 |
| Images copyright MARVEL COMICS |
Hi there, peeps. You're looking at the watercolour and gouache prototype cover of MARVEL COMICS #2, signed by the creator of NAMOR The SUB-MARINER himself, BILL EVERETT. Just thought the history lovers among you might like to see it. And below is what the actual published comic looked like way back in 1939. (And note the addition of the word 'Mystery' to the title.)
A version of the cover by DEAN MOTTER was used for an issue of MARVEL COMIC INDEX (below). Contrary to the claim on one site, it doesn't really qualify as 'inking' of Everett's page (which would be done on a vellum or acetate overlay if it were), but is more a newly drawn interpretation of Everett's original idea. Not convinced? Then look at the following side-by-side comparison and judge for yourself. The cover has clearly been completely redrawn.
4 comments:
The cover rough was inked by Dean (Mr X) Motter for the cover of the Marvel Comics Index #7b in 1978...
http://starlogged.blogspot.com/2012/11/1978-marvel-comics-index-issue-7b.html
Thanks for the link, Britt, but, despite what it says on the 'Starlogged' site, the cover looks more like a reinterpretation based on Everett's 'rough' than an actual inked job of Everett's art. Do a side-by-side comparison and you'll see the differences.
Motter didn't ink the actual rough, of course. ;)
That would be sacrilege, not to mention destruction of a historical artifact!
He just "finished" it, probably on lightboxed 2-ply bristol board.
Working off roughs, it's not unusual for the finisher/inker to add or remove elements.
But the main figure and action are faithful to Everett's intent, which is why it works as the cover to the Index dedicated to the Sub-Mariner!
I didn't intend to suggest he'd inked the actual rough, Britt. I'd assume that, normally, he'd use vellum or acetate overlay and ink it that way. But, however faithful he's been to Everett's INTENT, he certainly hasn't been to his FIGURES, to the extent that it looks more like a redrawn version BASED on the original. Nothing wrong with that of course, but I don't think it qualifies as an 'inked' version of Everett art as per the description.
Post a Comment