It's on My Shelf -- Maybe It Should Be on Yours!!

Consider this the first in an ongoing series of book reviews spotlighting various comics histories. We’ll look at books about particular artists, companies, eras, etc. Sometimes each of your three hosts will fly solo – at other times we may chime in on another’s review (just because we can’t keep quiet about our love of this literary genre!). So buckle in, and maybe even start scaring up some loose change!


For the kick-off I thought we’d examine one of my favorite subjects: the life and work of Big John Buscema! A recent release paying homage to the master is Dr. Emilio Soltero’s John Buscema: A Life in Sketches (Pearl Press 2008; msrp $24.95). I purchased this tome just a few weeks ago at one of my local comic shop haunts.



I’ll have to say up front – it is difficult for me to give any sort of review of this book without comparing it to two previous biographies of Buscema: J. David Spurlock’s John Buscema Sketchbook (Vanguard Productions 2001; msrp for the signed/numbered hardcover $39.95) and the out-of-print The Art of John Buscema by Sal Quartuccio and Bob Keenan (Sal Q. Productions 1978).


Perhaps it’s because both Quartuccio and Spurlock included lengthy interviews with Big John, and there is additional material from and about Buscema in many of TwoMorrows Publishing’s various magazines (Comic Book Artist, Alter Ego, Back Issue, et al.), that I just find Dr. Soltero’s lack of text to leave his labor of love looking more like unfinished potential. Don’t get me wrong – despite what I thought was a bit of a hefty price tag, I am still happy to have purchased this book. It’s an extensive collection of John’s sketches (many from the backs of comic pages he was penciling as a hired assignment) and roughs that fits in the palms of my hands. But I have a confession to make – I’ve been pilfering scans of John’s artworks from Ebay dealers and other websites for years. I’ve amassed quite a digital collection of pencil/inks, roughs, covers, and finished pages – perhaps over 500 images. Soltero’s work (with no recently-discovered interview material) just wasn’t much different (nor compelling) from what I already own.

Soltero does include snippets of interviews with Sal Buscema, Neal Adams, Ernie Chan, Kevin Nowlan, Juan Gimenez, and even a comic convention panel featuring John Buscema responding to questions from Jim Shooter. But these are generally short in length, and don’t necessarily illuminate the accompanying illustrations. And while no one could argue the importance of Sal Buscema or Chan (or the authority of Adams), where are others who were John’s contemporaries – creators like Stan Lee, John Romita, Roy Thomas, Marie Severin, George Roussos, Tom Palmer, or Dan Adkins? Even researching and securing permission for use of existing interviews/tributes would have added to this book.

Spurlock’s book benefits from organizing Buscema’s sketches into chapters such as Warriors, Women, etc. Quartuccio’s interview covers many aspects of John’s career and really deals with then-contemporary work such as John’s assignment to Marvel’s Wizard of Oz adaptation and the How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way book. John’s art serves simply as examples of his prowess but does help to move the interview along. While Soltero certainly has no dearth of any type of Buscema’s work, it’s displayed pell-mell throughout the book with no real flow to it. Also of note is the frequent inclusion of rough panels and pages from the Conan story, Isle of Pirates Doom. This is a nice touch, but begins to wear on the reader after awhile – could the author not have secured similar panel/page samples from Buscema’s Fantastic Four or Avengers work, either of which there is a treasure trove of material?

But if you are a true fan who enjoys John’s renditions of major Marvel characters (and even a JLA rough to boot!), his Tarzan and Conan work, animals, women, and just generally mean-looking barbarians, wizards, and guys in suits, then this book should find it’s way to your library. I know I’ve come across as overtly negative toward my recent purchase. Please understand – there are few bigger Buscema fans than me. But because of that, I want more, more, and more about Big John. Where’s that long lost interview, that colleague who after all these years decided to tell a few new anecdotes? Perhaps that wasn’t at all Soltero’s intent with this book. He does, after all, remark in his introduction that in his opinion the Quartuccio and Spurlock books fell short in including the vast amount of sketchwork that he has been able to give the reader. So I guess it depends on what you’re after – if it’s a vast display of John’s beautiful renderings, then this book is for you. If it’s a lesser amount of drafting but with information about the man and his career, then I’d urge you to seek out the Spurlock book from Vanguard.

Sharon: I'll chime in here...I have the Spurlock book and as Doug says, it's quite informative about Big John's career and techniques and contains a great interview with John. Its only flaw, to my mind, is that it does not contain repros of his penciled costumed superheroes work in it; there's no Avengers, or the Surfer, or Namor, or... well, you get the idea. But it's a handy overall guide to Buscema and contains beautiful illustrations of non-superheroes. Okay, back to Doug...

Either way, you really can’t go wrong. I’ve said it before – there are few who could be called master in the four-color field, and John Buscema is near the top of any list of that nature.

The Thomas-Adams X-Men: X-Men 59

X-Men #59  (1969)

X-Men #59 (August 1969)

“Do or Die, Baby!”
Scripter – Roy Thomas
Artist – Neal Adams
Embellisher –Tom Palmer

Karen: This is our fourth and final review (for now) of the Roy Thomas –Neal Adams X-Men stories. I can say without hesitation that it has been a real pleasure to read these stories, and they are a great example of how to do comics right. There’s plenty of action, characterization, and just excitement in these books.

Doug: An interesting note from my reading source, X-Men Classics #1 – the story that is in X-Men #59 is cut off right in the middle and left as a cliffhanger, actually continuing in X-Men Classics #2! Here I was, settling in to finish up this little series of reviews, when Whoa! An unsolicited return to the basement to retrieve more comics!

Sharon: The division of the story struck me as odd in X-Men Classics #1; there’s even an “intro” page summarizing X-Men #56 at the start. I’ll stick with the Adams Visionaries tpb and my recollections of the original issues! These stories (and the entire Thomas-Adams X-Men run) will also be included in the forthcoming Essential Classic X-Men volume 3 (in black and white).

Karen: Adams again gives us a wonderful, almost theatrical experience. There are so many good scenes in the book I almost don’t know where to begin. I think the panel of Cyclops cutting loose on a Sentinel on page 8 really conveys raw power, and the full page shot of the Sentinels flying into the sun is spectacular. I also liked Roy’s captions on this page – it was dramatic yet poetic: ”On the surface of this world of solar winds…of moment to moment thermonuclear cataclysm…a handful of humanoid forms will make but the most imperceptible of ripples…!”

Sharon: In an interview in Comic Book Artist, Adams himself cites this passage as a great example of how well Roy and he meshed, and of how Roy’s text complemented the art perfectly.

Doug: Agreed on all points. About the only bone I’d pick with Roy in this book is the continued effort of Marvel to play down their female characters. Jean is just portrayed as a dope – never knowing what to do unless Scott tells her, unsure of her abilities, etc. She is characterized here in much the same way we’ve seen the Silver Age Scarlet Witch and Invisible Girl. It’s interesting, though, that as the Bronze Age got under way (and into the Modern Age) other writers would take these three female supporting characters and make them the most powerful members of their respective teams.

Karen: I also really like the coloring job Adams did here. He wasn’t credited in the book, but the Bullpen Bulletins page mentions him as coloring his own work. His work has a sense of light and shadow, warmth and coolness. Of course, Tom Palmer’s inking also helps out in these areas, providing so much texture to the work.

Sharon: Adams made it a point to learn about coloring and printing technologies; he always wanted his work to be presented in the best possible light (as we know, he’s very hands on with his reprinted work and how it’s presented). Anyway, back then when he started to pencil for Marvel, he noticed that Marvel had a slightly larger color palette than DC did. As Neal has related in interviews, he advised DC to expand their palette (DC had thought it would be more expensive but it was not the case). So in the late 60s-early 70s you’ll start to see some DC coloring changes, such as DC’s “skin” tone changed from a pink to a more flesh color, or Batman’s costume from purplish to gray.

Doug: Yes, and I’d just reiterate what I think I’ve said for each of the previous three issues – the camera angles that Adams chose, the pacing, etc. is just so good and for its time largely revolutionary.

Karen: We see a ton of mutants in this issue, although unfortunately they are all cameos, as none of them get anything to do! Cyke, Jean, and Beast exchange costumes with the captured Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, and Toad, in order to throw off the Sentinel’s ability to adapt to powers. But unfortunately the three now free mutants don’t help out our X-Men! It would have been nice to see all six running around together.

Sharon: Yes, I never understood why the X-Men didn’t want at least Pietro helping out (Wanda was depowered at the time). I also had a hard time believing the X-Men would have donned the trio’s clothing, and I assume vice versa…ughh (thinking of sanitary issues). Also, isn’t the Beast a lot larger and taller than the short, puny Toad? Anyway, I liked how Adams made Wanda’s face slightly different from Jean’s (when they were shown in nearly identical panels, identically dressed in Wanda’s costume and tiara, in different panels on the same page); Jean’s face was a bit narrower and more angular.

Sharon: It was great to get a glimpse of how Wanda and Pietro would look in Adams’ hands. The shot of Pietro battling the Sentinels calls to mind the profile shot of Magneto later on at the end of X-Men #62; there’s a facial similarity between the two characters…in hindsight, of course! I’ve never read that Adams had intended a resemblance, but others sure picked up on it or may have been influenced by it. Too bad when Adams penciled the Avengers book later on, Wanda and Pietro were mostly comatose throughout his short-lived stint.

Sharon: And I loved the shot of Jean as Wanda using her “hex” (really telekinetic) power. In this instance, I felt Adams’ flourishes were warranted; style served substance, instead of distracting from it.

Karen: In order to stop the Sentinels, Cyclops pulls a play straight out of Captain Kirk’s playbook: he talks them into destroying themselves, by seeking out the source of all mutation, the sun itself! This could have felt like a cheat, but the way it was handled it, I felt it was a satisfying conclusion.

Sharon: The idea of the Sentinels flying into the sun, and the sun as the source of all mutation, was suggested by then-Marvel intern/office assistant…a fellow by the name of Chris Claremont. He was also included in the credits of Avengers #102, which continued the Sentinels’ story. Never one to rest on his laurels, later on Claremont famously supplied the plot point of the Living Island in a little book called Giant-Size X-Men. Talk about a fertile imagination!

Doug: Do either of you recall another Sentinels story where the constructs are able to carry on a conversation with non-Sentinels? It seems to me that their speech in this story is more akin to the Master Mold and not to ordinary Sentinels. I could be wrong, and admittedly haven’t gone to look up any other examples. But I found the conversations with Judge Chalmers to be a little more sentient than I’d recalled them having in other books.

Karen: After reading these issues, it seems like a shame that this creative team could not have stayed around for many years. I’m really curious where the book would have gone. But then, we might not have gotten the equally wonderful Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne years.

Doug: The heritage of this collaboration lives on in reprints – how many times? X-Men Classics 1-3, X-Men Visionaries: Neal Adams, Essential X-Men, Marvel Masterworks, the X-Men DVD-ROM, etc. That Marvel has gone back to this particular well so many times speaks to the “classic” nature of this creative team. As you said, Karen, although they weren’t together long, it seems that whatever they touched (Avengers, X-Men, Inhumans) turned to gold!

Sharon: In an earlier entry I mentioned Adams’ Ben Casey work and wished aloud that someone would package it—well, just TODAY I see my prayers have been answered! IDW Publishing has just announced a two-volume collection of the Adams Ben Casey strips, to be published in the summer of 2009. Ah, there is a God…

The Thomas-Adams X-Men: X-Men 58

X-Men #58 (1969) You know this is by Neal!

X-Men #58 (July 1969)

“Mission: Murder!”
Roy Thomas –script
Neal Adams – art
Tom Palmer – inks

Karen: This is the third issue in our look at the Adams-Thomas X-Men from the late 1960s. This issue is action packed, as the X-Men face off against the new and improved Sentinels. These Sentinels were no longer just giant robots – they were able to adapt to attacks and compensate for any mutant ability. This made them truly formidable foes for the young mutants. Unfortunately, as with many things, familiarity breeds contempt, and I’m afraid the overuse of the Sentinels has rendered them somewhat uninteresting nowadays. But here (and also in the early Claremont- Cockrum run), they were still incredibly dangerous and exciting threats.

Doug: The opening sequence with Hank and Bobby being attacked is quickly-paced and shows off the best of both of these X-Men. Also of note is Adams’ use of the television screens showcasing Larry Trask’s rant. Frank Miller would use this motif in both of his The Dark Knight Returns and Elektra: Assassin graphic novels.

Karen: Besides the action, we begin to see signs of a love triangle forming between Iceman, Lorna Dane, and Alex Summers, who has been rechristened “Havok”. Poor Iceman – I don’t think he really had a chance against the much more compelling Alex!

Sharon: I really enjoyed this sequence with Lorna “the green-haired goddess”, Alex, and Bobby (who looked good in his un-iced form, and much more like a teenager than the other X-Men in their civilian guises). This sort of character byplay was welcome, as the X-Men had become very stodgy with only the original five (as I’d mentioned previously). Seeing some unexpected characterization gave me hope that the series would develop into a Marvel contender. Loved Roy’s anti-war sentiment (voiced in Alex’s mouth): “Fighting’s your hang-up, Drake…not mine!”

Doug: This love triangle is not unlike one we’ll see “in a few years” in the pages of The Fantastic Four, between Johnny, Crystal, and Quicksilver. And if you think about it, Roy was writing those stories as well! Here it’s pretty easy to see Bobby stand in for Johnny, and Alex playing the part of Pietro. Of course, Lorna and Crystal had all of the explaining to do!

Sharon: When Lorna was introduced as a love interest for Bobby a few issues earlier, I immediately thought of the Johnny-Crystal pairing. At the time one of the things I felt was lacking in the X-Men was the sort of interpersonal relationships that made the Fantastic Four such a good series. As mentioned, the original five were getting boring (by this point Scott and Jean’s relationship seemed trouble free) and I thought that some new characters such as Lorna would liven things up. Adding Alex to the mix was even better!

Karen: We get some nice cameos in this issue with Mesmero, the Living Monolith, and the Banshee (back when he looked really weird!). This issue was really chock full o’ mutants, back when this was not a regular occurrence in X-Men mags! We’ll see even more in the next issue.

Doug: I get the impression that Roy and Neal were really starting to gel and pick up a head of steam in this, their third issue together. Respect for the past, laying the groundwork for the future… And I’m glad Dave Cockrum (and later John Byrne) softened the Banshee’s looks and gave him some personality. Having only seen the reprint of X-Men #28 after the All-New, All-Different team began, I can say I’m glad. The latter version of the character was much more to my liking!

Karen: Of course, the art is again gorgeous. The cover is one of my favorite X-Men covers. In fact the only thing marring the artwork is that terrible costume Angel was wearing! Yellow, red, blue, black…ye gods, what a mess. I guess Adams didn’t like it much either, as he would later replace it with a much cooler blue and white one. However, the Havok costume is one of the most original I’ve ever seen. I really like the concentric circles on his chest, which get larger as his power builds.

Doug: Angel’s costume is interesting to say the least, and I agree – the Havok costume, in all its simplicity, might be one of the best superhero suits ever designed. I was somewhat disoriented the first time I read this in that regardless of how Alex faced, the concentric circles always faced the reader.

Sharon: The Havok costume is great—all silhouette and no shading (per Adams’ instructions to Palmer, who had started to ink the costume with the usual lines and texture to depict musculature). I could do without the “eggbeater” headpiece, though (I understand its intent and that it was supplied by Trask… but it just looked so clumsy!).

Doug: But of Angel – do you like the blue/white color scheme, or the red/white scheme used in The Champions and the X-Men issues of the 1980’s?

Sharon: I preferred the blue and white. Something about the red with his blond hair didn’t appeal to me.

Doug: A comment on Adams’ faces – few artists really take the time to show emotion with the mouth. If you think about stalwarts like Kirby or Sal Buscema, their characters’ mouths generally look the same. But if you focus on what Adams is doing, and much later Byrne – there is a real attention to detail that allows a face-shot to move the action and emotion along without the use of full-body poses.

Sharon: I agree, Adams’ facial work—in close up or medium shot—often was excellent.

Doug: The first time Havok cuts loose on a Sentinel is awesome! I wish it had been a splash page!

Karen: We get a nice twist by Roy here, with Larry Trask turning out to be a mutant himself! Of course, he would also show up later in Avengers, right as Roy was ending his run on that title.

Doug: It’s certainly a cliffhanger! I love doing these reviews of classic stories – when you think about it, each story we’ve looked at so far on our wonderful little blog has had decent scripting, capable art (to say the least), and the stories flowed one issue into the next in a manner that made the consumer want to get back to that drug store or newsstand as quickly as possible.

Sharon: I literally counted the days until the next issue. I knew exactly when my Marvels (X-Men, Avengers, FF) would hit the stands at my neighborhood store.

Doug: These were times when the characters were written in-character, the artists were storytellers and not just posers, and there was a sense that the story was important as a vehicle toward making a buck, not just focusing on the buck itself.
Sigh…

The Thomas-Adams X-Men : X-Men #57

X-Men #57

X-Men #57 (June 1969)

“The Sentinels Live!”
Script – Roy Thomas
Pencils – Neal Adams
Inks- Tom Palmer

Karen: This is the second issue in our review of the Thomas-Adams X-Men, and here’s where things really get going. This issue (#57) kicks off one of the best Sentinel stories ever, in my opinion. While Cyclops, Angel, and Marvel Girl stay in Egypt trying to find Cyke’s brother Alex, who turns out to have a power even more destructive than his brother’s, Beast and Angel head back to America after an urgent distress call from Iceman’s girlfriend, the green-tressed Lorna Dane. What they discover is “The Sentinels Live!”

Sharon: Will someone please tell me why Lorna Dane was decked out in her Mesmero-donated costume, wearing a her headpiece, in the privacy of her own apartment? Was she suited up because she was supposed to be on call or something?

Sharon: That aside, I was thrilled to see her--she'd last appeared back in X-Men #52 and I was disappointed that she hadn't turned into a series regular immediately after that Magneto-Mesmero arc. IIRC, in #56's letter column Marvel mentioned she'd be back and I was glad, because at that time the original five were just too bland! . I was also glad that in #57 Roy wrote dialogue that specified Lorna had magnetic powers...in her first appearance; her powers weren't explicitly defined as such. (And Arnold Drake came up with a winner when he named her –I always get a kick out of her name!)

Karen: The art looks even better in this issue. Besides being a tremendous artist, Adams is a masterful storyteller. I often will just look over panels in comics without reading the words, to see if I can tell what’s going on by the pictures alone. Adams passes this test easily. His panels flow seamlessly and his choice of angles – how to “shoot the scene” – are perfect. I can only imagine what a revelation he was when he first hit comics.

Doug: I agree – the most impressive thing about this issue is its pace. On early pages where Lorna Dane is captured, there are five panels: a front-on shot, two ceiling shots, an upshot of Lorna’s face, and (although a thin vertical panel) a panoramic view of the Egyptian landscape. Adams really keeps the action moving not only through this intro. but through the entire story -- it never feels rushed. In addition to the pencil/ink art you’ve mentioned, the coloring is top-shelf. The aforementioned scene where Cyke lays into the Egyptian police, all colored in red tones, is quite effective. I can sense that a scene like that would have been influential on a young Alex Ross, who often prefers to paint in monochromatic schemes.

Doug: Also, the scene I mentioned in our previous post involving Adams’ mastery at the expense of the Beast is in this issue. The scene of a falling, very worried beast is shown as if it’s a movie film. Really moves the eye and creates the sense of speed and tension – powerfully rendered. Speaking of mood, just look through this story again and concentrate on the facial expressions in a given panel. Adams is amazing!

Karen: I don’t want to forget Tom Palmer. I’ve always been a big fan of his inking; I thought his work with John Buscema was some of the best comic art I’ve ever seen. Here, he applies shades and textures to Adams work and the combination is just brilliant.

Sharon: Palmer was basically just starting out back then and he'd already inked Colan (on Dr. Strange, which I didn't read so I was not familiar with his work); now Adams; soon, Buscema. Not bad!

Sharon: And as much as I like Palmer on Adams, Adams' work loses something when it's inked—by anyone. His line work just gets obscured by inks, color technology, etc. You have got to see his unadorned pencils (at least reproductions of such--unfortunately I don't have any original Adams artwork!) --I have seen somewhere a Magneto close up from #62 and a full page of several panels of Ant-Man in the Vision's body (from that famous Avengers issue)--the detail and delicacy is astonishing. Exquisite. Inks of any kind are too much. (Adams’ preferred inker—after himself-- was Giordano, because as he said it looked like he inked himself.)

Karen: The writing in this issue is also top notch; Roy gives us solid characterization and an interesting story. Everyone’s personality is clearly delineated without feeling like a caricature. It seems to me like Roy always had a good handle on Cyclops in particular, and with this storyline we get to see a few cracks in that stoic exterior, as Cyke worries over his new-found brother. With Alex, we get a chance to see how someone might react to finding out that they were not only a mutant, but one with an incredibly destructive power. His despair feels real.

Sharon: Adams did great job depicting Alex, here a “normal” person–there was none of that weird elongation I see in the costumed heroes. I also didn’t mind that Alex was half-naked throughout the story…

Doug: I would, however, argue that Roy couldn’t get away with a line like “You – you camel jockeys did this!” today. But you’re right – we realize that the X-Men are each different people. There certainly aren’t any cookie-cutter characters in this tale.

Karen: With this story, mutant hysteria is alive and well. Larry Trask, son of Bolivar Trask, the creator of the original Sentinels, has developed a new model of Sentinel and has sent them out to track down mutants. Although we only see them briefly in this issue, Adams’ Sentinels are truly threatening-looking; there is a real sense of mass to them.

Doug: I thought the element of surprise was powerful. In previous, and even some future Sentinel stories, they certainly don’t hide the fact that they are present. Of particular note was the emergence of the Sentinel that was in the cave with Alex Summers – that was a little creepy to think that something so large could lay in wait, especially during the melee that had taken place. This showed a Sentinel technology that would later become a hallmark – that they could be programmed to seize particular mutants, and would go to any measures necessary to nab their assigned quarry.

Doug: Also of note in this story is the use of a seeming “web cam” in Lorna’s apartment! Not bad, considering the technology was at least 30 years away from the time this story was written!

Karen: It’s funny, there’s no Professor X in the books at this time of course. I would have thought I might miss him, but I don’t. The team seems more than capable of performing without him. I kind of like that.

Doug: That’s a very interesting point, Karen, because when I think of the X-Men it’s the era of the All-New, All-Different X-Men and Professor X had such a prominent role on that team. Not only did he assemble the international mutant fighting force, but he mentored them for quite some time. In a way, it caused a regression of Cyke’s leadership ability, and perhaps provided the source of tension between Scott and Wolverine – had Cyke been completely in charge, Logan might have stood down (although I doubt it – it was Charles who kept him largely in check). But I digress with my senseless musings…

Sharon: In various interviews Neal has said he carefully planned the return of Professor X and the seeds were sown in this very arc…

Sharon: I cannot believe that no one has compiled Neal's Ben Casey strips into a collection, but perhaps there are ownership/copyright issues involved. I have the four collected volumes of "Mary Perkins On Stage" (a well-known syndicated strip by Leonard Starr) that was one of the first daily comic strips in the "photorealism" mode (back in the ‘50s), a style that was then used by many comic strip artists--including Neal.

The Thomas-Adams X-Men: X-Men #56

X-Men #56

X-Men #56 (May 1969)

“What is…The Power?”
Script: Roy Thomas

Pencils: Neal Adams
Inks: Tom Palmer

Karen: This issue of X-Men kicks off the Neal Adams – Roy Thomas run of the book, which, to my mind at least, is the most memorable run prior to the birth of the New X-Men years later. Most fans have probably heard how Adams came to the title, but for those who haven’t, the story goes something like this: Adams, who had been working at DC on titles like Deadman, came in to see Stan Lee. Stan was very appreciative of Neal’s art, and wanted to put him on one of Marvel’s best books. But Adams asked, “What is your worst selling title?” Lee told him it was X-Men; in fact, sales were so bad, they were planning on canceling the book. Adams told him that that was the book he wanted to work on. “Why?” Lee asked. Adams responded that since the title was going nowhere, he figured it would provide him with the greatest artistic freedom.

Sharon: We have Jim Steranko to thank for bringing Adams to Marvel; Steranko told his buddy Neal about the relative freedom at Marvel (i.e., Marvel artists were not tethered to working from “full scripts”, as was the case at DC). After spending years trying to break into comic books (and after achieving success on the Ben Casey syndicated comic strip), he finally got a break at Archie and then picked up work at Warren and DC. Neal had carved himself out a nice niche at DC (on war comics, Deadman, Brave and the Bold; World’s Finest, assorted covers, etc.) but was naturally intrigued by the prospect of greater artistic leeway, so he approached Stan.

Doug: I agree with your opening posit, Karen – even the seminal issues of the title when Stan and Jack introduced Magneto and the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants don’t seem to hold a candle to this series of stories that unfortunately closed the door on the original X-Men. And for me it’s all Adams’ pencils and the capable embellishing of Tom Palmer, who was also giving a consistent look to our favorite series, The Avengers.

Sharon, Adams’ Batman and Deadman are true high points in the latter DC Silver Age.

Sharon: First let me say Adams’ well-known, unstinting devotion to bettering creators’ rights is laudable, to say the least. And I yield to no one in my admiration of Neal’s superb talent as a draftsman- - but I must confess it’s an admiration achieved in hindsight. As someone who read these X-Men issues when they first came out, back then I found his work awful—too mannered and confusing. His “storytelling” was not clear and his zigzagging panels were ostentatious. (Plus, Gene Colan had been working that way for a while so it was not exactly unique.)

Karen: So Adams took over the art chores on the book with this issue, #56. Or as they described it in the credits: “And introducing the penciling wizardry of: Neal Adams”. Marvel seemed pretty excited to get him; that same month, the bullpens page had a blurb about Adams coming over to the House of Ideas: “We did it again! Yep, we’ve added another new liltin’ luminary to our rollickin’ roster of stars! Say hello to Nefarious Neal Adams, who has one foot tentatively planted in our Marvel doorway. We’re guessing that your ecstatic comments, when you see the way he illustrated our latest X-Men bombshell, will transform him into a Marvel madman from head to toe. It isn’t only his fantastic artwork that impresses us – but the way he makes it look so easy!”

Doug: I am really looking forward to the soon-to-be-released collection of all of Stan’s Soapbox columns – he was nothing if not bombastic!

Sharon: Back then artists took assignments where they could get them, meaning there were several who worked at both DC and Marvel at the same time. Even though these guys were mostly freelancers, working for the “competition” was frowned upon, so many artists who were working for DC used pen names when taking on Marvel assignments: Gil Kane was “Scott Edwards,” Gene Colan was “Adam Austin”, etc. Stan assumed Adams would follow suit and asked Adams how he wanted to be credited (since Marvel ran credits). Adams refused to use a pseudonym while working for both companies and said he wouldn’t work for Marvel unless he could use his real name. Stan capitulated. After this, for the most part, other artists started using their own names while working for both companies. Also, Adams hated the appellation “Nefarious” and thought it was childish. It didn’t last long, at least not in print.

Karen: From the first page, Adams artwork is a revelation. He is often cited for bringing a “photo-realism” to comics, and that is to my mind an understatement. At this time, his work was nothing less than revolutionary, and even today one can see its impact on the medium (Ivan Reis, anyone?). There’s a backup story in this issue about the Angel’s origin, drawn by Werner Roth, and frankly, after looking at the incredible work by Adams, to see Roth’s work is jarring. It is so simplistic compared to Adams.

Sharon: Maybe, but if Marvel had just let Roth work on the X-Men book—instead of constantly changing artists—Steranko, Barry Smith, etc.—perhaps some consistency could have been achieved. (It didn’t help that the X-Men also played musical chairs with the writers.) Certainly Roth (with or without Heck layouts) could tell a story clearly and had a way with attractive faces (probably due to his romance comics background). I felt that John Verpooten was a good inker for Roth (as on X-Men #52) and they could have stayed on the book. Artists like Steranko and Adams imparted a whole new feel, perhaps one too dark, mature and strange for characters who were supposed to be teenagers.

Sharon: The problem with some comic book audiences is that they can’t accept the co-existence of differing styles; there’s always a “hot” style that dominates (and spawns imitators/followers). Adams’ style ushered in a new wave of talented, more realistic pencilers, certainly…but his emergence also signaled the beginning of the end for those who drew more abstractly, like Kirby- -the King would become “irrelevant” within a year or two. (Luckily history has room for many styles and not just the style du jour.)

Doug: There certainly was a progression at Marvel and DC away from the sometimes-cartoony looks of Ditko and Kirby and from Moldoff and Boring (to name a few Distinguished Competitors). While men like John Buscema, Carmine Infantino, Gene Colan, and Curt Swan injected a more precise presentation of anatomy and a somewhat darker tonal quality to our four-color fun, it was Adams that truly raised the bar. As good as John Buscema was, he’s just a notch below Neal Adams – influentially speaking – in my book. While Adams didn’t produce the sheer volume of work that Big John did (or Curt Swan for that matter), his style typified what the late 1960’s “looked like” in real life.

Sharon: Well, Adams came from advertising and back then, magazines relied heavily on ads that were drawings that mimicked photography. So he essentially introduced that style to comic books.

Doug: Sharon, while I agree with your point that audiences (especially today’s) seem to desire a certain look – some years ago it was the “Image look” – I would certainly oppose your posit (if I hear you correctly) that a steady dose of Werner Roth would have kept the X-Men from dropping in sales. In a market that had welcomed Buscema (both by this time), Colan, Adams at DC, Ross Andru, of course John Romita, et al. I can’t see Roth’s somewhat-archaic style fitting in with the youth of the late ‘60’s. Infantino’s more realistic Batman, Swan’s Superman (and Legion), and many other examples had laid the foundation for the “next wave” of comic book art. Gone (or soon to be) was the blocky Kirby art, to be replaced by figures that were more lithe, long… X-Men was meandering about in part due to a lack of focus in scripts, but just as likely due to an eye-catching graphic presentation.

Karen: Now I know that Adams sometimes swiped photographs for backgrounds – I believe he even did it in this issue, for the Egyptian tombs the X-Men visit – but that doesn’t make me think any less of him.

Sharon: Adams has used photographs on a consistent basis and has always been an advocate for doing so (based on the many interviews I’ve read). He firmly believed that the way to draw well was not only from life drawing (observing), but also tracing over photos, which he did on a regular basis.

Doug: As an aside, I don’t mind artists who do this (I say “this” in the present tense, since I know my buddy Don Kramer (currently penciling Nightwing for DC) uses photos both for reference as well as lighting for particular camera angles, times of day, etc.), as I do believe it brings a sense of “real world” to the printed page. Saying that, I would add however that my admiration for John Buscema, who said he never drew from photos – that everything that found its way from his brain to his hand to the page was his alone – is simply immense. But Adams or even Alex Ross is no less talented because they “swipe” from photographs.

Karen: Adams’ faces are expressive, his figures always dynamic, and his panel layouts are incredible. There’s hardly a panel that fits the old square or rectangular pattern; instead he gives us panels with lines at 45 degree angles, panels that overlap or figures that run over three panels at a time! This gives the art a real energy, almost like a film.

Sharon: His art was certainly dynamic and a real shot in the arm for the book. I will say though that I'm not crazy about his figure work; in some panels here and there the proportions seemed off to me. His figures are too elongated for my taste, with disproportionately long torsos and/or ultra long legs. Yeah, I know Adams is taking a more realistic approach so he eschewed the "perfect" balanced body; but his physiques looked too unbalanced to me. And it's not just here in the X-Men stories, but I also felt this way when Adams later did the Green Lantern book; the stretched-out body proportions are especially noticeable when he depicted a guy like GL, who wears a unitard.  

Doug: What, you got a problem with big butts? Seriously though, as I stated above, I think this presentation of the human form is part of Adams’ style. I would take these distortions over those emanating from Gil Kane’s pencil anytime!

Karen: One of his best panels is a depiction of Marvel Girl telepathically contacting Angel. In this rectangular panel, in the background is the outline of a brain. Over this, at the top of the panel is Jean’s head, and descending below this are her face, her eyes with mask, and then just her eyes alone. Radiating out from the eyes are waves of psychic energy. At the very bottom is a small full figure drawing of Jean. Wow! You really need to see it to get the full impact of the art.

Sharon: Given the story, for me that sequence was overkill…style over substance. Where would an approach like this work? Well, I would have like to have seen Adams tackle Dr. Strange.

Doug: Not to get ahead of the game, but in regard to Adams and panel lay-outs, one of my all-time favorite action scenes is awaiting us in X-Men #57 and involves the bouncing Beast!

Karen: I haven’t said much about the story because frankly, it’s just OK. The X-Men have captured the Living Pharaoh, who had captured Alex Summers, Scott’s heretofore unknown brother. The Pharaoh escapes, takes Alex, and imprisons him in a special chamber. Turns out they both are mutants who utilize cosmic rays. With Alex in the chamber, the Pharaoh won’t have to “share” the rays any more (huh?). He absorbs so much power he becomes the very funky Living Monolith, a gigantic man-monster. As the X-Men battle him, Alex manages to break free, and the power of the rays goes back to him – and it causes an ancient temple to collapse. The ish ends with a super-charged Alex out of control.

Doug: What do you think of “Scott’s heretofore unknown brother”? Does that bother you? Sometimes I like retcons/revelations, sometimes I don’t. I guess because I like the Havok character I don’t mind this one. I wonder, too, if since Alex channels cosmic rays if Reed Richards ever thought along the way of concentrating Alex’s power in an attempt to permanently change Ben Grimm back to full-time human form… Seems like at some point Reed would have been involved in a scheme such as that (particularly if we’re to believe all of this “Illuminati” crap and his close relationship with Xavier all of these years). Anyway, the Pharaoh is a fair enough plot vehicle, but the Living Monolith sure is cool!

Sharon: Alex showing up suddenly is in the tradition of a soap opera…a sibling never mentioned, never referred to. Ludicrous! I mean, Alex wasn’t even mentioned in the Cyclops origin stories that had recently run in the X-Men, which had purported to fill in some of the background for Scott! Even so…I must admit I did like that Roy was expanding the X-Men canvas so, believability aside, adding Alex was a step in the right direction (and next issue, Roy would bring back Lorna, too; she was an Arnold Drake creation). The additional characters promised to invigorate what had become a stale, cloistered book.

Karen: This was just the beginning to a transformative run of comics, not only for the X-Men but for the industry as a whole.

Doug: Neal Adams deserves the Marvel Visionaries treatment. DC has done the collecting/comics history world a great service in reprinting not only Adams’ Batman and Deadman material, but his other-DC work as well.

Sharon: You’re in luck: there’s an X-Men Visionaries: Neal Adams volume available that collects Adams’ X-Men work.

Doug: Yes, I’m familiar with that book, although I don’t own it – for that matter, I suppose I should say that I have used the 1983 Baxter paper mini-series X-Men Classics that reprints most of the Thomas/Adams collaboration. But what I would really like to see between two covers is a wide range of Adams’ Marvel work – from X-Men to Avengers to Inhumans to Thor to whatever-else-he-did for the company. Again, while not turning out the number of pages or covers that other Marvel stalwarts have to their credit, Adams’ all-too-brief tenure at Marvel should be memorialized in a high-end manner such as DC has chosen to do.

Doug Tells: Why We Like the Marvel Visionaries series

At the August 2007 WizardWorld Chicago comic convention I plunked down some cold, hard cash for three books that have become treasures in my reprint collection: the Marvel Visionaries hardcover volumes for John Buscema, John Romita, Sr., and Roy Thomas.

I am very excited that I bought the Visionaries books. I won't post the exact contents here, but you should know that a simple search on www.amazon.com will reveal that information for you for all of the volumes in the series. You should know, too, that these books are larger than the Masterworks volumes, and at around $35, they cost A LOT less!

Of the three, the John Romita, Sr. book is perhaps the most redundant to my collection. I have the John Romita Sketchbook from Vanguard, as well as a John Romita hardcover published by Marvel several years ago (which I bought firsthand from the Jazzy one at an art gallery when he was in Chicago hyping the giclee that he and Alex Ross did of Spidey vs. the Goblin). Anyway, much of the material in this Visionaries volume was reprinted there, as well as the oft-reprinted ASM 39-40 and 50. Of note, however, is some 1950's Captain America work, as well as some Cap stuff from the late '60's-early '70's. Two issues of his FF run immediately after Kirby left for DC are also in the book; it's funny to see that Romita (or Sinnott) tried to ape Kirby's look rather than let John work his own magic. It’s one of John’s faults – the continual admission that he never felt comfortable penciling, that he always felt he lived in Kirby’s shadow. The reality for me, anyway, is that Romita is one of the most integral creators at Marvel, and gave them their “look” as Nick Cardy helped to give DC their “look” at approximately the same time. At any rate, this is an essential volume because of the nice package and survey of all periods of John's work; but like I stated earlier, there really isn't any surprising material.

Of the remaining two volumes, if I'm ranking, I guess I'd place the Roy Thomas edition second. And that's tough to say -- there are some great stories in it!! What strikes me, however, is what a great survey of Marvel art this volume presents! The work of Gene Colan, Marie Severin, Don Heck, John Buscema, George Klein, Dan Adkins, Mike Esposito, Gil Kane, Tom Palmer, Neal Adams, John Verpoorten, Herb Trimpe, John Severin, Joe Sinnott, Barry Windsor-Smith, Alan Weiss, Dick Giordano, Frank Robbins, Vince Colletta, George Perez, and Jackson Guice is all between the covers, and wonderfully reprinted in fine color (not too bright, as is often my complaint of these retooled volumes – I particularly find the Masterworks series guilty of this. Newsprint was generally muddy – brightening it too much takes away from the original feel). As all books in the series are surveys of the history of a particular artist, this volume showcases the evolution of the company. Essential stories are, of course, Avengers #'s 57-58 and Sub-Mariner #8, which again are often reprinted. The treat in the book for me, though, is Amazing Adventures #8 featuring Neal Adams art on the Inhumans and the Avengers. We just don't see that type of thing in reprint form! Some of Roy's black-and-white work is in here as well, but alas (as is the case in the Buscema volume) no Conan.

Lastly, to no one's surprise (at least no one who has followed this blog or my musings on the Avengers Assemble! message boards) as my favorite, is the John Buscema volume.

The editors made great choices for this -- it truly is the essential John Buscema. And what strikes me most about this book (and to a lesser extent the Romita book) is that what I hold in my hands is truly an evolution of John's work. His late '50's stuff is very rough compared to what we came to know and love in the Silver and Bronze Ages. I think Buscema hit his stride after the examples in the book where he drew over Kirby's lay-outs. I have read in multiple resources that John did not like to have to do that, but when looking at his work in a linear, historical fashion there is no mistaking the King's influence (on Romita, too). Also vital to the Buscema fan is the effect of different inkers on John's pencils. Inkers here include Frank Giacoia, John Tartaglione, Mike Esposito, George Roussos, Sal Buscema, John Romita, Sr., Tom Palmer, Joe Sinnott, John Verpoorten, Syd Shores, Rudy Nebres, Bill Sienkiewicz (my least favorite, bar none), and Stephanie Cerwinski (who is John's granddaughter!). John's first Avengers work (#41-42) is here, as is the pin-up from Annual #2. Later, #'s 75-76 are reprinted, in my mind to pay homage to John's Conan work (Dark Horse currently holds the licensing to Conan and Tarzan properties, and this volume suffers because of it), as that story included Arkon. The treasure in the volume may be Marvel Spotlight #30, with the Warriors Three; Sinnott remarks in his Brush Strokes With Greatness (TwoMorrows) that this was the first time he inked Buscema when John turned in loose breakdowns and Joe had to finish the job. The end result is striking, and it's neat to see Sinnott "do" John Buscema -- there's no mistaking John's presence on the page. One more thing -- Silver Surfer #4 is in here, too, and is in my humble opinion John's standard, his masterpiece. Buscema’s mastery is here – from the almost-splash of Norrin Radd with the animals of Africa to the majesty of Asgard to the brutality of the joust. All comic art should be compared to that single issue. Wow...

Additionally, I’d comment that these volumes contain little text aside from the comic stories. I believe Roy Thomas takes a few pages here and there to comment on the issues included in his volume. He also writes a lengthy introduction to the Buscema volume. A nice touch in the Thomas book is the inclusion of the letters page from FF #176 (where the Impossible Man goes berserk in the Marvel Bullpen) where Roy explains the impetus for that issue. All volumes in the series have dust jackets with additional art and minor commentary; the right side of the jacket has writer/artist profiles. At the conclusions of the Romita, Sr. and Buscema volumes there are some original pencils, watercolors, and character drafts that add a nice touch. However, these types of things only add 3-4 pages to the book and are not to be considered as an expansive sketchbook, et al. Sometimes I think commentary from Stan Lee, Thomas, or other Marvel editors might have been nice to “set the table” for a given story, but that might have perhaps upped the cost and/or dropped the page count for each tome.

At the back of the Buscema volume, there is a four-page story, credited as unpublished but intended for a magazine called "Marvel Italia". The exhibit in the book is a reproduction of John's pencils for the story, which included Loki, Thor, and the Silver Surfer. The pages come courtesy of Sal Velluto, who was the intended inker. I actually have a pencil and ball point pen rough on sketch-paper to page 3 of this story! It is obvious that John sketched it out, liked it, and using a light box reproduced the page onto comic artboard. And there it was, right in the book in my hands! When I first came across this, I made a quick trip to the basement to gather the portfolio in which I keep my non-framed art and viola! My wife was quite impressed...

The Roy Thomas volume contains a very interesting story in regard to inkers, and I guess I’d like to highlight it as one of the many reasons to check out this volume. We've mentioned several times (both here and on the AA! boards) about the power inkers have over pencillers -- Joe Sinnott often being the main subject of those conversations. I would encourage all who are able to view a copy of X-Men #64, the introduction and origin of Sunfire. The issue is credited to Don Heck (filling in for Neal Adams at the time) and Tom Palmer. Palmer is credited as the "embellisher" -- understanding that there can be a difference between inks and embellishing, I would say "did he EVER!"This issue may be the single-most beautiful book ever attributed to Don Heck, and we have Tom Palmer to thank. Given Heck's output at the time (I believe he was on the way out at Marvel and heading to Wonder Woman, et al. at DC), I can honestly say that there are only 3-4 figures in the entire story that one could look at and say, "Yeah, Don Heck's art". Palmer exerts his influence in such a way that this story flows near-seamlessly between the Adams before and after. I truly can't understand why Heck wasn't just credited with lay-outs, thumbnails, whatever -- he's just not in the book.That being said, we've discussed Sinnott and how he "saved" Kirby at times; we could have a similar discussion of Palmer exerting the same type of influence over Buscema's pencils in his last Avengers run (around Under Siege, Acts of Vengeance, etc.) when John was doing very loose lay-outs and Palmer the finishes; it was Palmer who kept the "look" from Buscema to Steve Epting to whoever-came-next. But I'm just surprised that we see this from Palmer so early on in his career.I'm not complaining, don't get me wrong. This is an extremely eye-pleasing story, and Roy Thomas writes a wonderful tale to boot. I just found it interesting given what I'd come to expect from Don Heck in that era how much un-Heck-like the book was.

Other volumes in the series include Stan Lee, two for Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, Chris Claremont, and John Romita, Jr. Any would make a valuable addition to the library of the Silver and Bronze Age Marvel enthusiast!