Comic Book Resources

I know I'll be infuriated by how high Jim Lee and Jeph Loeb get.

What I'm also infuriated by is that I didn't realise I was clicking on a link into the forums so now my cookies will have registered me as having visited so that when I next go to the forums the "newest unread post" links will take me to the wrong place. I hate it when that happens.

I'll also be infuriated when I see names that I didn't think of when voting - so far that's Alex Maleev who might have just scraped my top ten - but there'll be more

(I'm sure some people will be infuriated to see trace extraordinairre Greg Land in the list)

Dan

Tease. The writers/artists just randomly stops at 36. Of course, that makes sense why this is called the "Countdown" and not just "list."

Joss Whedon ahead of Carl Barks, Harvey Kurtzman, and Dave Sim. Right.

The problem with these kind of lists is the lack of knowledge of the voters. It's embarassing.

And, yeah, where Jeph Loeb and Jim Lee finish is going to drive me nuts.

First, I love that you've put mugshots in for everyone, I had no idea what most of them looked like.

Second, Joss Whedon, seriously? Outside of the Buffy stuff, he's written 17 issues of Astonishing X-men. I haven't read them (yet), but are they really so jaw-droppingly good that they already push him into the top 40?

WHne people don't agree with Robert R you think they "lack knowledge"? Isn't that calling someone stupid b/c their favorites aren't yours?

I'm inclined to agree with R here.

I probably haven't got the best knowledge of the old masters, but TBH, I've read enough older comics to know that there's very little written before about 1970 that I really like that much. I still try the odd older thing (and have the TPB of Kurtzman's Tales to Drive You Mad on my "to be read" shelf), but I think the only old school person who made my list was Alex Toth.

I'm sure some would call me a heathen for not voting for Kirby, Stan Lee, Eisner, Ditko, Kane, Bescuma, Fox etc, but their stuff really isn't to my tastes - at least not enough to make any top ten list of mine

Dan

I don't know what is embarassing about that when, left to the voters, a poll like this turns out people like Joss Whedon above Kirby or Jim Lee and Jeph Loeb in the Top 35. I don't think that's embarassing, I think it just shows the type of crowd that the poll pulled in.

Lack of knowledge? Probably not. I would say lack of exposure. Maybe I'm just thinking semantically, but to me saying that the voters have a lack of knowledge seems to imply that they are stupid because they are going to vote for their favorite writers.

Its an outlook like this that can really alienate new readers. If I'm a 16 year old kid who isn't well versed in the classics (which I'm not) and someone basically calls me an idiot because Joss Whedon is my favorite writer, it certainly isn't going to entice me to pick up any back issues of New Gods.

Then again, I like Jeph Leob and Jim Lee, so maybe I just don't know enough about what is good and what isn't. I just know what I enjoy.

Good points.
I guess it makes a difference whether the question is framed as "pick your favorites" or "pick the best".

On the other hand, picking Joss Whedon, to use a sports analogy, is like nominating a rookie to the hall of fame. Actually it's a bit worse, as the rookie is at least committed to his sport as a full time career, whereas Joss Whedon might decide to stop writing comics and concentrate on television and film.

I'm sure I'm not into comics as much as a lot of you guys (and girls) here, and even I recognize how dumb it is to have Joss Whedon at such a prominent rank in the top 100 best of all time list.

You might be hot stuff now, but all time? These lists are always arbitrary b.s. anyway. The problem with an all time list is that 99% of the high ranking things are recent.

"Lack of knowledge" refers to the fact that there are technically BETTER writers than Joss Whedon, who are lower on the list. It's not a matter of what you prefer, it's a matter of knowing what elements make up the craft of storytelling, and who's good at those things.

I'd agree Whedon is a good writer. Just not a good comic writer. Outside of Fray none of his comic work has impressed me. Even that was just okay.

I can't saw I'm shocked so many indie guys are so low. This is CBR. The Independent Board proves how few people read this stuff here.

Be funny if somone other then Alan Moore made Number One. Maybe Neil Gaiman. Stan Lee is going to make it pretty high too.

Man I wish there was an edit function here.

"I can't saw I'm shocked..."

Yeesh.

"It’s not a matter of what you prefer, it’s a matter of knowing what elements make up the craft of storytelling, and who’s good at those things."

yes, but (from what i can remember) the Cronin asked people to vote for their *personal favourite* writer and artist (or writer-artist), and well, *personal favourites* being more of a subjective sort of thing than anything else...

i guess the choices (and the list) would seem more justified for us if the Cronin included actual reasons cited by the fans to, er, justify the nominees.

Cronin did a good job justifying them himself.

"Cronin did a good job justifying them himself."

yeah, but they read more like profiles than justifications. i'm just saying a more subjective tone would have helped plenty, i guess.

>“Lack of knowledge” refers to the fact that there are
>technically BETTER writers than Joss Whedon, who are
>lower on the list. It’s not a matter of what you prefer,
>it’s a matter of knowing what elements make up the craft
>of storytelling, and who’s good at those things

Not at all. Being "technically" good is certainly a good thing, but any list like this is only going to be a list of people's current favourites, and technical skill is just one of the many things that decides whether you like someone's work along with their style, willingness to experiment, laziness and any personality that comes through their work.

You can't seriously suggest that I start voting for the likes of Jon Ostrander, Doug Moench, Dan Jurgens etc, because I can objectively see that they are technically good even though their work does nothing for me?

A professional would probably do that, but you don't go to fans expecting professional behavior!

Yeah well these aren't the Eisners so it's not the job of this vote to find the technical best - just what's popular.

"Yeah well these aren’t the Eisners so it’s not the job of this vote to find the technical best - just what’s popular. "

Oh come on.
The title is "CBRs all-time top 100 writers and artists"

Maybe the title should be changed to "CBRs All-Time Top 100 Writers and Artists as Voted by the Fans Based Upon Their Objective Perspective."

Seriously, this argument is just getting asinine. People are going to vote for their favorites, which is decided based upon what stories they like best. There was no criteria to vote on other than our opinions.

Yes, its a shame that the indie writers didn't get as many votes as the flash in the pan writers of today, but that is the consequence of this type of system.

Instead of b*tching and moaning about what a shame this is and how stupid all the voters are, why don't we all take a step back and look at the great writers assembled here? Pretend its the top 100 in any order and marvel at how many great writers have come in gone. At the end of the day it isn't going to matter of Alan Moore is #1 or Gaiman or Whedon or Ostrander or Loeb are.

What I object to on type of lists like this isn't "Best" or "Favorite", but "All Time".

I'd really like to know how many people who voted actually read more than a smattering of Kurtzman, Sim, or Barks? All time greats that have a legacy and impact on the form of comic books. If Joss Whedon got hit by a bus tomorrow, what would his comic book legacy be? Here's his writing history: http://www.comics.org/search.lasso?type=writer&query=joss+whedon&sort=alpha

41 entries which are mostly spinoffs of his television work, plus Fray and X-Men.

Granted, this is a subjective poll. I understand that. But, from what I can gather, it's really only going to reflect the last 10 to 20 years or so, plus Silver Age superheroes. I've seen the numbers for archives and other old reprints and it's pretty clear that the poll is going to skew way modern. That's why "All Time" is almost always a misnomer for these types of lists. The people who tend to vote really don't have the background to evaluate "All Time".

I haven't even looked at the writers page, but the artists list has Andy Kubert, Michael Turner, and Greg Land ranked equal or higher than P. Craig Russell. That's ridiculous.

I just hope Erik Larsen makes it onto ONE of the lists.

Maybe the title should be changed to “CBRs All-Time Top 100 Writers and Artists as Voted by the Fans Based Upon Their Objective Perspective.”

I think that's an accurate satire of the fairly unrealistic expectations regarding this list.

In any event, even if that WAS the title of the list, and we tossed in ALL the parsing language that people wanted, we would STILL get basically these same results , because there are a whole lot of people who DO think that Joss Whedon is, objectively, one the greatest comic book writers of all-time.

There are plenty of people who DO think that Greg Land is, objectively, one of the most proficient comic book artists of all-time.

Feel free to disagree with them. Lord knows I do.

But, like Lynxara said, "A professional would probably do that, but you don’t go to fans expecting professional behavior!"

Exactly. We're just judging what the CBR posters think - which should be evident in the fact that the votes are cast by CBR posters.

RE: Adam and DanCJ-

You guys are arguing with something I didn't say. I'm not talking about what the poll should be or anything. I was explaining the "lack of knowledge" comment that people took offense to.

I don't care who people vote for, but if they're voting Andy Kubert as one of the best artists of all time, then they literally don't know what makes good art. They know what they like, yes, but there is still a lack of knowledge.

Since I'm the one that started this mini-controversy, let me say that I think there's a great deal of difference between "lack of knowledge" and "stupidity". I'd have used "stupidity" if I had meant it. There's a cure for "lack of knowledge", curiosity and research, there's no cure for "stupidity". I suppose I should put more emphasis on the "CBR" in the poll title. I'll be shocked if the lists aren't dominated by Marvel and DC writers and artists of the last 20 years and a smattering of Silver Age writers and artists.

Even considering that, I'd have a hard time voting for anyone who hadn't been working in comics regularly for 10+ years for any sort of All Time list. Heck, I like Joss Whedon, but I'd have a hard time thinking he'd belong in the top 500 due to his small body of work, and certainly I'd put him behind some true pioneers.

Yeah, that's fine, Robert (and Dan, too).

Nothing wrong with saying, "You have ___ ahead of ___?!?" or "How could you put ____ on the list?"

That's completely reasonable.

I know I was thinking that often while compiling the votes.

"I just hope Erik Larsen makes it onto ONE of the lists."

I kind of doubt it. He doesn't get a whole lot of love at CBR. Which is kind of shame because I think a lot of people here would like Savage Dragon if they gave it a chance.

...Seeing as how much they seem to like Wheadon, eh Grant?

"“Lack of knowledge” refers to the fact that there are technically BETTER writers than Joss Whedon, who are lower on the list. It’s not a matter of what you prefer, it’s a matter of knowing what elements make up the craft of storytelling, and who’s good at those things."

I don't think there's any "Fact" to it at all. Art is not wholly subjective, but it is subjective enough that you can always debate the relative quality of artists (and I mean artists in the broad sense, not the "draws pictures" sense) from here nigh unto eternity. I still maintain Ed Wood had talent.

Joe Kubert at #28 is where I know that my tastes and the lists are totally irreconcilable. That's o.k., but I think this list says a lot more about the voters than the writers and artists.

I'm starting to think that Wally Wood, Russ Heath, Dick Sprang, Curt Swan, Jerry Robinson, Mac Raboy, and Lou Fine, among others, aren't going to be on the artists list. And I'm equally doubtful of Robert Kanigher, Joe Simon, Otto Binder, Bill Finger, Gardner Fox, John Broome, Bob Haney, Arnold Drake, and Michael Fleisher for writers.

"I don’t think there’s any “Fact” to it at all. Art is not wholly subjective, but it is subjective enough that you can always debate the relative quality of artists (and I mean artists in the broad sense, not the “draws pictures” sense) from here nigh unto eternity. I still maintain Ed Wood had talent."

But see, you're talking about talent. I'm talking about skill. And neither one is wholly reliant on the other. It's totally possible to have interesting characters in fascinating situations who have the worst, most stilted dialogue in history. The difference between talent and skill is that one is objectively measurable.

I feel bad because I voted for my own favourites, rather than who were actually the "best" according to my own opinion.

Hey, everyone's being so down on the list, but there does seem to be a nice mix of old and new on the 50-25 list thusfar. I think that all the ragging on Whedon and Loeb and Jim Lee is a little jumping the gun here.

Guys like Walt Simonson, Gil Kane, Jack Kirby (The Writer!) are all represented.

And Kudos to Brian for making the list informative and interesting. You rock, BC!

"…Seeing as how much they seem to like Wheadon, eh Grant?"

I like Whedon. Just not his comic work. I'm not badmouthing anyone for voting for Whedon. They like Kirkman too and Invincible is similar to Savage Dragon (considering it's one of Kirkman's favorites).

I take back what I said about Jeph Loeb. I don't think he deserved to be at number 25, but I thought he'd be in the top ten.

(If he'd kept up the standard of writing he had in The Challengers of the Unknown then he'd deserve to be in the top ten)

Other things - Re: "All Time", I can see your point here, but it's still valid because it stresses that we are voting for our favourites from all time, rather than our current favourites.

RE: "Lack of knowledge" - If someone likes Andy Kubert's work then that does not show a lack of knowledge of what makes "good art". Maybe if you don't like Andy Kuberts art (personally I find it passable) then you lack the knowledge of what appeal Andy's art has. Gawd knows I lack the knowledge of what people see in Jim Lee's art - and various others I've seen in the list so far.

And Alex Toth was robbed - He should have breezed the top ten

Dan

"Maybe if you don’t like Andy Kuberts art (personally I find it passable) then you lack the knowledge of what appeal Andy’s art has."

You're right. I don't know what appeal his art has. I can't find anything appealing about it.

I'm actually pretty happy with the lists so far. Many of my favs are appearing. So are a lot of creators whose work I find pretty darned lacking.

But the fact that Todd McFarlane beat out Barry Windsor-Smith was sad. I think it made my heart cry a little. On the inside.

I think McFarlane's an interesting vote because, while lauded at the time) he hasn't done anything for so long really that he can't really be shrugged off as a pop vote like one might be inclined to do with contemporary creators with little history (Wheadon, Finch, etc.). Voters had to think back a decade to pick him out; they had to consider. And still, enough picked him that he could beat out scads of others. Now, I'm not judging here, but I do find it surprising.

Those are good points about Tod McFarlane. I guess the reasons he were voted are the same reasons that he's the only 90's Image house style artist that I've ever had any time for (the art not the person). His work for me stands way above Jim Lee and Rob Leifeld and the rest of that crowd.

(Note - in the above statement I can only say that because Erik Larsen was never 90's Image House Style artist)

That makes sense, and I certainly did enjoy him at the time, while I was in high school (I adored his work on Hulk). He's kinda to Image artists what Mignola is to regular comic artists (or something like that), in that his characters are ultra stylized to the point that they are far more unrealistic than say, Jim Lee's or Mark Silvestri's unrealistic characters. So, I guess I can see the attraction; I was just surprised that the attraction held as strongly as it did.

I don't know if anyone's still reading this thread (perhaps you should put an updated entry on the site, Brian - at least when you finish putting in all the results), but I just wanted to say that the one artist whose presence on the list baffles me is Mark Bagley. The Image guys, and the Image-influenced Michael Turner, may not be to my taste, but at least their art has a kind of an adolescent hormone-addled zinginess (that's not to say the artists are adolescents) that I can see someone getting excited about. But Bagley, from what I've seen, is a mediocrity across the board, or to put it more positively, a competent professional comics artist (but no more than that). Would the people who voted for him pick up a book just because it had Bagley art? Or are they just voting for him because he's associated with a book they like, maybe Ultimate Spider-Man?

Or is there some merit to his art that I'm simply missing?

(In case anyone's wondering about my tastes, I think my vote was something like the following, though I've misplaced my actual post to Brian:

1. Don Newton
2. Jim Aparo
3. Paul Smith
4. Steve Rude
5. Mike Mignola
6. Jack Kirby
7. Mike Kaluta
8. Dick Sprang
9.Gene Colan
10. Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez)

I agree with you about Mark Bagly, but I'd have to say that everything you said about him applies just as well to Jim Aparo.

My big surprises so far have been:
Carlos Pacheco (though I like his work well enough)
Olivier Copiel
Jim Aparo
Mark Bagley
Steve McNiven (who?)
John Byrne (I'm not surprised that he made the list - just that he's 6th in the artists list)
Mike Mignola (in the writers list)
Fabien Nicieza (who?)
Roger Stern

This list doesn't include the people who's work I hate, but am not surprised by