If 616 Cap had said it it would have been out of character. For Ultimate Cap to say it was completely in character.

No, I thought it stood for asshole.

Right-o, Captain Albacete “don” need “istory”

He just needs a good razor sharpener to bellow his mighty battle cry “Ti via cose a anavajasoooo!!”

My Top 3

3. Tiger you just hit the jackpot
2. Spider-Man unmasked by Doc Ock in front of everyone (Spidey 11)
1. Great power comes great responsibility (AF 15)

Can we have a Top 100 splash pages next? or Top 100 suprises (reader did not see this coming) next?

Why!! Of course not, Ultimate Cap!

As everyone knows, that sacred “A” Stands for… ALBACETE!!

Captain Albacete, the King of Razor Blades.

P.S.: One of the reasons I prefer 616 Cap to Ultimate Cap is his respect towards people: Brubaker’s 616 Captain paid homage to the French Resistance against nazis in one flashback issue, which means Bru knows well his history books. Millar probably has just “Story of the Glasgow Rangers” as his foremost history book

Under the definition of aesthetics you yourself provided, which I still think is narrow, is “horrific subject matter” not “concerned with pure emotion and sensation”? Is horror not an emotion? Furthermore, learning a message about the evils of war satisfies our curious nature, again leading to an emotional response. We feel that we understand the world better, and we feel happy that is the case. And while we might not like facts, we rather have them than not.

Rob Liefeld’s Captain America: beauty is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder. Thousands of people, at some point, found Liefeld’s art beautiful. If they hadn’t of, the Liefeld and his art would be forgotten, and not iconic.

Planet 9 from Outer Space, a movie which is often described as “so bad it’s good”. Good, as in aesthetically pleasing. People are often perverse in the way that things which should ostensibly be found ugly are found beautiful for their very ugliness, although usually only when that ostensible ugliness is extreme. I can’t explain it, but from experience it seems the case.

KKK cross: I was, specifically, talking about iconicity is works of art. The KKK cross seems to be an icon as a general idea, rather than any one particular photograph of it. However, we may say that a photograph of the KKK cross may have some appeal, in so far as its horrific subject matter, or to be more accurate the horrific subject matter it signifies, moves us.

Is there anything else you’d like cleared up?

aes?thet?ic

–adjective
1. pertaining to a sense of the beautiful or to the science of aesthetics.
2. having a sense of the beautiful; characterized by a love of beauty.
3. pertaining to, involving, or concerned with pure emotion and sensation as opposed to pure intellectuality.

“The photo’s importance, its central position in culture, exists because it was able to burrow into people’s minds, and it was only able to do that because it was such a moving and well composed photo.”

The napalm photo was important and moving because of 1) its horrific subject matter, 2) its message about the evils of war, and a distant 3) its composition. Only 3) is properly an aesthetic value.

Now explain why Rob Liefeld’s Captain America, “Planet 9 from Outer Space,” or a KKK cross is iconic for its aesthetic appeal. Good luck with your answer…you’ll need it.

I think that you are taking a very narrow view of aesthetics. Something doesn’t have to be ‘beautiful’ to have aesthetic appeal. Anything that can cause some sort of joy, even a perverse joy, could be called aesthetic. Something can be aesthetic if it is moving, or enjoyable, or enlightening, or familiar, to take just a few examples.

Take the “napalm girl” photo. You say it is famous for its place in history, but thousands of photos were taken during the Vietnam war, ostensibly have the same place in history. The photo’s importance, its central position in culture, exists because it was able to burrow into people’s minds, and it was only able to do that because it was such a moving and well composed photo. I would say that the “napalm girl” photo is iconic, when thousands of photos of the same thing aren’t, solely because of its aesthetic appeal.

The images in origin stories, for instance, are appealing because the story that they are in is appealing, and they remind people of the story. The images have appeal, not in themselves, but for their position. There are plenty of panels in origin stories which aren’t iconic, because they have no and never had any appeal, because no-one liked the characters.