|
Claremont is why we have Adam Warren
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
I like reading that weird dude's 80's BSDM diolog
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
And Joss Whedon, probably.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
A Gnarlacious Bro posted:Claremont is why we have Adam Warren Claremont is why we have a lot of people. You can draw a fairly straight line between him and half the working sf/fantasy creators in the English-speaking world. Part of his deal is that he comes out of the weird era of 1960s science fiction where dudes could just smear their id across the page all willy-nilly and nobody would stop them. I've said it before on here, but Claremont is very much a sequel to Robert Heinlein, and Heinlein at his most fetishistic makes Claremont look like Dr. Seuss. Robert Anton Wilson is another graduate from the same school, and of course, there's always Piers Anthony. (For modern writers, you've got people like Jacqueline Carey or Laurell Hamilton.) It's a pet peeve of mine in comics discussion, although it is one hundred percent Claremont's fault, that people tend to maximize his creeper status at the expense of all the genuinely good, fun work he managed to produce. If Stan Lee and Jack Kirby are the forefathers of modern American comics, Claremont is at least their weird uncle. Wheat Loaf posted:And Joss Whedon, probably. No "probably" about it. Whedon's Astonishing run deliberately harkens back to the Paul Smith run in a lot of ways, which is a very deep cut.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:It's a pet peeve of mine in comics discussion, although it is one hundred percent Claremont's fault, that people tend to maximize his creeper status at the expense of all the genuinely good, fun work he managed to produce. If Stan Lee and Jack Kirby are the forefathers of modern American comics, Claremont is at least their weird uncle. Claremont gave us the two issues of Uncanny X-Men (#190-191) where Manhattan and everyone in it was transformed into Conan-The-Barbarian versions of themselves. That story alone should win him at least some goodwill even if it also indulges his kinks a bit. It also would be good material to cover in this thread, and if no one does by later tonight I might just do it myself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
RandallODim posted:Claremont gave us the two issues of Uncanny X-Men (#190-191) where Manhattan and everyone in it was transformed into Conan-The-Barbarian versions of themselves. That story alone should win him at least some goodwill even if it also indulges his kinks a bit. It also would be good material to cover in this thread, and if no one does by later tonight I might just do it myself. Years later, I found that and figured out it is, for no reason, a sequel to the Spider Man & Red Sonja issue of Marvel Team-Up. Kind of blew my mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Claremont is why we have a lot of people. You can draw a fairly straight line between him and half the working sf/fantasy creators in the English-speaking world. I think the difference between Claremont and the rest of those is that even if he is no weirder, the nature of the beast he worked with means it's a lot more visible, and it doesn't help that his proclivities seem a lot less conventional. It's a lot easier to get hung up on unusual fetishes represented in a primarily visual medium than saner ones in text. I'm still inclined to give him a look myself if people have recommendations, since if nothing else he seems like a less acknowledged figure in comics. More on Liefeld's level than Lee or Kirby's, but not necessarily in a bad way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:I think the difference between Claremont and the rest of those is that even if he is no weirder, the nature of the beast he worked with means it's a lot more visible, and it doesn't help that his proclivities seem a lot less conventional. It's a lot easier to get hung up on unusual fetishes represented in a primarily visual medium than saner ones in text. Read an X-Men book from like 1975 onward.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
If it's been mentioned, I probably already glossed over it and apologize, but with all this Claremont talk going on, would X-Women be Claremont enough to merit an explanation in here? I can't remember it well enough for myself, so if someone could do a quick spiel, it'd be appreciated and funnier than I could muster.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
I'm not sure what world you live in where Claremont is "less acknowledged," but if you want some recommendations, the Dark Phoenix Saga is a classic for a reason, so check that out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:I think the difference between Claremont and the rest of those is that even if he is no weirder, the nature of the beast he worked with means it's a lot more visible, and it doesn't help that his proclivities seem a lot less conventional. It's a lot easier to get hung up on unusual fetishes represented in a primarily visual medium than saner ones in text. He's not really less acknowledged. Anyone who tries to minimize his role in the history of the medium and the genre is lying to somebody and themselves. Claremont is enormously influential, even if he's very much a product of his time. The problem is that he was and is a truly weird dude, and as such, discussing his work comes with a very large elephant in the room. He also left the X-Men books in 1991, and proceeded to do some of the worst and weirdest work of his career, so most of the big Claremont stories anyone would want to talk about are at least 25 years old. I don't think it's understating the case to say that he's foundational for modern cape comics, at least on the level of somebody like Moore or Steve Gerber, and he's absolutely worth checking out. When he's good, he's very good; when he's bad, he's a particularly bizarre sort of train wreck. And yeah, putting him and Milo Manara on the same book was a truly bizarre notion. I'm only really familiar with Manara from what I occasionally saw in Heavy Metal, but he turned in exactly what you'd have expected him to. You don't hire Manara for anything shy of softcore pornography and that's what he produced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Eh I think there has been attempts to minimize him, but that is due to his rather lacluster later works. People then attempt to push the credit onto his artists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:He's not really less acknowledged. Anyone who tries to minimize his role in the history of the medium and the genre is lying to somebody and themselves. Claremont is enormously influential, even if he's very much a product of his time. The problem is that he was and is a truly weird dude, and as such, discussing his work comes with a very large elephant in the room. He also left the X-Men books in 1991, and proceeded to do some of the worst and weirdest work of his career, so most of the big Claremont stories anyone would want to talk about are at least 25 years old. I think the weirdness of the later stuff is actually enormously charming. Sometimes it's like if Henry Darger just happened to wander in and start collaborating with Oliver Coipel or whoever. I can't say I'd recommend it (to anybody (ever)) but I definitely have developed kind of a soft spot for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Yeah, I kind of like Sovereign 7, and I'll defend Mechanix as an interesting story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Thanks for explaining this, as much as it could be explained. So despite Superman being Superman, having two copies of himself led to them squabbling instead of cooperating? And how much did DC capitalize on Superman's eXtreme new look for the '90s? When he got split in two his personality got split as well, so each Superman was physically whole, but only had half of Clark's personality. Blue was the calm, rational, Spock-ish side who was at one point surprised to find himself paralysed by fear in a crisis situation. Red was the brave, loudmouthed, reckless side who believed in lightning blasts first and questions later. Your standard emotion vs. intellect dichotomy, only even clumsier and more boring than that sounds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
Claremont put heart and soul into his x-men run and it's solid work. You come out of it knowing a little too much of the author but I'd take that over boring by the numbers where's my check work 8 times out of 10
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
ITYM body and soul forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:ITYM body and soul forever. I'm on awful.apk right now and so can't post new threads; someone else please post "itt we are written by Chris Claremont" so we can all go bananas with the catchphrases, bad accents, and fetish content.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Read an X-Men book from like 1975 onward. Yea. Basically everything from there to I'd say 85 is consistently solid. Its after the Brood Saga and into Mutant Massacre that things start to get weird. Australia has a lot of good stuff, and it also contains my 3rd favorite team after the Giant Sized Team and the Jim Lee team. Fall of the Mutants is really strange, but the X-men part is way better than the New Mutants one, though that's more because I hate Dr Moreau stories. Oh yea, Inferno. I have read it multiple times and I still cannot decide if I like it or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:Claremont is why we have a lot of people. You can draw a fairly straight line between him and half the working sf/fantasy creators in the English-speaking world. Claremont is weird because yeah he absolutely was all about putting his id up on display in a Heinlein-ish manner. But at the same time, when you look at what was being produced at the time in terms of representation of women in mainstream comics, dude was leagues ahead of his contemporaries. Stereotypical Strong Female Protagonists (That mention of the Brian Wood X-Men makes me pretty uncomfortable. Hindsight I guess) are a world better than the kidnapping victims of the likes of early Jean Grey and Sue Storm. He's a product of 70s nerd proto-feminism, stuff like Elfquest and all that. A good example of this is he wrote a response to the whole "Carol Danvers is raped by her own magical son" Avengers storyline (Avengers 200 belongs in this thread, is a strong candidate for worst comic ever published by Marvel and also Marcus' creepface will be stuck in my nightmares for eternity) where Carol takes the Avengers to task for just letting it happen. This isn't to excuse his... foibles, it's to contextualize him. Yeah he's more remembered for being super into bondage and mind control, and that is part of the weird total package. But to just remember that because his 90s comics were awful and he's hung up on the X-Men is pretty uncharitable I think. Also interestingly a lot of writers from that time seemed to have stock phrases that they kept returning to. Simon Furman is particularly notorious for this. twistedmentat posted:Yea. Basically everything from there to I'd say 85 is consistently solid. Its after the Brood Saga and into Mutant Massacre that things start to get weird. Australia has a lot of good stuff, and it also contains my 3rd favorite team after the Giant Sized Team and the Jim Lee team. Fall of the Mutants is really strange, but the X-men part is way better than the New Mutants one, though that's more because I hate Dr Moreau stories. Excalibur is pretty much good until Warren Ellis leaves(skip Lobdell however) and although the book basically became Alan Davis' baby, I think when Claremont's around the quality does have to do with him. Check out the Cross-Time Caper. I remember my dad getting me X-Factor 23 as a back issue in like 1991 because he thought Cameron Hodge's ruby quartz armor and the creepy smiling Right robot looked rad... I remember being pretty upset over the ad for Fall of the Mutants.  Looking back it's a pretty striking image, exactly what an ad should be. Maybe I should start a house ads thread... Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Looking back it's a pretty striking image, exactly what an ad should be. Maybe I should start a house ads thread... YES. I love old house ads, especially when you look at who gets put in them. In the 80s She-Hulk got as much page real estate as Spider-Man, which is cool. Also, yeah, echoing everyone on this page. Anyone concerned with comics history should read some Claremont.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Excalibur vol 1 is some great Claremont/Davis stuff. And so what if Claremont is into some weird bondage stuff? Does no one remember Wonder Woman?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
I tried to do a huge read of all the Claremont stuff a few months ago and I was like "this is supposed to be good?" I guess he does plotting and new concepts well but he writes some of the worst dialogue ever. I dunno if editorial demanded that every character somehow force pithy expository descriptions of their powers in every issue but they're there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Ferrule posted:And so what if Claremont is into some weird bondage stuff? Does no one remember Wonder Woman? Different people have different "creeped out" thresholds, is all. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
zoux posted:I tried to do a huge read of all the Claremont stuff a few months ago and I was like "this is supposed to be good?" I guess he does plotting and new concepts well but he writes some of the worst dialogue ever. I dunno if editorial demanded that every character somehow force pithy expository descriptions of their powers in every issue but they're there. They did! It was part of an effort to keep every comic new reader friendly. The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Man you tell me. Didn't it get given to Livewire when she became a hero? Wanderer posted:Years later, I found that and figured out it is, for no reason, a sequel to the Spider Man & Red Sonja issue of Marvel Team-Up. Kind of blew my mind. It's kind of amusing that in the Marvel Universe, the modern-age reincarnation of Red Sonja is apparently Mary Jane Watson. Yvonmukluk fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
zoux posted:I tried to do a huge read of all the Claremont stuff a few months ago and I was like "this is supposed to be good?" I guess he does plotting and new concepts well but he writes some of the worst dialogue ever. I dunno if editorial demanded that every character somehow force pithy expository descriptions of their powers in every issue but they're there. Compare Claremont's dialog to a lot of his contemporaries though, is the point. Also yeah, the reason characters explain themselves over and over again in older comics is because "every comic is someone's first" was essentially a law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:They did! It was part of an effort to keep every comic new reader friendly. The more things change the more they stay the same. Yeah, it was one of several big rules in the Jim Shooter period. Another one was that nobody gets to even mildly swear, which is why you had a lot of the characters' trademark unique exclamations, whereas later writers would have the relative freedom to write "$&@#" or "drat." Another big thing during the Shooter period was that they couldn't directly mention homosexuality in any light at all, which is also why you have storylines like Steve Rogers's old pal Arnie Roth, where the whole thing is written like your parents dancing around your uncle's relationship with his "friend."
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Didn't it get given to Livewire when she became a hero? It was a different lady hero but yeah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:They did! It was part of an effort to keep every comic new reader friendly. The more things change the more they stay the same. Stan Lee posted:Every comic is somebody's first comic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Every issue of Man-Thing is legally required to have the phrase "Whatever knows fear burns at the Man-Thing's touch!" and the Gerber stories are still all great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Compare Claremont's dialog to a lot of his contemporaries though, is the point. Also yeah, the reason characters explain themselves over and over again in older comics is because "every comic is someone's first" was essentially a law. It's one of the reasons I can't hang with most comics written before 2000.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Claremont is weird because yeah he absolutely was all about putting his id up on display in a Heinlein-ish manner. But at the same time, when you look at what was being produced at the time in terms of representation of women in mainstream comics, dude was leagues ahead of his contemporaries. Stereotypical Strong Female Protagonists (That mention of the Brian Wood X-Men makes me pretty uncomfortable. Hindsight I guess) are a world better than the kidnapping victims of the likes of early Jean Grey and Sue Storm. He's a product of 70s nerd proto-feminism, stuff like Elfquest and all that. I have an old interview with Claremont by Peter Sanderson that explains a lot about him. Basically, his mom was in the British women's auxiliary services during World War II and he remembers her as a badass, and he grew up reading Heinlein, whose female characters are pretty fetishistic in retrospect, but who are generally forces to be reckoned with regardless. When he started reading superhero comics, he found a lot that frustrated him; the example he uses is some 1970s DC team-up book where Batman has been shot and is on his deathbed, Robin and Green Arrow are working to try to find the shooter, and Black Canary leaves in the middle of the story because she has an appointment to get her hair done. When Claremont got handed Iron Fist, he basically set out to make female characters he liked, which is where you get stuff like his version of Carol Danvers. Lightning Lord posted:Compare Claremont's dialog to a lot of his contemporaries though, is the point. Exactly. He's working from a different influence pool. zoux posted:It's one of the reasons I can't hang with most comics written before 2000. I can honestly respect that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
I want to make him read a stack of 60's Spider-Man and watch him drown in word balloons and thought bubbles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
When I got MU I was like "Wow I can read every comic ever" and got about 2 issues into the original FF.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
I think it's a testament to Claremont's ear that we all actually remember his little "here's what my power is" jingles. He does over-exposit and his characters do get awfully long-winded, but I think, again, that was him running up against the limitations of his era. If you wanted to show that your characters had interiority, you had to make it exterior, you know? Lifedeath for instance is super wordy and when I did a big UXM reread last summer I got exhausted halfway through. But it wasn't a wordy version of a kind of story other people were doing concisely. It was him inventing new ways for superhero comics to tell stories. If he felt obliged to really show his work in getting there I can't hold it against him. On the other hand, he had Rachel Grey turn into a mind-controlled dinosaur-human because [......?]
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Die Laughing posted:I want to make him read a stack of 60's Spider-Man and watch him drown in word balloons and thought bubbles. Also because Peter is the only one talking, it makes him constantly bringing up his powers look smug as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Archyduke posted:I think it's a testament to Claremont's ear that we all actually remember his little "here's what my power is" jingles. He does over-exposit and his characters do get awfully long-winded, but I think, again, that was him running up against the limitations of his era I'd buy that if his new stuff wasn't even more execrable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
I'm pretty busy this weekend but I'm planning some write ups. At this point, I think I'd like to focus on Big 2 fantasy comics. I would like to do Crystar and Arak, Son of Thunder, about a Native American who gets adopted by Vikings, becomes one of Charlemagne's peers and fights mythological monsters in Conan-esque adventures. I might also do the time Travis Morgan, the Warlord, appeared in Green Arrow when Mike Grell was writing it as a gritty crime comic with almost no ties to the DC Universe that influenced Arrow, simply because Grell wanted to do a joke where people confused Morgan for Oliver Queen. Because they both have goatees, you see? Anyone have any requests in this vein? zoux posted:When I got MU I was like "Wow I can read every comic ever" and got about 2 issues into the original FF. Those comics are to be enjoyed for Kirby's art and plotting. Stan Lee's thin contributions are pretty much a distracting burden.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Also because Peter is the only one talking, it makes him constantly bringing up his powers look smug as gently caress. It was his Ayn Rand phase, that makes everyone smug as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 19:49
|
|