWisp, Photon, Rocket Racer, Big Wheel, Jigsaw, Human Fly, White Dragon, Fusion, Red 9, Spider-Kid, Ramrod, Slyde, and Chance. If we include these 18 terrible ideas, that still is a total of 35 villains in 200 issues vs. Ditko’s 18 in 39 issues.

 

Steve Ditko was a creative powerhouse.

[Unca Ben]

When I first saw Frank Brunners artwork, I was stunned. Frank is a great artist, a great “drawer”.

 

Yet...

 

Compared to Steve Ditko’s creations above, what creations of Franks can you think of that have lasted as long, are as original, and are popular enough to continue today?

 

Steve’s design of the Spider-Man costume, Dr. Strange and Iron Man compare to what original design of Franks?

 

[Fedoraman]

I’ve always regarded the measure of a comic book artist as creator...appreciate great artists more than I do great “drawers”.[/b]

So, is that essentially what you are saying? Other comic artists might be better draftsmen but Ditko was more creative? I don't know.

I will address this point first, the merits of Ditko's drawing will have to wait for another post.

 

I think you are looking past the point I made: the measure of an artist as a creator, not just an artist good with a pencil (and I do believe Ditko was very good with a pencil). You have an art background so you’re familiar with drawing and design; concept creation vs. drawing skills.

 

Ditko created the bulk of the ASM cannon in only 39 issues, and after 50 years it is still in use today. I respect Stan Lee, but I submit that Steve Ditko was a primary creative force behind Spider-Man during that time.

 

I say this because after Ditko left the title, during the rest of Lee’s initial run, the creative output in terms of new characters and designs dropped significantly, though Lee worked with no less than 4 artists from ASM 39 through 100. These artists were Romita, Heck, Buscema and Kane.

 

Seventeen supporting characters were created during Ditko’s 39 issue tenure on ASM. These characters are unique from each other both visually and behaviorally, in the way Ditko conceived and drew them:

Peter Parker, Uncle Ben, Aunt May, J.J.J., John Jameson, Flash Thompson, Liz Allen, Betty Brant, Anna Watson, Mary Jane Watson (as a continuing off camera “gag’), Curt Connors, Frederick Foswell, Ned Leeds, Prof Warren, Norman and Harry Osborne, Gwen Stacey.

 

Eighteen antagonists for Spider-Man were created during Ditko’s tenure. Most of these villains are visually striking in their conception and design and remain virtually unchanged in 50 years:

Chameleon, Vulture, Tinkerer, Dr. Octopus, Sandman, Lizard, Electro, Big Man, Enforcers, Mysterio, Green Goblin, Kraven, Scorpion, Prof Smythe/ Robot Spider-Slayer, Crime-Master, Molten Man, Looter, Prof. Stromm.

After Ditko’s tenure on ASM, with Lee still writing, here are the new characters created:

ASM 39-100 (62 issues):

 

Three new supporting characters in 62 consecutive issues:

Robbie Robertson, Randy Robertson, Capt. Stacey. Did I leave anyone out?

 

Eight new antagonists in 62 issues:

Rhino, Shocker, Kingpin, Man Mountain Marko, Silvermane, Prowler, Kangaroo, Schemer.

 

That’s thirty-five characters during Ditko’s 39 issues, compared to 11 new characters in the following 62 non-Ditko issues.

 

To continue even further: (why not?)

 

For another 200 issues, from ASM #100 – 300, with dozens of writers and artists involved, there were only 11 new supporting cast characters of note (12 if you include Jean DeWolff from an ancillary Spidey title):

Sha Shan, Glory Grant, Mamie Muggins, Marla Madison-Jameson, Barton Hamilton, Debra Whitman, Lance Bannon, Gayle Watson, Nathan Lubensky, Madame Web, Kathryn Cushing.

Many of these have come and gone, while Flash, Betty, Liz, J.J.J. et al will live on...

 

…and 17 noteworthy villains: and 2 of these 17 were Green Goblin derivatives

Morbius, Richard Raleigh, Man-Wolf, Jonas Harow, Hammerhead, Punisher, Tarantula, Jackal, Black Cat, Calypso, Hydro-Man, Hobgoblin, the Rose, Jack O’Lantern, Puma, the Venom Symbiote, Silver Sable.

 

I’m going to leave out the Gibbon, Mindworm, Grizzly, Cyclone, Mirage, Will-O-theWisp, Photon, Rocket Racer, Big Wheel, Jigsaw, Human Fly, White Dragon, Fusion, Red 9, Spider-Kid, Ramrod, Slyde, and Chance. If we include these 18 terrible ideas, that still is a total of 35 villains in 200 issues vs. Ditko’s 18 in 39 issues.

 

Steve Ditko was a creative powerhouse.

 

I had never seen it broken down that way before - Thank you!

 

BUT - What did the 'creative powerhouse' do after leaving ASM?

 

What is HIS creative output since that time? (And I don't mean his creative ways to deny people his signature or hide in his NY apartment from fanboys).

[mackenzie999]

I think you are drawing a false conclusion here. Most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, from which some may draw the conclusion that they live in a particularly hazardous area. The real reason this happens is that the vast majority of driving involves going to or coming from home.

 

Same principle applies here: was Ditko so prolific a creator because all these characters simply gushed out of him, or was it perhaps, as the initial artist in the series, he was the first one tasked with drawing Doc Ock, JJJ, etc? Once the supporting cast is established there is no need to populate it at the same pace required initially*. Additionally, if any other artist were given the same scripts they too would have designed the look of them all. (I understand there is a bit of controversy surrounding the Lee/Ditko degrees of contribution, but that is a whole 'nother 55 gallon drum of worms). For the sake of argument let's say Ditko did create your list of characters. were they really that creative? My god, how many times did he go to the animal kingdom well? Chameleon / Vulture / Octopus / Lizard / Scorpion etc. Some were creative, but as they say a stopped clock is still right twice a day too.

 

I guess in the long run what really bothers me about Ditko's work is 100% subjective: to me it's just awkward and ugly. And when I say ugly, I mean Frank Robbins ugly. I cannot argue this point as it is only my opinion, and obviously many disagree with this very strongly, but that is ultimately where I am coming from.

 

 

*In series animation, for example, it is a rule of thumb that you initially need about 100 character designs for all the primary and background characters.

[Comicopolis]

"Eight new antagonists in 62 issues:

Rhino, Shocker, Kingpin, Man Mountain Marko, Silvermane, Prowler, Kangaroo, Schemer."

 

And every one of them terrible.

 

Yes, including. Kingpin.

[Unca Ben]

BUT - What did the 'creative powerhouse' do after leaving ASM?

He created and drew Hawk & Dove, the Creeper, Shade the Changing Man, and the Stalker for DC.

 

He worked on Blue Beetle, the Question, and Capt Atom (that he co-created) at Charlton.

 

He drew over a dozen stories for Warren Magazines, mostly in ink - wash. Some of these are considered among his finest work.

 

He did some work for Wally Woods' Witzend.

 

Other misc work for Marvel, DC, and Defiant.

 

And more.

[Logan510]

I think you are drawing a false conclusion here. Most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, from which some may draw the conclusion that they live in a particularly hazardous area. The real reason this happens is that the vast majority of driving involves going to or coming from home.

 

Same principle applies here: was Ditko so prolific a creator because all these characters simply gushed out of him, or was it perhaps, as the initial artist in the series, he was the first one tasked with drawing Doc Ock, JJJ, etc? Once the supporting cast is established there is no need to populate it at the same pace required initially*. Additionally, if any other artist were given the same scripts they too would have designed the look of them all. (I understand there is a bit of controversy surrounding the Lee/Ditko degrees of contribution, but that is a whole 'nother 55 gallon drum of worms). For the sake of argument let's say Ditko did create your list of characters. were they really that creative? My god, how many times did he go to the animal kingdom well? Chameleon / Vulture / Octopus / Lizard / Scorpion etc. Some were creative, but as they say a stopped clock is still right twice a day too.

 

I guess in the long run what really bothers me about Ditko's work is 100% subjective: to me it's just awkward and ugly. And when I say ugly, I mean Frank Robbins ugly. I cannot argue this point as it is only my opinion, and obviously many disagree with this very strongly, but that is ultimately where I am coming from.

 

 

*In series animation, for example, it is a rule of thumb that you initially need about 100 character designs for all the primary and background characters.

 

I'm a little surprised that an artist would only judge the work from the surface elements. Aside from his creativity you can look at his layout, composition, use of light and shade, body language and arguably the most important element of a good comic book artist...storytelling ability.

[Shaven Kev-migration]

Dark Dominion was awesome.

[mackenzie999]

 

I'm a little surprised that an artist would only judge the work from the surface elements. Aside from his creativity you can look at his layout, composition, use of light and shade, body language and arguably the most important element of a good comic book artist...storytelling ability.

 

I do consider all of these things in my opinion of him, I just don't have the time (nor the readers the interest I assume) in my opinions of all of it. I find his composition bland, he applies light and dark like paste, his body language is uniformly awkward, and his storytelling, well...honestly it's been about 35 years since I've read anything he's done but it never made an impression on me as particularly notable. Dormammu was cool though, I give him that (although the magic effects in Doc Strange always seemed oddly chunky to me).

 

Edit: in all fairness SD probably wouldn't like my work either!

[Logan510]

 

I'm a little surprised that an artist would only judge the work from the surface elements. Aside from his creativity you can look at his layout, composition, use of light and shade, body language and arguably the most important element of a good comic book artist...storytelling ability.

 

I do consider all of these things in my opinion of him, I just don't have the time (nor the readers the interest I assume) in my opinions of all of it. I find his composition bland, he applies light and dark like paste, his body language is uniformly awkward, and his storytelling, well...honestly it's been about 35 years since I've read anything he's done but it never made an impression on me as particularly notable. Dormammu was cool though, I give him that (although the magic effects in Doc Strange always seemed oddly chunky to me).

 

Edit: in all fairness SD probably wouldn't like my work either!

 

 

I think all you would have to do is see what his peers say about him and ask all the artists who he influenced and love his work. Two of my favorites, Byrne and Perez have cited his work several times as being an influence.

 

Is Ditko the greatest illustrator? Hardly. With comic book artists it's important to judge the overall package. Unfortunately too many fans get caught up in surface elements and that's how you get guys like Liefeld and McFarlane becoming superstars.

[mackenzie999]

 

 

I think all you would have to do is see what his peers say about him and ask all the artists who he influenced and love his work.

 

Or simply form my own opinions based on what I think and not the thoughts of others.

Don't mean to be snippy here but trying to connect me to Liefield is a low blow!

[Logan510]

 

 

I think all you would have to do is see what his peers say about him and ask all the artists who he influenced and love his work.

 

Or simply form my own opinions based on what I think and not the thoughts of others.

Don't mean to be snippy here but trying to connect me to Liefield is a low blow!

 

I didn't connect you with Liefeld, I'm actually a little confused how you got to that conclusion

 

Weren't you also the guy who asked people to explain about Ditko as maybe it was something you weren't seeing? I would think the opinions of other successful people in the industry might shed some light on the subject?

[Unca Ben]

I think you are drawing a false conclusion here. Most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, from which some may draw the conclusion that they live in a particularly hazardous area. The real reason this happens is that the vast majority of driving involves going to or coming from home.

 

Same principle applies here: was Ditko so prolific a creator because all these characters simply gushed out of him, or was it perhaps, as the initial artist in the series, he was the first one tasked with drawing Doc Ock, JJJ, etc? Once the supporting cast is established there is no need to populate it at the same pace required initially*. Additionally, if any other artist were given the same scripts they too would have designed the look of them all. (I understand there is a bit of controversy surrounding the Lee/Ditko degrees of contribution, but that is a whole 'nother 55 gallon drum of worms). For the sake of argument let's say Ditko did create your list of characters. were they really that creative? My god, how many times did he go to the animal kingdom well? Chameleon / Vulture / Octopus / Lizard / Scorpion etc. Some were creative, but as they say a stopped clock is still right twice a day too.

 

I guess in the long run what really bothers me about Ditko's work is 100% subjective: to me it's just awkward and ugly. And when I say ugly, I mean Frank Robbins ugly. I cannot argue this point as it is only my opinion, and obviously many disagree with this very strongly, but that is ultimately where I am coming from.

 

 

*In series animation, for example, it is a rule of thumb that you initially need about 100 character designs for all the primary and background characters.

 

No false conclusions here.

 

I was merely documenting the scope of Ditko’s contribution to probably the most popular super hero character in the last 50 years. I also feel his animal kingdom creations were among his best, what’s not to like about Octopi, vultures, lizards and scorpions?

 

Beyond guys like Barks, Eisner, Kurtzman, Krigstein, Toth, and the like; and other than Kirby’s creations; the Batman or Superman cannons; or some others like DC’s Flash and perhaps Green Lantern, what single fan favorite artist (like Brunner, Bolland, Golden, Perez, Kaluta, and so on) has created (or co-created) such a world?

 

And why not? Was it a lack of opportunity? There have been hundreds of new comic book characters and titles created in the last 50 years, why have so few (if any) achieved the levels of Spider-Man? Many of these artists have had the opportunity, like Ditko, to be the initial artist on a new series, and have characters gush out of them at a prolific rate, yet few did, or few stuck, the way Ditko’s did.

 

Is creativity just luck, being in the right place at the right time? No real muse, just happenstance?

 

And as regards to draftsmanship, show me a comic book artist whose work isn’t 100% subjective, or any other artist, for that matter. I’m fine with your opinion of Steve’s work. I personally find the work of Ingels, Wolverton, and Mignola to be unattractive, for example (GASP!).

 

But I don’t let that perspective blind me to the talent and creativity these men have.

 

Anyways, fun debating with you, that’s what makes these boards fun (sometimes).

 

Best to you and yours,

David

 

 

[mackenzie999]

I didn't connect you with Liefeld, I'm actually a little confused how you got to that conclusion

 

Because you suggested I was not seeing past the surface of his work, then said people like that are responsible for the success of Liefeld.

 

Weren't you also the guy who asked people to explain about Ditko as maybe it was something you weren't seeing? I would think the opinions of other successful people in the industry might shed some light on the subject?

 

Well...you kind of got me there, I did ask.

[Logan510]

I didn't connect you with Liefeld, I'm actually a little confused how you got to that conclusion

 

Because you suggested I was not seeing past the surface of his work, then said people like that are responsible for the success of Liefeld.

 

Weren't you also the guy who asked people to explain about Ditko as maybe it was something you weren't seeing? I would think the opinions of other successful people in the industry might shed some light on the subject?

 

Well...you kind of got me there, I did ask.

 

I can see where you might get to that conclusion now and I apologize for that as it was not my intent. I don't consider you as just a "fan" as you're a trained artist working in a field that's at least related to sequential art, as opposed to joe six pack who just knows what he likes.

[mackenzie999]

I have no problems with animal-based characters, but as far as expressing his creativity goes, in the first five Spidies with original villains, we have animal, animal, animal, Sandman, animal. That is 80%.

 

This is assuming Ditko was in fact responsible for the ideation of these guys. Maybe he was just following the -script, and it was Lee's idea to go all animal. In which case, yes, any other artist assigned to the series would have designed them. What did Ditko bring to this assignment? Let's see. Vulture? I'll make him an old bald guy with a nose like a beak! Lizard? Shaped like a man (why? this is not a low budget movie) but I'll give him a lab coat! I'm sorry but this creativity does not impress me. I do give him some points though...no face on the Chameleon was cool ( but two different lizard villains in six months? C'mon!) , and not making Doc Ock buff ceratainly went against the comic norm.

 

Can't really argue against the enduring nature of Spiderman though, but I can try. Most of the iconic Marvel heroes of this era were at least in part touched by the hand of Lee. Another way of saying this is that Lee helped create many enduring series and characters. Ditko had exactly one that really stuck. Who was his partner in this? Oh right, that other guy with the gigantic resume of success. You are free to draw your own conclusions here.

 

And it has been a fun debate, even if it is all subjective. I'm punching out now, I've been neglecting my real job too much today!