Legion World Forums LEGION CLUBHOUSE The Legion of Super-Heroes Giffen is doing LSH Annual!!!

Okay, so doesn't that make him responsible for the art in that issue? Which was crap, imho.

I don't care for the Legacies cover, but I wouldn't describe it as horrible. I've seen worse.

The awfulness of Timber Wolf and Saturn Girl have distracted me every time I've looked at that cover in the past... but now that you mention it - Cosmic Boy and Lightning Lad don't look too bad really. And I can definitely see there's an homage to earlier artists going on there.

I absolutely agree Chief and if you read my comments I always reiterate that my views only reflect my tastes but I appreciate that others have different views. What I object to is that there are people on this board that support Giffen and have desribed me and others as 'wrong', 'insulting' and various other absolutes.

I have an opinion. They have an opinion. Neither is absolute but I feel - and I accept it is a perception - that when someone criticises Giffen they are accused of absoluteism but someone praising Giffen can say what they like.

I have said many times that I believe Giffen's art around the GDS was some of the best in Legion history but when that is compared with the 5YL art it is chalk and cheese and to me the 5YL art is poor. The 5YL art does not tell the story well IMHO. it was regularyly difficult to tell what was happening and who was whom. Some may feel that added to the overall product but in my opinion it greatly detracted from the storytelling. I always accept that this is my opinion but I am neither wrong nor insulting for having it or stating it.

Since judging the quality of anyone's artwork is about 99% subjective, I think we can and should all just infer that an IMHO is intended when any such judgments are made.

IMHO, of course.

Thanks for the thoughtful response SAL!

I'm gonna go ahead and concede that I may have overreacted to the original post by Future King. Looking back on it, I think that the wording was not as harsh as I originally thought it was. I see he edited it at some point, but I'll assume his edit didn't really change anything in such a way as to alter what he said.

I think I may have been overly sensitive, especially since I don't see what's so horrible about the Legacies cover like so many others. Also, together and seperately, Levitz and Giffen have produced my absolute favorite Legion stories, the ones that made me into such a hardcore fan. The era that began when Paul returned to the Legion as regular writer in the 280s of Volume 2 all the way through Zero Hour is "my" Legion, even with some rough patches here and there (particularly the last year of Volume Three and that last year leading up to Zero Hour).

I greatly respect what Giffen did with and without Levitz during that long time frame. So it hurts when someone refers to his art as "hideous" or even when only the pre-Omen & Prophet stuff is revered. In my mind LSH Vol. 4, issues 1-38/TMK may be the most perfect and definitive set of comics out of that whole Levitz/Giffen era.

Still, I'm not immune to Giffen criticism. He's done lots of projects over the years, writing and artwise, that have just caused me to scratch my head. Among those are certainly those really out-there costume redesigns he did at the end of Levitz's run on Volume Three. I personally thought and still think that most, if not all of those, are among the ugliest costumes I've ever seen!

I commented elsewhere that I've been guilty of similar creator-bashing at times, particularly with easy targets like Rob Liefeld and Judd Winick who always seem fashionable to lambast.

But this being a Legion-centric board, there are certain creators who've had definitive influences on the Legion. No matter where in the spectrum you fall, there's no denying Giffen is one of those. So, of course, when one of those is as controversial as Giffen is (possibly THE most controversial Legion creator?), things may get heated and words phrased or taken in such a way as to offend somebody somewhere.

In this case I went a little too far, though I do think the tone of my responses never went into uncivil territory.I think we all need to keep in mind that when a subject as sensitive as Giffen comes up here, being a little more well-rounded and speaking less in absolutes is always a good idea.

But just for the record: I like the Legacies cover pretty well and damn well look forward to the Annual whenever it comes out!

Ok, my take:

1) Cover of Legacies: It should be pointed out that it's a Giffen-Milgrom job, and Milgrom does reduce Giffen's art to a more basic line, as compared to Al Gordon, for instance. Also, there is a huge chance Giffen was doing a Cockrun homage. So it's all good to me in that respect.
2) Art CAN be discussed, it's not always a matter of taste. Sure, I can prefer Giffen's blocky art to any Jim Lee (and I do), however, there is no point in denying that Jim Lee is a helluva artist. He KNOWS art. He knows proportions, he understands pacing, storytelling and drama. When I say Kevin Sharpe is a bad artist, it is not personal or about taste: he really has a lot to catch up on BASICS.
3) When SILVER AGE LAD says Giffen's art during 5YL was poor, it doesn't make sense: you can say it is complicated, artsy, but POOR. Each page was very meticulously worked on. It WAS complicated (and I agree), but it was always DELIBERATE. There is not a poor issue of 5YL - it is undeniable that Giffen worked like hell on it, there was always a LOT going on. In fact, each issue packs a year or more of Geoff Johns' writing. Again: people may not like the style or the tone (agreed) but to call it poor or 'bad art' is just wrong.

Sorry Ricardo but I am not wrong. I have an opinion which you may not agree with but that doesn't make you right and me wrong. For me the artwork during 5YL greatly detracted from some very good storylines. Comic art is supposed to tell a story - if it does not then it is poor IMHO.

Again IMHO, complicated and deliberate do not = good, they = complicated and deliberate, which can be good, bad or indifferent dependining on context. Just because Giffen is a capable artist - which he undoubtedly is - does not mean that anything he does is good, surely? Artist like the rest of us get lazy, have rushed deadlines or have bad periods. IMHO 5YL was a bad period. You may disagree and that is what free thinking is all about. Neither of us are 'right' or 'wrong' we simply have differing opinions.

KG's 5YL art did tell a story, and told it well - it was not poor art, even if it was to your disliking, SA Lad.

You of course are free to dislike it. But any shortfall was/is not inherently in the art itself, merely in the interpretation/aesthetic of anyone who does not like it.

I'm not really sure why you guys are arguing about whether someone can call someone's art poor or not.

It's their opinion. It's not like anyone is saying "Nightcrawler is an asshole." They are saying "Nightcrawler's art is poor." Which is a valid opinion.

You guys need to chill out a bit here. Please.

Now, with that said...would you guys who aren't fans of Giffen's art be this open with your opinions like this if Giffen were a member here?

She was in the reboot but as a little girl or the same age she was when she was first introduced in the legion. Re-read that issue with Both Invisible Kid's fighting on the cover with Charma being the cause...you'll see Danielle.

As I recall in v3, Brainy removes the Computo matrix from Danielle, which thus allows him to turn Computo into the majordomo for LSH HQ. I can't remember if we actually see her in any of the issues where Jacques is shown visiting his family, however.

i'd love to see Danielle (Computo) in the Legion Academy, along with Dragonmage, Catspaw, Kintetix, Monstress, Kid Quantum, etc.

I admit to being a slavish Giff-fan as many know, however I do feel I could state to Keith that I disliked his 'abstract squiggles Trencher period' and that he would probably (hopefully!) take it in good humour...

I'd probably be all passive-aggressive about it and only mention how much I liked the Great Darkness Saga era artwork, and then just diplomatically avoid mentioning further.

Then again, I did totally get called out by Francis Manapul after stating that I thought his first few issues of the Legion were gorgeous, and that the quality dropped off sharply soon after, making me think that having a few months of lead-time to polish things gave a strong initial impression that he couldn't keep up with, so, yeah, sometimes I'll shoot my mouth off without checking if someone's a member...

I think it's notable that Manapul's style on ADVENTURE and FLASH is very different from his style on LSH.

[snip]

Who knows? Maybe he'd be glad that people are fired up about it, so long as they're not indifferent.

I am not a slavish Giffen-fan. I did like his Legion art when he was doing it for Paul Levitz. It was truly amazing stuff. I did not like his art for the 5YL period. I agree with Silver Age Lad in stating that I think his art in that period was poor. Obviously those that liked his art from that period would not think that it is poor.

I would have written the above even if Mr. Giffen was a member here. As a comic book professional, he should know that there are some who won't like his work and think that he is a poor artist. Who knows, he might even look back at his art from that period and muse "What was I thinking?" or he might think "This is the best I've ever done" or something in between.

Seriously, I think the Giff would be cool with honest criticisms... I'd LOVE to see him here one day...!

I do think above all else he is a LSH fan.

He needs to have me run a Facebook Page for him!!!

my point was: is art itself poor merely because the viewer doesn't like it?

people are saying "the art is poor" rather than "I found the art poor."

little difference, perhaps - but I would suggest the latter is less likely to tick off people of a different opinion, while the former can be read as if the poster is asserting "that's the way it is, period."

If you follow him at DC boards, he is probably the most humble artist you can find. There is a guy who absolutely loathes everything he does with Doom Patrol and Giffen loves to have him around (really!).
So, yeah, I am quite sure he might be reading what we are writing here (then, maybe, he only writes/reads Legion forum at the DC board) and I wouldn't change a line. Even though I like the more streamlined artwork of recent Booster Gold and Mad Hatter one-shot, for me, his peak was during 5YL.

Exactly. Finding the art poor = opinion. The art is poor = statement based on laws of aesthetics. That's just what I was talking about.
Obviously, just because the art is complicated/busy doesn't mean it is good. But I would never consider Bill Sienkewicz art as bad just because it is complicated, for instance. It's undeniable he masters composition, tracing etc. It may not be to one's taste? Definitely. So, Nightcrawler, I really wasn't trying to tick anyone off, just stating there is a huge difference between liking something and commanding of art.

KG is my baby daddy.

I'm glad there was no internet around when I was young and first discovered Bill Sienkewicz's art, otherwise I would now be really embarrassed to read the things I would have written about someone who is one of my favourite artists today.

Except Silver Age Lad gave reasons beyond "I didn't like it" for why he thought the art was poor. Specifically, "The 5YL art does not tell the story well IMHO. it was regularyly difficult to tell what was happening and who was whom." and "For me the artwork during 5YL greatly detracted from some very good storylines. Comic art is supposed to tell a story - if it does not then it is poor IMHO." And note that SAL phrases this as his opinion. "IMHO" & "for me".

Even still, would it be fair to say that you don't find the art to be poor, mostly because you like it?

You maybe ticked off because it is being said "the art is poor" rather than "I found the art poor", but in the same way when it is said "the art wasn't poor" instead of "I didn't find the art poor" it will tick people off. And in a way, saying "the art wasn't poor" to someone who just said "the art was poor IMHO" is to discount/invalidate their opinion.