CBI Archive
What Is This, Anyway, Screw Steve Gerber Week?
- by Brad Curran
- in General
Saturday, October 6th, 2007 at 9:23 PM EST
Updated: Saturday, October 6th, 2007 at 9:23 PM EST
Given the fact that their scheduling problems have become Paul O’Brien’s new white whale (well, other than ADD and the Comics Journal’s love of basoon solos, I guess), I doubt that this is intentional, but still; it is odd to see two new series featuring Steve Gerber’s most personal creations coming out in the same week; the so-long-in-coming out it may have taken longer than Gerber’s run on the book got Omega the Unknown, by award winning novelist Jonathan Lethem and indie stars Farel Dalrymple and Paul Hornschemeier (has there ever been an art team with harder to spell last names?); and the so far out of leftfield I had no idea it existed until I walked in to the shop and one of the guys who runs the place shoved it in my face that it existed Howard the Duck, from the suprisingly well suited team of Ty Templeton and Juan Bobillo; so, never mind all the semicolons, here comes the reviews!
Omega the Unknown is a really weird book to do a revival of. The original series, by Gerber, co-writer Mary Skrenes, and artist Jim Mooney “unfinished dream”, as Lethem and company put it in their dedication to the original creative team on the first page, or an interesting failure, given your perspective. I tend to think of it as a bit of both, but more of the former, if for no other reason than that it took forever to go anywhere, and didn’t start until the final issue. The original team was meant to tie up the whole thing in the pages of the Defenders (it was even advertised in the letter page of the last issue), but that didn’t happening, and another writer wound up finishing the story instead (I forget who; I want to say David Anthony Kraft, but I also remember seeing Steven Grant attached to it, and I’m too damned lazy to actually check. Surely one of our know it all slobs knowledgable, hygenic readers can clear it all up in the comments section anyway. That’s interactivity for you; doing my own research for me since 2001.
Anyway, besides the fact that it’s a Steve Gerber comic from a time when he was to the mainstream comics scene what someone like Grant Morrison is today, the series has remained interesting despite it’s sad end because it was so ahead of its time. The slow burn plot movement, the attempt to do something different with the superhero genre (so much so that it is more than a little reminiscent of the “Mature Readers” comics WildStorm was putting out for awhile that were meant to be thrillers or action/adventure stories with superhero trappings than an actual superhero comic), the examination of themes like violence and indentity; all of these things are more or less common place in comics now. Hell, Peter Milligan has made a carrer out of similar work. But this pretty startlingly different from what else was coming out at the time. Couple that with the fact that, while he was a solid cartoonist who could tell a story, Jim Mooney was not the most dynamic artist in the world (and he was jostling for space on the shelf with John Buscema and Barry Windsor Smith at the time, among others), and you can see why it didn’t fly way back when.
All of that makes the idea of anyone doing a revamp of the book an odd proposition indeed; it’s either something you’d really want to do or a copyright renewal kind of thing. In this case, it’s the former, at least from everything Jonathan Lethem has said.
I think there’s something admirable about that; when he let his geek flag fly, Brad Meltzer wrote a big DCU crossover and a Justice League run (okay, and Green Arrow). Lethem went for a Marvel character with one of the shortest runs this side of Dakota North or Night Cat. I can also see how it’s appealing in the sense that the characters are in a tabula rasa state; I can even see the whole “unfinished story” appeal; that’s at least part of the reason why the New Gods keep being revived, even if they never seem to catch on.
Steve Gerber didn’t quite see it that way, as you can read here among many other places. He backed off from his original stance of Lethem being “an enemy for life”, probably after Lethem gushed about the original series, but I can see why he’d be so pissed, because Marvel reviving the book (no matter who was writing it) was part of a bad creator rights history between them.
All that said, Lethem’s cred as a novelist (even if I never did finish Fortress of Solitude during that month I checked it out of the library) and the novelty of anyone, at all, trying to reive Omega the Unknown piqued my interest. Two years ago. It’s nice to finally see the book out (probably as nice as me finally getting to the point of the review here), and even better that it’s interesting.
The problem with doing a re-launch/vamp/imagining (whatever phrase you like the most, really) of such an obscure character was pointed out pretty well by Paul O’Brien in that link I provided a couple paragraphs back; you run in to the trouble of it being pointless if you stray too far from the original (like doing the secret origin of Michael Myers), and being redundant if you’re too close (like doing a shot by shot remake of Psycho, for instance).
Lethem toes the line pretty well here. There are definitely echoes of the original series here; beyond using most of the set up, there’s the general, purveying sense of weirdness and ambiguity; we have no idea if Omega is a hallucination or if he’s imagining everyone else (something Lethem makes explicit); the fact that the book is meant to only last ten issues this time leads me to believe there will be an ending this time, which is reassuring, even if I am a fan of “weird for weird’s sake”. Although it’s also sucky that he’s getting something Gerber and Skrenes never did, I guess having a genius grant affords him that much. He throws in just enough of his own ideas, from what looks like a government conspiracy plot, to the completely self serving superhero the Mink, to a doctor who has no analogue from the original series, that you can justify his using the original property on storytelling grounds, if not on any other.
The art from Dalrymple and Hornschemeier (seriously, couldn’t they have at least thrown in a Scott Williams or a Paul Smith, just to give me something easier to type?) adds a lot to the book; I’m pretty confident in saying that it looks like nothing else Marvel is publishing right now, and probably anything they ever have. It’s certainly the only Marvel comic I can think of where the art owes more to R. Crumb than Jack Kirby. Omega and the other fantastic elements in the book seem really out of place; normally, that’s an annoyance in a superhero comic, but it fits in the with the general tone of the book of something not being right here.
Unlike pretty much every mainstream artist working for Marvel and DC, I can’t readily name any of Dalrymple’s influences, other than a vague resemblance to what I’m familiar with of Crumb’s work. It doesn’t remind me of any of the alt-comics heavy hitters I’m familiar with, other than a slight resemblance to Adrian Tomine’s work, but since I can’t think of why I draw that inference other than some vague inkling, it can’t be that strong. It’s scratchy and shaded enough to fit in with Jeffrey Brown, but doesn’t have his– unique approach to figure drawing. I’ll be nice and leave it there (especially since I’ve only read his titanically funny mini-comic self parody, Be A Man; maybe he doesn’t always draw like that).
That was more of an excuse for me to name drop all of the alt comics guys I’m familiar with (Clowes Ware Burns Spiegelman Thompson purple monkey dishwasher), really, but you can also take it as my saying that Dalrymple’s art is as idiosyncratic as his name, if you choose. Hornschemeier (seriously! Why couldn’t they hire Dave Stewart like everyone else) provides colors that pull of a muted palette without being too muddy, which ain’t easy, from what I’ve seen, and compliment the pencils beautifully. The lettering (I assume Darlymple did it himself, although he isn’t credited) even helps the book stand out from the norm, eschewing the flash and computerized slickness of mainstream comics for something that would be more at home in a self published comic.
Lethem’s scripting deserves more comment than I originally gave it. Being the latest, and quite possibly the most prestigious, novelist to make his comics debut (I’m pretty sure this is the first comic he’s ever done), it’s interesting to see how he handles the transition from prose to sequential art, especially since prose writers like Brad Meltzer have been hammered in part because they seem to be trying to write novels in every single panel with a caption in it.
He doesn’t appear to be overwriting here, although maybe that’s where Karl Rusnak, who’s credited under Lethem, comes in. There are some narrative captions, which only appear when Omega’s around, interestingly enough (he was mute through the most of the original series, from what I remember). Co-lead Alexander Island does all the talking, which makes sense, as he’s taking on James-Michael Starling’s role in the original series; the super intelligent kid with zero social skills tied to Omega, with two young women watching out for him. He’s a big part of all the mystery, so it’s an interesting idea to keep us out of his head.
This was a good start to a longer story. Despite the murky ethical issues and the long wait, I’d say it was worth it; at the very least, I want to pick up the next issue to see what’s going on. The Howard the Duck revival is a different animal though, and not just because… well, he’s duck.
In one way, I liked this comic a lot more than I expected to. That’s not saying much, because as I mentioned about ten years ago, when I started writing this, I had no idea it existed until one of the guys who runs my LCS waved it in my face and said “You know you want it.”
I’m not sure if he was being sarcastic or actually remembered me telling him about the fact that I’d read the MAX Howard mini, but I decided to prove him right, despite the fact that I’m pretty much of the opinion that no one should be writing Howard but Steve Gerber. This one can’t even have the appeals of Omega behind it; while Gerber didn’t get to give the series an ending, he did do quite a bit with the character, and I thought left him in a decent place at the end of his last run.
That said, short of getting Evan Dorkin (or, if they really wanted to go crazy, Johnny Ryan), Ty Templeton’s probably the best writer for the job, and not just because he wrote a short story featuring the character in a Civil War one shot, of all things. He has a good sense of the absurd, which is key to Howard’s adventures, and captures Howard’s alternating misanthropy and bemusement with us hairless apes and our stupidity (as well as the occasional moments where he shows he’s not such a bad guy under all that cynicism) well. Beverly seems in character, too, or at least much character as Gerber ever gave her. She’s not a bimbo, but she does some things that make it seem like it some times, all while still seeming like the kind of woman Howard would want to spend his time with. Quite why their interspecies/interdimensional pairing has never bothered me finally strikes me as odd; perhaps all of the tolerance I was taught by the liberal education system as a youngin’ paid off. Also, Gerber never really showed them having sex or anything. Not even in the MAX comic. Although they did shower together. Again; I was perfectly okay with that.
So, Templeton hit the right notes here. Juan Bobillo’s expressive art, always a joy on She-Hulk, translates well to a comedy book without a single green female lawyer in sight; this may very well be the comic he was born to draw. The story even worked better for me than it did Burgas’s (who offers his review below me) or everyone’s favorite Scotish racounter/wrestling question answerer, Iain Burnside.
Well, at least I thought I did. The more I think about it, the less impressed I become. Beyond what Templeton and Bobillo (along with inker Marcelo Sosa and colorist Nestor Pereyra) bring to the table, I think a big part of my enjoyment of this book is that I was literally expecting nothing from it. The fact that it read a lot like a Gerber Howard comic impressed the hell out of me.
That’s the problem with it, though; it’s like a Gerber Howard comic, in the same way that Astonishing X-Men is like the Claremont comics Joss Whedon (and I, admittedly) read at an impressionable age; it gets all the surface details right, but lacks the verve of the original comics it’s emulating, and no how much the current creators are able insert their style in to the mix, there’s no escaping that. It’s not a bad comic; it’s got a loopy charm to it, which is worth something when so many other mainstream comics are having to so rigidly tie in to the current company line. But I haven’t really been able to enjoy this book as much as I did when I read it since I stumbled across the cover band analogy. Hell, it made me like Astonishing X-Men less, and I didn’t think anything could do that.
It’s not a bad comic, either as a Howard story or on its own merits. I may even buy the next issue, to see if Templeton can get this thing moving. It’s just disappointing in a way I wouldn’t expect out of a non-Gerber revival of Howard, in that it is not excruciatingly awful. Which is a step in the right direction, I have to say. But, you know, as far as the questionable revivals, both ethically and legally, of Steve Gerber creations go, I’d say the one by the acclaimed novelist was the better read this time out. Maybe Templeton can close the gap next time out. Because it’s totally fair to compare the two books based on the criteria that they were both created by Steve Gerber. Really!
28 Comments
Monkey » What Is This, Anyway, Screw Steve Gerber Week?
October 6, 2007 at 11:22 pm
[…] صÙ?ت اÙ?سÙ?Ù? اÙ?صاÙ?Ø wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt … familiar with (Clowes Ware Burns Spiegelman Thompson purple monkey dishwasher), really, but you can also take it as my saying that Dalrymple’s… […]
Lynxara
October 7, 2007 at 6:31 am
Please, please edit your text before putting it online for the world to see. Aside from the horrible, nearly unreadable molestations of grammar happening in your run-on sentences, there are several sentences throughout the body of the text where you have simply dropped entire key words and phrases. Much of the second paragraph is wholly unintelligible because of this. It also features a parenthetical aside that explodes into a run-on sentence so incredibly out of control that you apparently forgot you were even writing a parenthetical aside to begin with, and so never bothered closing your parentheses!
It would be one thing if it was just one paragraph, but it keeps happening throughout the body of the text. There are multiple sentences here where I have no fucking clue what you were trying to communicate on a basic level, because you left words out, and multiple run-ons that meander to the point of utter unreadability. Why should anyone bother to read what you’ve written if you apparently can’t be bothered to make it intelligible? How can anyone take your review seriously when you aren’t articulate enough to write complete sentences?
I’m really sort of offended you posted this, Brad, because your writing is usually polished to at least basic standards of coherence. In fact, it’s usually fun to read. Please bother to have a moment’s consideration for the audience and don’t actually post things that haven’t been proofread. If there isn’t someone proofing the CSBG posts, then there really should be. Criticism dies the moment the writing behind it fails.
fourthworlder
October 7, 2007 at 10:37 am
A good policy for self-editing: smoke the joint AFTER all the proof-reading.
Sleestak
October 7, 2007 at 12:36 pm
I referred to it as “Rape Steve Gerber Week”. To-may-toe, Toe-mah-toe.
Rohan Williams
October 7, 2007 at 5:47 pm
“If there isn’t someone proofing the CSBG posts, then there really should be.”
I agree with the general sentiment of your comment, but surely this is going a bit too far for a blog about comics? It’s not like we’re paying people for professional writing and top-notch editing or anything (not saying the posters here aren’t capable of great writing and editing, just that it’s time-consuming).
Greg Hatcher
October 7, 2007 at 6:04 pm
We do get paid a pittance of sorts. It’s ‘professional’ to that extent. I think the last time it stacked up to enough to actually merit Jonah cutting a check we voted to send it to Lea Hernandez or the HERO initiative or something, rather than figure out how to divide it among everyone, because none of us could figure out a formula that made sense. But we ARE professional writers, we get paid, damn it!
Some of us proof more than others. I’m such an OCD freak I have been known to fix the formatting of quotes and the spelling in comments from time to time. But I would never wish my fussiness on anyone else.
Rohan Williams
October 7, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Well, there ya go, you learn something new everyday. Unfortunately, if the financial structure of CSBG is the new thing I learn today, then it’s not shaping up to be a very productive day. Still, interesting to know, even if it totally undermines my “cut them some slack, they don’t get paid!” defence.
I’ve noticed your posts here usually refer to your work as columns, Greg, and that you mention other places you write for. Not living in America, I probably haven’t seen those publications, but I assume that’s paid work too?
MarkAndrew
October 7, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Wait, now, WHO gets paid? I should write more. (Post coming tonight, in fact.)
And I’m boycotting all of these (and Foolkiller) due to Gerber loyalty. Even though he said on his blog he was OK with it. And even if his behavior in regards to Omega was VERY strange - Especially since he doesn’t, legally, have a leg to stand on.
But I remain loyal, ’cause he’s my favorite mainstream writer ever, and I kinda feel like I owe him.
Rene
October 7, 2007 at 6:52 pm
I have a lot of respect for Steve Gerber as a writer. He really was the Grant Morrison of his day, maybe even more important than Morrison, because the comic book scene was much more conventional back then.
But I have to say it too, I have less and less sympathy for these writers that get all territorial about stuff they created under willingly-entered work for hire contracts and taking advantage of the tremendous visibility of Marvel or DC.
I don’t think it’s cute anymore, actually I think these creators sound like spoiled teenagers with big egos. If he wanted the rights to the characters, Gerber should have self-published Omega and Howard and Foolkiller, or then why didn’t he seek a smaller publisher that would allow him to retain the rights.
Another thing that burned me for these creator rights issues is that these guys almost always prove they’re even worse than the Big Two when they become “the Boss”.
Zach Adams
October 8, 2007 at 2:22 am
Rene–I’d agree with you on Howard. However, I was under the impression that there was some legal murkiness behind Omega and whether Marvel or Gerber actually owned him. If that’s true, I’d totally understand his not wanting anyone to revive the character until things are sorted out, and unless he was paid.
Journalista - the news weblog of The Comics Journal » Blog Archive » Oct. 8, 2007: Bob Montana is still Archie’s creator
October 8, 2007 at 3:24 am
[…] [Review] Brad Curran and Don McPherson on the first issues of two new comics based on the work of writer Steve Gerber: Omega the Unknown and Howard the Duck. […]
The Mad Monkey
October 8, 2007 at 4:14 am
This whole Gerber thing is ridiculous.
First things first…I would like to point out that I do enjoy Gerber’s work and respect him very much as a writer.
With that said…
His arguments and threats concerning characters he hasn’t touched in 30 years are idiotic. If he felt so strongly about Omega and Foolkiller, then perhaps he should’ve been the one going to Marvel with new story ideas. But, he didn’t. So, he has no right to whine about someone else doing it. Especially considering (with the possible exception of Omega) that he has absolutely no ownership of the characters in question.
You can’t blame someone else for wanting to write a story for a character they have an interest in. I’m quite certain that Ty Templeton and the fellows writing Omega (sorry, I can’t remember their names) had no intention of offending or screwing over Mr. Gerber. They just wanted to tell a story and TPTB at Marvel thought it would be a good idea.
The rest of what I wanted to say has already been stated wonderfully by Rene in the above post, so I’m not going to rehash it.
Allan Lappin
October 8, 2007 at 7:24 am
I don’t know whether there is murkiness over the ownership of Howard the Duck, Omega, et al, but I do know that Steve Gerber has an incredibly distinctive “voice”. I saw no reason to buy these comics knowing that it wouldn’t be the “real” Howard, Omega, etc.
[Yes, I know virtually all characters published by the Big Two have been written by more than one writer. The more unique the chqaracter, though, the more I associate him/her/it with the creator of the book.]
Greg Hatcher
October 8, 2007 at 9:04 am
Nobody here would have seen it, probably, Rohan. I’m a contributing editor at a teen scholastic magazine called WITH, circulated primarily to schools and church youth groups and such. I did the movie column there for ten years and I still do the occasional article or short-fiction piece for them. But yeah, it’s paid.
Prankster
October 8, 2007 at 10:00 am
I concur, with somewhat less vehemence, about the proof-reading thing. Those first two paragraphs really are a chore to read, and I’m still not totally clear on what you’re trying to say.
As for Gerber…I admit I don’t know all the details, but I feel bad for the guy. Yes, he was writing work-for-hire, but it was really hard to do otherwise back then, and part of the reason he was able to write such great comics is that it WAS personal to him. These were characters he cared about, and stories he wanted to tell. I don’t think a writer should be punished for investing his work with some passion.
And the Big Two were really, really sleazy companies in some ways back then. They actively seemed to go out of their way to screw over the creative talent…I mean, this is a company that couldn’t even see fit to giving Kirby a proper chunk of the money from his creations. This is, in fact, a very contentious issue amongst creative types–too many people entering creative fields end up signing their life away just for a shot at getting recognized. The music industry is the same way (although at least there if you become a top-selling artist you have the leverage to renegotiate your contract).
So even if Gerber wasn’t completely screwed over, I can understand why he wouldn’t want to go back and tackle Omega for Marvel again, and indeed, he may have been hoping that the ten issues he did would be allowed to just remain as they were. No matter what the earnest, fanboyish ethusiasm on the part of Lethem and co., the fact of the matter is that there’s something quite sick at the heart of superhero comics, and their perpetual ownership of other people’s stories is tied in with this. I can understand why Gerber has trouble getting behind this.
Cayman
October 8, 2007 at 10:43 am
Gerber’s whining is tedious. One might as well say “How dare Gerber write Doctor Fate!”
john b
October 8, 2007 at 12:18 pm
I couldn’t even finish this article…I mean how long would it take to type in and google “Steven Grant - Omega the Unknown” to know that he finished the story with Trimpe…or google image some of Jeff Brown’s comics, it’d take two seconds. You came across very rude in several parts of this article.
Rene
October 8, 2007 at 1:17 pm
As for Gerber…I admit I don’t know all the details, but I feel bad for the guy. Yes, he was writing work-for-hire, but it was really hard to do otherwise back then, and part of the reason he was able to write such great comics is that it WAS personal to him.
If the guy is overflowing with creative energies and simply wants to do personal stuff, he doesn’t need a big company like Marvel for that. If all I want is to play my music, I can always form a garage band. It was hard back then, and it is still hard right now, but if you really want complete creative control and all the rights to your creations, more hardship is the price you pay.
Now, if you willingly enter a work-for-hire contract with a big company like Marvel or DC, you KNOW you’re not getting the rights to the characters, c’mon. In return, you get access to a wider readership that you probably wouldn’t have otherwise. It seems to me that guys like Gerber want to take the good with none of the bad.
They want it both ways. They associated their names with the Marvel brand, they had EARLIER popular Marvel characters created by other writers to help sell their books (Hulk appeared in Omega #2, and Spider-Man in Howard #1), but they ALSO want the characters to be theirs, reneging contracts they willing entered to.
Apodaca
October 8, 2007 at 1:24 pm
And how, exactly, has Steve Gerber been punished?
If anything, he wants to punish other writers for doing their jobs.
Jack Norris
October 8, 2007 at 7:08 pm
Because poor, helpless Marvel really needs your protection from the all-powerful tyranny of the complaining creator.
Give me a break. You read an article or two about him being unhappy with the situation and you’re “sick of his whining”: why, it’s like he’s under your bedroom window with a megaphone going on about it day and night, driving you to distraction. Or, you know, not.
To paraphrase Rene: “Stupid Donner Party, why didn’t they call in a rescue copter with their cel phones?”
The resemblance between today’s independent/self-publishing situation and the way things were at the time is pretty much nonexistent, not just a matter of “It was hard back then, and it is still hard right now”. The closest things at the time that could be any kind of inspiration or role model were the undergrounds, whose time had largely passed. The independents as we know them were still a couple of years in the future. So, in failing to singlehandedly invent the modern independent comic as we know it today before he wrote anything he valued, he deserves to have everyone start in with the tough-guy-talking, the “I have no sympathy” crap, and be spat on?
Nice.
Rohan Williams
October 8, 2007 at 8:57 pm
@Greg: Cool, so there ya go, you’re a professional writer either way. I once wrote for/edited something that was a bit like my part of the world’s version of the mag you described, and I always liked the fact that as long as you mentioned certain schools, you’d pretty much have a built-in audience.
On the Gerber thing, I don’t find myself sympathising too much with the plight of the work-for-hire creator either (despite the quality and originality of their work), but I’m sure I’d feel quite differently if I was Steve Gerber or Jack Kirby. The experiences they must have had with Marvel and DC back then don’t sound fun.
Conor E
October 8, 2007 at 9:03 pm
My one problem with Gerber’s position… why doesn’t the creator of Dr. Fate deserve the same respect that Gerber’s demanding? How about Lee, Kirby, Ditko, Everett, and whoever else created the cast of Defenders? As long as he’s working on characters created by others, he comes off as a massive hypocrite.
Apodaca
October 8, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Because poor, helpless Steve Gerber really needs your protection from the all-powerful tyranny of the profiting company.
Freak out much?
Rohan Williams
October 8, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Cayman, Rene and Connor make good points- Gerber’s argument would be more convincing if he himself stayed away from characters created by others and owned by the Big Two. Of course, if he had done that, we would’ve missed out on some acclaimed runs on those characters.
Isn’t it possible that the murkiness of the Omega rights could be because Marvel promised Gerber some sort of deal whereby he would be able to keep the rights to the character, and then didn’t keep their end of the deal? There’s probably more going on there than we know about.
Jiminey Snickety
October 9, 2007 at 2:50 pm
They cancelled Night Cat?
When the hell did that happen?
That explains why I have been waiting all these years - and here I thought it was because they had put Kevin Smith on the title.
Jack Norris
October 9, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Apodaca said:
Because poor, helpless Steve Gerber really needs your protection from the all-powerful tyranny of the profiting company.
No, but it’s not as ludicrously disproportionate as the other way around.
And:
Freak out much?
No, but I would be if I were the one trying to characterize his bitching about the situation as wanting to “punish other writers for doing their jobs”.
Apodaca
October 9, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Ha ha ha! You can’t do better than “I know you are, but what am I?”
You have my sympathy.
Jack Norris
October 9, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Read your original reply to my post and explain how you are doing anything other than “I know you are.. etc.” yourself.
As you said in the other thread, Marvel has basically won, so how is it anything other than ugly to spit on the “loser”, apparently just to identify oneself with the “top dog”?