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
• 
Now THAT, my friends, is comedy.
So that was a dìçk joke, right? I mean it was a joke, and it was by… oh, never mind.
Byrne does nothing but create masterpieces, Lab Rats, Doom Patrol and the Demon have proven his artistry of the superhero concept. Fans and pro alike agree it’s fresh and innovative.
Byrne’s working on the All-New Atom with full-figured writer supreme, Gail Simone.
What’s Peter’s next gig?
Byrne’s working on the All-New Atom with full-figured writer supreme, Gail Simone.
What’s Peter’s next gig?
Byrne’s working on the All-New Atom with full-figured writer supreme, Gail Simone.
What’s Peter’s next gig?
John Byrne’s work has also appeared on the cover of Time.
I’m sure Peter’s work on The Dark Tower book will garner mucho publicity as well.
That and $4.50 will get you a double late mochachino or 5 U2 songs on iTunes.
I recommend Native Son as one choice. It’s an early version of Vertigo but moodier.
John Byrne’s work has also appeared on the cover of Time.
I’m sure Peter’s work on The Dark Tower book will garner mucho publicity as well.
That and $4.50 will get you a double late mochachino or 5 U2 songs on iTunes.
I recommend Native Son as one choice. It’s an early version of Vertigo but moodier.
John Byrne’s work has also appeared on the cover of Time.
I’m sure Peter’s work on The Dark Tower book will garner mucho publicity as well.
That and $4.50 will get you a double late mochachino or 5 U2 songs on iTunes.
I recommend Native Son as one choice. It’s an early version of Vertigo but moodier.
Byrne does nothing but create masterpieces.
Then apparently you and the rest of the world are at odds as to what the definition of the word “masterpiece” is.
A double ‘late’ mochachino? C’mon, somebody else step in; I can’t do all the heavy lifting here!
Joe, you can’t do any of the heavy lifting. Oh my, you caught me, I misspelled “latte” a thousand pardons good sir!
Here try this one. If Peter David cares so much about the integrity of the characters he works on; why did he change the brilliant Wonder Girl character that Byrne created to be a normal teenager, into a blonde stand-in for Jenna Jameson?
You know who Jenna is, right Joe. I’m sure you do.
Joe, you can’t do any of the heavy lifting. Oh my, you caught me, I misspelled “latte” a thousand pardons good sir!
Here try this one. If Peter David cares so much about the integrity of the characters he works on; why did he change the brilliant Wonder Girl character that Byrne created to be a normal teenager, into a blonde stand-in for Jenna Jameson?
You know who Jenna is, right Joe. I’m sure you do.
Joe, you can’t do any of the heavy lifting. Oh my, you caught me, I misspelled “latte” a thousand pardons good sir!
Here try this one. If Peter David cares so much about the integrity of the characters he works on; why did he change the brilliant Wonder Girl character that Byrne created to be a normal teenager, into a blonde stand-in for Jenna Jameson?
You know who Jenna is, right Joe. I’m sure you do.
Masterpiece. The output of one John Byrne. Open your eye and stol trying to curry the favor of your master for once.
LOL! That should say: Open your eyes and stop trying to curry the favor of your master for once.
Anyway, be honest with yourselves. Peace.
> 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.
Actually, that only lasted two issues (#4 and #6 – he didn’t appear in #5) before he developed a personality – it’s a new character, not the Vision that Bendis killed, but it’s not “nothing but a robot” either.
Normally I don’t like to get involved in these sorts of things, but I gotta say that this Mike O’Brian/O’Brien (which is it? Does he really not know how to spell his own name?) is just the most pitiful person I’ve ever encountered. And he’s certainly not doing any favors for John Byrne. He can’t be for real, can he? He makes me miss that X-Ray guy.
Now can we get back to an actual rational, adult discussion?
Robert, I think you’re being completely unfair. If somebody can’t spell latte, I’m sure his own name would prove to be equally difficult. And the fact that both versions link back to Byrne’s website is also surely a bizarre coincidence.
Well, considering he’s also living in a bizarro-universe where people praised Byrne’s Doom Patrol, perhaps spelling is equally mutable in his world.
And, sorry, I can’t let this one slide by. Byrne has written novels? Um, yeah, techically, since the exactly two that he has written does qualify for the plural. Now if only PAD could manage to write that many…
I don’t agree Somebody, I feel Marvel has trashed the Vision character…again. I’m glad you like the new one though.
Never read Whipping Boy or Fear Book? Those were best-sellers. Guess you guys missed out on real literature. Undoubtedly too busy reading “the Hulk” by PAD. Or the character using the name “Hulk,” anyway.
As a matter of fact, son, I did read Whipping Boy. Had to track it down at used shops, since it’s such a best-seller it was totally out of print. Never did find Fear Book.
If you had passed Reading Comprehension 101 you might have noted that I did say Byrne had written two novels, therefore, perhaps, just perhaps, implying that I was aware of their existence…
Despite JBs best-selling novels, there are a lot of people in charge of ordering books at bookshops, who, not unlike yourself, have an agenda against the man and his work. They refuse to place orders, and suddenly, not so surprisingly, there is the illusion of a lack of demand. This is a hallmark of the comic shop owners who wish to see him fail.
This is a hallmark of the comic shop owners who wish to see him fail.
And I’m sure most comic shop owners couldn’t give a rat’s ášš about who writes what.
Rather, they care about what sells.
Which probably says alot about Byrne and his works right there.
Did you just propose that there is a conspiracy amongst book vendors to keep John Byrne down? If you believe that, I have a nice tin foil hat I’d like to sell you…
I can’t tell who’s trying to be ironic in this thread.
And please my friend, don’t be so rude with your Reading Comprehension 101 remark. You know full well that Gods and Goddesses, the wonderful John Byrne Wonder Woman novel, was a best-seller as well as Fear Book and Whipping Boy. So please stuff your smugness in a sock, mister!
Well, I was never an Avengers fan, or read much of Byrne’s Hulk run, but The Dark Phoenix Saga was my first introduction into reading a monthly superhero comic (my first ongoing monthly was the tie-in Transformers), and his Next Men is a masterpiece. Nonetheless, news that he’s being a hypocrite isn’t exactly news.
As far as different writers’ approaches to writing, I was really into Claremont’s X-Men in my teens, but got out of in my twenties, because there was this increasing feeling that nothing of any permanence or insight was happening with the characters or the premise; things were going in circles: The mansion’s destroyed. Now it’s rebuilt. Now it’s destroyed again. Now it’s rebuilt. They’re at the mansion. No, now they’re in the Australian Outback. Now they’re scattered and regrouping……at the mansion. Jean’s dead. Jean’s alive. Jean’s dead again. Nightcrawler/Storm/Wolverine have to deal with the loss/weakening of their powers. Nope, not any more. New costume change because the artist just feels like it. And another. And another. And so on.
I don’t mind some storylines and premises being temporary, but I’d like some sense of progression. But because of the serial and decades-long nature of comics, the big franchise-nature of books like the X-books, and the interferences of corporate suits from upstairs, it’s easier nowadays to stick to individual writers in the intimate environment of single-character or non-franchise books like Peter’s Hulk to see that sort of progression that still remains true to the fundamentals of the character. That’s just me.
Julio Diaz: 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.”
Luigi Novi: You’re both wrong. It should be crack-up or crackhead. Peter forgot the hyphen, and you wrongly put in a space between the two words. 🙂
Stephen McGrath: 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.
Luigi Novi: the problem statement is that it only references age as the only determining factor in this. 13-year-olds could just as easily be disappointed with something as an adult would. A 13-year old, for example, might pick up an issue of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby’s Hulk #1 and be disappointed that the Hulk is gray and not green.
Michael J. Norton: 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!).
Luigi Novi: I respectfully disagree. The issue of when homicide is justifiable is a valid one in the real world, it’s a valid one in fiction, and hence, it’s a valid one in superhero comics, including with regards to one character who is a warrior. Warriors are people who fight in wars. In wars, warriors kill. Given that Diana did what she had no choice but to do, I don’t know why that act on her part is causing so much grief. But that’s just me.
Kurt: 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.
Luigi Novi: Thank you! I wish more webmasters would do this.
Mike O’Brien: 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…Fans and pro alike agree it’s fresh and innovative.
Luigi Novi: Too bad fans and pros alike didn’t agree that those books were worth buying.
Can you document these claims? Or buy “fans and pros alike”, are you just projecting your own feelings onto others?
Mike O’Brien: It’s interestig that a writer known for “writing to the bit” would criticize a superior writer like John Byrne…..Byrne has even written novels for chrissakes!
Luigi Novi: And Peter has written dozens of novels. Your point?
Mike O’Brien: Here try this one. If Peter David cares so much about the integrity of the characters he works on; why did he change the brilliant Wonder Girl character that Byrne created to be a normal teenager, into a blonde stand-in for Jenna Jameson?
Luigi Novi: He didn’t. Peter wrote the character. He didn’t draw her. If you feel she was drawn in that manner (a common and unfortunate aspect of most superhero illustration), you should direct that criticism to the one who drew her that way. Not the writer.
Mike O’Brien: Open your eyes and stop trying to curry the favor of your master for once.
Luigi Novi: Try opening yours and seeing all the times Peter’s fans her have disagreed with him on various different topics, and then tell us how you incorporate that into your “currying favor” theory. To say nothing of the fact that Peter doesn’t delete such comments from his board as Byrne does.
Robert Fuller: Normally I don’t like to get involved in these sorts of things, but I gotta say that this Mike O’Brian/O’Brien (which is it? Does he really not know how to spell his own name?) is just the most pitiful person I’ve ever encountered. And he’s certainly not doing any favors for John Byrne. He can’t be for real, can he? He makes me miss that X-Ray guy.
Luigi Novi: Oh please, I’ve seen far worse. Try checking out some of the troglodytes on the imdb boards, or some of the rare trolls at Nitcentral. Or those intrepid miscreants extras from the cast of Deliverance that have popped up on these boards on occasion.
Mike O’Brien: Despite JBs best-selling novels, there are a lot of people in charge of ordering books at bookshops, who, not unlike yourself, have an agenda against the man and his work. They refuse to place orders, and suddenly, not so surprisingly, there is the illusion of a lack of demand. This is a hallmark of the comic shop owners who wish to see him fail.
Luigi Novi: Yeah, because the main thing that retailers want to do is not sell product. Especially the owners of comic book stores, which A. are apparently the only type of outlet that you can buy novels in, according to Mike’s perception of the world, and B. are so healthy right now as an industry, that they can afford to not stock books that would otherwise sell, just for reasons of personal spite.
Craig J. Ries and “djinnmastr”, your true colors are showing. Comic shop owners say “Byrne doesn’t sell,” so of course they under-order his books. So when kids come in to find the all-ages books he produces—guess what?!? They don’t carry them! Self-fulfilling prophecy!
But you knew this already.
Luigi? Time for a reality check, my man.
Craig J. Ries and “djinnmastr”, your true colors are showing.
Your right… my true colors are that I’d ban your worthless ášš if I had the power. We get enough spam around here that we don’t need a troll like you, too.
Go sniff Byrne’s ášš since you seem to enjoy being behind it so much.
But you knew this already.
I’m guess that, like spelling, logic isn’t really your forte.
Btw, for the record, the only stuff of Byrne’s I’ve ever really read that lasted more than an issue or two is his run on Alpha Flight. Not bad stuff, but not great either; certainly nothing that jumps out and says “go buy other stuff he’s written”.
the brilliant Wonder Girl character that Byrne created to be a normal teenager
Yeah, I know, this isn’t a Wonder Girl discussion, but on that tangent, I can’t believe that Byrne has the nads to create a character who runs off and gets superpowers by any means necessary and calls her “a normal teenager.” SHE’S IN A SUPERHERO COMIC BOOK. Vanessa Kapatelis was a normal teenager. Lucy Spears was a normal teenager. Cassie? No freaking way. I mean, what did he expect her to be?
Byrne’s problem is that he wants too much consistency. And that only leads to stagnation of a character.
Peter made Cassie grow into a more mature, responsible young woman under his pen, and instilled in her the capability of leadership and – dare I say it? – nobility that she’d earlier lacked. That evolution gave her room to progress to the point where she’s at now in TEEN TITANS – and, BTW, I like her in the Titans. I’m dying to see the effect of Kon’s death on her, since I’m reading 52, and I’m going to be paying very close attention to TT OYL to see how her “deal” with Ares affects her.
Ironic, is it not, that I like the David/Johns versions of Cassie a billion times more than I did the Byrne version? And this is the guy who created her!
Sorry, Johnny ol’ boy, but I’m afraid the sales (and fans and critics) are speaking for themselves.
Queen Anthai-here is the problem with your statement that Cassie grew into a more mature young woman. Why didn’t the othe rpeople around her also grow and mature.
They are all the same age but Cassie grew a few years, I guess in between panels.
Nothing new for Peter, he changes ages, backgrounds and origins of characters on a whim.
Let’s also not be so quick to pat Peter on the back for writing almost 50 novels. Most of those were done for existing characters. Byrne came up with Fear Book and Whipping Boy on his own. He created the characters.
If only the bookstores weren’t run by the same fanboys that have taken over and slaughtered the direct sales market, he could have been the next Stephen King.
Queen Anthai-here is the problem with your statement that Cassie grew into a more mature young woman. Why didn’t the othe rpeople around her also grow and mature.
They are all the same age but Cassie grew a few years, I guess in between panels.
Nothing new for Peter, he changes ages, backgrounds and origins of characters on a whim.
Let’s also not be so quick to pat Peter on the back for writing almost 50 novels. Most of those were done for existing characters. Byrne came up with Fear Book and Whipping Boy on his own. He created the characters.
If only the bookstores weren’t run by the same fanboys that have taken over and slaughtered the direct sales market, he could have been the next Stephen King.
Queen Anthai-here is the problem with your statement that Cassie grew into a more mature young woman. Why didn’t the othe rpeople around her also grow and mature.
They are all the same age but Cassie grew a few years, I guess in between panels.
Nothing new for Peter, he changes ages, backgrounds and origins of characters on a whim.
Let’s also not be so quick to pat Peter on the back for writing almost 50 novels. Most of those were done for existing characters. Byrne came up with Fear Book and Whipping Boy on his own. He created the characters.
If only the bookstores weren’t run by the same fanboys that have taken over and slaughtered the direct sales market, he could have been the next Stephen King.
Mr. O’Brien, some polite advice:
Your attempts to defend John Byrne are pretty much achieving the opposite effect intended. I respect and admire Byrne’s contributions to the comics industry, but you’re championing his weakest work as being “lauded by fans and pros alike”, you’re actively insisting that “the bookstores” are run by people who have an anti-Byrne agenda (this would be every bookstore in America, then? Nationwide chains like Barnes and Noble are run by some geek saying, “Pffh. John Byrne’s not anywhere near as good as Peter David. I won’t order any of his books for my hundreds of stores.”)…in short, you’re really making a bad impression.
My advice would be to keep quiet and let John Byrne’s writing and art speak for themselves. (Which would probably be my advice to Byrne, too, should he ask for it; his central point, that sometimes writers make too drastic a change on a book simply to “shake things up”, is valid, but he does it a disservice with the examples he cited.)
This isn’t a popularity contest, it isn’t a “Byrne vs. David” debate; both of them have done some almighty great work over the course of their long careers. John Byrne just put his foot in his mouth, that’s all. Trying to fit it all the way down your throat, while insisting that you love the taste of shoe leather, isn’t the best way to prove your point.
Actually, at this point I’m leaning more towards believing that Mike O’Brien (sounds like Miguel O’Hara) isn’t being serious.
I’m leaning towards Mike O’Brian being John Byrne…
Well, believe it or not, Darick Robertson used this ‘Mike O’Brian’ as a basis for the editor character in Transmetropolitan. So, he’s not John Byrne.
He is, however, a deeply disturbed individual. He is like the Silas character in The DaVinci Code, except he uses Byrne comics as a method of self flagelation.
Just watch and laugh.
Posted by: Mike O’Brien at May 28, 2006 08:59 PM
It’s interestig that a writer known for “writing to the bit” would criticize a superior writer like John Byrne.
Your evaluation of Peter’s writing skills relative to John’s are irrelevant in the context of this discussion. Peter didn’t criticize John’s comic-book scripts or novels. He merely pointed out the hypocrisy of John criticizing others for something he has done, numerous times.
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.
I’m not going to bother debating the accuracy of that statement, because, again, it’s irrelevant to the debate at hand. The question at hand is: why is John Byrne criticizing others for altering characters to suit their “whims” when he has altered characters?
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!
Agreed. Let’s not bring them up, because they have nothing to do with this discussion.
Byrne has even written novels for chrissakes! What am I getting at here, sweetpea?
Good question.
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.
Actually, Peter was only answering an unfair swipe from John Byrne. John brought this on himself, not the other way around. I’m not sure how you could see otherwise. The documentary evidence is right here before your eyes. Check the date/time on the entry in John’s forum where he criticizes Peter, and then check the date/time the entry that spawned this thread. John’s came first, Peter’s came afterwards. QED.
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.
And, again, this is all irrelevant to the debate we’re having.
Now I’ll go back to my mean old board and think about what Bono said: Vertigo, my friend Vertigo.
Your subsequent posts demonstrate your inability to keep that promise.
Look, Mike O’Brien/Mike O’Brian/Madman Mike, I happen to like John’s writing, although I like Peter’s writing a lot more. You apparently loathe Peter’s writing and worship John’s. The world’s big enough to accommodate your view and mine.
The world is not big enough, however, to accommodate lies nor hypocrisy. You are lying when you say Peter routinely “bashes” John and cannot “let go of his connection” to him. Peter routinely defends himself against John’s distortions.
And it is hypocritical for John to criticize others for that which he has done numerous times.
By the way, many people on this board, myself included, have criticized or disagreed with Peter on more than one occasion. Only once did I see Peter shut someone down (actually, I think he shut the thread down) for spitefully arguing with someone who had suffered a personal tragedy. Peter tried repeatedly asking the offender to be civil, and only shut him down after said attempts had failed. So Peter is not our “master,” and he doesn’t try to be. His commitment to free speech is demonstrable and admirable.
John, on the other hand, routinely calls his own fans “stupid” and has deleted posts and/or threads that exposed his hypocrisy.
“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).”
Which was exactly what I did, particularly when one considers that, in the “Kirby days,” the Hulk regularly went through different incarnations (at least four in the first five issues). The fact that later writers locked the Hulk into a certain version does nothing to change the fact that, back in the day, there were many variances in the Hulk’s personality. I went back to that spirit. John, for all his posturing, instantly changed the character more sweepingly than I ever did, and made the impossible-to-roll-back change of Bruce being married, to boot. I don’t object to John having made changes. I object to the hypocrisy of accusing others of wrongheadedness when they do the same.
“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.”
Your understanding is wrong. The merged Hulk was intended as a storyline with a beginning, middle and end. What I said was that, when I started on the book, the concept of merging all the personalities into one persona was something that I was “working toward” so that, when the development occurred, it would make sense. But I NEVER said that it was intended to be permanent, anymore than “Mr. Fixit” was. Common sense should dictate otherwise, particularly considering that I ended the storyline and went in another direction.
“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.”
That’s a agood point. Let’s see: The thread was started on April 30 at 5:24 AM. And how long did it take John to reply with a comment, not on the topic in general, but bashing my work in specific? It went up at…hmmm…April 30 at 5:29 AM.
So basically he restrained himself for five whole minutes.
Boy, you’re right, he’s mellowed out.
As for Mike’s (Mikes’) comments, it’s hilarious that he would accuse people here of kowtowing to me when he parrots, word for word, John’s inaccurate criticisms of my work. Tragically, there’s no party line here to be toed, no cute slam phrases to be echoed, so everyone is forced to think for themselves rather than mouth John’s words. Tragic, that. Set your watches: I’m sure he’ll be along to accuse me of having someone fall to their death underwater any time now.
And yes, John’s done more “original” titles than I. Then again, “Soulsearchers and Company” has run far longer than any of John’s original titles, and then there’s “Sachs & Violens” and “Fallen Angel,” not to mention novel series such as “Sir Apropos of Nothing,” the King Arthur trilogy, and the upcoming “Hidden Earth” series, so…
PAD
“Queen Anthai-here is the problem with your statement that Cassie grew into a more mature young woman. Why didn’t the othe rpeople around her also grow and mature.”
Did you even read “Young Justice” or did you just believe what John said?
It is, frankly, nuts to complain over Cassie’s becoming more mature in her personality and leadership skills. God forbid one should actually show teens maturing. At the same time, the other characters grew and changed as well (although, admittedly, Impulse and Robin least of all, but that’s because Impulse pretty much is ADD boy and major changes for Robin had to be reserved for his own title.) Arrowette actually decided to leave her costumed persona behind and lead a “normal” life although she remained loyal to her friends; Empress wound up taking on the responsibility of caring for her de-aged parents in a clear metaphor for adults having to tend to their aged folks; Superboy matured enough to realize that the perfect girl for him was right there in front of him and came to acknowledge the deep love he felt for her; Secret faced a number of issues and wound up having a happy ending, at the hands of Darkseid of all people.
If you’re talking about making Cassie voluptuous, that wasn’t at either my or Todd Nauck’s hands. That came after the book and characters were taken away from us. Go argue with DC.
I was completely respectful to John’s vision of the character. Not all the slams, inaccuracies or jibes can possibly change that.
PAD
“Byrne’s working on the All-New Atom with full-figured writer supreme, Gail Simone.
What’s Peter’s next gig?”
You mean BESIDES X-Factor, Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Fallen Angel, Marvel Adventures Spider-Man, Wonder Man, the Dark Tower, Spike vs. Dracula, Soulsearchers and Company, an FF novel, the novelization of Spider-Man 3, the next New Frontier novel and a NF novella, a Next Gen novel, and “The Hidden Earth?” Besides all that?
Okay, actually, I do have another comic series I’ve turned in the first script for, but Marvel wants to be further along before it’s announced, so I’m going to respect that.
PAD
“John Byrne’s work has also appeared on the cover of Time.”
My work has appeared on the Op-Ed page of “The New York Times.” So…your point?
PAD
Posted by: Peter David at May 29, 2006 08:22 AM
“Byrne’s working on the All-New Atom with full-figured writer supreme, Gail Simone.
What’s Peter’s next gig?”
You mean BESIDES X-Factor, Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Fallen Angel, Marvel Adventures Spider-Man, Wonder Man, the Dark Tower, Spike vs. Dracula, Soulsearchers and Company, an FF novel, the novelization of Spider-Man 3, the next New Frontier novel and a NF novella, a Next Gen novel, and “The Hidden Earth?” Besides all that?
Okay, actually, I do have another comic series I’ve turned in the first script for, but Marvel wants to be further along before it’s announced, so I’m going to respect that.
But, Peter, don’t you know that if John Byrne has fewer writing gigs than you at the moment, it means he has more writing gigs than you at the moment? And if you’re work sells better than his, his work is selling better than yours? It’s the new math! 🙂
Good night, I can’t believe I used “you’re” when I should have used “your” in my last post! I know the dámņ difference, yet in the last couple of years I’ve been making that mistake with increasing frequency.
Gah! I must have a slow-acting form of brain-eating bacteria!!!!
Can somebody tell me what a full-figured writer supreme is? Or is this something I’m better off not knowing?
“Can somebody tell me what a full-figured writer supreme is? Or is this something I’m better off not knowing?”
Just look in a mirror and take out the writer part.