glendgold

He hasn't taken it down yet, but...

Things have been tough everywhere. I invite you to click on this for a good laugh: https://www.ebay.com/itm/203794562144 "done on scrap paper or some type of comic paper" is a careful way of saying "torn out of Jim Steranko's HIstory of Comics."

this is exactly how we're going to get the rumor that Queen and Andy Gibb own the cover to Action 1.

I think that's a misunderstanding of how in 1935 or so, he did Popeye in betweens.

This auction has a page from one of those classic so-bad-it's-good storylines, the one where Luke Cage travels to Latveria because Doom stiffed him for $400. Always felt it was Steve Englehart making a point to Marvel management.

Agree. Also, it doesn't look like a kid drew it. Rothko would probably be flattered if he could get exactly back to how kids draw. I did a deep dive last night on Rothko + technique because I knew nothing about his work. And the first thing that came up is that the journal Nature has a whole scientific paper on how innovative his secret (yes, secret) painting techniques were: https://www.nature.com/articles/456447a . Should that make it important or interesting in your eyes if you already think he's garbage? Of course not. But I find the suggestions that if people are into the art they've been manipulated to be condescending - which, again, given this forum, is hiliarious. Rothko wanted an emotional response from people and he hated it, apparently, when critics tried to explain it or intellectualize it. I'm 57 years old and I've been in the arts my whole career. The smartest, most passionate person i've met with the most intensely honed aesthetic sense in every medium i know - I'd trust her for recommendations in books, music, movies, whatever - freaking LOVES Rothko. She used to sit in the chapel in Houston for an hour at a time just taking them in. Me, they bounce off me. But I recognize like the music of Charles Ives, the novels of Murakami or the films of Haneke, there is some kind of emotional connection in there for certain people that just leaves me confused. That doesn't mean those people are wrong, and to suggest the work is some random, tossed off nonsense that fooled everyone is a misuse of dismissiveness. Save that for dismissing the comic art I post.

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/Original-in-the-Manner-of-Jack-Kirby-228-c-EEB458A846 The person who forged this seems to have heard that there's....something going on with the back of a lot of Jack's art, and has tried to imitate it without actually knowing what it is (ssssh, no, let's not tell him). Also the terms of this auction were, I think, written with flags dipped in red ink. G

Y'know, a comic art forum might not be the wisest place for the "art I don't like is bad" take. I invite you to take in the possibility that people who have responded emotionally to Rothko, for whatever reason, are doing so because they are genuinely moved, not because they've been conned. I didn't get Rothko at all, but then I saw a roomful of his paintings, in person, displayed in the lighting he favored, and it's not like I fell in love, but I understood why other people were having an intense, maybe spiritual response. There are a ton of artists who get hyped whose appeal I don't understand, but I'm generally able to remind myself that an audience who genuinely loves it might not have been manipulated. Or just manipulated. BTW, the play RED by John Logan was wonderful. I saw it a few years ago - Alfred Molina as Rothko, and he paints a Rothko on stage during the play. Of course, if he'd done it with eight arms, it have been more on topic for the rest of us.

Yes. And sometimes he sent quick sketches to fans in the mail. He also did more extensive commissions if you paid him. However -- generally speaking -- he didn't draw at conventions.

Kirby pencil pieces are a minefield, and have only gotten worse as prices have gone up and the opportuntities for bad behavior without consequence have gotten more solid. BTW, he rarely drew at conventions, fwiw.

The Hobbit, but with the dramatic tension of consistently wondering whether the next bite of fish is the one that's going to poison you.

And the gates are open...

It is a great page. I bought it from the Donnellys for $1700 back in what feels like the 1930s and sold it for a massive profit of $300 soon thereafter. But don't cry for me, Argentina. I managed to keep a good one, too.

It's a great page, and No.

My impression was that he drew the entirety of a stand-alone "Nega-Man" story for FF 102, which Stan -- for various reasons -- held back, and the published FF 102 was actually Jack's FF 103.

When the book split up, this wasn't the first page to go, nor the last. It's a good page, but there are also three great splashes, quite a few action pages, a wee bit of autobiography and I'm even fond of the page where Jack just spent multiple panels with the Surfer trying to get his board away from Lockjaw. I'm unclear on whether this was the absolute last book Jack drew for marvel in the silver age, or if FF 102 has that honor, but it definitely reflects his anger and frustration with Stan pretty well.

I'm a little sad someone broke the book up after 58 years.

I remember Frazetta's interview in Esquire where he said Ellie pointed out that he forgot to draw harnesses on the bears. He said it didn't matter - it worked anyway.

Vaid take, of course, but I will sheepishly admit to kind of digging this one-armed soldir recoiling from the muskrat-bear vs ptery-pig-lizard. He clearly did it in five minutes but those were five pretty good minutes. I think Frazetta has much worse paintings, even if you don't get into the racist stuff. YMMV.

Yep.

These slipped my attention but I note this was pulled *after* the auction was over. A suggestion: if you see a piece of Kirby art that's inked by Theakston, make sure it has pencils. Greg lightboxed. A lot. Not sure if that's what happened here, but it would be a reasonable guess.

I have a long (and good) professional relationship with Gordon, but waiting a very long time for him to open up can be part of the deal.

I'm also looking for a conservator - I have a piece of art where the frame was also designed by the artist, so I need someone who isn't just trained on paper. But also: no insurance? The guy we're talking about has no insurance? That might not seem like the headline, but not having insurance is kind of a bad look. I mean, beating on a capitol police officer is also a bad look, but if we're keeping it aboout collecting, you'd really hope the guy handling your work wasn't going to do either of those things. Kind of high-risk for the safety of your art.

I've never seen that book but the art reproduced in this blog post looks pretty darned good for Steve in that time frame: https://blogintomystery.com/2012/12/28/the-monster-in-steve-ditkos-dragon-lord-isnt-steve-ditkos-gorgo-though-its-pretty-much-steve-ditkos-gorgo-marvel-spotlight-vol-2-5/ i was kind of hoping the character design would be EXACTLY Godzilla with a false mustache and glasses.

Nice catch with MTA 47 - I didn't know about that cover. He did some Machine Man stuff after that, and that bizarre Captain Universe book, but nothing before that cover you mentioned. Also I kinda think he didn't work with Zeck, right? He did pair with some interesting inkers, like Craig Russell on Rom.