Print

[MarkWarner]

I am really looking forward to this week's read ... Mr Briefer PLEASE don't disappoint me!

If you don't like the book, then the blame falls 100% on "Drusilla lives!" who was either hinting or at the very least soliloquizing about Frankenstein on last week's book discussion.

I picked one from the humorous phase .. I think a bit of lightness would be good:

https://comicbookplus.com/?dlid=15993 and the story we are concentrating is the first one The Zombies and it's double length!

[Captain Audio]

These remind me of the early Mad Magazine and Cracked.
I liked the story, though it sort of telegraphed the punchline it still held my interest till the end.

This would have done well as a 60's early 70's animated series. Kids would have loved it.

[paw broon]

I'm very wary of posting this as Briefer's Frankenstein seems very popular and a bit of a cult.  I read the whole book and just didn't get it.  In fact, I didn't fully understand the final story.  The art throughout seemed poor, as opposed to funny and quirky, which is what I was expecting.  Usually I have some sort of reaction - enjoyment, thrill, laugh, eureka moment, boredom, offense, but in this case, nothing.  Curious as to what non-N. Americans say about the comic as it occurred to me that perhaps the humour didn't travel.

[misappear]

I've read maybe a half dozen of this title, and I don't get them either.  I remember being at conventions back in the late 70's and people were all over this title like it was the holy grail of collecting.  It might have been a Chicago thing, I don't know. 

These comics were legitimately scarce.  I bought a lot of collections in my day, and I don't recall ever seeing one in anyone's stash. 

Ah well...

--David

[MarkWarner]

Well I read the first story "The Zombies" and I thought it was great! Just some light fun, and I wonder why Briefer's humorous Frankenstein phase never made it to animation. Was it ever thought about?

Jos

[misappear]

Whoah!!!!

I'll have you know that Paw and I have impeccable taste!!  Getting it is what we do!!

Seriously, there are many forms of comic book whimsy. I never really sorted it all out, but you can sort this stuff.  For example, Barks' duck books, and perhaps the Fairy Tale Parade type of whimsical morality plays could be in one group.  The MAD humor type with Panic, Get Lost, and other imitators are another;  the teen books certainly enjoy a position as a sub group of humor/whimsy with Archie, Buzzy, Thirteen going on Eighteen and the like.  Sure, they are all "humor", but really different in content and target.

I would guess that the Frankenstein series would be most similar to the MAD parody books, as it is an extended play on the original concept in MAD which was a satire of other comics and media/literature.  The outstanding feature of the MAD books was an over the top frenetic art style that made each panel a work unto itself.  Frankenstein doesn't have the visual chops to keep me coming back. As stated earlier, the jokes and situations were really telegraphed, so i can't say the writing was innovative. 

In a way, I still see these things through my eight-year-old mind.  Growing up on the South Side of Chicago, i had very limited financial resources. I stayed away from humor titles because they didn't have the re-reading factor that the super-hero books did.  This comic, although OK in the whimsy department, wouldn't have seemed to be a similar value that a Superman or Magnus would have offered.  Know what I mean?  You can tell a good story over and over, but even a good joke will get stale a lot quicker.  Even a Duck book, with its intricate plots, would have afforded more. 

Paw, we have to defend ourselves here!

--David

[paw broon]

Taking up the cudgels, I agree with David.  Like him, growing up in a working class town in Central Scotland in the '50's, I couldn't afford to chance buying a comic I might not like and as I was superhero daft, on the odd occasions I had some pennies spare, I bought Marvelman or Ace Hart, or similar.  And I didn't bother with Beano and Dandy.
But whereas humour strips such as The Broons, which is in many peoples minds a work of art, were available free to me and thousands of other kids, as most folk bought The Sunday Post, really made me laugh, I never considered spending money on humour comics. I hardly ever saw Mad but I did see and buy, at 2nd. hand shops in the '60's, Don Martin paperbacks.  Now, they were hilarious.  I think I saw comics and strips as 2 divisions - Superheroes/MMM  and everything else.  Everything else included humour, ranging from whimsical Rupert types to Bash St. Kids (another small classic) but, at that age, what could possibly compete with Superman or Dan Dare or Ace Hart?  Note here that all the humour strips i mention are a few panels or a couple of pages at most and not a long story. 
Back to Frankenstein and that phrase David uses, "Frankenstein doesn't have the visual chops to keep me coming back." says it all really. If we were to compare it to a Barks Duck book, the differences in quality become glaringly obvious. Well, I think they do.

[jimmm kelly]

Why the apples and oranges comparisons?

I understand talking about our childhoods and why we bought the things we bought when we were kids--and the kinds of often goofy theories we had about what was good and what wasn't. And I get that it was a hard choice, when we were kids with limited funds, to choose what comic we would gamble on.

But we aren't kids anymore and we don't have to pit one artist against another. I'm glad that the world was big enough for both Dick Briefer and Carl Barks. And I'm happy I don't have to choose between them. The more variety of comics I can sample, the better.

I really don't like these kinds of arguments. So I'll stay out of this one from now on.

[crashryan]

I liked this better than I thought I would. Briefer's humor is VERY quiet in the first and last stories, raising an appreciative smile now and then but never a good laugh. There are amusing references to subjects on the public's mind in 1947, such as employee-employer relations and the repeal of wartime ceiling prices. The story I enjoyed most was the Pie-Eyed Piper, though it moves rather slowly it has more funny situations than The Zombies.

Two things prevent me from fully enjoying the comic. One is the artwork. Briefer certainly has a unique style, but it strikes me as sloppy and unattractive. The other is the pacing. The flow from panel to the panel is choppy. Important events--e.g. Frankenstein pulling the factory whistle in the first story and Frankenstein bumping into the woman's butt in the Blooperman story--are often unclear. At least I think Frank is supposed to be bumping into the shrewish wife; maybe the idea is that she steps back and runs into him. That's what I mean, unclear.

The fillers don't do much for me. Hector was only two pages yet moved like molasses. Jose was a lame stereotype gag: lazy Mexican. Even as a kid it bugged me when foreign-language speakers converse with each other in their own tongue yet still speak with thick accents. The one exception I remember was Dell's Tonto comics. Tonto spoke to non-Indians using his infamous baby-talk, but to fellow Indians he spoke formal English. Anyway, Jose can't seem to decide whether he's speaking comic-book Spanish ("Thees sun, she is hot!") or comic-book French ('lak zee streaks of lighting!")

Overall, an okay comic. I think it might grow on me; I may check out other issues.

[narfstar]

I enjoyed the Frankenstein story the most so far. Just good fun. Well I may have enjoyed the Rulah story more, but not as it was intended but as humor. I think Frankenstein probably had a more adult audience in the day. The art was not pretty but catches your attention and has a strange appeal. I know many of the British humors strips that Paw may like just do not seem funny to me. Humor is so much influenced by our lives and circumstances.

[misappear]

Note to Jimmm,

Hey amigo, we're not arguing here.  I'm just goofin' around.  We're analyzing juvenile pop culture, sharing our take on the merits and the nostalgia. 

Please allow me to advance my perspective in another way;  When I was a kid, I would wistfully imagine a place that had all the comic books ever published all neatly stacked on shelves.  I would imagine myself in that room just sitting and reading, and reading, and reading.....

Some dream, eh?  Well looked what happened.  There they all are, staring right back at me on this screen.  And we all know they're ALL out there if you want them.  So, where do I start?  Jimmm, I'm 60.  How many CAN I read? 

Remember a couple weeks ago, Drusilla said that the later issues of Danger were better that the #1 posted?  That info is filed in my brain and if I get the time, I'm going there because of that recommendation.  Paw mentioned some titles that I never heard of, and I'll look into those if I have some extra time.  Time.....it's a much more menacing word than it once was.  Until I have to "stop reading" I'd like to read what's the best for me.  Like you said, "The more variety of comics I can sample, the better."  I don't want to be morose, but the word "can" may mean totally different things for you and me. 

But I'm glad I'm here now, and I'm happy to read these books, and these posts, and I'm sure glad you do too.

--David

[Drusilla lives!]

I am really looking forward to this week's read ... Mr Briefer PLEASE don't disappoint me!

If you don't like the book, then the blame falls 100% on "Drusilla lives!" who was either hinting or at the very least soliloquizing about Frankenstein on last week's book discussion. ...

Oh sure, blame me why don'tcha!... Just kidding! 

Well, as I did happen to mention in passing last week, that S&K "Your Dreams" comic made me think of Briefer's "Frankenstein" for some reason.  Again, no idea why really.  I wasn't that familiar with Briefer's work (and in fact I'd only read about this title in reviews for that Yoe collection that came out awhile back).  Nevertheless, there must've been something... perhaps it was that odd thematic mix, or the highly stylized Kirby artwork... or perhaps just that someone happened to upload an issue of Frankenstein that same week. 

At the risk of sounding like Donald Rumsfeld, what I do know is I didn't know what to expect.  I mean, a whole comic devoted to a humorous Frankenstein monster?... With such cartoonish artwork no less!  My first impression was that it was going to be a bit too childish... pure greasy kids stuff as they say.  But I needed a change of pace, so I gave it a shot anyway.  Well, the artwork was cartoonish, but it grew on me, as did the stories.  Which turned out to be really funny... with some genuine belly laughs in places... despite being over fifty years old. 

Liked "Zombies," but I found "The Pie-Eyed Piper" to be my personal favorite here... closely followed by "Blooperman."  Didn't get the final punch-line of "Hail The King" though.   The text fuller piece did have one good laugh/punch-line in there... but mostly it was, well, text fuller. 

In brief, I found Briefer's humorous take on Frankie a thumbs-up. 

[bowers]

This was an interesting choice. I've read a much later issue which featured a rather different horror-based character. Not being very impressed with it, I was glad to see an earlier, humorous version for comparison. I found this to be a bit more entertaining. Briefer was fairly successful in adapting the title character and playing him for laughs. His artwork and writing do, indeed, seem to belong in a parody mag, such as "Mad" or "Cracked". "The Zombies" was a fun little comedy of errors, as was "The Pie-Eyed Piper". Didn't find anything very special about the other two stories or the filler. I really can't think of anything published around this time to compare this title to, so I'll have to give it points for being unique. Cheers, Bowers

[narfstar]

Not quite the same but Sparky Watts is an off beat GA humor feature that I like. Maybe Mark can schedule a Sparky story soon.

[paw broon]

Sorry jimmm, didn't mean to offend you.  I do however think that comparisons are worthwhile in many cases, and in this case, in my opinion, the work, both story and art, on Frankenstein just doesn't measure up.  Either as it stands on it's own or when put up against, Watkins, Barks or Don Martin. 
This is the first Frankenstein funny I've ever seen or read and I didn't get anything from it.  And I thought one way of guaging it's quality or otherwise, was to put it up against  Barks duck stuff, as I have read a lot of the longer stories and find them irresistable.  Naturally I pondered why and came to the conclusion that the art and story in Mr. Briefer's book was not of a very good standard, the jokes, what there were of them, either fell flat for me or, perhaps, went over my head. And, despite a re-read, that last story and particularly the end of it, still doesn't make sense.
I recall writing before the start of this group that I wasn't comfortable with the possibility of anyone being unhappy with another's thoughts and opinions.  And it looks as if I have been responsible for bringing my concerns to life.
I have to admit to wishing I had been eloquent enough to write what David has about the "Dream".
I have the same thoughts more and more as my next landmark birthday rapidly approaches and realize that I will never have time to do all the things I want, or read all the comics on the site.  I'm giving it a serious try, though.  But I have to have some sort of way of figuring out where to go next and, sampling something as we do here lets me compare it to other material, come to decisions and go charging off to seek it out. 
Too many comics to try, too much wine to sample, too many recipes in the books to attempt, too many places I haven't visited.  JUST NOT ENOUGH TIME LEFT TO GET IT DONE.

[narfstar]

Opinions are just that. No one should get upset with a difference of opinion

[MarkWarner]

Jim Sparky Watts is now on the list And any other suggestions please shout!

[Drusilla lives!]

I kinda figured there was gonna be trouble when I saw this issue, I suppose MarkWarner sensed it too. 

Cartoonists have it pretty hard.  They really are very much like standup comedians.  They put their work (and themselves) out there, in a sense naked to the subjective tastes of the public, and are either applauded or pummeled... one either loves or hates their work... one either "gets it" or doesn't.   I guess perhaps as one moves more and more toward the minimal, somewhat abstract, and downright quirky individualistic side of the artform (as opposed to the "realistic illustrative tradition" for lack of a better descriptor), one finds less and less common aesthetic middle ground to appreciate.   

I mean, not everyone "gets" Kirby either and that's ok.  But that's why I was a bit surprised myself here... I enjoyed Briefer's art more and more as I went along, even though I expected it to be a chore at the outset.  A somewhat rare occurrence in my experience. 

Some final random thoughts (that I didn't get a chance to mention before)...

-Imo there's a real "Archie-like" teen vibe running through this comic.  For some reason I could picture kids like those portrayed in the Bowery Boys... or perhaps their more upper middle-class, hot-rod driving contemporaries... sitting around the drug store soda fountain reading this stuff.

-From a quick look at some other issues in the run, it seems Briefer's artwork here has reached its abstract minimalistic peek, and reminds me somewhat of Kurtzman. 

-The artwork in the first two issues is outstanding imo, and my first impression is that there's a stylistic hint of Eisner.  Will go back and read these when I can find the time.

-The artwork on the last incarnation of this title (the straight-horror issues) is as outstanding as it is unexpectedly jarring.  In what seems to be done "on the turn of a dime" on his part, Briefer simultaneously demonstrates in a most shocking way not only a different "take" on the character, but his own stylistic depth.  It's astonishing really, it's the same monster, and yet it soooo isn't... amazing... will the REAL Briefer please stand up.