Will Eisner vs. Stan Lee

Now A Contract with God I could write about and its interesting way of portraying tenement life during the 30s. But what really interested me was Stan Lee’s interview with Will Eisner. They really bantered each other; it felt like one of them was about to slap the other. For me it was hard to really side with one against the other. They both brought up several points about comics that I agreed with. For one thing I did agree that comics can be a higher art form which both Stan Lee and Will Eisner stated. But Will Eisner really does see comics as a driving force of story, that they shouldn’t be limited that they were in need of better story. Not just stuff for kids. I can agree to that, but Eisner just felt as though he had no wiggle room for stuff for kids. Because Lee was right in a way that kids are really do look into comics. And that doesn’t mean a comic is a low form because it is geared towards a younger audience. I agreed with Lee that it’s the writing that makes the story good, no matter what audience its for. Eisner seemed to feel that perhaps stuff for kids was just too black and white. But hey Stan Lee wrote Spider-Man and killed Gwen Stacy, something that truly shocked the comic book world. And that was geared towards a younger audience. That’s where I got a little irritated with Eisner; I understood that he felt that there needed to be something for an adult audience. But that doesn’t mean you get to look down upon a younger one. Stan Lee and many other comic book writers that wrote for a younger audience didn’t write down to the younger audience they were being relatable with their characters. Thus creating a good story for any audience. And that’s what both Eisner and Lee somewhat agreed on is that story if its good should be appreciated and not seen as a lowly form. Both men want to see comic books appreciated as being an art. But Lee tends to be I would say more open to varying audiences and super heroes. While Eisner is a realist and wants to see life in comics, he wants to see something besides another super hero. So you put a realist and an idealist in a room, well of course you’re going to have tension.

But in the end I end up in the middle, and I think most comic book readers do now. I started reading X-Men when I was young, I felt like someone understood what it felt like to be an outcast. I then moved on into Spawn which is more mature but still superhero based, but I liked the idea that life is like a bed of roses, there are thorns underneath. Then lastly I moved onto a wide genre of comics in the online world and onto Eisner. Onto what in some ways he considers a higher form. But as Stan Lee said I started out in comics when I was young, if you handed me an Eisner comic when I was my younger self I would’ve loved the art but I would’ve not understood the material. If you handed me a copy of X-Men though I would read it ten times over. That for me is what it comes down to, is story and whether or not it is good, I don’t give a shit about its intended audience. I just want a good story.

Comics of the 1930s

Wow, where to start on the start of the comic book age.  I read here and there through the Marvel, EC comics and some of the old DC and Carl Barks. What struck me was how little experimentation there was because of the factorial process. The panels were basic, some of the comics felt like a dead fish when reading it. Except for some, I would say of course the ones with Jack Kirby felt more dynamic and felt as though the had movement, like the artist was connected with the story.  The EC comics were very well illustrated, with a few static bumps here and there. DC comics picked up in the later years as well. I think it was the comics more close to the 30s that felt stiff and awkward at times. It felt as though the teams working on the pages just hadn’t found their rhythm quite yet.   

In the later years 40s and 50s I could see that there was a comfort a rhythm that was followed. But still not the full investment in story, the still felt more like radio shows. The use of dialogue and narration was just the same as it was in radio. Very musical and exaggerated, at times I heard it was Orson Welles giving narration to Batman or The Black Panther. Which made me feel a bit detached. But when reading Carl Barks’ comics of Donald Duck and his nephews. I felt more comfortable, more like I was in a story.  It might be that there was no over the top narration and that the dialogue was natural. But for the most part, it was because he didn’t play down to the audience. He told the story, that was it, no artist ego in the way. This is what a comic was and should feel. And a lot of artist and writer’s I believe have evolved from that motive to tell just a story. But to often and even still today, they worry that the reader just won’t get or that they have to have their glory page to awe the reader in image. Not awe the reader in story.  

Comics in the Newspaper

When reading through the old newspaper comics like Terry and the Pirates, Prince Valiant, and Little Nemo in Slumberland. I was surprised by the experimentation in the comics and how big they were when printed. As a kid I was just used to reading the Sunday funnies, that’s all they were really, not much story just your gag strip. But there was a lot of variety, and some gag strips, but story overall wasn’t super important for most of the comics. A lot of the story was put aside, unless it was comics like Prince Valiant. What was seen as important were the pictures. You didn’t even really need text to follow what was happening, it was about enjoying the imagery. The panels and layout were all so different for each strip you picked up gave a different feel through its panels. I felt that if you just took the panel break down of each artist you would be able to tell them apart. I also feel that the comics were a bit less about the artist’s ego in the sense that they were just having fun creating a story and seeing what they could get away with.  Whereas in some of todays comics I feel as though some artists just want to show off, they don’t seem as connected to the story, and want to give you the double page spread of beauty.

The funniest part about reading the old strips was the dialogue. The dialogue overall was horrible. I couldn’t make sense of most of it or it was dryer than apiece of toast left in Death Valley. Some of the strips had ok dialogue but; honestly it seemed as though the editor took a nap during that process.  But getting to see the beginnings of what led to the comic book you get to see how the basic structure and rules came about. I also saw some of what we left behind, lost, tossed into the bin. Hopefully one day someone will find it, examine it and see its purpose can be used again. And in some ways the old oddities of the strip are coming back through web comics.