In article 14...@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca, nolive...@mta.ca (Nelson Oliveira) writes:

Well I grew up on Jim Aparo too. His art has become rather stilted and unimaginative lately,
but he used to have a wild, exciting style. Check out The Brave and the Bold V1 ca. #110
and onwards, and Detective Comics just after Archie Goodwin took over as editor (#327?
Can't remember...) That was some of the greatest art of that era. (And I'm not old, dammit!)

---
Stig Tollefsen
se93...@brunel.ac.uk

"I was a teenage dinosaur / Stoned and obsolete / I didn't get fucked and I didn't get kissed /
I got so fucking pissed" - Iggy Pop, Repo Man

|> In <CLsqGF....@csc.ti.com> a130149@crazy (John Hall(0032 jvh )) writes:
|>
|> >Just reacting to your attack on Jim Aparo --  it wasn't always thus.
|> >His 70's work on Batman in Detective is adequate, and in mid-70's
|> >Brave and Bold work is rich and detailed, it a pity about his frozen
|> >faces, but these represent to me one of the classic faces of Batman.
|> >By no means the best, but classic.  You want to see terrible Batman,
|> >I reckon Infantino is as bad as it gets, and you can spot it a mile off
|> >like Aparo's.

Well, I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.  I love Infantino's
work on Batman in the 60's.  It wasn't the Dark Knight we're used to now, but
it was a real change and improvement.  I vividly remember the first _New Look_
story which opened up Gotham beautifully (and even has Batman holding a gun on
some thugs -- a little more reality than readers are willing to endure for
some reason).  The story that took place in the Scottish (?) castle, the
inevitable (for Infantino) ape story all are vividly impressed on my memory,
though I sold the issues years ago in a reckless fit of poverty.

My votes for lackluster Batman would be most of the current stable and Irv
Novick who seemed far superior in his war comics.  I wish Gene Day had more
time (for more reasons than this!) He brought such intelligence to his short
tenure.  Do others agree that the Swamp Thing Issue Number 5 qualifies Wrightson
as one of the great Batman artists.  Adams is the classic, I guess, and I think
Aparo's best work seemed heavily Adams-influenced.

As I said, I think the quality of most of the Batman titles now is regrettable
when you consider how important the title is.  Much different from the Superman
titles which have such consistently good art which manages to bring out a lot
of individual flourish

--
Tom Owens
MIT Library Systems Office
ow...@mit.edu
617-253-1618 voice 617-253-8894 fax

: |> >Just reacting to your attack on Jim Aparo --  it wasn't always thus.
: |> >His 70's work on Batman in Detective is adequate, and in mid-70's
: |> >Brave and Bold work is rich and detailed, it a pity about his frozen
: |> >faces, but these represent to me one of the classic faces of Batman.
: |> >By no means the best, but classic.  You want to see terrible Batman,
: |> >I reckon Infantino is as bad as it gets, and you can spot it a mile off
: |> >like Aparo's.

: Well, I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.  I love Infantino's
: work on Batman in the 60's.  It wasn't the Dark Knight we're used to now, but

I'll agree to disagree on this.  The sameness of Infantino's heads really distracts
me (so does Aparo's).

: My votes for lackluster Batman would be most of the current stable and Irv
: Novick who seemed far superior in his war comics.  I wish Gene Day had more
: time (for more reasons than this!) He brought such intelligence to his short
:
I could only find 1 Day comic listed in my Batman: Detective 527 (?).  I have to
agree that Novick is drab, but I like the O'Neil writing in that period more than
what came before or what followed .  I think Ernie Chua is much drabber than Novick
though, and the stories don't hold up as well.  

 tenure.  Do others agree that the Swamp Thing Issue Number 5 qualifies Wrightson
: as one of the great Batman artists.  Adams is the classic, I guess, and I think
: Aparo's best work seemed heavily Adams-influenced.

Yes, I like Swamp Thing 7 very much.  One of my favorite longer runs was the Colan
run that took place during Moench's complicated mid-80s thread.  After reading that,
I'd had such high hopes for Moench coming back to Batman, but there's none of
the plot density.  Ah well.  I could really do with a long stretch of Bruce (Batman)
doing some DETECTING while life goes on around him.  Think we'll get that?

Oh, the other totally forgetable Batman, IMO, is the stuff that occurred in World's
Finest, from about issue 200 on.  What I've read of it.  Lethal boring plots, too.

My apologies for not getting on too well with VI.

In article <CM18HL....@csc.ti.com>, a130149@crazy (John Hall 0032 jvh )) writes:
|> I'll agree to disagree on this.  The sameness of Infantino's heads really distracts
|> me (so does Aparo's).
|>

You found this to be true even in his 60's work?  I agree that his work in the
80's was not up to his work in the 60s.

|> Yes, I like Swamp Thing 7 very much.  One of my favorite longer runs was the Colan
|> run that took place during Moench's complicated mid-80s thread.  After reading that,
|> I'd had such high hopes for Moench coming back to Batman, but there's none of
|> the plot density.  Ah well.  I could really do with a long stretch of Bruce (Batman)
|> doing some DETECTING while life goes on around him.  Think we'll get that?

I don't think so.  One of the things I miss in modern comics is the _small_ story.
Every menace has to be earth-shaking, every event cataclysmic, every plot device
as overstated as this sentence.  I'd really like to see a common, garden variety
mystery with some real detective work and a common crook.

One of my favorite Golden Age covers was a picture of Superman getting his hair
cut.  This was back when Supes hair couldn't be cut.  The barber was exasperated
and Supes seemed either bemused or unaware of the barber's difficulties.  It had
nothing to do with the stories inside.  It was just an amusing, quiet cover.  I
wish we had some of that today.

Sorry about forgetting which Swamp Thing Batman was in; I'm sure it was 7 now that
you point it out.

--
Tom Owens
MIT Library Systems Office
ow...@mit.edu
617-253-1618 voice 617-253-8894 fax

: In article <CM18HL....@csc.ti.com>, a130149@crazy (John Hall 0032 jvh )) writes:
: |> I'll agree to disagree on this.  The sameness of Infantino's heads really distracts
: |> me (so does Aparo's).
: |>
: You found this to be true even in his 60's work?  I agree that his work in the
: 80's was not up to his work in the 60s.
I had a check, and yep, most of the Batman Infantino I have is 60s, reprinted in
70s detectives and Batmans.  I could find very little 80s Infantino Batnam in my
x-reference.  

: I don't think so.  One of the things I miss in modern comics is the _small_ story.
: Every menace has to be earth-shaking, every event cataclysmic, every plot device
: as overstated as this sentence.  I'd really like to see a common, garden variety
: mystery with some real detective work and a common crook.

: and Supes seemed either bemused or unaware of the barber's difficulties.  It had
: nothing to do with the stories inside.  It was just an amusing, quiet cover.  I
: wish we had some of that today.

I absolutely agree.  More of Batman and Superman scheming together to make a fool
of Lois. :-)

I also liked the second stories in many of the 70s issues:  Unsolved Cases, Just a
minute mysteries, James Gordon feature stories, Tales of Gotham City (not the three
part dud but the short story featuring in the dollar Detective comics), even some
of the Robin stories and Catwoman second features.  Couldn't get into the Batgirl
stories though.  

And I just have to mention two of my favorite later Batman stories:  Batman 383
Just as night follows day - Bruce tries to get some sleep;  and Detective 567
The Night of Thanks But No Thanks - classic one-off story of non-violence -
WITH a Green Arrow story for those who cared.

I agree!  The issues in those years held the best *sustained* quality
I've ever seen in Batman stories and art.  Moench spun out and fulfilled
long plot threads.  Supporting cast members would gain new dimension
as Moench revealed new aspects of them that were unexpected but made sense!
Harvey Bullock went from being a one-dimensional foil for Batman
(sort of the Anti-Gordon on the police force) to being a well developed
character with a distinct heroic attitude.  

Moench paced his storytelling well, mixing in some fine little
resolved-in-one-issue stories with longer threads that made real changes
in Bruce and other characters, one experience at a time.

Bruce and Selina were well on their way to resolving sharing *every* side of
their lives, and Moench made that believable.  There was a delightful issue
of a double date they had with Green Arrow and Black Canary.  Too bad a change
of editors nipped those developments and restored the status quo by having
Catwoman brainwashed to be a criminal again.  Feh!

There were several great issues where many facinating story threads unfolded
while Batman sat alone on a rooftop slowly moving pebbles from one pile to
another until his mind straightened out enough to return to action.  

Hmmmmnnnn...  I wonder if that sequence inspired David Sim's handling
of his title character during the Melmoth arc in "Cerebus"?

--James Langdell             jam...@eng.sun.com
  Sun Microsystems           Mountain View, Calif.

"Someone" called the Shadow ? The Shadow  is one of the premier pulp
characters in comicdom, and even predates Batman. DC was publishing the
Shadow back in the mid 1970s, and they had a team up with Batman as part
of that. DC doesn't own the Shadow, though.

Pre-Crisis, it seemed like every superhero in existence knew Batman's id.
That includes not just the old League (all of whom except Firestorm
knew), but people like Supergirl, Plastic man, Metamorpho etc.

Abhijit

The Shadow appeared in Batman #253, mid 1973.  Whether or not Lamont Cranston
knew Batman's identity or not is irrelevant, since DC no longer has the
right to publish the Shadow, and the Shadow is not part of DC continuity.

I don't know anything about that Shadow, except for the quote you made.  This
shadow dressed like a thrities gangster, and relied heavily on revolvers.  He
saved the Wayne family once -- from a hold up.  It was on the road that later
turned into Crime Alley.  Gunshots were fired at this time, which scared little
Bruce and gave him a deep, unknown fear of gunfire.  The Shadow led him into a
similar situation to cure him of his fear.  I'm no longer sure whether it was
an issue of 'Tec, or of Batman, but I do know that he appeared in an anniversary
issue.  (My collection is in N.Y., and I'm in Texas, so I can't research it.)
There were several other stories in the issue: a sub-plot concerning Leslie
Thompkins (might have been a part of the Shadow storyline), plus a segment
titled something like The Many Costumes of Batman.  The cover had this grabber:
"You can see the Shadow, but can you find Batman in this picture?"  I'm
starting to wonder if this Shadow is the same one that Joe mentioned.  Does
anyone else remember this issue?  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~
Scott Mermelstein, aka ST...@Jetson.UH.edu ~    "Catwoman, you're not nice"
University of Houston ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~               --Robin
    (713) 743-7333    ~ (as she forced him into a pit of tigers on a TV episode)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

The Shadow is one of the most classic pulp characters and
predates the Batman by several years. He did indeed carry
guns and wear a red bandanna. Back in the early 70s, DC
was publishing the Shadow (whom they don't own). As part of
this, they had two teamups with the Batman in Batman #253
and #259.

Incidentally, Dark Horse is publishing the Shadow now in a new
mini-series.

Abhijit