Main Menu

Who Are The Creators?

Started by Funt Solo, 06 September, 2021, 05:46:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

milstar

Quote from: Richard on 07 September, 2021, 01:16:55 AM
Not really. Bolland was an iconic artist, but the appearance of the character was already very well established before he worked on the strip.

It's not "Judge Dredd: created by Pat Mills and Brian Bolland."

"Stop trying to make 'fetch' happen. Fetch is never going to happen."

Whose Dredd is more recognizable? I doubt it's Carlos'. But I give Carlos the credit as the first ancestor.

And sorry, but I think Pat Mills has to have his say. Unless he decisively cut his ties with the character. Then again, I think the question here is whose version is more impact ful in the eyes of readers. I think many will say that for modern Batman, thanks to Frank Miller.
Reyt, you lot. Shut up, belt up, 'n if ye can't see t' bloody exit, ye must be bloody blind.

IndigoPrime

Let's make this easier: Ezquerra came up with THE ENTIRE DESIGN. Without him, there's no bizarre fascistic uniform or huge bike. There's no iconic helmet. There's not even any Mega City One, since it was his image with massive 'organic' buildings that drove the change of setting. Bolland was important in ITERATING on the concept, and due to his prominence in US comics is known worldwide to a greater degree than Ezquerra. But iteration is not creation (in the sense of the original concept).

If a band does a great cover version of a song that is in some ways more memorable than the original, they still didn't write the original song.

AlexF

I wonder if we're all rather glossing over the role of editor in all this?
To stick with the Dredd/Mills example, it is relevant, I think, that he actively chose which stories to commission and run in the early Progs, and who knows quite how much rewriting he did of any given panel sequence / word balloon, all of which helps add up to the Dredd we know today (a LOT, by his own reckoning..).

Getting away from Mills (as far as possible, ideally!) I fel that current editor Matt Smith must surely have had a big hand in 'creating' a vast array of thrills from the last two decades, just not on his own. Are you a creator if you merely suggest a name and basic look of a character (in which case, Bob Kane IS the creator of Batman) - or do you have to have a hand in shaping those first stories, and giving that character some sort of actual personality (in which case, Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson have a large claim ot have at the very least co-created Batman).

If a writer sends you an outline for a story, and the editor replies to say 'yes, but what if you changed the name to xx, and put them into situation y, and gave them some sort of side kick' - and the wrtier then follows all this advice - who, then, is the creator? (i.e. do John Tomlinson and Dave Bishop deserve co-creator status on Nikolai Dante, for pushing it into a sci-fi milieu, and pushing for intorductory stories, among other things?)

Annoyingly it all actually matters, because of copyright and payment norms and all sorts.

And although I've no idea how to do it legally / fairly, I think there is a case that when a new writer/artist takes on an existing character and manages to make them way more popular/interesting, they do deserve some sort of credit that isn't miles away from 'creator' - the most notorious example being Todd McFarlane and David Michelenie on Venom, I guess. But, you know, see also Gordon Rennie on Jaegir - a full cast of 'new' characters but on a technicality part of somebody else's creation (take your pick there between G F-D, Alan Grant, Steve MacManus and Dave Gibbons...)

This I one reason why I don't totally begrudge Stan Lee's status as 'creator' of all those superheroes. Sure, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko may have had all the ideas, but have you ever read any of the comics they scripted as well as drew? Barmy as heck, and in places entertaining - but they're not a patch on the sheer exuberance and enjoyment of the comics they wrote/drew that Lee scripted. He's a damn good writer, and I submit that those creations all flourished as much because of his contributions as because they were inherently great ideas from the artists.

IndigoPrime

The problem with Stan Lee has been in the marginalisation of those he worked with. Instead of "created by Stan Lee and", things have shifted to "created by Stan Lee".

As for editors, my take would be that they help creators iterate. They can be analogous to engineers or even producers in music. A producer may transform a song, but that doesn't mean they came up with it in the first place. In short, editors are there to provide guidance (and increasingly management) and to make work better. They might even say "I'd like a series about X". But apart from in very specific circumstances, it's a stretch to call them co-creators of strips.

(It's hard to overplay the sheer importance of Matt Smith to modern-era 2000 AD. And I've no doubt he's been heavily influential in a number of strips. But I doubt he sits there thinking he should have taken co-creator credits for a bunch of series that debuted during his tenure.)

Jim_Campbell

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2021, 07:41:10 AM
Let's make this easier: Ezquerra came up with THE ENTIRE DESIGN. Without him, there's no bizarre fascistic uniform or huge bike. There's no iconic helmet. There's not even any Mega City One, since it was his image with massive 'organic' buildings that drove the change of setting.

Yeah. I think it's hard to overstate how lucky 2000AD got with Ezquerra, even though Wagner famously hated the character design when he first saw it. His wide-ranging European influences are the reason we got his utterly outlandish Mega City One, and he was canny enough to both pick up on the fascist undertones of the strip, even way back then, and to bring his experience of actually growing up in a fascist dictatorship to bear when visualising Dredd.
Stupidly Busy Letterer: Samples. | Blog
Less-Awesome-Artist: Scribbles.

sheridan

Quote from: Funt Solo on 06 September, 2021, 07:01:42 PM
Quote from: milstar on 06 September, 2021, 06:05:24 PM
Cursed Earth, which is where Dredd became the star of 2000ad and practically the character we are all familiar with has been (mostly) written by Mills.

This is an outlying reading of the situation. You'll find that most consider Wagner's detailing of Mega-City One, and his characterization of Dredd as an anti-hero as being closest to the established milieu. Conversely, Mills writes Dredd usually as hero and savior.

In terms of world-building: most folk have avoided the rather silly floating rocks that were taken from Damnation Alley (and used as a reason not to fly to Mega-City Two). I'm not sure why Mike Carroll chose to resurrect them for Desperadlands, but each to their own.

Luna-1, with its inclusion of the Sov Judges, is far more significant in terms of world-building than The Cursed Earth.


This is something I've thought about on my current prog slog - a lot of elements were introduced in the early days of Dredd, including a little of Dredd's character (though some parts definitely don't ring true with the Old Stoney Face we all know today).  Then Dredd goes off to Luna-1, then off across the Cursed Earth, then Judge Cal happens, during which Wagner is firmly ensconced as sole writer (well, including the Grant Wagner Combine - and they were bouncing ideas off each other before Grant's name made it in to the credits).  Once Cal left we got in to the true Dredd stories, with city and Judge pretty much as we know them today, citywide disasters and genuine character development notwithstanding.  So I reckon Wagner had an idea of what he wanted to do with the story and partially used The Day the Law Died to clear the decks, in the same way he'd do with The Apocalypse War and Day of Chaos.

broodblik

Lets make it again easy for everyone with an artists formula:

Dredd = (Ezquerra * 0,75) + (Bolland * 0,2) + (Other talented guys whom draw great pictures * 0,05)
When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in his car.

Old age is the Lord's way of telling us to step aside for something new. Death's in case we didn't take the hint.

credo

Quote from: milstar on 07 September, 2021, 06:34:11 AM
Whose Dredd is more recognizable?

Carlos'. It's Carlos'.

I'm pretty sure for any actual 2000ad reader, Dredd is defined by Carlos, then probably one of McMahon, Bolland or Ron Smith. Maybe McNeil or Flint. Even then, Flint and McMahon (at least initially) were clearly drawing on inspiration from Carlos.

I think Bolland is only the definitive Dredd to people who only know the dark judges.


broodblik

Quote from: broodblik on 07 September, 2021, 11:32:15 AM
Lets make it again easy for everyone with an artists formula:

Dredd = (Ezquerra * 0,75) + (Bolland * 0,2) + (Other talented guys whom draw great pictures * 0,05)

My revised formula:

Dredd = (Ezquerra * 0,75) + (Bolland * 0,1)  + (Ron smith * 0,1) + (Other talented guys whom draw great pictures * 0,05)
When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in his car.

Old age is the Lord's way of telling us to step aside for something new. Death's in case we didn't take the hint.

milstar

Quote from: credo on 07 September, 2021, 12:17:05 PM
Quote from: milstar on 07 September, 2021, 06:34:11 AM
Whose Dredd is more recognizable?

Carlos'. It's Carlos'.

I'm pretty sure for any actual 2000ad reader, Dredd is defined by Carlos, then probably one of McMahon, Bolland or Ron Smith. Maybe McNeil or Flint. Even then, Flint and McMahon (at least initially) were clearly drawing on inspiration from Carlos.

I think Bolland is only the definitive Dredd to people who only know the dark judges.

Bolland drew unforgettable jawline, for me, first Brian then everybody else.
Reyt, you lot. Shut up, belt up, 'n if ye can't see t' bloody exit, ye must be bloody blind.

milstar

Quote from: AlexF on 07 September, 2021, 08:41:09 AM
I wonder if we're all rather glossing over the role of editor in all this?
To stick with the Dredd/Mills example, it is relevant, I think, that he actively chose which stories to commission and run in the early Progs, and who knows quite how much rewriting he did of any given panel sequence / word balloon, all of which helps add up to the Dredd we know today (a LOT, by his own reckoning..).

Getting away from Mills (as far as possible, ideally!) I fel that current editor Matt Smith must surely have had a big hand in 'creating' a vast array of thrills from the last two decades, just not on his own. Are you a creator if you merely suggest a name and basic look of a character (in which case, Bob Kane IS the creator of Batman) - or do you have to have a hand in shaping those first stories, and giving that character some sort of actual personality (in which case, Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson have a large claim ot have at the very least co-created Batman).

If a writer sends you an outline for a story, and the editor replies to say 'yes, but what if you changed the name to xx, and put them into situation y, and gave them some sort of side kick' - and the wrtier then follows all this advice - who, then, is the creator? (i.e. do John Tomlinson and Dave Bishop deserve co-creator status on Nikolai Dante, for pushing it into a sci-fi milieu, and pushing for intorductory stories, among other things?)

Annoyingly it all actually matters, because of copyright and payment norms and all sorts.

And although I've no idea how to do it legally / fairly, I think there is a case that when a new writer/artist takes on an existing character and manages to make them way more popular/interesting, they do deserve some sort of credit that isn't miles away from 'creator' - the most notorious example being Todd McFarlane and David Michelenie on Venom, I guess. But, you know, see also Gordon Rennie on Jaegir - a full cast of 'new' characters but on a technicality part of somebody else's creation (take your pick there between G F-D, Alan Grant, Steve MacManus and Dave Gibbons...)

This I one reason why I don't totally begrudge Stan Lee's status as 'creator' of all those superheroes. Sure, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko may have had all the ideas, but have you ever read any of the comics they scripted as well as drew? Barmy as heck, and in places entertaining - but they're not a patch on the sheer exuberance and enjoyment of the comics they wrote/drew that Lee scripted. He's a damn good writer, and I submit that those creations all flourished as much because of his contributions as because they were inherently great ideas from the artists.

Keep in mind that Wagner returned to the character I think after ten issues (starting with Robot Wars).

I like to think as creator as someone who had input on the character, but necessarily was the writer. In Batman's case, Bill Finger was properly robbed off by Bob Kane for years. At least from the perspective that first writer and artist receive the credit. And both had no one to edit their stories significantly or to put some input on the character.

In Stan's case..."Everyone can have an idea" - which is what allegedly Ditko told Stan. Marvel then was using their own method (synopsis, art, dialogue) so I agree with Ditko there. And I must say, Ditko's The Question and Kirby's Mr. Miracle are not bad at all. And spared by all the gimmickry that Stan did in his stories.
Reyt, you lot. Shut up, belt up, 'n if ye can't see t' bloody exit, ye must be bloody blind.

O Lucky Stevie!

John & Carlos created Judge Dredd.

Pat & Mick created Rico, then with Brian they created the Cursed Earth.

Simples.
"We'll send all these nasty words to Aunt Jane. Don't you think that would be fun?"

AlexF

But who created Mega City 1? Certainly Carlos was involved - but beyond that?
And who created the idea of 'Judge, Jury and Executioner'? Was that in Wagner's original pitch, or was that a bit of Mills magic?

Jim_Campbell

What I find more than a little confusing in all this is Mills' insistence on identifying Gerry Finley-Day as primary creator of Rogue Trooper (to the extent of labelling all other Rogue and Rogue-world series an affront to GFD's rights as creator) when Rogue is easily as much a 'house character' as Dredd.

Rogue's creation is pretty well-documented, in as much as GFD's initial pitch was deemed basically unusable, and the whole thing was thrashed out in a meeting between GFD, Gibbons and Steve Mac during which pretty much all of GFD's ideas went out of the window and the strip that finally appeared bore little resemblence to the one he had pitched.

If Steve Mac's editorial input into the strip's 'development' doesn't invalidate GFD's right to be considered as a primary creator alongside Dave,* then why does Pat's input (whatever it actually was) as 2000AD's editor invalidate John's right to be identified as the primary co-creator of Dredd?

*See also the perennial point about Pat's rage over writers other than the originator working on a series, but apparent indifference to replacing artists.
Stupidly Busy Letterer: Samples. | Blog
Less-Awesome-Artist: Scribbles.

Will Cooling

I think this whole argument is a little silly.

You know who decided that John Wagner would be the only writer created as the co-creator of Judge Dredd? Pat Mills, when he was the editor of 2000AD. It's a shame he's walked back from the strong adherence to the belief that the writer and artist who create the concept are the creators. I'm sure he would freak if his successors in the editor's chair got listed as co-creators on A.B.C Warriors or Slaine.

On the surface Mills has a somewhat valid argument for a "further developed by..." given the key role he played as editor in nailing the wider of context of Dredd down. But I think in reality you see that these contributions are more him siding with Ezquerra; Yes he overruled Wagner's objections to Dredd's costume but he didn't come up with it. Yes he came up with the name Mega Ciy One and moved the date of the series further into the future, but that was simply him responding Ezquerra's city landsapes. These were great moves, but they're not really acts of creation as Mills was never the one pushing for the series to go in a more futuristic direction, just responding to what one of the co-creators wanted to do.

And I think that's the key argument against listing Mills as a co-creator. It doesn't take anything away from Wagner - nothing changes the fact that it was Wagner came up with the idea of a Dirty Harry satire where a super-cop had the power to unleash instant justice. What listing Mills as co-creator does is give him undue credit for what is actually the influence that Ezquerra had on the development of the character i.e. move it into the future, lean into fascist imagery.

Incidentally I do think the arguments over Rico are a bit misleading, as someone who fell for these myself when I first read the Mega-History. Rico really wasn't that major a character in the character's history, until Wagner really started emphasising the idea of a Dredd lineage with the stories that followed Blood Cadets. Even Kraken was more about his brainwashing by the Judda than the idea that the Fargo bloodline was corrupted. The key thing that the stories Wagner has gotten from Rico this century, is that the idea that only he can add useful things to the mythos is wrong. But that doesn't make Mills a co-creator of Dredd.
Formerly WIll@The Nexus