Top 5 Comic Creator Pariahs

Originally posted by The Bub Frank Miller's true contributions to comics aren't on the writing end.

While I agree he's an artist first, he was pretty influential in his style of writing, especially the Dark Knight returns, he really pioneered narration as a stream of the character's consciousness, prior to his work it was either third person narration through an ominiscent narrator (even stuff like Moore's Miracleman used this) or first person exposition, common in early comics. But TDR we had this very intimate glimpse into Batman's tortured psych but awesome but terrifying, bordering on psychotic, something that future comics would copy often.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say ... no.

I taught history for 6 years, so now I take great enjoyment in anything that flaunts historical accuracy as much as possible.

But in all seriousness, no it doesn't bother me when obviously non-historical works take great liberties with historical accuracy.

Edited by Anna Raven - 29-Feb-2012 at 3:35am

That was kind of my point as well, though not so eloquently put. Their armor seems like minor quibble in the face of stuff like the fact that the Spartans only held off the Persians for a day before they were reinforced by other Greek soldiers, the complete lack of phalanx fighting, the grotesquerie that was the Persian court, etc.

And yet despite it all I love 300 because its just a good rollicking fun read.

Edited by Anna Raven - 29-Feb-2012 at 5:58am

I guess, I just don't consider clothing errors to take egregious precedent over major plot alterations made to "suit" his story. And going off of what you originally said, judging him purely as an artist, I think he made a successful change in look for a stylized interpretation that complimented his art style and enhanced his narrative.

Plus it's Frank Miller, everything he does is stylized and over-the-top. It's like getting mad at Michael Bay for the inaccuracies of Pearl Harbor.

Your metaphor would be appropriate if this D-Day mini-series also had all the allies land in one mega drop boat, made all their major kills with a large Rambo knife, and they were able to scar Hitler's face during his surprise visit to the beach while cladded in a Nazi uniform made of skulls and armed with a red button that gassed Jews directly when he pushed it. And, you know, American soldiers didn't wear shirts.

Dave Sim....heh. If the list was All-Time Pariahs, he would head it I think. Cerebus is a stunning piece of comic work but you either love or hate it, there is no middle stance.

I would rank Sim in with Moore in that both creators have espoused certain views and beliefs that rankle others. I applaud them for sticking to those beliefs/views despite all the criticism but all that should be separated from the quality of their work. Is that easy to do? No, but it should still be the goal.

Bendis would top my list. I've read very little of his work that I've liked or enjoyed. And that is sampling quite a bit, from his Avengers to DD to Siege to Ultimate Spider-Man. Ult Spidey is the best I've read of him but it's far from being one of my favorite all-time Spidey stories. As far as I am concerned, Bendis destroyed the Avengers.

As for the rest on this list, I have no real problems with any of them even Liefeld. Land's art is quite acceptable, Loeb had his moments (his various mini-series with Tim Sale being among my favorites) and Miller and Moore are rightful legends. As for Liefeld, I've never really hated him. His art is still as dynamic as ever. Is he a good writer? Sometimes, but I'm willing to give him extra props for still doing so even as various publishers do now.

Although I do find it interesting that of this list, 3 are artists. Art still surpasses story I guess.

As for inaccurate rendering of hoplite tactics and Greek armor...Frank Miller is about as off the bandwagon of demanding realism in comics as you can get. He's gone on record numerous times with his naked contempt for realistic rendering and ultra-accurate draftsmanship, which he sees as the death of exciting line work. Just about every panel he's ever drawn since 1983 makes this same political statement. He also admits in interviews that after careful research, accurate renderings of armor and clothing didn't fit the romanticized visual narrative he was aiming for, so he threw out his more historically accurate designs, as the Spartans "looked too much like armored ants". You might not like comic art that strays into stylized impressionism, but you can't hold it to a standard that the art tries so hard to escape. Now if Frank was like John Byrne and never moved past his Neal Adams obsession with tight, accurate rendering, yeah, you can fault him for throwing out what he doesn't like about the late Archaic.


Good art is the key to a good comic. I look at them like movies. A great cast can carry or cause you to excuse a weak script, but if everyone in the film is horribly miscast, you don't care how compelling the plot they were trying to convey is on paper. The more the story is conveyed via art as opposed to the pasted-up prose, the better the art-and the book-is. If a good plot is all you're looking for, paperback books are a much better option.

My point wasn't that Miller's artistic vision wouldn't allow for armor, merely that including it wasn't crucial. Nor did the lack of armor invalidate his story any more than the dozen other historical inaccuracies he included. Frank Miller's Spartans were depicted as ridiculous over-the-top master fighters, much more so than their historical counterparts. So good that no matter how many Persians attacked them, be it in with greater numbers, superior armor, frighting beasts, or strange magics, the superior skill and willpower of the Sparta army overcame. Adding or subtracting armor doesn't change nor sully this key aspect of the story.

It'd be like getting mad at Captain America or Batman writers for not properly fitting them against a majority of their enemies who attack them with firearms. Who cares? It's the god damn Batman and Captain friggin America!    

Michael Ryan. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only guy who likes his stuff.

How did Joe Quesada not make this list? As editor-of-everything, he was able to do much more damage than these guys could on single stories. Although I think it is generally agreed the dude is an awesome artist.

Their Greg Land panel actually isn't too horrible for him. That scene made me hate the writer more.