The splash page of Spider-Woman #1:
Let's close in on the credits:
One more zoom:
Hmm. I can't say it's a bad thing to give credit to someone who played a vital role in the creation of Alex Maleev's art.
But this raises a whole buncha questions:
**Does this imply that Maleev DIDN'T use models for any other characters? That Agent Brand, for example, was completely drawn "from scratch?" Because it sure wouldn't seem fair to credit Jolynn Carpenter for her work, and not everybody else Maleev was using.
**Speaking of unfair, the whole credit issue seems to have its priorities misplaced. They credit the model one of the characters is based upon, but nowhere in the issue do they give any credit for the reprinted panels drawn by the Luna brothers or Leinil Yu (from Spider-Woman: Origins and Secret Invasion). So, we credit models, but not the actual artists whose actual artwork is being reprinted??????
**This could be a terrible precedent--do we have to go back and re-credit all of Maleev's previous works, either in reprints or in trades, to acknowledge the models he's used? What about all of Alex Ross' work? If our new principle is we need to give credit to an artist's models, there's a whole lot of uncredited comics modeling that needs to be acknowledged.
**On the plus side, this would mean that Greg Land owes us a pretty exciting list of adult movie stars...
Let's close in on the credits:
One more zoom:
Hmm. I can't say it's a bad thing to give credit to someone who played a vital role in the creation of Alex Maleev's art.But this raises a whole buncha questions:
**Does this imply that Maleev DIDN'T use models for any other characters? That Agent Brand, for example, was completely drawn "from scratch?" Because it sure wouldn't seem fair to credit Jolynn Carpenter for her work, and not everybody else Maleev was using.
**Speaking of unfair, the whole credit issue seems to have its priorities misplaced. They credit the model one of the characters is based upon, but nowhere in the issue do they give any credit for the reprinted panels drawn by the Luna brothers or Leinil Yu (from Spider-Woman: Origins and Secret Invasion). So, we credit models, but not the actual artists whose actual artwork is being reprinted??????
**This could be a terrible precedent--do we have to go back and re-credit all of Maleev's previous works, either in reprints or in trades, to acknowledge the models he's used? What about all of Alex Ross' work? If our new principle is we need to give credit to an artist's models, there's a whole lot of uncredited comics modeling that needs to be acknowledged.
**On the plus side, this would mean that Greg Land owes us a pretty exciting list of adult movie stars...
6 comments:
But why stop at the new guys? Modelling superhero comic characters on real-life persons goes back to the early years of the genre, with e.g. the original Captain Marvel based on Fred MacMurray and Mary Marvel on Judy Garland.
Other examples from the Silver and Bronze ages that spring to mind:
Mary Jane Watson based on Ann-Margret
the Kingpin based on Sidney Greenstreet
Jean Grey based on Farrah Fawcett (during the Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne runs)
Kitty Pryde based on Sigourney Weaver
I would posit that there is a significant difference between an artist basing a character's appearance on someone, and the artist having that someone come in and physically model each and every one of that character's poses for you.
Or tracing them off a lightbox...
Yeah, what the heck is that people keep talking about portraits like the Mona Lisa where the artists just had the model sitting for them? Lousy tracers all!
Seriously, I see nothing wrong with artists using models or reference material (taking photographs and making sketches of material used for props and backgrounds, like e.g. Hergé did to a tremendous extent starting at least with "The Blue Lotus"). It can actually mean that the artists takes pains and makes extra efforts for their work to look realistic. (One Marvel artist, IIRC Ross Andru or Gil Kane, for instance made lots of sketches of rooftop views of New York from different locations when he worked on features like Spider-Man).
Another interesting precedent: I recently bought "The Misadventures of Jane" (Titan Books), a h/c collection of a British comic strip series from the 1930s and 1940s. The model the artist, Norman Pett, used for Jane became a minor celebrity at the time and eventually went on to play Jane in a movie. (She had the lovely name Chrystabel Leighton-Porter; Pett first met her as a nude model at Birmingham Central School of Art; Jane did have a habit of losing her clothes in the course of her adventures).
Mensh, I think we're talking at cross purposes here, because (other than taking shots at Greg Land), I have no problem with with comic book artists using real life models (although I will confess, to my personal taste, it often results in artwork that is usually very static and boring. What works for one "panel" of the Mona Lisa isn't necessarily the best method for producing 100+ panels of an "action" comic book. Just my taste...).
My post was just about why, after so many years, we're suddenly getting actual model credits in the comic books. Why the change, and what are the mechanics of the new practice? Why is one model credited, but the rest not? Etc. That's it. It wasn't an anti-modeling screed.
As to the old-schoolers you cite, there is indeed a huge difference between "basing" a character's appearance on Ann-Margret (especially when, to my eyes, MJ never looked anything like her), and bringing Ann-Margret into the studio to model 100+ panels at a time. The former probably doesn't justify an in-book credit; the latter seems more justified...although, as my post points out, that principle is being applied inconsistently at best.
The way you presented the credits for Spider-Woman #1 I assumed that the listing of Jolynn Carpenter is/will be a one-off thing, and so I tend to see it as one of the "optional extras" among the credits. For instance, occasionally you find credits for "plot assist", but that does not necessarily mean that stories without them were plotted by the credited writer without assistance (here I would expect that the artist, even when not listed as co-plotter, and the editor could have had a hand in it, to say nothing of plots based on existing works). And in the 1960s some Marvel credits could include jokey listings featuring "you, the reader" and Irving Forbush, IIRC. And there I think that in the first issue of a solo series starring the character in question, why not list the model or inspiration?
I usually tend to get more upset by what ISN'T mentioned in the credits than what is. For instance, in the X-Men movies, or at least the first one, they listed Stan Lee and Jack Kirby among the credits, but not e.g. Len Wein, Dave Cockrum, Chris Claremont, or John Byrne.
I hope whoever modeled for Maleev's Namor has checked himself into rehab.
Post a Comment