|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 17, 2016 15:39:28 GMT -5
While I recognize his mastery, Hogarth's Tarzan is just too..."clean" for me. I think that's why I really love Kubert's Tarzan, because it was pretty gritty.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 17, 2016 16:22:21 GMT -5
Can't wait to get home. Received cellphone UPS notice that my Complete Joe Kubert Tarzan was delivered today. I have seen many covers of this via internet and on the wall of comic shops but during the time it was being published i could never find it on the shelves of stores due i think to distribution systems here. So this will be an all new pleasure to finally have this collection to blow my mind. Joe Kubert's art is fantastic and Tarzan just seemed to fit him so well and be a natural for him. Glad to delve into this finally.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 17, 2016 18:05:50 GMT -5
Thanks, I still haven't read all the Pellucidar books. When I said earlier that the Land that Time Forgot trilogy is one of my favourite ERB works, I forgot to add that I was already old enough that the way the German characters were automatically cast as the bad guys struck me as distasteful. 6+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Or it was provident, considering my country's worst atrocities were still to come. From that perspective, you might say his timing was terrible, if Back to the Stone Age came out in 1937, at the height of he Nazi period! But his heart was in the right place. More than a few of my favourite English-language genre writers indulged in some very questionable German-bashing during the two world wars - Agatha Christie, Rex Stout, Dennis Wheatley, ... understandable, and it doesn't make me think any the less of them as writers or even as persons, but there's no denying it's there.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 17, 2016 18:11:53 GMT -5
While I recognize his mastery, Hogarth's Tarzan is just too..."clean" for me. I think that's why I really love Kubert's Tarzan, because it was pretty gritty. The fact that my taste seems to fall somewhere in the middle is probably the main reason I don't really have a favourite Tarzan artist. I more or less agree about Hogarth, though I should probably give his stuff a closer look before passing judgement, and while I agree that a rougher edge would be more appropriate for the character, for some reason Kubert's style has never clicked with me. I would probably lean more towards Hogarth, so if I ever get around to reading Tarzan comics his are probably the ones I'll try first.
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Aug 17, 2016 18:46:04 GMT -5
It's Back to the Stone Age, one of the Pellucidar novels. Thanks, I still haven't read all the Pellucidar books. When I said earlier that the Land that Time Forgot trilogy is one of my favourite ERB works, I forgot to add that I was already old enough that the way the German characters were automatically cast as the bad guys struck me as distasteful. I have mixed feelings about the Caspak trilogy. I really enjoyed the second and third books, but find The Land That Time Forgot itself to be a little underwhelming. I think it is largely the character of Lis La Rue, who is possibly the least interesting of Burroughs' heroines; never rising above the role of distressed damsel. The Caspakian maidens in The People That Time Forgot and Out of Time's Abyss are far more engaging and entertaining and contribute a lot more to the stories.
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on Aug 18, 2016 1:43:43 GMT -5
Thanks, I still haven't read all the Pellucidar books. When I said earlier that the Land that Time Forgot trilogy is one of my favourite ERB works, I forgot to add that I was already old enough that the way the German characters were automatically cast as the bad guys struck me as distasteful. I have mixed feelings about the Caspak trilogy. I really enjoyed the second and third books, but find The Land That Time Forgot itself to be a little underwhelming. I think it is largely the character of Lis La Rue, who is possibly the least interesting of Burroughs' heroines; never rising above the role of distressed damsel. The Caspakian maidens in The People That Time Forgot and Out of Time's Abyss are far more engaging and entertaining and contribute a lot more to the stories. As a translator, I really struggled with her being called "the girl" for the first 40 or so pages until ERB finally deigned her important enough to have a name.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 18, 2016 8:24:42 GMT -5
I grew up reading Gold Key Tarzan (and Korak) and was thrilled when Joe Kubert took on Tarzan. As beautiful as the Manning Gold Keys were, the Kubert Tarzan was more violent, more primeval, more dynamic, just plain more exciting to look at. For whateve reasons, I never was moved tro read the novels, though. My one and only ERB novel was The Outlaw of Torn, which I loved when I was 13 or 14. Very much in the vein of Robin Hood and The Black Arrow.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 18, 2016 8:26:34 GMT -5
While I recognize his mastery, Hogarth's Tarzan is just too..."clean" for me. I think that's why I really love Kubert's Tarzan, because it was pretty gritty. The fact that my taste seems to fall somewhere in the middle is probably the main reason I don't really have a favourite Tarzan artist. I more or less agree about Hogarth, though I should probably give his stuff a closer look before passing judgement, and while I agree that a rougher edge would be more appropriate for the character, for some reason Kubert's style has never clicked with me. I would probably lean more towards Hogarth, so if I ever get around to reading Tarzan comics his are probably the ones I'll try first. And what is wrong with a "clean" art style? Remember that Hogarth was drawing for newspaper publication and their printing is crap. It was also intended to draw in as wide a readership as possible across the country. Hogarth and Manning and Foster all created clean, crisp beautiful artwork that is still being collected and reprinted through today. I think that means they must have been doing something that everybody could like! Kubert's Tarzan carries a quiet strength which you can believe in for somebody who was raised in, survived in and became a part of the jungle. Kubert gave us a lithe, wirey and athletic Tarzan that leaps from the pages as the Lord of the Jungle.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 18, 2016 12:03:29 GMT -5
The fact that my taste seems to fall somewhere in the middle is probably the main reason I don't really have a favourite Tarzan artist. I more or less agree about Hogarth, though I should probably give his stuff a closer look before passing judgement, and while I agree that a rougher edge would be more appropriate for the character, for some reason Kubert's style has never clicked with me. I would probably lean more towards Hogarth, so if I ever get around to reading Tarzan comics his are probably the ones I'll try first. And what is wrong with a "clean" art style? Remember that Hogarth was drawing for newspaper publication and their printing is crap. It was also intended to draw in as wide a readership as possible across the country. Hogarth and Manning and Foster all created clean, crisp beautiful artwork that is still being collected and reprinted through today. I think that means they must have been doing something that everybody could like! Kubert's Tarzan carries a quiet strength which you can believe in for somebody who was raised in, survived in and became a part of the jungle. Kubert gave us a lithe, wirey and athletic Tarzan that leaps from the pages as the Lord of the Jungle. When I said clean, I wasn't necessarily just meaning the artwork, though I was to an extent. You look at Hogarth's work and it looks like you'd walk through that jungle without getting sweaty, getting any mud on your boots or being bitten by a single mosquito. It has no weight and no grit. Kubert's jungle looks hot and oppressive and jungley. And his Tarzan looks like he's struggled to survive while Hogarth's looks like he walked out of a photo-shoot for Jungle-man's Quarterly. Different strokes for different folks. Hogarth is a great artist...I just think his Tarzan is too clean.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 18, 2016 12:36:05 GMT -5
And what is wrong with a "clean" art style? Remember that Hogarth was drawing for newspaper publication and their printing is crap. It was also intended to draw in as wide a readership as possible across the country. Hogarth and Manning and Foster all created clean, crisp beautiful artwork that is still being collected and reprinted through today. I think that means they must have been doing something that everybody could like! Kubert's Tarzan carries a quiet strength which you can believe in for somebody who was raised in, survived in and became a part of the jungle. Kubert gave us a lithe, wirey and athletic Tarzan that leaps from the pages as the Lord of the Jungle. When I said clean, I wasn't necessarily just meaning the artwork, though I was to an extent. You look at Hogarth's work and it looks like you'd walk through that jungle without getting sweaty, getting any mud on your boots or being bitten by a single mosquito. It has no weight and no grit. Kubert's jungle looks hot and oppressive and jungley. And his Tarzan looks like he's struggled to survive while Hogarth's looks like he walked out of a photo-shoot for Jungle-man's Quarterly. Different strokes for different folks. Hogarth is a great artist...I just think his Tarzan is too clean. yeah, i can see that aspect of Hogarth's art style. Kind of reflects the times i would guess as nobody would want to see or watch what a Tarzan would really look like: long haired, dirty, unkempt, smelly, scarred, chewed on bug infested jungle lord. Probably not the most appealing comic strip for the masses (LOL) to partake of.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 18, 2016 16:19:28 GMT -5
When I said clean, I wasn't necessarily just meaning the artwork, though I was to an extent. You look at Hogarth's work and it looks like you'd walk through that jungle without getting sweaty, getting any mud on your boots or being bitten by a single mosquito. It has no weight and no grit. Kubert's jungle looks hot and oppressive and jungley. And his Tarzan looks like he's struggled to survive while Hogarth's looks like he walked out of a photo-shoot for Jungle-man's Quarterly. Different strokes for different folks. Hogarth is a great artist...I just think his Tarzan is too clean. yeah, i can see that aspect of Hogarth's art style. Kind of reflects the times i would guess as nobody would want to see or watch what a Tarzan would really look like: long haired, dirty, unkempt, smelly, scarred, chewed on bug infested jungle lord. Probably not the most appealing comic strip for the masses (LOL) to partake of. What Slam said. Hogarth's art is beautiful, no doubt, but very much in the illustrative tradition of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. His panels look like they could be color plates in a book. Stunning, but not naturalistic.
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Aug 18, 2016 19:41:17 GMT -5
When I said clean, I wasn't necessarily just meaning the artwork, though I was to an extent. You look at Hogarth's work and it looks like you'd walk through that jungle without getting sweaty, getting any mud on your boots or being bitten by a single mosquito. It has no weight and no grit. Kubert's jungle looks hot and oppressive and jungley. And his Tarzan looks like he's struggled to survive while Hogarth's looks like he walked out of a photo-shoot for Jungle-man's Quarterly. Different strokes for different folks. Hogarth is a great artist...I just think his Tarzan is too clean. yeah, i can see that aspect of Hogarth's art style. Kind of reflects the times i would guess as nobody would want to see or watch what a Tarzan would really look like: long haired, dirty, unkempt, smelly, scarred, chewed on bug infested jungle lord. Probably not the most appealing comic strip for the masses (LOL) to partake of. Actually, not long-haired. According to Burroughs, worked out how to shave and cut his hair with his father's knife, which he did in an attempt to look more like the pictures he saw in the books in his parents' hut, which were the only reference he had for someone who looked like him.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Aug 26, 2016 9:30:59 GMT -5
While I recognize his mastery, Hogarth's Tarzan is just too..."clean" for me. I think that's why I really love Kubert's Tarzan, because it was pretty gritty. Not enough grit!
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 26, 2016 10:10:28 GMT -5
yeah, i can see that aspect of Hogarth's art style. Kind of reflects the times i would guess as nobody would want to see or watch what a Tarzan would really look like: long haired, dirty, unkempt, smelly, scarred, chewed on bug infested jungle lord. Probably not the most appealing comic strip for the masses (LOL) to partake of. Actually, not long-haired. According to Burroughs, worked out how to shave and cut his hair with his father's knife, which he did in an attempt to look more like the pictures he saw in the books in his parents' hut, which were the only reference he had for someone who looked like him. This is true, but it is doubtful Tarzan would have learned how to maintain a sharpened knife or how to maintain a haircut and shave with only his reflection in water. How long would he let his hair grow out before cutting or trimming? he has to be unkempt for awhile at least? To run a knife across your skin to cut hair requires a steady hand and tolerance to pain, especially as that blade dulls.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 26, 2016 10:11:48 GMT -5
While I recognize his mastery, Hogarth's Tarzan is just too..."clean" for me. I think that's why I really love Kubert's Tarzan, because it was pretty gritty. Not enough grit! Monkey Lord see, Monkey Lord do, Monkey Lord likes to throw his poo.....at you
|
|