When Did John Byrne "Lose It"?

[delekkerste]

No, not *that* kind of "losin' it".

 

What's the consensus on when John Byrne came down off his peak talent levels? His run on the X-Men was, IMO, probably the best super-hero artwork we've ever seen. That run wrapped up in early 1981, but he moved to the FF just a few months later - what do people think about the artwork on that run (I have some of those issues, but haven't looked at them since the 1980s)? What's the consensus on his Alpha Flight artwork that came out a couple of years later? I have all those issues, but not handy - I recall, though, that the art looked a lot looser (re: sloppier) than his X-Men work. Was he inking his own stuff by that point? Thoughts?

[shiverbones]

FF was alright in my book, but not great. Alpha was sloppy, but his superman stuff was actually really tight. I think that was the last thing he did of merit.

[Aman619]

after he became the living god and felt he could do no wrong. I still liked his Next Men, but his pencilling and self-inking was already starting to go off the tracks. Reminded me of when Gil Kane was allowed (?) to ink his own Green Lantern pencils (starting in #49) ... It was crude and powerful at the same time without the mannered inks of Sid Greene. ANyway, IMO Byrne got to the top of the heap and just kinda coasted from there on.

[sckao]

 

I think he lost it when he thought he could do 4 pages of artwork a day without sacrificing quality. In a published interview, he stated that he could draw a full page in 1.5 hours.

[rob_react]

FF was alright in my book, but not great. Alpha was sloppy, but his superman stuff was actually really tight. I think that was the last thing he did of merit.

 

That's about right. The Superman stuff was actually an improvement over his later FF (270 and above) work. What was the timing on those? When did he end FF and when did he begin Superman/ Legends?

 

Here's the real litmus test, by the way, I'm actually looking to buy some Byrne art from about the first 35-40 issues of his FF run. After that, with the exception of the Superman stuff, which was overall VERY nice, I appraise Byrne art on a piece by piece basis. Most of it ends up in the reject pile.

[s-man]

I really loved the stuff he did in both Alpha Flight and FF. I think that maybe in the case of his X-Men run, it helped that he had Austin doing the inks. They seemed to mesh extremely well together...better then any other inker that has done Byrne stuff, IMO. I think he also did a great job in his Superman stint and the Next Men stuff was pretty good to. His stint in Wolverine was a bit loose, not his best. And his newer stint in JLA isnt as impressive as his older stuff, but its not bad. Over all, I would say that he hasnt gone downhill that much. He can still draw some pretty great stuff!

[deathlok]

I loved Alpha Flight from the first issue and Byrne helped with the visuals that I can remember so well. I started to lose interest during the Next Men. Perhaps it was the writing or characters, but it got old real quick. I think I dropped it after a dozen issues.

[uclapeterg]

I think the later FF issues were kinda sloppy (altho 285 remains my fav). I thought his worst work was Wonder Woman... ugh. I think his current work on JLA is pretty good , though.

[s-man]

I loved Alpha Flight from the first issue and Byrne helped with the visuals that I can remember so well. I started to lose interest during the Next Men. Perhaps it was the writing or characters, but it got old real quick. I think I dropped it after a dozen issues.

 

Next Men got very strange, very quick. I mean to go from breaking out of captivity and end up being famous for being in comics? Strange concept...but I still liked the artwork!

[nitowljr-migration]

Byrne's worst artistic endeavors have been from lack of pencil art. Somewhere along the line he decided sloppy or no layouts at all were good enough. He was paid for both pencils and inks so who's gonna know the difference? Most of his recent stuff looks like it was inked with one of those big Sharpie permanent markers.

 

The best Byrne stuff, in my opinion and pretty much everyone else's, are, of course, his collaborations with Terry Austin. The only other inker I can remember truly "embellishing" Byrne's art has been Al Gordon. FF #274 (Byrne/Gordon) is one of the few Byrne works without Austin that I enjoy reading.

[joe_collector]

What's the consensus on when John Byrne came down off his peak talent levels?

 

As soon as he was given writing and inking duties, his art suffered considerably. I can see a noted difference between his last "real art" and his first "All-Byrne" FF 232 issue.

 

The easiest way for me to say it is that everything "GOT BIG". His panels increased in size, characters got larger, background detail started fading away, and there was "less going on" in the panels.

 

This was obviously a time-saver so he could produce more art/day, but it shifted him from that-generation's Neal Adams, into just another hack who was pumping out quick-krap for $$$.

[Zonker]

The best Byrne stuff, in my opinion and pretty much everyone else's, are, of course, his collaborations with Terry Austin.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

 

It is impossible to over-estimate what Terry Austin brings to the party. Not only did he make Byrne look good on X-Men, early Superman, etc. but he also fixed Mike Nasser's early work in Worlds Finest and Marshall Rogers' early work on Detective Comics. Neither the later Marshall Rogers / Giordano Detective issues nor the Rogers/Rubinstein Silver Surfer issues were anywhere near as powerful.

 

Austin came out of the Neal Adams Continuity studio, and a lot of the Adams-esque look of the Dark Phoenix period is due to Austin's influence, IMHO.

[Marvelous]

When I think of Byrne art from the 80s to present the thing that pops out to me is the similarity of all the faces of the different characters. Looked like cookie cutter copies of one another.

[joe_collector]

It is impossible to over-estimate what Terry Austin brings to the party.

 

I think too many people overestimate Austin's contribution, personally. I agree that he was one of the best inkers for Byrne, but it's also obvious that John put a lot of work into his X-Men art, at that came out as well.

 

I can pick up an issue of MTU, or Iron Fist or Champions with Byrne art, and it's not like there's any real difference in terms of layout, action of pencil quality. In fact, I often prefer Layton's inks over Austin's, depending on the book.

 

 

Dave Hunt on MTU wasn't too bad either.

 

 

 

[Fan4Fan]

Byrne's worst artistic endeavors have been from lack of pencil art. Somewhere along the line he decided sloppy or no layouts at all were good enough. He was paid for both pencils and inks so who's gonna know the difference? Most of his recent stuff looks like it was inked with one of those big Sharpie permanent markers.

 

Which is exactly what he used on some of his FF work... ugh!

 

Byrne's work is best inked by someone else. Some of his Marvel Team-Up and Marvel Two-in-One pages are quite nice.

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

[uclapeterg]

You could say that about one of the best artists ever... Kirby.

 

When I think of Byrne art from the 80s to present the thing that pops out to me is the similarity of all the faces of the different characters. Looked like cookie cutter copies of one another.

[uclapeterg]

I thought Byrne's early work on FF was quite good.

[rob_react]

Byrne's worst artistic endeavors have been from lack of pencil art. Somewhere along the line he decided sloppy or no layouts at all were good enough. He was paid for both pencils and inks so who's gonna know the difference? Most of his recent stuff looks like it was inked with one of those big Sharpie permanent markers.

 

Which is exactly what he used on some of his FF work... ugh!

 

Byrne's work is best inked by someone else. Some of his Marvel Team-Up and Marvel Two-in-One pages are quite nice.

 

 

There are some on ebay right now if anyone is interested.

[Kevin Boyd]

I believe he started pencilling in ink when he as doing Fantastic Four and Alpha Flight at the same time. I remember watching a documentary on John as he drew Alpha Flight #9 in ink with only slight pencil outlines to guide his hand.

 

That being said, I find it hard to pinpoint when Byrne "lost it" as I still buy and enjoy his work.

 

However, there were projects that I just didn't like, and some I just didn't buy, such as... X-Men: The Hidden Years, Jack Kirby's Fourth World, the Genesis mini-series.

 

I have been enjoying Generations and JLA, and I'm curious to see the Doom Patrol, as there's a group of characters that I have never been interested in reading.

[sckao]

Byrne's worst artistic endeavors have been from lack of pencil art. Somewhere along the line he decided sloppy or no layouts at all were good enough. He was paid for both pencils and inks so who's gonna know the difference? Most of his recent stuff looks like it was inked with one of those big Sharpie permanent markers.

 

The best Byrne stuff, in my opinion and pretty much everyone else's, are, of course, his collaborations with Terry Austin. The only other inker I can remember truly "embellishing" Byrne's art has been Al Gordon. FF #274 (Byrne/Gordon) is one of the few Byrne works without Austin that I enjoy reading.

 

Terry Austin now seems to ink with thicker technical pens as well. It's all about speed these days.

 

You really can't get the line variations and fluidity with technical pens like you can with brushes or quills. You can get fine details like in a Travis Charest drawing, but then you have to consciously put in the thicker blacks for line weight.