Welcome to the first ever installment of Reclaiming History, an ongoing series where the Comics Cube! tries to balance out what the history books say and what actually happened! Click here for the archive!
Today, we reclaim history in favor of the late, great Bill Finger, whom the Comics Cube! recognizes as the actual creator of Batman!
What's that, you say? Everyone knows that Bob Kane created Batman? Yes, that's what everyone knows, and if I worked for DC Comics or published a Batman story, I would have to credit Bob Kane as the sole creator of Batman, which is a damn shame and a social sin, because the truth is that Bob Kane would have killed Batman if left to his own devices. Bill Finger is the man primarily responsible for Batman and his success, and the tragedy of it all is that he will never get the credit he deserves for it, ever. The company will never recognize it, because it is legally mandated that Bob Kane gets a sole byline for every single Batman product, ever.
So let's recount, okay? Bob Kane was tasked by DC Comics to create a new superhero to ride on the success of Superman. He comes up with the idea of a man inspired by a bat, calling him, logically enough, "Birdman." (This is a subject of debate. Some people think he came up with "Bat-Man," some with "Birdman.") So he comes up with this dork (picture courtesy of Cracked):
I'm sorry, but what the hell is that thing? Does he look particularly batlike to you? He looks like he's wearing chainmail. Most importantly, he looks like the type of character that not only would have been forgotten by the end of the Golden Age, but also that he wouldn't even be well-liked in the Golden Age. According to Jim Steranko's History of Comics, those tights are red.
Fortunately for all of us, Bob Kane had an assistant named Bill Finger (pronounced like "zinger," not "linger"), who then made a bunch of changes to Bob Kane's ridiculously stupid design. He suggested, among other things, a cowl and gloves. In short, he changed that giant dork up there to Batman:
Now, isn't that much better? And wouldn't, oh, I dunno, 71 years of success agree with me? Yes, yes it does.
So not only does Bill Finger, I'm sorry, create Batman's look; he also comes up with the name Bruce Wayne and the idea that Batman is a scientific detective! Under Kane's pen, Batman was just going to be yet another rich man who was a vigilante at night. Gee, I wonder how many darts I'd have to throw on a poster of Golden Age heroes who fit that description.
Oh, wait, not many. HERE'S ONE NOW:
Hell, even Mr. Terrific in his earnest lameness is cooler than Bob Kane's "Batman".
Oh, wait, look, here's the Sandman, another rich guy by day, vigilante by night!
And how could we forget the pulp heroes? Here's Zorro!
And, of course, the Shadow!
So basically, Bob Kane wouldn't have even made "Batman" a generic character - he would have made him too lame to even be generic. Bill Finger saved the visual aspect of Batman, and then he proceeded to write a bunch of Batman's earliest adventures. Another writer, Gardner Fox, came up with the Batarang, the Bat-plane/Bat-gyro, and, purportedly, the utility belt (though I'm willing to give that last one to Kane, given his original sketch), and Finger came up with the Batcave, the Batmobile, and Gotham City.
Bob Kane did indeed draw the early Batman stories, which no one disputes. But wait, did he "draw" or "trace"? For that information, we'll turn to Robby Reed, at Dial B for Blog.
Yeah, I'm going with "traced." That example is just one of many, and there is a good amount of evidence that Bob Kane was a swipe artist that puts Rob Liefeld to shame. And actually, Finger's not off the hook either - as the Professor pointed out before, many of the original Batman stories were direct swipes of The Shadow stories, including the first-ever Batman story. So basically, in the entire first Batman stories, if the stories weren't original, and the actual art wasn't original, what was?
That's right. The costume and the trappings - and Bill Finger was the one most responsible for it. Not Bob Kane.
Of course, Bob Kane doesn't acknowledge this - like a shrewd businessman, he quickly signed away all rights to Batman to DC in exchange for monetary compensation on every Batman product ever and a solitary byline. No one else can share this byline with him, and in fact, Jerry Robinson (who is like Bill Finger as it relates to the Joker, in that it's yet another thing where Bob Kane decides to take the credit) says, "I felt that I was part of a team. Unfortunately Bob did not feel that way, most of all with Bill. He should have credited Bill as co-creator, because I know; I was there. The Joker was my creation, and Bill wrote the first Joker story from my concept. Bill created all of the other characters... Penguin, Riddler, Catwoman. He was very innovative. The slogans, the Dynamic Duo and Gotham City -- it was all Bill Finger." (Credit: Dial B for Blog) By all accounts, Finger also came up with the "Dark Knight" moniker. And those gigantic props that were a trademark of early Batman stories? Finger came up with those too.
So basically, Bill Finger slaved away on the character you all know and you all love - the character that you read every week in comics, that you've seen in so many successful cartoons, that you've seen in many successful movies - while living on a paycheck and dying in obscurity and poverty, only to be given credit when the mountain of evidence against Kane was insurmountable.
Meanwhile, Bob Kane raked in millions and millions for all of Bill Finger's work, and on his grave, he's celebrated for having walked in the light of a higher power.
“Robert Kane aka Bob Kane -- GOD bestowed a dream upon Bob Kane, Blessed with divine inspiration and a rich imagination, Bob created a legacy known as BATMAN. Introduced in a May 1939 comic book, Batman grew from a tiny acorn into an American Icon. A ‘Hand of God’ creation, Batman and his world personify the eternal struggle of good versus evil, with GOD's laws prevailing in the end. Bob Kane, Bruce Wayne, Batman -- they are one and the same. Bob infused his dual identity character with his own attributes: goodness, kindness, compassion, sensitivity, generosity, intelligence, integrity, courage, purity of spirit, a love of all mankind. Batman is known as the ‘Dark Knight,’ but through his deeds he walks in the light of a higher power, as did his creator -- Bob Kane!"
You know, I talk on this blog a lot about the injustices done in the comics industry. There's the fact that Superman's creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, lived in poverty after DC bought Superman from them. There's all the problems Gene Colan is having now that could have all been avoided if the corporations were kind enough to recognize his work, and there's the issue with Jack Kirby's heirs and their want of recognition for the stuff Kirby did, and of course I talk a whole awful lot about how Steve Ditko deserves most of the credit for Spider-Man. There's, of course, all the recent crap surrounding Alan Moore and Watchmen. And you know, it's one thing for a corporation to screw the artists out of their rightful credit - it's dirty, it's measly, and it's ridiculous, but you expect it, because corporations are about profit-maximization, and you know they're dirty. But when an artist screws another fellow artist out of his proper credit? That's something else. It's a whole different level of baseness and ego-tripping. Even Stan Lee conceded eventually that Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko were the rightful co-creators of the Marvel Universe. All Kane gave Finger eventually - after years of hiding behind false excuses like "I was inspired by Zorro" - was the acknowledgment that Finger did a lot of work on Batman. No co-creator credits, nothing.
Bill Finger did eventually get credit for creating Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern, with Martin Nodell, which may explain why Alan Scott also operates in Gotham City, but Green Lantern, famous as he is, isn't Batman or anywhere near close to him.
The Will Eisner Awards inducted Bill Finger into their Hall of Fame in 1999, the same year they inducted Jack Cole, Murphy Anderson, Art Spiegelman, Mac Raboy, and Gardner Fox (another guy Kane didn't give credit to), among others. And in 2005, the Eisner Awards established the Bill Finger Award for Excellence in Comic Book Writing, to celebrate, each year, two comic book writers, one alive and one deceased, who didn't get the credit they deserved.
Perhaps the most telling thing about Bill Finger's career is the fact that "I don't want to get Fingered," has become a quotable quote for any creator to tell an editor, when he feels as if he's not getting due credit.
In an industry where the higher-ups and some artists seem to have the exact opposite values of those of the characters they espouse, Bill Finger did his job humbly and created stories to thrill us for a lifetime. He never asked for the credit that he didn't get, and he must have believed that he would have gotten it eventually. He did work for us, the fans, and even if he'll never get the credit he deserves because legal mandate prohibits it so, we fans, we who love the character of Batman and all the values he embodies, should know the truth.
Long live Bill Finger, the real creator of Batman.
Jul 28, 2010
Jul 22, 2010
A Watchmen Sequel Is Coming...
...or at least I'm sure of it. More sure of it, actually, than I've ever been. And I would love to be wrong. So for the love of Eisner, I hope I'm wrong.
After the news that Alan Moore turned down the rights to Watchmen, Dan Didio responded, and not with the response I for one would like to hear.
I am, for the record, not completely against the idea of a Watchmen spinoff. I honestly, honestly think that there's room in the market for a Tales of the Black Freighter series. As proved by this reconstruction of the Black Freighter comic-within-a-comic, it stands well on its own and isn't limited to being good because it parallels the main story.
And as late as 1988, Moore and Gibbons were thinking about a Minutemen prequel.
But they never thought about a sequel, because, damn it, the story's complete as it is!
And even if they do come out with a prequel, you would have to be so incredibly careful so as to introduce all the right details. If you even introduce the wrong detail or even, say, confirm that Hooded Justice was Rolf Muller, you are tainting the original story. And there are only two people who can come up with what "the right details" would be. Alan Moore is already out, and the only person - the only person - who should have the prerogative to create ancillary material is Dave Gibbons. If Gibbons is involved, I can respect the existence of any such follow-up project, and even then only grudgingly.
For those who say that comics have long relied on the continued use of existing characters, I want to say this: it is not the same thing. Watchmen was a complete story and had a definitive ending, while other comics were made to continue under other hands. If DC wanted to continue Moore properties, they should do it with the ABC books, which were conceived for that purpose. The whole point of Watchmen being the important volume that it was was that it was innovative and pioneering, and if you want to honor it, create something of your own. Unfortunately, "creating something of your own" is not really something the Didio regime is familiar with.
For those who say that Moore is a hypocrite because he refuses to play in his sandbox, but he'll gladly play with existing characters in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I want to say this: it is not the same thing. League is a playful project read by comic book readers - an audience of thousands, as opposed to the larger number that read classic literature. Most fans of classic literature aren't even aware of League. If anything, League helps classic literature because it makes other people aware of the books, adding to its already massive audience. And it's also good for the readers. Who benefits in a Watchmen spinoff? DC does, for money. But who else? Anyone reading it will have already read Watchmen. There's no exchange of readership here. This is fan service at its very lowest, and the worst part about it is that a lot of fans would hate it. It would sell, because we comic fans are stupid and buy crap that makes us curious, even if it's crap, but a lot of us would hate it - and a lot of us would hate it for no other reason than it exists.
Nevertheless, I think a sequel is coming. The timing of this is all too convenient. San Diego Comic-Con has already begun. In the next few days, I'm expecting a bomb to be dropped.
And I hope I'm wrong. I really, really hope I'm wrong.
After the news that Alan Moore turned down the rights to Watchmen, Dan Didio responded, and not with the response I for one would like to hear.
"Realistically, we naturally never really comment about any deals – perspective or ones that we close otherwise," Dido said of Moore's statements. "But the one thing that we've been saying for a while is that 'Watchmen' is truly one of the premier projects out there, and if we were ever to proceed with [a sequel] the most logical place to start would be with Alan and Dave. For me, it's one of those things that's still one of the crown jewels in comics, and if you ever wanted to approach it, you'd have to do it in that manner – making sure the best talent available and possible was working on it."Yep, that smells like something's going to be done to me. Offering the rights back to Moore (and really, what kind of deal is it when you say "We'll give you ownership if you do what we say with them" anyway?) is exactly what any businessman would do if they want to come up with a sequel. This way, when they come up with a sequel and it sucks, they can say, "Well, we tried to get Alan involved, but he wouldn't."
I am, for the record, not completely against the idea of a Watchmen spinoff. I honestly, honestly think that there's room in the market for a Tales of the Black Freighter series. As proved by this reconstruction of the Black Freighter comic-within-a-comic, it stands well on its own and isn't limited to being good because it parallels the main story.
And as late as 1988, Moore and Gibbons were thinking about a Minutemen prequel.
But they never thought about a sequel, because, damn it, the story's complete as it is!
And even if they do come out with a prequel, you would have to be so incredibly careful so as to introduce all the right details. If you even introduce the wrong detail or even, say, confirm that Hooded Justice was Rolf Muller, you are tainting the original story. And there are only two people who can come up with what "the right details" would be. Alan Moore is already out, and the only person - the only person - who should have the prerogative to create ancillary material is Dave Gibbons. If Gibbons is involved, I can respect the existence of any such follow-up project, and even then only grudgingly.
For those who say that comics have long relied on the continued use of existing characters, I want to say this: it is not the same thing. Watchmen was a complete story and had a definitive ending, while other comics were made to continue under other hands. If DC wanted to continue Moore properties, they should do it with the ABC books, which were conceived for that purpose. The whole point of Watchmen being the important volume that it was was that it was innovative and pioneering, and if you want to honor it, create something of your own. Unfortunately, "creating something of your own" is not really something the Didio regime is familiar with.
For those who say that Moore is a hypocrite because he refuses to play in his sandbox, but he'll gladly play with existing characters in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I want to say this: it is not the same thing. League is a playful project read by comic book readers - an audience of thousands, as opposed to the larger number that read classic literature. Most fans of classic literature aren't even aware of League. If anything, League helps classic literature because it makes other people aware of the books, adding to its already massive audience. And it's also good for the readers. Who benefits in a Watchmen spinoff? DC does, for money. But who else? Anyone reading it will have already read Watchmen. There's no exchange of readership here. This is fan service at its very lowest, and the worst part about it is that a lot of fans would hate it. It would sell, because we comic fans are stupid and buy crap that makes us curious, even if it's crap, but a lot of us would hate it - and a lot of us would hate it for no other reason than it exists.
Nevertheless, I think a sequel is coming. The timing of this is all too convenient. San Diego Comic-Con has already begun. In the next few days, I'm expecting a bomb to be dropped.
And I hope I'm wrong. I really, really hope I'm wrong.
Featured In:
Alan Moore,
dave gibbons,
Duy,
watchmen
Jul 21, 2010
Comics Techniques and Tricks: Alan Moore and J.H. Williams III
Welcome to another edition of Comics Techniques and Tricks, in which we showcase techniques that only comics can do! Click here for the archive!
Today's comic trick comes from Alan Moore and J.H. Williams III, who from 1999 to 2006 did Promethea, a 32-issue, mythology-laden comic book about a superheroine who traveled the Immateria - the realms of the imagination - using the Kaballah as a guide.
One of the criticisms of Promethea is that it's too preachy (it is), and as a result, it drags (it does, plotwise).
But damned if the art isn't awesome! Check out this one, where Promethea and Barbara Shelley (the previous generation's Promethea) are in the Immateria, and they get to what is termed a "solar sphere." Sure, the exposition in any other comic may drag, and for some, this does, but I think JH Williams III does a great job of making the story as compelling as possible despite the lack of plot. He accomplishes this by using Comics Techniques and Tricks! Check this one out:
How did you read it? Clockwise or counterclockwise? Well, if you read it one way, try it the other way!
You can read it both ways!! How cool is that?
It's things like this that have made JH Williams III my favorite artist working in comics today!
Today's comic trick comes from Alan Moore and J.H. Williams III, who from 1999 to 2006 did Promethea, a 32-issue, mythology-laden comic book about a superheroine who traveled the Immateria - the realms of the imagination - using the Kaballah as a guide.
One of the criticisms of Promethea is that it's too preachy (it is), and as a result, it drags (it does, plotwise).
But damned if the art isn't awesome! Check out this one, where Promethea and Barbara Shelley (the previous generation's Promethea) are in the Immateria, and they get to what is termed a "solar sphere." Sure, the exposition in any other comic may drag, and for some, this does, but I think JH Williams III does a great job of making the story as compelling as possible despite the lack of plot. He accomplishes this by using Comics Techniques and Tricks! Check this one out:
How did you read it? Clockwise or counterclockwise? Well, if you read it one way, try it the other way!
You can read it both ways!! How cool is that?
It's things like this that have made JH Williams III my favorite artist working in comics today!
Featured In:
Alan Moore,
Comics Techniques and Tricks,
Duy,
JH Williams III,
Promethea
Jul 16, 2010
Escher in Comics: Steve Bissette's 1963: Tales of the Uncanny
Welcome to another installment of Escher in Comics, in which we take a look at how some comics use MC Escher's artistic techniques! Click here for the archive!
For those of you not in the know, MC Escher (1898-1972) was a Dutch graphic artist that was known for tessellations, optical illusions, and mathematical pictures. One of his famous works was the 1961 piece Waterfall:
Essentially, the water from the base of the waterfall seems to run uphill to feed itself into the waterfall. I always liked this one and thought it was pretty cool.
In the 1963 line of comics by Alan Moore, Steve Bissette, and Rick Veitch, we got to read 1993-era satires of comics from Marvel's Silver Age. Each 1963 character stood for a character of that bygone era from the House of Ideas. Iron Man's counterpart was a half-human/half-robot named the Hypernaut, who lived in a nicely Escheresque headquarters, in the shape of a Penrose triangle:
Pretty cool, huh? What a trip!
For those of you not in the know, MC Escher (1898-1972) was a Dutch graphic artist that was known for tessellations, optical illusions, and mathematical pictures. One of his famous works was the 1961 piece Waterfall:
Essentially, the water from the base of the waterfall seems to run uphill to feed itself into the waterfall. I always liked this one and thought it was pretty cool.
In the 1963 line of comics by Alan Moore, Steve Bissette, and Rick Veitch, we got to read 1993-era satires of comics from Marvel's Silver Age. Each 1963 character stood for a character of that bygone era from the House of Ideas. Iron Man's counterpart was a half-human/half-robot named the Hypernaut, who lived in a nicely Escheresque headquarters, in the shape of a Penrose triangle:
Pretty cool, huh? What a trip!
Featured In:
1963,
Alan Moore,
Duy,
Escher,
rick veitch,
Steve Bissette
Jul 8, 2010
Comics Techniques and Tricks: Frank Miller
Welcome to another edition of Comics Techniques and Tricks, in which we showcase techniques that only comics can do! Click here for the archive!
As I've made clear before, I have major issues with Frank Miller's Batman story, The Dark Knight Returns. However, as I've also mentioned, I can't deny the technical excellence of it, or how fundamentally sound it is. The first issue, specifically, which was written full script, I think, showcases brilliant layouts.
One such example is this following scene, when Bruce Wayne is finally giving into the Batman part of his persona, and knocks over a statue in the process. In this sequence, Miller successfully uses the uniform panel as a measure of time, with a grid successfully controlling every beat of the story.
Miller turns this on its ear by having the first panel take the place of 8 panels. With the windows taking the same space as the rest of the panels below it, the windows effectively perform the same function as the panels; the time and beats are still controlled, but with only one moment taking place in this space, the slow motion effect is achieved.
To heighten the mastery of this storytelling technique, here's acclaimed comics writer Warren Ellis:
Kinda makes you see the book in a different light, huh?
As I've made clear before, I have major issues with Frank Miller's Batman story, The Dark Knight Returns. However, as I've also mentioned, I can't deny the technical excellence of it, or how fundamentally sound it is. The first issue, specifically, which was written full script, I think, showcases brilliant layouts.
One such example is this following scene, when Bruce Wayne is finally giving into the Batman part of his persona, and knocks over a statue in the process. In this sequence, Miller successfully uses the uniform panel as a measure of time, with a grid successfully controlling every beat of the story.
Miller turns this on its ear by having the first panel take the place of 8 panels. With the windows taking the same space as the rest of the panels below it, the windows effectively perform the same function as the panels; the time and beats are still controlled, but with only one moment taking place in this space, the slow motion effect is achieved.
To heighten the mastery of this storytelling technique, here's acclaimed comics writer Warren Ellis:
The sixteen-panel grid is a pig to work. I've stayed clear of it. It's a scary-looking bugger. As a rule, only writer-artists have made it sing, and even then there can be a loss of linear storytelling. The most famous 16-grid book of the last twenty years or so is Frank Miller, Klaus Janson & Lynn Varley's THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and it illustrates the nature of the beast perfectly.
Kinda makes you see the book in a different light, huh?
Featured In:
Comics Techniques and Tricks,
Dark Knight Returns,
Duy,
Frank Miller
Jul 1, 2010
Comics Techniques and Tricks: Chris Ware
Welcome to another edition of Comics Techniques and Tricks, in which we showcase techniques that only comics can do! Click here for the archive!
Today's comic trick comes from Chris Ware and Quimby the Mouse, his contemporary take on George Herriman's Krazy Kat theme. Ware, a master of design and using typography, uses words so that they're actually a part of the picture!
Note how the text reads "I'm a very generous person, but I can't stand being around you anymore." But he uses the same "you" to start a new sentence, "You make me happy." He also uses the same "I can't stand" to start a sentence that reads downward: "I just can't stand being alone." The entire composition of the page is built on the words! You don't see that every day.
You can see this and many other cool tricks in Quimby the Mouse!
Today's comic trick comes from Chris Ware and Quimby the Mouse, his contemporary take on George Herriman's Krazy Kat theme. Ware, a master of design and using typography, uses words so that they're actually a part of the picture!
Note how the text reads "I'm a very generous person, but I can't stand being around you anymore." But he uses the same "you" to start a new sentence, "You make me happy." He also uses the same "I can't stand" to start a sentence that reads downward: "I just can't stand being alone." The entire composition of the page is built on the words! You don't see that every day.
You can see this and many other cool tricks in Quimby the Mouse!
Featured In:
chris ware,
Comics Techniques and Tricks,
Duy,
quimby the mouse
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)