|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2016 8:00:35 GMT -5
I only selected Miller/Janson, but I'd have also gone for Miller/Mazzucchelli had that option been there for my second vote... or Miller and anybody actually, as Frank Miller pretty much defined the classic Daredevil that we know and love.
|
|
|
|
Post by String on Dec 27, 2016 11:09:16 GMT -5
Seems like Miller and Jansen have to come out as winners by the very nature of how the poll is set up. It assumes that nothing worth mentioning came before Miller/Jansen and, thus, they are the team that made Daredevil what he is. Anyone who disagrees doesn't have a voice in the poll. Not saying I necessarily disagree. I haven't read enough Daredevil. Just seems the very question is skewed. While I see your point, I disagree. You cannot underestimate Miller's influence on Daredevil. For all intents and purposes, he solidified the focus and appeal of the character in ways no other previous creators did. His template for the character became the popular perception among fans and rose the character from the B-list into the mainstream light. That's not saying the work that came before Miller wasn't any good. My understanding though, is that, even with Lee, finding the right focus for the character to keep the title selling was difficult. I've read plenty of arguments where DD is often lauded early on as 'the poor man's Spider-Man'. Lee's workload at that time may have helped contribute to what is seen by some as his inability to give proper creative attention to the character (which in turn may account for DD's weak early rogues gallery). Thankfully, Gene Colan was able to grant the character a defining look that helped contribute to ongoing sales but still, the problem with focus continued. It wasn't until Miller's blending of noir, tragedy, and mysticism that fans found something hugely appealing. In fact, I would offer that Miller had such an impact and influence on the character, that IMO only two other creators had have similar effects to such appeal: Claremont on X-Men and Simonson on Thor. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 27, 2016 11:13:12 GMT -5
Seems like Miller and Jansen have to come out as winners by the very nature of how the poll is set up. It assumes that nothing worth mentioning came before Miller/Jansen and, thus, they are the team that made Daredevil what he is. Anyone who disagrees doesn't have a voice in the poll. Not saying I necessarily disagree. I haven't read enough Daredevil. Just seems the very question is skewed. While I see your point, I disagree. You cannot underestimate Miller's influence on Daredevil. For all intents and purposes, he solidified the focus and appeal of the character in ways no other previous creators did. His template for the character became the popular perception among fans and rose the character from the B-list into the mainstream light. That's not saying the work that came before Miller wasn't any good. My understanding though, is that, even with Lee, finding the right focus for the character to keep the title selling was difficult. I've read plenty of arguments where DD is often lauded early on as 'the poor man's Spider-Man'. Lee's workload at that time may have helped contribute to what is seen by some as his inability to give proper creative attention to the character (which in turn may account for DD's weak early rogues gallery). Thankfully, Gene Colan was able to grant the character a defining look that helped contribute to ongoing sales but still, the problem with focus continued. It wasn't until Miller's blending of noir, tragedy, and mysticism that fans found something hugely appealing. In fact, I would offer that Miller had such an impact and influence on the character, that IMO only two other creators had have similar effects to such appeal: Claremont on X-Men and Simonson on Thor. I'm not disputing the importance of Miller on Daredevil. This would make for a great Miller Daredevil Appreciation Thread. My concern raised is over the inherant bias of a poll that is presented as if it is being objective. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 27, 2016 11:49:47 GMT -5
The only runs on here that I've read are Miller-Jansen and the first trade of Waid-Sammee. So that narrows the ones I can vote for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 27, 2016 13:10:28 GMT -5
My concern raised is over the inherant bias of a poll that is presented as if it is being objective. What makes you think it is an "objective" poll? I only said: I've ignored pre-Miller DD and focused on long runs (at least a year). I hope I didn't overlook any. Did I (overlook any)? I only meant for it to be comprehensive, given those obviously subjective boundaries. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 27, 2016 14:26:24 GMT -5
My concern raised is over the inherant bias of a poll that is presented as if it is being objective. What makes you think it is an "objective" poll? I only said: I've ignored pre-Miller DD and focused on long runs (at least a year). I hope I didn't overlook any. Did I (overlook any)? I only meant for it to be comprehensive, given those obviously subjective boundaries. What is the point of a poll that isn't objective? Why ask if you've already decided the answer and are trying to steer people towards it? Don't mean to derail this thread. I just don't get it. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 27, 2016 17:48:26 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure Lee/Colan lasted more than a year, yet it's not listed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Dec 27, 2016 18:26:50 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure Lee/Colan lasted more than a year, yet it's not listed. The OP didn't like them so he's not letting anyone vote for them |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 27, 2016 19:17:46 GMT -5
Miller/Janson is the only one I've read of those listed. I would vote for the Lee/Colan, personally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 28, 2016 8:23:06 GMT -5
What makes you think it is an "objective" poll? I only said: Did I (overlook any)? I only meant for it to be comprehensive, given those obviously subjective boundaries. What is the point of a poll that isn't objective? Why ask if you've already decided the answer and are trying to steer people towards it? I still don't know what an "objective" poll would look like. And BTW, my favourite DD creative team, isn't even among the answers (so much for that theory). I'm pretty sure Lee/Colan lasted more than a year, yet it's not listed. The OP didn't like them so he's not letting anyone vote for them The tyrant! |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 28, 2016 8:38:52 GMT -5
I still don't know what an "objective" poll would look like. And BTW, my favourite DD creative team, isn't even among the answers (so much for that theory). An objective poll would allow participants to choose any answer. While it couldn't include every team ever, it would make an effort to represent all major creative teams and include an "other" option so that it is minimizing favoring some answers over others. Any poll that eliminates options based upon the member's whims is a logical fallacy--as if to say "I want to know what you like (so long as it affirms what I think you should like)". |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 28, 2016 9:48:45 GMT -5
I didn't vote in the poll since I've read only one of the choices and thus can't make a comparison with the others, but I don't mind the idea of limiting it to Miller-Janson and afterwards: Miller really made Daredevil a new character and it's that version that seems to have been written by everyone else since. I prefer the earlier, Stan Lee version that lasted more or less right up to just before Miller took over the writing and added the hard-boiled detective trappings, plus the Catholic guilt and all that. I like the Miller version as well, but you could argue that it's a separate thing of its own.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 28, 2016 10:05:25 GMT -5
An objective poll would allow participants to choose any answer. That would make it more comprehensive, not more "objective". While it couldn't include every team ever, it would make an effort to represent all major creative teams and include an "other" option so that it is minimizing favoring some answers over others. It could include every team ever, it'd just be a lot of work. The "other" option, isn't a satisfactory workaround. Any poll that eliminates options based upon the member's whims is a logical fallacy--as if to say "I want to know what you like (so long as it affirms what I think you should like)". Every poll esteems from a desire to see a question answered, call it a whim, if you like. I fail to see the "logical fallacy" in asking "which one do you like more, among those from a particular time period?" There's obviously a preference for said time period, hence the limitation. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 28, 2016 14:15:37 GMT -5
An objective poll would allow participants to choose any answer. That would make it more comprehensive, not more "objective" I thoroughly disagree, but you're entitled to believe whatever you like, Oz. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 28, 2016 14:54:09 GMT -5
That would make it more comprehensive, not more "objective" I thoroughly disagree, but you're entitled to believe whatever you like, Oz. It's not my native language, but the meaning of "objective" seems to be the same as in Spanish: I could be misrepresenting a fact, had I asked the question: What are your top 3 creative teams of all time? Or something along those lines, but I didn't. At the same time, I was making it crystal clear, in the very first post, that I was leaving out earlier or short-lived creative teams, for no particular reason. There's no misrepresentation, unless you infer what I wasn't implying. |
|
