|
|
Post by Rob Allen on May 15, 2015 17:24:50 GMT -5
Does anyone have scans of Hulk #1?
It's relatively clear in some of the captions and dialogue that the name "Hulk" was added later, pasted over what was originally there.
Historian and writer Will Murray conjectures in a recent post that the original name was "Man-Monster".
Does that sound (and look) plausible?
|
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on May 15, 2015 19:23:03 GMT -5
I'm on that email listserv too. In Will's email to the group yesterday, he stated that "there are clues all over the book", so I pulled out my "Fantastic Firsts" tpb and re-read Hulk #1, taking particular note of repeated terms/descriptions. The ones that immediately jumped out at me were "man " and "monster." Specifically I noticed: 1) "Man" and "Monster" are prominently displayed on the cover. 2) The opening splash states the Hulk is "half-man, half-monster." 3) A caption on page 6 describes the gamma-ray changed Banner as "the man-monster." 4) On page 13, Banner has a dialogue balloon that has a conspicuous empty space before the word "monster"...so it looks like a word was erased, possibly "man." 5) Finally, the last couple of pages of the story focus on the Gargoyle repeatedly saying he doesn't want to remain a "monster" and wants to become a "man" again. Based on the above observations, when I responded to the list yesterday I posited that "Man-Monster" was the name Will was thinking of (and it was). IMHO "Man-Monster" seems unwieldy for the name of an ongoing protagonist. Perhaps it was always intended as a placeholder until Lee could settle on the perfect name. Note, in Hulk #1 the changed Banner is frequently referred to as a "thing" but obviously that name was already being used.  There's also a reference to the transformed Banner as a "hulking thing", so perhaps when Lee gave the story a final readthrough he realized a punchier, more succinct name like the "Hulk" would be a better fit. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2015 19:31:51 GMT -5
Here's some scans that I've foundBelow see pages 1, 4, and 5 from The Incredible Hulk# 1, (May 1962), art by Jack Kirby and Paul Reinman.    In this panel above you - in the Center Square his identity was revealed as Dr. Bruce Banner.  These panels shows the birth of the Hulk - the original Hulk was "Grey" ... not "Green"
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on May 15, 2015 20:46:40 GMT -5
Does anyone have scans of Hulk #1? It's relatively clear in some of the captions and dialogue that the name "Hulk" was added later, pasted over what was originally there. Historian and writer Will Murray conjectures in a recent post that the original name was "Man-Monster". Does that sound (and look) plausible? Yes and no. I just went over the whole book. Out of the 39 word balloons and captions in which the phrases "The Hulk" or "Hulk" appear, 36 do not have enough space to accommodate the proposed "Man-Monster" name. The remaining three, all captions, have room but the lettering is consistent with its surroundings and does not look pasted on. If Will is arguing that the character was named "Man-Monster" in the planning stages, he could be right, but if so, the evidence says the name change happened before the first issue was lettered. Cei-U! I summon the big pink killjoy! |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on May 15, 2015 21:01:46 GMT -5
Prior to its use in the MU, the word "hulk" often designated a ship that was afloat but not sea-worthy. "Dead in the water" is as good a description as any. I've read that Stan was chided at the time for his choice to christen the character thus, and after six issues it seemed to live up to the name.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on May 17, 2015 1:36:52 GMT -5
Off-topic, but I consider those two panels that show Banner caught in the blast of the bomb going off to be two of the greatest panels in the history of comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 17, 2015 4:01:48 GMT -5
You know, I've seen some of those panels out of context before, but I've never actually read that whole sequence. What strikes me is that I don't really get a Kirby vibe off of it, but a Ditko one. (Well, the second row of panels on the second page does have a Kirby-esque face, I guess.) If I didn't know it was Kirby, I never would have guessed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on May 17, 2015 17:09:20 GMT -5
Yes and no. I just went over the whole book. Out of the 39 word balloons and captions in which the phrases "The Hulk" or "Hulk" appear, 36 do not have enough space to accommodate the proposed "Man-Monster" name. The remaining three, all captions, have room but the lettering is consistent with its surroundings and does not look pasted on. If Will is arguing that the character was named "Man-Monster" in the planning stages, he could be right, but if so, the evidence says the name change happened before the first issue was lettered. Cei-U! I summon the big pink killjoy! Kurt, I'd like to send your reply to Will & the list if it's OK with you. Here's Will's summary of his case: Someone else then responded: Will agrees that it was and they speculate that the original name was shorter and started with 'R', perhaps "Roe", since Stan liked alliterative names. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on May 17, 2015 22:04:49 GMT -5
I wish I could post scans of the panels but my copy is from the CD collection that came out a few years back and it's not set up to extract individual pages or panels, so you're gonna have to trust me on the following:
Page 7. The "hulking thing" phrase shows no sign of being relettered or pasted over, save for some slight smudging around the "g". The lettering is identical in form and spacing to the rest of the caption.
Page 8. "The Hulk" appears six times, twice in panel 1, twice in panel 2, once in panel 3 and once in panel 4. In all but the third panel, there is simply no room in the word balloons for it ever to have said "Man-Monster."
Page 13. Neither word balloon cited shows "extra space," at least no more so than dozens of others throughout the book.
Page 18. Again, there is no room in either "questionable" use of "The Hulk" to accommodate a name as long as "Man-Monster," not without seriously crowding the right-hand panel border.
According to the GCD, the first 11 pages are lettered by Ray Holloway, Artie Simek lettering the balance (plus the display lettering on the earlier pages), which suggests Murray is right about the origin sequence being done some time prior to the second half of the book. Perhaps they originally intended this story to run in two consecutive issues of one of the anthology titles? At any rate, Holloway's lettering is, frankly, not very good, and it may be his sloppiness and inconsistency, especially compared to Simek's work, that is misleading Will. I only know him by reputation but I can't help thinking he has misinterpreted what he's seeing in this issue to support his theory. (Starting with your conclusion then seeking evidence to support it rather than drawing your conclusion from the evidence is a common failing among many well-meaning researchers. I've fallen prey to the temptation a time or two myself.) And honestly, I can't imagine Stan (or, more importantly, Martin Goodman) going with a name as clumsy and uneuphonious (is that a word?) as "Man-Monster" for what they hoped would be their follow-up to the hit Fantastic Four title.
All in my opinion, natch.
Cei-U!
I summon the counter-argument!
Added 5/18/15: By the way, Rob, of course you can share this with the group but you might omit my implied criticism of Will Murray. No sense in pointlessly pissing off a fellow historia over a minor difference of pinion, after all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on May 18, 2015 4:17:35 GMT -5
You know, I've seen some of those panels out of context before, but I've never actually read that whole sequence. What strikes me is that I don't really get a Kirby vibe off of it, but a Ditko one. (Well, the second row of panels on the second page does have a Kirby-esque face, I guess.) If I didn't know it was Kirby, I never would have guessed. It's not just you. |
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on May 18, 2015 9:30:59 GMT -5
Here's Will's summary of his case: ... ... I think Will needs to take a second look at this panel. He has extracted "the hulk which is still Bruce Banner", arguing that it's being used as a descriptor (presumably in the sense that we might use a phrase like "the wreck of a man who was once noted surgeon Stephen Strange"). But look at the phrase in its full context: "Driven by sheer instinct the part of the Hulk which is still Bruce Banner heads for a small cottage, smashing all obstacles in his path!" (emphasis mine). It's the "part" that's heading for the cottage, not the "hulk which is still Bruce Banner" heading for the cottage. With this reading, it's pretty clear to me that "hulk" here is not a "descriptor". Stan is saying Bruce Banner is still a part of the Hulk. And I'm not seeing the "clumsily relettered" 'Hulks' in the other five instances on page 8. The first occurrence looks a little sloppy, but it's in bold, and almost every bold word on those first eleven pages is pretty sloppy. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on May 18, 2015 14:29:41 GMT -5
OK, I've sent an edited version of your rebuttal to the list.
I don't think Will started with the "Man-Monster" name; he says he has suspected for a long time that the name had been re-lettered on some of the earliest pages and has been trying for years to find out or figure out what it had originally been. "Man-Monster" was his latest theory.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 18, 2015 18:07:09 GMT -5
I have it on good authority that the Hulk's original name was intended to be "Big Mike." Please don't ask me to reveal my sources.
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 19, 2015 1:59:29 GMT -5
I have it on good authority that the Hulk's original name was intended to be "Big Mike." Please don't ask me to reveal my sources. Obviously, they was sippin' siiiiiiiiirrrrruuuuppppp! |
|
There's also a reference to the transformed Banner as a "hulking thing", so perhaps when Lee gave the story a final readthrough he realized a punchier, more succinct name like the "Hulk" would be a better fit.
