Erik Larsen is asking the question on, well, his lips at the moment: Do the Essentials/Showcase-format reprints invalidate artistic integrity?:
It’s a valid point that the creators of this work intended it to be in color. There can be no denying that. These pages were drawn with the idea that they would see print in color.
Some would argue (and have) that while producing inexpensive reprints for fans is laudable, giving color the old heave-ho is inexcusable. They feel that the custodians of this art form have a “higher duty” and that color emphatically Does matter. Dark Phoenix’s red costume is crucial, they’d say - and how does one get across the notion that the Fantastic Four is a team and how can we see that they were an imitation of the Challengers of the Unknown (who all had matching suits) without seeing that their outfits did in fact match and weren’t green, blue, purple and red? That’s something black and white reprints lose entirely.
And it’s hard to argue with that logic.
Actually, no, it’s not, at least for the earlier 60s/70s books that get reprinted. Yes, the stories were drawn to be colored, but the coloring that was done was basic and often done without any relevance to the original intent of the linework artists. Sure, you can’t see that the Fantastic Four all have the same color of outfits, but it’s the coherent design and that big “4″ on their chests that gives away the fact that they’re a team.
Bah.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:05 am
Doesn’t bother me. It offers a different experience and for those who don’t like it there are always back issues and other collections where the comic books can be admired in their full colour glory.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:13 am
Bah, indeed. You dismiss the FF/Challengers analogy but it looks like you purposly ignored the importance of color in the Phoenix/Dark Phoenix story. Let’s see you blithely distinguish away that one.
And what about Jack Kirby’s New Gods where the vibrant color scheme truly was part of the package. DC’s black/white/grey reprints are ghastly and literally pale next to the originals.
I believe color matters on some projects more than others. On the classic Claremont/Wein/Cockrum/Byrne run color adds a lot. House of Mystery & Tomb of Dracula might actually look better without color. It really does depend on the material.
November 3rd, 2006 at 2:19 pm
Well, I can’t get too deep into the minutiae of exactly how much authenticity to the original format to expect in reprinted works. All I can tell you is I enjoy reading something like Masterworks far more than reading the same content in Essentials. The color makes a difference to my experience. This is what prevents me from purchasing any of the Essentials volumes, truthfully. They just seem too “ghetto”. I’m glad there is a way to read all these old stories if I have the desire to, but for me comics is a marriage of stories and art, and color is part of that art.
November 3rd, 2006 at 2:22 pm
Down, Graeme. You’re trying way too hard here to make Erik look like an evil troglodyte.
November 3rd, 2006 at 3:30 pm
While there are a few instances where it would be great to see the original color (or for our British readers COLOUR), I don’t mind the black and white reprints at all. In fact, as a cartoonist, it gives me the opportunity to really study the ink lines in a way color can sometimes obscure or overpower.
I think the amazing (and inexpensive) access these reprints give to new or younger fans far outweighs any of the thematic disconnects Larson is so worried about.
Looks like Erik may be running out of stuff to opine upon.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:19 pm
If there is one person more full of sh!t then Mark Millar, it would be Erik Larson.
First few articles of his column did non-stop praising about how he and Image publish original work and that was so much better then having to write someone else’s character (like Superman and Spider-Man). He purposely ignored the fact that DC has Vertigo, he’s done work for hire projects while being with Image, and that Image not only does work for hire too, but one of it’s founders attempted to steal credit from Neil Gaiman. Of course, if he could write Shazam, well then that would be okay. But, everyone, just do work for Image.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:25 pm
“You dismiss the FF/Challengers analogy but it looks like you purposly ignored the importance of color in the Phoenix/Dark Phoenix story. Let’s see you blithely distinguish away that one.”
I haven’t read the books in a long time, but wasn’t the costume actually different when she was Phoenix and Dark Phoenix? I mean, wasn’t there a dark triangle behind the phoenix motif when she was “good” that disappeared - partially because the entire outfit was inked with more darks - when she was bad? Also, I could be wrong, but I think that her face was also darkened for the majority of her being evil, but that could be me misremembering.
Oh, and I’m pretty sure that her hair was done differently, as well - Longer, and more out of control.
I’m not saying that color is entirely unimportant, but I don’t think that it really started figuring into the original artistic intentions of the work until the late ’80s, early ’90s.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:30 pm
You tell that Jean Grey is acting evil by the actual story itself. If only going by visual clues, her eyes turn white, and she’s surrounded by an energy field (if my memory serves me right).
Marvel took advantage of what Manga has been doing for decades. Printing their material as cheaply as possibly and it’s working. DC saw how much Marvel was doing and wisely followed suit (not if only DC would do Omnibus editions and Marvel would do Absolute editions).
Plus, these stories are also available in color. Crucial stories like “The Dark Phoenix Saga” are also available as trades.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:40 pm
until someone finds a way to get me 500 pages of comcis for cheap WITH color, this arguement means nothing to me. essentials and showcases are great for people with limited spending cash who would like to read these comics.
November 3rd, 2006 at 4:50 pm
I think Erik was saying that Essentials and Showcases are a-ok in his book. His argument was simply that color figured into artistic intentions, and it certainly did in terms of costumes for character designs, even if it didn’t usually panel-to-panel.
November 3rd, 2006 at 7:03 pm
I’ve got to say, I agree that anyone with half a brain should be able to deal with black and white (Have you EVER seen how the characters look in colour? Then if you can’t fill it in with your imagination while reading the b&w, you have brain damage).
HOWEVER, I couldn’t disagree more about the time frames you single out for both praise and dismissal, artist’s intentions be damned.
My all-time favourite colouring dates from the early to mid seventies, to the point that my biggest beef with the Shooter regime is his dictates regarding colouring which replaced the great, moody, subtle colouring of the 70s with the washed-out, too-damned-many-white-backgrounds colours of 80s Marvel.
In fact, in most cases for books from the 70s, I prefer a black and white reprint to one re-coloured according to the preferences of a later era if it’s too hard (or pricey) to get my hands on a quality original.
Ed-not-really-Jack
“GIVE a man a fish…
He eats for a DAY.
TEACH a man TO fish…
He eats for a LIFETIME.
TURN a man INTO a fish…
Become MASTER of the WORLD!!!
YAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!”
PS. No, there’s nothing there yet if you click the link to my blog, but the name should make it obvious that it will mostly focus on 70s Marvel, though I make no promises to stick to that consistently (I’m actually hoping to devote a whole post to the fact that all my “Shooter-hating” sentiments depend almost entirely upon his colouring policies {and some other visual dictates I remember from interviews of the time} rather than the usual “I heard he was a dick to this or that creator”).
November 3rd, 2006 at 7:43 pm
I don’t buy the Essentials based on the fact they are in b&w. Isn’t it possible to produce cheap color reprints?
I see Erik’s point here and think that it’s a shame that some of this material that deserves to be reprinted isn’t getting a little better treatment.
November 3rd, 2006 at 8:14 pm
From TFA:
I liken those that avoid
the black and white volumes
to those that don’t care
to look at original art -
“because it’s too big
and not in color.”
That (to me) is madness.
It’s pretty clear Erik’s not against Showcase and Essential volumes. He states that he buys them. The quotes above are just illustrating arguements he’s heard.
November 3rd, 2006 at 8:34 pm
“I see Erik’s point here and think that it’s a shame that some of this material that deserves to be reprinted isn’t getting a little better treatment.”
It is. Most of it’s being reprinted in the high quality hardcover editions. You simply can’t get that much color material at budget prices.
November 4th, 2006 at 5:28 am
I Am Persistant I played star wars for the first time with Josh Because Josh did All the fighting and I did all the levers
November 4th, 2006 at 11:05 am
If you want color, you can get it. If you want cheap, you can get it. What’s the problem?
November 4th, 2006 at 11:56 am
Graeme, this is dishonest of you. The column talks about the pros and cons of black and white reprints. You snip out the con part and bash him for it, presenting it as if he’s against it and ignoring the rest.
Erik is planning reprinting early Savage Dragon in Showcase/Essentials style format. So he’s clearly not against the format.
November 4th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
Augie DeBlieck Jr said:
“Down, Graeme. You’re trying way too hard here to make Erik look like an evil troglodyte.”
No, just making it more obvious.
—————
I admire that Erik is the only Image founder to still be working consistantly on one of his creations. I think he is the only founder to honor the promise for which Image was founded.
But I also think Erik should cut his column frequency to once a month so he doesn’t have to try so hard to find things to talk about. He’s starting to sound as out of the loop as John Byrne.
November 4th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
Hey, I typed in a smiley after the
“…just making it more obvious.” remark.
Honest.