was considered great art by most of my co workers, while this
was considered beyond stupid.
To me they are BOTH stupid and great at the same time. But since modern superheroes are inherently worse the more 'serious' they are, I like the Liefeld thing way more...since it really feels like a twelve year old boy somehow got someone to publish his art in editions of 50,000. I get more of the 'thrill of true art' from that.
I know defending Liefeld is pretty tired at this point. I certainly don't want to be surrounded by his art for an extended period of time, that's for sure. But I think stuff like All Star Superman and JH Williams III is far more worthy of derision. I happen to like Frank Quietly ok, but I think it's goofier then something like Stephen Platt.
38 comments:
i had that prophet poster as a kid, btw.
joe madureira had a sweet run on x-men when he was 18
there's a hormonal quality to the drawings that seems natural at that age
I hated Rob Liefeld when I was in high school. Youngblood had just come out, and I worked at a comic book store. I've still never read it, but the level of pure retardation in it is perfect for comics, probably, but this doesn't make me able to read it and it depresses me to think about it. It's way better visually than something like Quitely. I don't get what the big deal about him is. I liked All-Star Superman a lot because of the goofy, somehow-not-campy-but-fun stories, but I almost couldn't read it because of the art. [cue old jazz, or, er, 90s indie rock]. The computer coloring, the pasted on lettering, the neurotic fidelity to verisimilitude make Liefeld look like Herriman or something. I feel stupid reading All-Star-Supes - maybe it's growing into adulthood in the 90s, but I'm starting to get sick of the notion that comics should be fun and remind you of your childhood. I'd say I want them to be more serious, but then I think about "Wilson" and I want to shoot myself. I guess I'm just coming out of my post-comics-fest-I-am-a-mote-and-this-is-a-cultural-wasteland blues... I like what you said before, Austin, about wanting to see real creativity or something...
Rob Liefeld = Jimbo
Who wouldn't want to look at comics drawn by Jimbo?
i didn't have any of this stuff as a kid
just had an issue of "witchblade"
the only witchblade i had was 'medieval spawn vs witchblade'
I grew up with super hero comics, and I have to say, the reasons people are so derisive of Liefeld's work is because the man produced some of the most banal comics of all time.
I understand the notion that super hero comics are goofy and therefore not to be taken seriously. I also understand that if you are going to do those books, they should be fun to look at and full of energy. That very idea is what made Jack Kirby the "King Of Comics."
But Liefeld's work isn't just mocked because of his uncanny ability to showcase his weakness and handicaps as an artist, nor is it because he perpetrated the weakest and most juvenile "writing" of the 90s. It's because his work is a pain to look at. They are ugly, awkward compositions that lack any real imagination or fun.
I could say that one of the troubling aspects of Liefeld is that I think he truly thought he was a phenomenal artist and took himself and his work far too seriously in relation to what he was doing, but then again, that argument MIGHT be said about Fletcher Hanks (well, no one really knows what Fletcher Hanks thought of the work he was doing, but that's the impression I get when reading his stuff. I could be very wrong about that) But at least Hank's work has a vitality and life to it that was on par with people like Kirby. Liefeld's work just sits on the page like a wet turd.
I do agree that Liefeld's work is like the psyche of a 12 year old boy exposed and rendered into bloated lines and exaggerated physiognomy. But is that really a good thing? Is that interesting?
Also, I am curious...how are All Star Superman and J.H. Williams MORE worthy of derision than Rob Liefeld? Is it because they might seem to strive for some sort of "higher art" than Liefeld and are therefor some sort of huckster or scam artist?
LOVES SPAWN
was way into McFarlane-era Amazing Spidey
someone better respond to J.H.D's epic comment properly
or else this is gonna become a mcfarlane love-fest pretty fast, which i will participate in, ahem.
Is it a good thing to have the psyche of a 12 year old boy play out in front of our eyes? Yes. because 12 year old boys are different than other people, so it's worth hearing what they have to say.
There is an unbridled enthusiasm to early image comics that I would like to find in any comic that I read. A sense that anything could happen, regardless of how retarded that thing may be.
Like it or not there is a something in each one of us that identifies with that stuff. As artists we can choose to either ignore it or reconcile with it. I see artists like Ben Marra and Victor Cayro reconciling with it and creating amazing comics.
this post made me think of aaron noble, anybody seen his stuff?
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&source=imghp&q=aaron+noble&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
it's like taking all the weird freneticism (i just made that word up) of image comics without the banal narrative aspects...
but as for some clarification, are we attacking serious superhero portrayals because they exhibit "superhero decadence" or for some other reason?
jesus...
rob liefeld...
is a mainstream meme
There is a major difference between what artists like Liefeld (and Marat Mychaels and the rest of the Extreme Team) was doing and what Marra is doing.
I really enjoy Marra's work (although I do have some disagreements about some of his ideas of what comics "should be") but part of the appeal of his art, whether intended or not, is a sense of irony or at the very least a sense of humor. I am sure he takes what he is doing very seriously, but you don't make a comic called "Gangsta Rap Posse" without a tiny wink and a nod.
There is a sense of satire to the work, no matter how sincerely it is created.
I actually have a soft spot for a lot of the "B Grade" comics. I used to love Grips when I was a teenager, and in fact anything by Kris Silver and Silverwolf Comics really tickled me. I loved how they felt subversive, and even kinda dangerous. I also loved Tim Vigil's stuff and loved Faust(I am sure a source of inspiration for artists like Marra) more than my mainstream superhero stuff because it was more like the horror films that I was watching.
I was psyched for Image when it first came out, but even as a teenager I could smell somthing wrong. All the books had slick, hyper-colored artwork, but the work felt cheap, like someone was getting something over on me. I really enjoyed Dragon though, because it reminded me of 70s Marvel stuff, with big freaky shark dudes bunching out super hookers. Just FUN.
But trying to justify the work of Liefeld seems to me simply contrarian at the least. I mean, seriously, it seems the only reason to bring it up is because of how popular it is to bash him.
Fun comics are great, and dumb fun comics are great, no doubt. But defending Liefeld seems a stretch.
'James Henry Dufresne said...
There is a major difference between what artists like Liefeld (and Marat Mychaels and the rest of the Extreme Team) was doing and what Marra is doing.'
thinking about agency...
seems like marra is claiming agency over neglected 'retro' territory, and framing/celebrating it as kitsch just as frank santoro / comics comics did before.
feel like the same is true of both marra and liefeld - creating 'pornography' in order to sell copies, one via a lucrative and fluctuating direct market comics market and one via a (dying?) subculture within comics, founded around the output of several boutique publishers of 'art comics' as well as through various channels on the internet.
I totally disagree with everything you say about Liefeld because to me those compostions are great. I do like to look at them and i do find them full of fun. I get a little thrill just looking at his page in this post. certianly dont feel that way about quietly.
good way to explain liefeld:
a i have this distinct memory of an after school art class in san francisco. it was a whole mix of students...it was this community run program, so there were more well to do kids and inner city kids side by side.
there was one kid who always came in who was, it seemed, homeless...or living in a shelter. anyway...he always drew these insane rob liefield style pin up drawings...just endless sketches of a team of superheroes. he had notes about their origins and everything, but would never draw straight comics...just huge poster pin ups on the biggest paper the class had. his stuff was BEAUTIFUL (he was like 17 years old). all the other kids would crowd around and love his drawings and hed talk about the characters.
anyway, he loved liefeld and drew like liefeld. based his whole style on him.
id say quietly is more worthy because...well, if you'äre going to make fun of rob you have to make fun of quietly. they're both bad/good. as a teenager, a grant morrison comic seemed so much better then a brandon choi comic. now they seem pretty much equal to me. morrison gets so much more respect or whatever, but they are both basically entertaining comic makers that you forget about instantly.
glad Marat Mychaels was brought up. boy did i have a lot of his comics.
i still wish jeff matsuda hadnt been knocked off new men because i could never get into todd naucks style.
I believe there are sincere art brut values in Liefeld's drawing. He get's criticized by the craft establishment in mainstream comics, but as an artist he never let his "weaknesses" get in the way of a dynamic image. His art jumps off the page, even if it ends up ultimately tripping over itself.
Looking back on his imitators, like Mychaels and Fraga, you can't really say the same thing. Not even Jim Lee (Liefeld's clearest influence) had the same raw energy about it.
Having drawn in an "image style" myself through most of my early teenage years I can say personally that I still to this day try to tap that zeal for drawing that I once had. Sorta like Ausin's post about cave painting. I feel like those were my cave paintings.
It's important to keep in mind how young Liefeld was when he broke into comics. If had had conformed o the craft values of the time would anyone give a shit about him now? His art will always stick out like a sore thumb, and in the long run that's a good thing.
"seems like marra is claiming agency over neglected 'retro' territory, and framing/celebrating it as kitsch"
Yes!
"I totally disagree with everything you say about Liefeld because to me those compostions are great. I do like to look at them and i do find them full of fun. I get a little thrill just looking at his page in this post. certianly dont feel that way about quietly."
uh, huh - there's energy and vitality that Quitely and most "good" comics artists lack. Liefeld avoids the necessity of thinking about anatomy or physics and just goes butt-wild.
"morrison gets so much more respect or whatever, but they are both basically entertaining comic makers that you forget about instantly."
Totally true. I think I get excited by something like All-Star Superman or the TV show True Blood because they so successfully make entertaining, but forgettable culture. There's actually very little of that stuff that's actually fun. But it is stupid too.
I might have been at the age where I was already a little too old to appreciate those Image guys it seems. (Or at least I probably CONSIDERED myself too mature. I was into Vertigo shit and Eightball by the time I turned 18, and was dropping mainstream "super junk")
I think for a lot of artists, especially the mainstream superhero crowd, Liefeld is so openly chastised by that community because they see him as a scam artist because 1.)He didn't know how to draw anatomy, didn't know a lot of basic art principles and 2.)His work catered to an "unsophisticated" crowd, i.e. adolescent males who hadn't read comics before.
But the work did entice new readership, and OBVIOUSLY struck a chord with young males. It just honed in on what young boys wanted to read about; Tuff dudes with big guns and gritted teeth and hot babes with orbital breasts and swords. Story, content, character...pssssh. It is really no different than say, Dragonball Z.
But I will have to say that for me, his work is so FLAT. It DOESN'T jump off the page AT ALL. It's SO surface that it has no life. That's just me, though.
Now, obviously true criticism of Liefeld and his cohorts has to be separated from the opinions of the Super Hero Comics Community. As a commodity, they want to be taken seriously and be seen as a progressive, mature genre NOT just for the adolescent power fantasy ghetto, and Liefeld is the poster boy for that.
But for me, his stuff is ugly and boorish and not at all captivating. To me, someone like Erik Larsen much better represents that dumb fun that comics can be. His panels are full of energy and bravado and shit gets blown up and big mutant chicken men punch people's heads through walls.
As for all the Quietly bashing...I don't get it. For being a "mainstream" comics guy, he seems to be one of the only ones with imagination. There is an issue of New X-men that is almost completely without text, and the whole issue is, I believe, taking place inside the mind of one of the characters. The whole comic is just so beautiful. Fuck comics theory, or speculation of intent, or whatever, it's just a gorgeous comic.
I think I have a soft spot in my heart for Morrison because at the time Image was starting I was freaking out over Doom Patrol. Sandman was starting to seem pretentious and boring , but Doom Patrol was all over the place - wacky anagrams, postmodern craziness that blew my teenaged mind. James - I think we were probably too old when Youngblood and Wildcats, etc. came out to really appreciate it like the adolescent kids who were creating and devouring it. I always associate Image with this kid I worked with who would torment me and later got fired for stealing our store's copy of the platinum Spiderman #1. As for, Quitely - he just seems like a watered down Geoff Darrow (or 90s X-Men artist) - all those extra lines and marks that McFarlane and those other dudes pioneered look so showy and ugly and inelegant compared with the null utilitarianism of older mainstream artists. I think Austin's point is that at least Liefeld acknowledges that he's being a peacock - he doesn't apologize for himself or try to be taken "seriously." Those fucking computer gradients in Superman clash so terribly with the fussy lines. It makes me feel like Seth when I look at it.
And I love Mark Beyer because he's flat and expressionistic and pattenr-y and ugly - just like Liefeld.
im not bashing quietly...i feel like i'm saying that he is more or less on the same overall level as liefeld (not in terms of ability, for sure, but in overall net worth). the liefeld bias is so deep that that comes across as bashing!
liefelds current work is pretty lame...but that stuff he did when he was younger still has the feeling of 'im doing a comic an theyre letting me do it! wow!' coulpled with the fact that he doesnt have enough respect or patience to bother to learn all the bullshit that john romita sr probably tied to teach him. i think that's great.
speaking of the romitas though, i think john romita JR is a great artist and i get way more out of him than liefeld or quietly.
It's funny you mention Geoff Darrow...I see his influence pop up in all sorts of new, "indie/art" comics (certainly in the aforementioned Victor Cayro.)
Also, Doom Patrol was a favorite of mine as well. In fact, I think it still stands up as one of the most subversive comics ever put out by DC Comics. To see a dadaist take on super heroes at that age like you said, blew my mind. To me, it stands behind Watchmen as the only relevant take on the genre. (Animal Man was good too, in it's own way.)
Also, I like Mark Beyer too...but maybe for all the reasons it's NOT Liefeld ;)
Doom Force :)
Totally agreed re Doom Patrol. It introduced me to Dada, anagrams, other odd ideas, too, I'm sure. I think it might be better than Watchmen, but just because Alan Moore gets corny and ham-fisted sometimes.
Ian - total blast from the past!
Have you(all) seen FLEX MENTALLO? a 4-issue Doom Patrol spin off drawn by Quitely? its A M A Z I N G !!!!
The thin pen line and realism is a perfect counterpoint to Grant Morrison's absurd conceits.
other things to love from "the 90's"
Answer Me!
Bananafish
Dame Darcy
Lisa Suckdog?????
The Desert Peach?????
Ian wrote: "Is it a good thing to have the psyche of a 12 year old boy play out in front of our eyes? Yes. because 12 year old boys are different than other people, so it's worth hearing what they have to say."
You know who else is "different"? – People with brain damage. Mongoloids. White Supremacists. Black Panthers. Someone who gouged out his own eyeball. An infant.
Let's all do our part and give these people a "voice" in our beautiful tapestry of humanity....
Seriously though, I don't think these appraisals are taking into account historical realities. It's all about how we want to imagine we remember all of this junk; like we had some kind of innate sense of irony even then and weren't really reading comics for the same reasons other boys were. I don't buy it at all.
If you're serious about appraising the works mentioned in earnest— in the context from which they issued— there is no way anyone could come to the conclusion that JH Williams, or Quitely are worse than a Liefield. Who tells a better story? —Not the story of how you discovered irony and want to rewrite childhood narratives in the wake, but the actual story the works set out to tell.
You can easily argue that the two "pros" we're talking about lack certain somethings, but it's ridiculous to compare their efforts to works that really do not set out to accomplish the same things.
Liefield was a douchey no-talent. Kids liked him because he was very easy to copy, and kids genuinely ( underline) bought into that steroid-rage posture he brought to every fucking image he ever drew. It's the same reason they liked THE ULTIMATE WARRIOR.
eehh, isn't figuring out which shitty artist is more sincere in their shittyness just more parsing how many angels can dance on a superstring?
"since modern superheroes are inherently worse the more 'serious' they are, I like the Liefeld thing way more" come on. Liefeld is deadly serious, in that adolescent sociopathic way. If it was all a big joke it would not be any better. I guess you can just say his composition is great. You could do the same for his anatomy. There's no accounting for taste.
bros - I look at him like Henry Darger. Thinking about what wrought Youngblood anthropologically and how wacky it is is like watching Dolemite - it's funny because of its stupidity but also hard to take your eyes off because of its intensity.
MT - I wanna read Flex Mentallo, but my only choice is on the computer, and until I get that IPad it's too much eye strain.
He wasn't naive, though, he just had really limited abilities.He used them first and foremost to make money.
— And it's not to some end that I can sympathize with, like Eastman and Lairds' TMNT. I think those guys had some genuine fannish zeal. Liefield, I think, had no real love for any of it. I don't think he ever conceived of characters as more than a list of super powers, for example. He had no interest in creating worlds on paper, he just hit on that Ultimate Warrior formula and ran with it.
I'm actually still kind of pissed that that's what we got as 12 year olds. All the people who grew up with Kirby were right to scorn all of the pre-Image crap ( I have some love for Savage Dragon and Sam Kieth, though).
I bet you're right. I confess that I've never read Youngblood - I like how expressive it looks, but I'm sure it's not worth reading. Still don't like Quitely.
Blaise and Jesse and I were talking at the comics fest and I said that I couldn't stand most comics, but liked a lot of movies, literature, fine art. They asked me why I was into comics, why I made them, and I said that it was because the cultural machinery surrounding comics when I was growing up encouraged reader identification as comics-persons. Everyone likes movies, art, books (kinda), but only some kids (especially as they get older) are into comics. So we're stuck.
And this led into discussing how what you read as a 12-17-year-old shapes the type of comics you like as an adult. Blaise read Tomine, McManus watched cartoons & read goofy, cartoony stuff, and I was into pretentious Alan Moore and Frank Miller comics. So Blaise's stuff looks like Tomine, Jesse's look like cartoons, and my comics are pretentious. Guess I was lucky (?) to've seen that stuff at that age.
I actually like Liefeld a lot more now then I did when I was 12. I was more of a straight-up Jim Lee fan then. I guess I admire that old Liefeld stuff now because I realize that he was basically doing the same thing I was trying to do at 12 years old, which is ape Jim Lee.
I mean, unless you are the type of person who created an entire comics universe of characters that were even worse than Youngblood when you were 12 years old there is no reason to to be interested in his work. I don't even try to explain it to people who are 5 years older than me or 5 years younger. It was just a certain moment in time, for better or worse.
Ultimate Warrior? Yeah, and?
I'm with you, Jason, in being attracted to comics—right now, anyhow— more through that kind identification with the culture surrounding it. I'm not so interested in keeping up with everything going on in comics and more interested in straight drawing/image making these days. But still, that world of comics is kind of a nice little bubble world, where weirdos can still gather..though it does seem like many are interested in qualifying things done in that world in ways that make them palatable to other cultural forces. That can be fun, sometimes, but it often results in presenting the work like its a step-child to more advanced forms..
I like Quitely, and I even like JH Williams. I don't need to have that enjoyment make nice with what I'm interested in as an artist.The stuff they make has more in common with LOST, or semi-hackey genre film or fiction than it does with an appreciation for Darger..
Ultimately, all that really keeps me coming back to the world of comics,as a distinct head-space, is that it's a place where a certain type seems to gather around those long boxes. Some are obnoxious and stupid, but I can be both those things too...
Ian- I like the Ultimate Warrior as a bizarre cultural artifact, but I'm more interested in watching LOST.
Again, I don't need it all to fit snugly together. That seems to me like the mark of the aesthete, you know? Like thinking of yourself in terms of the thingly things you might like, so you can think of yourself as one who exists to express what amounts to taste-as-branding. I'm not sure that makes sense...
Ultimately, these kinds of surface expressions of taste/aesthetics deny access to the underlying roots of interest.Those roots, I think, lie moreso in the subjective reading and through experience, rather than through thingliness.
With you on Lost, Luke.
"I don't need to have that enjoyment make nice with what I'm interested in as an artist."
"Like thinking of yourself in terms of the thingly things you might like, so you can think of yourself as one who exists to express what amounts to taste-as-branding."
"Ultimately, these kinds of surface expressions of taste/aesthetics deny access to the underlying roots of interest."
really like what you're saying. There's some pathological aesthetics at work. People want so badly to be understandable and to be one thing (punk rocker, bike messenger, businessman, bear, etc.) that is "cool," not several at once. This is what I'm usually conflicted about and it's stupid. I'd rather have Panter (the conflicted collage) than Teratoid Heights (the perfect gem), but I can have both so I appreciate what works in each. I think people look for rules to simplify their choices and culture to solidify out their identities.
I can't help but enjoy Lost, Deadwood, the Wire, the Office, True Blood even if it makes me look like a dork.
Post a Comment