shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on May 5, 2017 4:50:24 GMT -5
He was right. It did. To be precise, it was a story in which CB lost his powers and left the team. He wasn't seen again for a year and a half... Ouch. That's just not right.
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on May 5, 2017 17:21:13 GMT -5
Instead of a letters page, Doctor Strange #13 had a text page by Steve Englehart in which he stated Frank Brunner would return to alternate as artist with Gene Colan. Six issues later, Englehart had quit Marvel, Colan was off Doctor Strange, and Brunner did not return as artist, although he did later draw covers to #28-30 & 33. link
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 5, 2017 23:40:27 GMT -5
Instead of a letters page, Doctor Strange #13 had a text page by Steve Englehart in which he stated Frank Brunner would return to alternate as artist with Gene Colan. Six issues later, Englehart had quit Marvel, Colan was off Doctor Strange, and Brunner did not return as artist, although he did later draw covers to #28-30 & 33. linkThat would have so good - though more than a little strange, two such different styles alternating from issue to issue. I think it would have been cool if Englehart had decided to do two completely different story-lines for them - though maddening at the same time, probably! Englehart's Avengers and Doctor Strange are two of the most regrettably interrupted runs in comics, for me. Wish he could have continued for another 100 issues or so on each.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on May 7, 2017 8:11:24 GMT -5
In Ghost Rider #19, two readers...Larry Twiss and Giles Dyer...both complain about Marvel's use of Satan in the comic, and Marvel's response to both letters is to assure the readers that this is being addressed. Satan, they claim, will no longer appear in the book as they have decided it is not their place to meddle with religion, which they appreciate is a very personal thing. They are sure that Giles and Larry will now be appreciating the horny red dude's absence from the book. This is the cover of the issue in question...
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on May 7, 2017 8:41:54 GMT -5
In Ghost Rider #19, two readers...Larry Twiss and Giles Dyer...both complain about Marvel's use of Satan in the comic, and Marvel's response to both letters is to assure the readers that this is being addressed. Satan, they claim, will no longer appear in the book as they have decided it is not their place to meddle with religion, which they appreciate is a very personal thing. They are sure that Giles and Larry will now be appreciating the horny red dude's absence from the book. This is the cover of the issue in question...
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on May 7, 2017 9:03:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 8, 2017 13:02:22 GMT -5
In Ghost Rider #19, two readers...Larry Twiss and Giles Dyer...both complain about Marvel's use of Satan in the comic, and Marvel's response to both letters is to assure the readers that this is being addressed. Satan, they claim, will no longer appear in the book as they have decided it is not their place to meddle with religion, which they appreciate is a very personal thing. They are sure that Giles and Larry will now be appreciating the horny red dude's absence from the book. This is the cover of the issue in question... Maybe that issue was already in production and they didn't want to toss it? I know that later Marvel's company line would be that it was never the "real" Satan, but another high ranking demon using the name, or something like that. It always seemed like a cop-out to me, and one that didn't make much sense.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 8, 2017 13:26:59 GMT -5
Maybe that issue was already in production and they didn't want to toss it? I would suspect that's it; I'm sure the story in that comic was produced a good while before its letter page. As a reader, had I noticed the discrepancy, I would have assumed that "from now on" Satan won't appear in this book anymore. A complete, complete cop-out that emasculated Ghost Rider, Son of Satan, Satana and to some extent Dracula. Those horror books were born during the supernatural fad of the era, with films like The omen, the exorcist, Rosemary's baby et al. They all featured chilling tales based on the Judaeo-Christian version of God, of Satan, of Heaven and Hell, and of how Satan is constantly trying to get our poor mortal souls. They're also works of fiction, and never pretend otherwise. One of my good friends in the early '80s was a Catholic priest. And he loved "devil" movies! They were fiction, so he didn't mind at all that his religion was used (and often MISused) as a prop, so long as the story was fun! I recall asking him how to fight vampires according to the Catholic church (the real-world one, not the one from the movies). His answer? "Vampires don't exist!" -I really loved that answer. In the pages of Ghost Rider, Johnny Blaze sells his soul to Satan to save the life of someone he cares for... and as happens in this type of story, he gets bamboozled, the person he saved dies anyway for another reason, and the poor fellow ends up damned and cursed to ride the night as the Ghost Rider. What a great origin story! Also one that really loses steam when you reveal that Satan is actually just a bad guy from another dimension. (Mephisto, in this case, I believe). Later, Johnny is rescued by a bloke who tells him not to despair; that guy really looks like Jesus, although he's not named. And that's perfect! That's exactly what Jesus would do if he were a comic-book character, but just to avoid offending anyone, he's not actually identified and is unlikely to make too many return appearances anyway. Why retcon that story? To anyone who wants the mysterious saviour be Jesus, it can be. To those who don't want him to be, he doesn't have to. As for Satan, hey... It's a comic-book Satan! Having him appear in comics is not a religious statement; it's a plot element. Just as having ghosts is not a religious statement, or having Asgard actually exist is not a religious statement. Marvel really dropped the ball on this one!
|
|
shiryu
Junior Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by shiryu on May 9, 2017 17:13:55 GMT -5
Interesting. There are a few Thor stories (vy Doug Moench IIRC) from the late '80s addressing religion and Marvel always seems very respectful, much more so than when gods from other mythological pantheons are involved. Thor even mentions a power "even higher than allfather Odin" once or twice, when asked about God in the Christian sense. And didn't both Ben Grimm and Nightcrawler die and go to Heaven in more recent stories from the last 10-15 years?
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 10, 2017 0:12:42 GMT -5
I can't read the title of this thread without hearing it sung along to that "These are People that Died" song.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 10, 2017 5:47:31 GMT -5
Interesting. There are a few Thor stories (vy Doug Moench IIRC) from the late '80s addressing religion and Marvel always seems very respectful, much more so than when gods from other mythological pantheons are involved. Thor even mentions a power "even higher than allfather Odin" once or twice, when asked about God in the Christian sense. And didn't both Ben Grimm and Nightcrawler die and go to Heaven in more recent stories from the last 10-15 years? Yes, although for Ben Grimm we got a very meta-treatment of the afterlife... he met his creator, who was Jack Kirby! I don't know what happened to Kurt (didn't read those issues) but I suspect he went down the road of "Marvel characters go to the afterlife they believe in". Above the Asgardian gods are "Those who sit above in shadow", but they're not the top of the mountain yet... I'm pretty sure Eternity and the Living Tribunal would have precedence over them in the grand order of things. In the recent Thanos hardcover trilogy, we met a character who was above all the other gods of the Marvel multiverse, above all realities, thus trumping any other cosmic power. But even that one didn't strike me as being "God". Thor annual #10 had a nice explanation for the existence of the "mythological" god that allowed Marvel not to insult anyone, religion-wise. Itbwas explained that when on life-bearing worlds, there is a certain substance (simply called "god stuff") that gets shaped by the dreams and beliefs of living beings, and that out of this god stuff Olympians, Asgardians and all other classical gods are formed. That means we can have, as in some issues of Thor, a character who is called Indra and has all the attributes of that god, without him being the "real" Indra. A cop-out, to be sure, but a clever and elegant one.
|
|
shiryu
Junior Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by shiryu on May 10, 2017 6:48:57 GMT -5
Thor annual #10 had a nice explanation for the existence of the "mythological" god that allowed Marvel not to insult anyone, religion-wise. Itbwas explained that when on life-bearing worlds, there is a certain substance (simply called "god stuff") that gets shaped by the dreams and beliefs of living beings, and that out of this god stuff Olympians, Asgardians and all other classical gods are formed. That means we can have, as in some issues of Thor, a character who is called Indra and has all the attributes of that god, without him being the "real" Indra. A cop-out, to be sure, but a clever and elegant one. I vaguely remember too, and this was given as the explanation for why gods need someone to believe in them, otherwise they would cease to exist. But at the same time it poses a new problem since not many people would believe in Odin by the 20th century, and yet there he was. I suppose a more logical explanation would be "the belief and knowledge" of living beings, so for example the Vikings' belief created Odin and his pantheon, and then they survived thanks to their stories being told over the centuries as myths more or less everybody has heard of.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 10, 2017 7:24:07 GMT -5
Thor annual #10 had a nice explanation for the existence of the "mythological" god that allowed Marvel not to insult anyone, religion-wise. Itbwas explained that when on life-bearing worlds, there is a certain substance (simply called "god stuff") that gets shaped by the dreams and beliefs of living beings, and that out of this god stuff Olympians, Asgardians and all other classical gods are formed. That means we can have, as in some issues of Thor, a character who is called Indra and has all the attributes of that god, without him being the "real" Indra. A cop-out, to be sure, but a clever and elegant one. I vaguely remember too, and this was given as the explanation for why gods need someone to believe in them, otherwise they would cease to exist. But at the same time it poses a new problem since not many people would believe in Odin by the 20th century, and yet there he was. I suppose a more logical explanation would be "the belief and knowledge" of living beings, so for example the Vikings' belief created Odin and his pantheon, and then they survived thanks to their stories being told over the centuries as myths more or less everybody has heard of. That makes sense. I also assumed that once a pantheon was formed from the God stuff, it stayed formed, even if it didn't have that many followers; its power and influence might wane, but it would remain extant (unless it was destroyed by outside forces). Since most pantheons usually come with their own afterlife, perhaps the souls captured in their respective versions of Heaven and Hell guarantee a reserve of believers causing those gods never to fade away completely!
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on May 10, 2017 16:46:19 GMT -5
In the pages of Ghost Rider, Johnny Blaze sells his soul to Satan to save the life of someone he cares for... and as happens in this type of story, he gets bamboozled, the person he saved dies anyway for another reason, and the poor fellow ends up damned and cursed to ride the night as the Ghost Rider. What a great origin story! Also one that really loses steam when you reveal that Satan is actually just a bad guy from another dimension. (Mephisto, in this case, I believe). Later, Johnny is rescued by a bloke who tells him not to despair; that guy really looks like Jesus, although he's not named. And that's perfect! That's exactly what Jesus would do if he were a comic-book character, but just to avoid offending anyone, he's not actually identified and is unlikely to make too many return appearances anyway. Why retcon that story? To anyone who wants the mysterious saviour be Jesus, it can be. To those who don't want him to be, he doesn't have to. As for Satan, hey... It's a comic-book Satan! Having him appear in comics is not a religious statement; it's a plot element. Just as having ghosts is not a religious statement, or having Asgard actually exist is not a religious statement. Marvel really dropped the ball on this one! Tony Isabella should have asked Steve Englehart to write another fake priest's letter of praise to Jim Shooter. Marvunapp.com's entry on Marduk Kurios gives six different retcons of who Daimon Hellstrom's father really was. linkTheir entry on "the Friend" says the character was suggested to Tony Isabella by Steve Gerber, who himself featured Jesus in Howard the Duck Max #5-6. link
|
|