I don’t see why Whedon should get off the hook. Has he done anything to acknowledge his debt to Kirby?

Re: Sarah Boxer’s comment that the Silver Surfer was “a giant phallus on a surfboard”: I read the original issues as a young teenager and I never made that association! Had I done so I’d have stopped reading that comic (eeewwww!). I followed Silver Surfer for the stories of cosmic adventure and art.

Are people these days reading far more into the stuff than was ever there?

I freely admit that I didn’t grow up reading superhero comics. But I didn’t grow up reading princess comics either. I don’t see this as a gendered thing–although I can see social pressures that might be exerted to make it a gendered thing.

Meanwhile, as an adult, I can look at Kirby’s work with admiration and appreciation, and recognize his enormous talent and accomplishments.

It’s pretty embarrassing, in this day and age, for anyone to make gendered assumptions about who reads what.

And I will also note that I wouldn’t touch those Twilight books (OR the movies) with an 11-foot pole.

@ Karen “It’s pretty embarrassing, in this day and age, for anyone to make gendered assumptions about who reads what.”

BRAVO!

1. Was the Moviefone thing really so offensive? I know plenty of women like superheroes, but I imagine plenty more don’t. I have several female friends who are (almost) as excited about Avengers as I am, but for every one of them there are at least 5 others who don’t know why Batman isn’t an Avenger. If you are one of those women who don’t need an Avengers primer, maybe that article isn’t meant for you.

2. I don’t feel conflicted in the least about seeing Avengers, but making a donation to Hero Initiative is a great idea any time, so I will be doing that.

3. That pic of the little girl in the Voltron/Power Ranger whatever outfit made my day.

Yeah, that Moviefone article is so clearly lighthearted/jokey/parody. Unclench, comics blogosphere.

I stopped reading when you referred to a picture of a little girl dressed as Voltron as “Power Rangers”.

Credibility lost. ;)

@Stuart: “I don’t see why Whedon should get off the hook. Has he done anything to acknowledge his debt to Kirby?”

I just read a Wired interview where he praises Claremont, Starlin, Morrison, Quitely, Millar, and Hitch, but…no mention of Kirby (or Lee, or Heck) by name, or indeed much acknowledgement of the ’60’s era at all.

On the one hand, it’s a bit of a galling oversight (assuming it’s Whedon’s and not the editor’s). On the other, at least he DID mention multiple creators by name and acknowledge his debt to them.

OKAY OKAY OKAY.

I saw the picture of the transforming girl somewhere on Twitter and loved it. And wanted it for this piece. And then googled for it and it said it ws the power rangers. And I thought, hm that doesn’t really look like the Power Rangers but…okay.

And In my defense…Voltron and the Transformers are the two blind spots in my nerd interests. So guilty as charged.

But I still love Jack Kirby!

(Heidi, the Power Rangers have a doggie on their shield, while Voltron has the crusader’s cross. Titan Maximum has a giant “T”.)

I grew up on Spider-Man, started collecting in 1984, and didn’t really notice Kirby until many years later. I guess it’s kind of like reading “Catcher in the Rye” when you’re young… I just never got inoculated with the Kirby love bug.

(My superhero fixation as a young boy was Spider-Man, who is probably the most un-Kirby superhero in the Marvel Universe. Slim physique, no crazy cosmic machinery or backgrounds, more likely to suffer from Ditko dots of the flu than of Kirby Krackle.)

My opinion of Kirby is neutral… yeah, he created a lot of amazing stuff, showed a dynamic style of artwork. But his writing… oog.

Does he deserve better from Disney? Certainly. But it seems that Jack Kirby has now attained the level of adoration also held by Charles Schulz. Criticize either, and you run the risk of backlash.

As for girls and superheroes… well, my nieces created this awesome storyline where they mashed Barbie and the Charlie Angels movie into a delightful afternoon! (Hey… aside from the licensed recreations, why isn’t there a Barbie superhero line, like the Barbie Mermaid Tale?)

Sarah Boxer’s contribution to that TJC piece contained a considerable amount of sneering and offensive stereotypes (“thanks for letting me into the locker room”, that kind of thing).

The Silver Surfer is a “phallus on a surf board?” I don’t get it … is any bald person a phallus? Are phalluses silver? Perhaps certain people are just prone to seeing phalluses everywhere?

Boxer’s contribution is well worth reading, partly because of her delicious description of the differences between the Marvel and DC heroes:

The most interesting point (at least to me) in Hatfield’s book is that the Marvel superheroes are not only physically layered but semantically layered. They have layers of personal history & mythology, which they carry with them over time. They are encrusted with their own history.

As Hatfield writes, “the Marvel characters remembered — and so did their readers.” And this historical encrustation, which the Marvel-type superhero carries with him, makes for a certain kind of fan.The Marvel readers are “addicted, soap-opera like, to continuing storylines and unresolved problems.” Captain America is a superhero soap opera. This is why I can’t jump into the discussion. This is why I don’t want to. Those super-encrusted layers of narrative clothing are super-nauseating and super-repulsive.

By contrast, the DC characters (as Umberto Eco has noted) are “blessed” with forgetfulness. They exist in what Neil Gaiman has called “a state of grace.” Each new story is a fresh starting point, naked and free. The characters have personality but they are, narratively, blank slates. As with a comic strip like Peanuts, anyone can dive in. Even me.

Linus is my idea of a great super-hero.

One of the problems Marvel comics have had has been their accessibility. Those “layers of narrative clothing” might make the stories less accessible, but they also vastly increase the range of possible stories. As the number of significant details in a character’s life increases, the easier it is to base stories on them, and the easier it is to write for adults.

SRS

Shakespeare, Olivier, Dickinson, Beethoven.

In comics, it is Kirby.

Sure, you can always argue from personal taste. But that’s all you can do. Historically, artistically, economically — the ship has sailed. There will always be re-interpretation, but it is in the rare air now. He is (to steal from Arlen Schumer) our auteur.

p.s. the idea that Kirby was just about male power fantasies doesn’t jive either. Two words: BIG BARDA.