So over on the Byrne board there’s a lengthy thread about the Hulk which consists, for the most part, of bashing my work on the title because, well, it’s the Byrne board, so it’s SOP. But what really fractured me was the following comment from John:
“Once upon a time, when a writer wanted to “do something different” s/he left the character/title being worked on, handing it over to someone who wanted to continue with the established motifs. Some time around 25 years ago this started to change. Writers like Claremont and David, as well as others, began changing the books/characters to suit their interests of the moment….It’s the same old song — the characters being made to serve the needs of the talent, instead of the talent serving the needs of the characters.”
You just have to love that from the guy who, before my run on the title, was handed a character who was unmarried and transformed into a monster when he got angry, and over the course of the run he split the character in two, separating them into two individual beings, thus eliminating a dynamic that had been in place for a quarter of a century, married off the hero, and basically wrote a series of stories that were indistinguishable from “Godzilla”–dedicated scientist and his group of equally dedicated followers pursues a furious green monster he’s accidentally unleashed upon the world. Stories that, in short, had nothing to do with the Hulk.
And that’s not even counting what the master of lip service to authorial intent did to the Vision, turning him white and unemotional when the original Vision was neither.
That John Byrne. What a crack up.
PAD
• 
You forgot to mention his revamp of Supes, changed the whole dynamic of the character. When a writer comes onto a book, I want them to grow the character, not just do the same old same old with it. That would get old and repetitive, much like John’s continual need to cause controversy so that everyone remembers he is still around.
You forgot to mention his revamp of Supes, changed the whole dynamic of the character. When a writer comes onto a book, I want them to grow the character, not just do the same old same old with it. That would get old and repetitive, much like John’s continual need to cause controversy so that everyone remembers he is still around.
Seems a certain wall-crawling menace got a bit of a modification by Byrne as well. Anyone remember the fan reaction to that?
Memo from pot to kettle: you’re black! (cough- Man of Steel- cough)
I used to read the posts at Byrne Robotics quite regularly, and I even posted there once. Because I really, really, really like Byrne’s work.
But, y’know, I can’t even look at that forum anymore. The man is so embittered, hyper-judgmental, and ridiculously hypocritical, even the thought of his forum just gives me a headache.
Note to any Byrnebots who may actually be reading this: I’m basing this on my evaluation of Byrne’s very own postings in his own forum. I’m taking nothing out of context, I am not relying on hearsay, or doing any of the other things you accuse Byrne’s detractors of doing. The man is what he is, folks.
“Oh, give us a specific example, you accursed Byrne-basher!” cried Byrne’s defenders.
Why? Peter already did just that.
God, I hated his work on my Superman…Well, not mine, per se, but my hero…
Past that, he’s downright wrong.
What he gave us was a formula for absolute stagnation.
I want the characters to be true to themselves, but I sure as hëll want them to grow too.
There’s not a whole hëll of a lot in PAD’s Hulk run which doesn’t mesh pretty well with what came before. It just looks at it in a smarter, more focused away.
There’s nothing that makes me want to stab my eyes out more than seeing comics like an episode of the Flintstones where everything’s back to normal at the end of the issue.
It’s only a problem when it’s not done with thought and care and respect, not blind dogma.
It’s sad that such a cool character like the Vision is being given the Byrne treatment AGAIN over in the pages of Teen Beat Avengers. He is nothing but a robot now.
Remember when the Vision was the android that could cry? Well, Marvel doesn’t either. The character is treated like a household appliance.
PAD, I agree with every word of your post except the very last one. I believe that the correct word should be “head” rather than “up,” making the last paragraph read:
“That John Byrne. What a crack head.”
Silver lining – at least he used the words “PAD” and “talent” in the same sentence. 😉
Pad, I don’t always agree with you, but seriously, does anyone pay attention to what John Byrne says anymore? It’s not even that I disagree with 90% of what he says, but it’s obvious that he isn’t interested in other points of view. And he seems to actualyl be proud of the fact that apparantly every bit of his conscious thought occurs in a closed loop.
Can we give Byrne a post in the Bush White House? Seems his perspective on reality is about as unfocused as theirs.
Jay “King of the Obvious Joke”
I’d not use Byrne’s Superman revamp as a counterexample, as everything that changed was either dictated by or approved directly by The Powers That Were before they went ahead. It certainly wasn’t just Byrne’s revamp – the new Lex Luthor was Marv Wolfman’s idea, or so I keep getting told.
The Evil done to the poor Vision, however, is a) inexcusable and b) a perfect example of what Byrne himself was railing against.
I agree, VISION QUEST + HULKBUSTERS=total crap. I hate not liking Byrne anymore because I used to love a lot of Byrne’s early work, especially the art.
He created the current Wonder Girl, Cassandra Sandmark who is a hottie now but when Byrne drew her she had the the worst haircuts ever seen on a young female character! With or without the wig!
Dear Peter,
Your body of original work has outshine Mr. Byrne for well over 10 years now. While he is living in his past glory days like a not so funny Al Bundy (“I once wrote the Fantastic Four and scored four touch-downs in one high school game) While he’s a comic legend in his own right, so are you – and you still surpass him. While he retreads the same types of stories, you created excellent work like Fallen Angel. When John Byrne goes back to old character, he did it cause he needs the work. When you do it, it’s because the fans beg for it.
As the Metallica Lyrics say, “the empty can rattles the most.” John, as much as I respect his past work, hasn’t had a quarter full can of true creativity for years and everyone knows it. And he is literally reaching the point where only people my age remember that glory.
You, on the other hand, will not be relegated to there. You are a comic master and everyone knows a book will only improve with you on it. You’re ideas are fresh.
Remeber that next time the old bullies start yapping.
Peace.
I LOVED the changes you put the Hulk through! Those were some of the first comics I ever read and are, in a huge way, responsible for me getting into comics in the first place. And how DARE he diss Claremont – the guy who’s responsibile for pretty much every awesome moment in X-Men history! Man, what a dìçkhëád…
Howard wrote:
Seems a certain wall-crawling menace got a bit of a modification by Byrne as well. Anyone remember the fan reaction to that?
Yup! I got three or four letters printed in that miniseries (except for the one which said, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”) 🙂
Well, just because he contradicts himself doesn’t mean that his point is moot. I mean, it doesn’t help, but…
When I lent the first two volumes of PAD’s Hulk Visionaries to my 13-year-old cousin, he expressed disappointment because this was not the Hulk he knew.
“It’s the same old song — the characters being made to serve the needs of the talent, instead of the talent serving the needs of the characters.”
I think my biggest complaint about that statement is that it puts a tremendous number of limitations on writing characters. Ya know, sometimes a gimmick gets old. Hulk can only smash so much. Supergirl can only be so bland. Superman can only be so powerful. Sometimes you need writers to come in with new ideas and force the characters to meet them head-on, even if it means transforming them. Otherwise, what he have is a thing called “stagnation,” which comics must, must, MUST avoid at all cost if they are to last.
But that’s on the writer’s heads. Me, I’d rather just read good stories. Hulk can smash all he wants, as long as it is good. Or he can try something else, although it may take a talented writer like PAD to show us how versatile a character can be.
Grant Morrison’s All-Star Superman shows what a mistake Byrne’s version of the character was. Superman is limited when he is portrayed as essentially a Kansas farm boy who has super powers. However, when he’s a strange visitor from another planet pretending to be Clark Kent but moving in realms beyond our dreams and conducting experiments beyond our comprehension, the sky is the limit storywise.
While I loved Byrne’s run on FF, it took some getting used to because of the changes he made. And I agree that what he did with the Vision was terrible.
And Peter, when it comes to portraying the Hulk, you are The Master!!!
Writers need some freedom to innovate. Take Walt Simonson’s Thor. Thor had become stale. No one could challenge him, and only if he transformed to his mortal self was there an issue. However, by introducing Beta Ray Bill – who could lift Thor’s hammer – and following a great arc of Norse mythology, Thor became a must-read title.
Later in the series though, Captain America suddenly became able to lift the hammer, too. To me, that was innovation that went TOO far. By continuing to find more and more “worthy” individuals, it watered down one of the things that made Thor unique.
This reminds me of a column (BID, I think??) where PAD talked about all the conflicts between satisfying the old comic readers who want tradition, and the newer comic readers who want constant innovation on a title.
Well, I guess I’m torn here, because I’m a PAD fan and a JB fan. I really enjoyed both runs on Hulk. I seem to recall JB’s run was cut short, while PAD’s went…well…awhile.
I think a character should be recognizable to the point that a 13 year old should be able to read the book and not be *too* dissapointed by what he finds. I think rule of thumb should be: “Make whatever changes to the character that you think will make for good stories…just make sure that when you are done, you leave the character either as you found him/her, as much as possible, or as close to the original model as you can. That way, when the next guy comes along, they’ve got a blank canvas to work with, not painting over someone else’s work.
In closing, I kinda wish for the days when I didn’t know who the creators were, except for the names. I sometimes wish we could close the curtain that the internet has open to the backstage area…
I actually liked the Man of Steel revamp of Superman. However, as someone already pointed out, that’s was a team effort at DC.
It certainly is unfortunate that Byrne acts like this sometimes.
One other thing. When Vision was added to Young Avengers, did anyone else thing of Red Tornado in Young Justice?
This is always a complicated issue. “Changing characters” and all that. People keep arguing over Spider-Man’s marriage, for instance. I generally choose to ignore Byrne’s rants, though. He’s a good artist and I look forward to his work on the new Atom series, but he’s full of hot air.
“He created the current Wonder Girl, Cassandra Sandmark who is a hottie now but when Byrne drew her she had the the worst haircuts ever seen on a young female character! With or without the wig!”
This was always one of the things that got me about the Byrne/PAD situation. Cassie was created as part of Byrne’s ongoing quest to create the “everygirl teen superheroine”. First he did it with Kitty Pryde, for whom he blamed the “failure” of his vision on Chris Claremont and the nature of the X-Men comic. Then he’d create Wonder Girl, who few people cared for. After that, he created the Mattie Franklin version of Spider-Woman, who possibly lasted a shorter time than any other version of Spider-Woman.
Now, when he found out that someone wanted Cassie in Young Justice (which was still being called JLA Jr. at the time), he opposed the idea and said that he felt it would undermine the “regular girl” quality he was going for with the character. He felt that a super-team would make her seem less normal.
Now, DC let Cassie join Young Justice and handed her over to who else but Peter David. What does he do? He proceeds to absolutely slam the concept through the hoop! Cassie went from being a rather stereotypical spunky kid to being a smart, brave and yet entirely normal girl who happened to have super-powers. The perfect everykid and the heart of Young Justice. Not only that, the exact opposite of what Byrne suggested happens. Instead of Cassie being made less normal by the team, she and the other girls manage to ground the team and make them into a group of teenage friends rather than just yet another teen super-group.
So, since PAD actually managed to utilize Byrne’s idea better than Byrne did, I think we can say that the things he says are to be taken with a grain of salt.
(Mind you, I do think Cassie’s strayed from her “everygirl” roots, but only after she joined the Titans).
“When Vision was added to Young Avengers, did anyone else thing of Red Tornado in Young Justice?”
I think that was the idea. I mean, it couldn’t have been a coincidence, since they’re basically the same character with different powers.
“I think that was the idea. I mean, it couldn’t have been a coincidence, since they’re basically the same character with different powers.”
I don’t know. They’re serving very different roles in the groups. The new Vision is a peer to the others, while Red Tornado was with Young Justice to supervise. Also, Vision doesn’t have the dry wit that Red Tornado developed under Mr. David.
Posted by: Stephen McGrath at May 27, 2006 04:17 PM
In closing, I kinda wish for the days when I didn’t know who the creators were, except for the names. I sometimes wish we could close the curtain that the internet has open to the backstage area…
I sure as hëll don’t. I started identifying my favorite creators when I was six or seven. I was proud that I was able to identify an artist by looking at their artwork, without seeing the credits.
Before long, I even learned to identify the styles of various writers. I was even prouder.
Why? Because the idea that “characters are more important than creators” is pure bunk. Characters, and the things they do, are the result of the work of creators. The things that happen on the comic-book page couldn’t happen without the work of creators. Good characters are the result of good creators.
Spider-Man is good when the creators on Spider-Man are good. He is not as good when the creators on his book are not as good. Characters are naught but ideas until a creator does something with them. Ideas are a dime a dozen. It’s the execution that counts.
I don’t follow characters, I follow creators. Like Peter David.
Rock on, Peter.
PAD is actually the first author that I was really aware of. And that was when I started college and Spidey 2099 came out.
Of course, I knew *of* authors before then. I knew that Stan Lee had created lots of Spidey stuff and Bob Kane had created Batman (I now know that Bill Finger was a large part of that, too). However, at that point I was still reading comics purely because of characters. I liked Spider-Man, so all Spider-Man comics were created equal.
After I started reading Spidey 2099, I started paying attention to writers, and to artists to a lesser degree. I’m now at the point where I go onto amazon.com and type in a author’s name to see what Trade Paperbacks he has out. I guess I give Peter credit for making me realise that the author maters as much as the title character.
One other thing about Byrne’s comments. Stan Lee shook up the status quo *constantly*. Byrne’s version of the history of comics isn’t very consistent with Marvel’s history.
It was John Byrne who got me into comics. Specifically that last panel in an X-men book, where Magneto turns to face them, a full page.
I didn’t know who he was. But i could not wait until the next issue.
Around that time I also read the Count Nefaria trilogy in Avengers and I was totally hooked into the Marvel universe.
I really would like to like John Byrne. But it’s just not possible any more. He’s too bitter, too judgemental and his reasoning leaves a lot to be desired.
There are times when I think that PAD is a little too thin skinned but a few minutes over at the Byrne board and I come away convinced that Peter is as tough as Toshiro Mifune compared to the way Byrne carries on.
John Byrne will always have a special place in comics history that nobody can take away, not even himself. Which is a good thing because he has done a lot to tarnish it. If he wants to “win” his feuds with those creators he feels have wronged him here’s a suggestion–beat them by writing better stories and illustrating them with the panache that made me fall in love with a medium those many years ago.
This is yet another example of why this website needs a frickin’ fan board. C’mon, people! How long will I have to shout into the darkness before someone realizes that it’s a good idea?
As a comic book fan, I admit I spend a fair amount of time at the Byrne board. But the more I’m there, the more disappointed I get in the way people get treated – I’m pretty sure one long-time poster was totally banned from the site because he disagreed with Byrne too much.
I would abandon that board in a heartbeat if there was a PAD board on this website, and I suspect I wouldn’t exactly be leading the exodus from Byrne’s site.
So please, PAD, Kathleen, I’m begging you. BEGGING YOU. Start up a message board. It would make life easier, and wonderful.
Having read all the comments on this thread thus far, I would like to take note of the fact that while everyone has critized the man and the writer, except for not liking Cassandra’s orignal hairstyle(s), no one has posted a negative commnet on John Byrne the artist.
It just goes to show that there is some good in everybody.
Perhaps Byrne needs to ask his doctor to check for hardening of the arteries or blocked arteries, because I suspect he has diminished flow to his head.
PAD is by far the superior writer.
Bryne’s Fantastic Four (issue #340, to be exact, picked up in line at the grocery store) got me into comics. I collected until I was about 13 and decided I was too old for comics.
About two years later I couldn’t help myself, and peeked at Hulk #354 (or was it 355?) while I was wasting time at Waldenbooks. “Read my mind Jones.” I fell for it immediately and had to buy a copy. Of course, it started the addiction back up (dámņ you, PAD).
I picked Bryne back up, but when he came back to the mainstream after doing “Next Men,” his stuff slowly became unreadable for me. I’m still not sure if I just grew up and refined my taste, or he just got bad.
Make that FF #240. Boy, I am getting old.
Everyone, do yourself a favor and stay away from the Byrne board. You’ll feel much better.
I’m still a fan of Byrne’s work. I buy the FF Visionaries line, just bought the X-Men Omnibus. Heck, I even liked Lab Rats!
Byrne the man, well…
I’ll choose to remember the guy who signed my comics when a friend gave them to him at a convention while I was home sick over the guy who called me “Insult Boy” on his board for no reason I could detect. Byrne’s FF was a big part of my childhood, and I’ll always thank him for that.
Posted by: Kurt at May 27, 2006 07:16 PM
This is yet another example of why this website needs a frickin’ fan board. C’mon, people! How long will I have to shout into the darkness before someone realizes that it’s a good idea?
As a comic book fan, I admit I spend a fair amount of time at the Byrne board. But the more I’m there, the more disappointed I get in the way people get treated – I’m pretty sure one long-time poster was totally banned from the site because he disagreed with Byrne too much.
I would abandon that board in a heartbeat if there was a PAD board on this website, and I suspect I wouldn’t exactly be leading the exodus from Byrne’s site.
So please, PAD, Kathleen, I’m begging you. BEGGING YOU. Start up a message board. It would make life easier, and wonderful.
Apparently, Kurt, you were never on AOL. PAD had a message board there, and it was a good board. However, it frequently went off onto some pretty wild tangents, and even attracted more than a couple of posters who didn’t even know who PAD was. PAD was pretty liberal regarding the topics discussed on the board; even though it was ostensibly supposed to be regarding PAD’s work, the banner for the board stated that pretty much anything and everything was open. That, however, was the opening for those who didn’t know PAD’s writings. When topics turned political, some incredibly non-liberal AOL members started coming along, weighing in with their contrary opinions. Note, PAD never had any argument with opposite viewpoints, just as here. But when the posters never bothered reading PAD’s “real-world” writings (whether comics-related or B5 or Star Trek or Sir Apropos), it became truly annoying. Towards the end of PAD’s active participation on the board (about the same time the blog became active), PAD was making efforts to rein in the political chat as much as possible, especially those who wouldn’t bother reading the comics or books or watching the shows PAD would discuss.
PAD, of course, can refute or verify (and most likely, will), but I think it was that experience–people who only wanted to fight his politics–that burned him on the message boards.
Well, in my opinion Byrne has a point, he just isn’t making it very well. In reality there is a trend that’s happened for the last 5 years or so of creators taking characters and changing them just to suit a storyline or hot trend. Take WonderWoman for example, who has been turned into Frank Castle by Greg Rucka just so DC can have a conflict (nevermind treating characters with respect, there’s money to be made!). That is the most egregious example. The other one is Cassie Sandsmark. See, I believe that a writer can change a character and grow them forward but should never regress. Unfortunately when PAD matured Cassie into a leader and a good, grounded character who handled crisis well Geoff Johns decided that was enough of that and regressed her to the state of a whiny,spoiled, “My So-Called Life” teen character. Both reasons why I won’t read any new DC comics until DiDio leaves.
PAD is actually the first author that I was really aware of. And that was when I started college and Spidey 2099 came out.
The first PAD book I bought specifically because he wrote it was the Spider-man/Spider-man 2099 special. Which probably explains why I do not at all mind the return of Hobby 2211.
“It’s the same old song — the characters being made to serve the needs of the talent, instead of the talent serving the needs of the characters.”
Okay, I’ve thought of something else to say. This statement of Byrne’s really makes me wonder if he means “characters” or “gimmicks.” Because gimmicks can get old, and change becomes necessary, otherwise you lose readers. (This is probably a change from my previous position, in which I say that Hulk can “smash” as much as wants, as long as the stories are good. Truth is, I’d probably get tired of it after 150 consecutive issues, even with PAD’s fantastic writing.)
The challenge for writers, I guess, is all about timing. Some changes you don’t want to make changes right away–you want to let it develop at its own pace. Sometimes you want it to be sudden for the shock value. And always, always, you have to make these decisions based on the characters, the gimmick, and the audience. Because PAD’s character writing was strong, he was able to change the Hulk’s established gimmick without compromising the fact that he was telling Hulk stories.
This raises some questions, though. Which characters can you change, and which character can’t you change? Superman Red and Blue would never work as a permanent concept, yet essentially we have the same sort of change that PAD has successfully implemented on Hulk: Gimmick changes, characters remain.
So how does one know when it is time to change a gimmick? Can it be done from the start, or should it be done over some time?
Ugh. Byrne. There’s nothing that will make me stop buying a book like the name Byrne attached to it on writing duties. Unless it’s David Byrne. THAT would be interesting.
Its not Byrne’s fault. Its just hard for him to see what hes typing due to his head being so far up his ášš.
Joseph – I was on AOL, and I remember his message board. Regardless of the political tensions, I enjoyed it there.
There are two solutions: charge everybody $2 to become members, in the same manner as Kevin Smith on the View Askew board, and ruthlessly ban all trolls. If someone joins the community only to antagonize, then BOOM. They’re booted. End of story. The internet is not a democracy.
It’s thinking like this (Byrne’s) that there hasn’t been a successful new X-Men character in 15 years. The last one was Bishop, who was introduced in ’91.
And it hasn’t been for lack of trying on Marvel’s part. There’s been: Maggot, Marrow, Cecilia Reyes, Thunderbird, Lifeguard, Slipstream, and Stacy X (No, Emma and Tessa don’t count as “new” characters).
Ah, here’s some sad news–the great Alex Toth passed away. He was 78 and reportedly died at his drawing table. A great talent.
Count me in as one who very much enjoyed the changes Byrne brought to most characters. Yes, even Supes who, in the decades prior, had really not undergone much in the way of any change. Byrne threw that out the window and had me really interested in what would happen.
Which, of course, makes his current stance all the more sadly hypocritical.
First let me say that Byrne’s early work is still some of the finest in comics. Next Men, FF and of course X-men all thrived during his tenure. Something happend though around the time he took over Wonder Woman. Either his ego had gotten so large her became unconcerned to what others thought was a good story, or he was unable to adapt to the change in what readers wanted from comics.
He has became an egotistical, bitter, irrational old man. I miss the Old Byrne
Hmmm. While I do not care for his bitterness, my main complaint is that he is not writing and/or drawing anything worth reading. Because of his past glories, I usually order the first few issues of anything that he does. The last time that I continued ordering all the way through to the end was his Generations stories for DC.
The last Generations miniseries would have been dropped by me if it was an ongoing series.
Byrne is suffering from the terminal sin, blandness.
I don’t think the comment about Byrne’s first run on the HULK is entirely fair. We’re talking about one story arc. That’s like saying that PAD’s intent was to write about the HULK as The Maestro (when that appeared as a brief story arc).
It’s common knowledge that Byrne’s first run was cut short and that from his interviews prior to his run, his intent seemed to be to take the character back to his Kirby days (which would have been in character for him). Now, if he’d stated that he wanted to permanently separate the Hulk and Banner, that’s something else. My understanding is that the merged Hulk was the goal of PAD’s run — that he did not intend to return to the savage Hulk.
Also, it’s worth noting that someone else started the thread about the Hulk on the Byrne board. It wasn’t Byrne and the point wasn’t to bash PAD’s work but to comment on changes to the character. The thread was titled “Does anyone miss the classic Hulk?” Considering that most of the people who posted *did* miss that version of the character, it’s safe to say that most of them would not be a fan of PAD’s run. That said, many posters did defend it (including former HULK editor Glenn Greenberg, who I mention mostly because of his connection to the character and because he’s a big fan of PAD’s run on the book and has never been banned or anything because of it).
I also think it’s misleading to say that it’s SOP to bash PAD’s work on the Byrne board. It happens rarely but Byrne is not a fan of PAD’s work but PAD is not singled out in that regard. It seems to be less personal but more stylistic… which happens.
Thing about posts like “Does anyone miss the Classic hulk”…sure they do…till they get it again. I mean, go read the Hulk smash issues, and you’ll be no longer missing it.
It’s like the Hal Jordan crowd. Well, they got him back…and he’s as bland as ever. Hal was much better as a dead hero, then a live one.
It’s interestig that a writer known for “writing to the bit” would criticize a superior writer like John Byrne.
Wonder Woman, Lab Rats, Doom Patrol and Blood of the Demon. These are just a few of the man’s latest masterpieces. Talked about by fans and pros alike as fresh and innovative takes on the hoary old superhero concept.
Let’s not even bring up Next Men, Babe, Danger Unlimited, Namor and of course Alpha Flight. All of them celebrated by fans as all-time classics of comic literature!
Byrne has even written novels for chrissakes! What am I getting at here, sweetpea?
Just this, why does a tired old hack like Peter David continue to bash John Byrne? Could it be jealousy by a man who had to beg to get back on the Hulk and Spider-Man. Could it be because we have a very active messageboard honoring a true gentleman of the field, not a blog, what a creepy concept, by a man who just won’t let go of his connection to a man greater than him.
Who knows? When John Byrne writes a character he brings out the best and the heroic side of the character and never forgets it’s the all-age quality of the character that matters most. When David writes a character he tries to tear down the goodness and replace it with dìçk jokes and oh-so funny putdowns.
Now I’ll go back to my mean old board and think about what Bono said: Vertigo, my friend Vertigo.
It’s interestig that a writer known for “writing to the bit” would criticize a superior writer like John Byrne.
Wonder Woman, Lab Rats, Doom Patrol and Blood of the Demon. These are just a few of the man’s latest masterpieces. Talked about by fans and pros alike as fresh and innovative takes on the hoary old superhero concept.
Let’s not even bring up Next Men, Babe, Danger Unlimited, Namor and of course Alpha Flight. All of them celebrated by fans as all-time classics of comic literature!
Byrne has even written novels for chrissakes! What am I getting at here, sweetpea?
Just this, why does a tired old hack like Peter David continue to bash John Byrne? Could it be jealousy by a man who had to beg to get back on the Hulk and Spider-Man. Could it be because we have a very active messageboard honoring a true gentleman of the field, not a blog, what a creepy concept, by a man who just won’t let go of his connection to a man greater than him.
Who knows? When John Byrne writes a character he brings out the best and the heroic side of the character and never forgets it’s the all-age quality of the character that matters most. When David writes a character he tries to tear down the goodness and replace it with dìçk jokes and oh-so funny putdowns.
Now I’ll go back to my mean old board and think about what Bono said: Vertigo, my friend Vertigo.
It’s interestig that a writer known for “writing to the bit” would criticize a superior writer like John Byrne.
Wonder Woman, Lab Rats, Doom Patrol and Blood of the Demon. These are just a few of the man’s latest masterpieces. Talked about by fans and pros alike as fresh and innovative takes on the hoary old superhero concept.
Let’s not even bring up Next Men, Babe, Danger Unlimited, Namor and of course Alpha Flight. All of them celebrated by fans as all-time classics of comic literature!
Byrne has even written novels for chrissakes! What am I getting at here, sweetpea?
Just this, why does a tired old hack like Peter David continue to bash John Byrne? Could it be jealousy by a man who had to beg to get back on the Hulk and Spider-Man. Could it be because we have a very active messageboard honoring a true gentleman of the field, not a blog, what a creepy concept, by a man who just won’t let go of his connection to a man greater than him.
Who knows? When John Byrne writes a character he brings out the best and the heroic side of the character and never forgets it’s the all-age quality of the character that matters most. When David writes a character he tries to tear down the goodness and replace it with dìçk jokes and oh-so funny putdowns.
Now I’ll go back to my mean old board and think about what Bono said: Vertigo, my friend Vertigo.