• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Another big find surfaces in Siegel / Superman copyright docs

Started by markseifert,

85 posts in this topic

conditionfreak

conditionfreak

Posted
Posted
those houses don't look so run down. actually, they look a lot like the houses in my neighborhood and they'd be pushing $1 million here, $1.1-$1.4 with some good interior renovations.

 

:o

 

You must be in New York. I can hook you up with some better than this in Cleveland, for 50 grand each (I get to keep the difference from what the house actually costs :)

 

You can buy houses just a little worse than this in Cleveland for one dollar. You just have to sign that you will live in it and not rent it out.

 

True.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BR-migration

BR-migration

Posted
Posted

Yep - go back to the original post today and you'll see Denis Kitchen's response. Really cool stuff. If you're interested in more Keaton art, Kitchen Sink's book on Flying Jenny is well worth tracking down.

 

The house is in a very bad neighborhood -- but as someone pointed out, its condition isn't all *that* bad. In fact, a group here in Cleveland with help/direction from a comics person is going to be undergoing a rehabilitation effort very soon that all of us can be a part of -- and it doesn't involve just giving money away. It should be posted here in a couple of weeks. It's going to be very, very cool.

 

BR

www.greendoorfilms.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BangZoom

BangZoom

Posted
Posted

 

Kitchen's response to the posting of the Russell Keaton Superman strips is here.

 

Link

 

It reads in part:

 

"I’m the one who sent the Russell Keaton Superman material to Jerry & Joanne Siegel years ago in an effort to produce a book about the “secret origin of Superman.” Some of you may recall that I published “The Aviation Art of Russell Keaton” in the 90s (Kitchen Sink Press) and in the process discovered this amazing connection. The unpublished material is co-owned by the Keatons & Siegels under © law) but the Siegel’s lawyers at the time would not allow this to go forward (because of the then-pending litigation against DC)."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buttock

buttock

Posted
Posted
was this entered as evidence by the Siegels? Any ideas on what purpose it was meant to serve in the case? Did DC ever see these pages, or just the later version by Shuster? And if not, would this have any bearing on the recent decision that marks only Action 1 and only its content to be in contention now?

 

Here's a bit of additional background on this document.

 

The author of that Newsarama post runs the site where the material is hosted. He also posted some Siegel/DC correspondence that has come to light as part of the copyright situation also -- and which stirred up some controversy around the net a couple weeks ago.

 

Absolutely must-read stuff if you haven't seen it. Here's a couple brief excerpts of Trexler's commentary on the docs, but you should really go read his whole post as well.

 

Even apart from the gender issues there's a lot of amazing stuff here--the recurring savage criticism of Joe Shuster's art; an early critique of Wayne Boring as an artist unsuitable for Superman...

 

Yet it is the sex stuff that really stands out, providing a rare insiders' perspective on the comics writing culture of the past. One of the true highlights of the newly released correspondence is the black-and-white sketch of Lois Lane included in this post. The artist was Siegel's and Shuster's editor, Whitney Ellsworth, who was attempting to get the duo to make Lois Lane less curvaceous.

 

These docs are an amazing insider look at a key time and place in the industry.

 

Well after reading all those documents, I can say that it's amazing that DC was able to survive after hemorrhaging cash all those years... meh

 

Several times I noticed there would be a few paragraphs criticizing Siegel, lamenting how terrible things were both from a production and financial standpoint, and then - "ohbytheway here's your check for X-thousand dollars."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the blob

the blob

Posted
Posted

the one on the left looks pretty big though. yes, i know, and you can buy houses like that in ghetto Buffalo and other upstate NY depressed towns for like $10-25K as well. If I had some spare cash I'd seriously consider buying one circa 1900 for spare parts for my house if it still had some original details like the stained glass windows. all but one stained glass window in my circa 1900 victorianish house were removed, as were a lot of the original details like the frigging fireplaces. i see my neighbor's gorgeous original mahogony or oak or something nice fireplaces and get ticked off someone in the past ripped our's out and replaced it with a totally nondescript wood frame. (at least the tiles are still in my fireplace).

 

oh well, going off topic, just pointing out that from the street those houses don't look so bad. even in a HORRIBLE neighborhood in NYC they'd be $300K++++.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jayman

Jayman

Posted
Posted

Funny you asked about that as I just started cleaning it up for myself but I guess I can share.

Here are the first three sections, I only have cleaned up the type and straightened out the panels. I do not want to alter the art in any way, so it remains untouched.

 

siegel_keatonFirstThree.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
binarysunrise

binarysunrise

Posted
Posted
Funny you asked about that as I just started cleaning it up for myself but I guess I can share.

Here are the first three sections, I only have cleaned up the type and straightened out the panels. I do not want to alter the art in any way, so it remains untouched.

 

siegel_keatonFirstThree.jpg

 

Great start! I'd love to see your final product :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

Overall, its interesting to think about what effect this artwork might have had on the success of Superman. It's much more professional, cleaner and polished than Shuster's style. I like to think that the late 30s comics business was like S&S, and Bob Kane, a lot of kids coming up with ideas and crudely drawn panels to illustrate them, and going off the NYC to get rich or die trying.

 

But clearly there was a pool of talented experienced artists already working. Had Siegel stayed with this look, or had DC teamed him with a better artist than Shuster, like this, better able to meet deadlines etc, (i.e, a "professional") would Superman still have succeeded? Or done even better? Or would this art have looked too stiff, or old-fashioned? Missing that crude "Im learning as fast as I can dammit" Shuster quality?

 

Or would it have made no difference? We will never know. A lot would depend on this artists version of Superman himself. I dont recall seeing a shot in costume on that website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jayman

Jayman

Posted
Posted
Great start! I'd love to see your final product :)

 

Thanks! Like I said I was just fooling around doing this for myself but when I saw the post asking about cleaning it up I figured I'd share it with the boards. I do plan on doing the rest. As far as cleaning up the artwork though it's tricky, as I truly cannot tell what is a photocopy artifact and original art. So for that fact I do not want to risk altering the look of the art in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

start by deciding that this artists used clean lines and not a pointillism effect, like Seurat. I think all the little specks that give this a grainy look were never there. Old copiers tended to add flecks in whiite areas. And each time you copy a copy that grow and migrate. This being a court copy certainly must be a 9th generation copy or so. Its riddle with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

look in between every line that describes a fold or outline. and delete any dotted or splotchy mark that "grew" between them. Those werent there. I kinda like the overall effect, a grainy texture. It works well in some panels, but is obviously wrong in so many more though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing