STANLEY STORIES: Tales From The Tomb #1, pt. 4: Elemental Swamp Horror Takes Elder Dog's Life; Mordant Humor Dominates One-Page Fillers

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Tales From The Tomb #1, pt. 4: Elemental Swamp Horror Takes Elder Dog's Life; Mordant Humor Dominates One-Page Fillers

Here's the last of Tales From The Tomb... "The Mudman." The Grand Comics Database claims this story was drawn by George Evans. I only wish it were... the GCD has some endearingly nutty errors. This is not George Evans' artwork, I assure you...

THIS is an example of George Evans' typically graceful artwork, just in case you're unfamiliar with his comix.

"The Mudman" has a Tubby-esque main character, given to some mild cognitive biases and full of chatter. If Tubby had been presented with a horrific event, as seen here, the results would likely be similar, especially this panel:

"The Mudman" offers the only bona-fide monster rampage moment in this unique anthology. Stanley obviously wished to end the book with a bang. His sense of comic absurdity barely keeps contained. Or, to be fair, I'll say that it's hard to read "serious" Stanley without an overlay of his strong sense of comedy.

Two tongue-in-cheek fillers end this book. "Asphalt Test," drawn by Frank Springer, is cut from the cloth of Dunc 'n' Loo, and is quite amusing:

"The 'Interview'" sends off Tales From the Tomb on an appropriate note of nuttiness.

Well, there you have it, folks. 80 addled pages of nightmare images, neurotic fantasies, a truckload of ellipses, and some undeniably effective moments.

Tales From The Tomb ended John Stanley's short-lived career as a writer of non-humor comix. I wonder what might have happened, had these comix been OK with people, and had Stanley continued in this vein.

I'm glad he didn't, as we might not have his mid-1960s auteur period, where he was a total cartoonist for a few happy years. But, as daffy as some of these stories are, they are always compelling and colorful and, even when their scare-concepts fail, or are staged ineptly, damned imaginative.

As I said in a prior post, there are no other horror comix like John Stanley's. We can only be thankful that this eccentric outburst saw print.

Look for the final Halloween Little Lulu post--on Halloween! See you then...

No comments:

THE JOHN STANLEY COMICS BIBLIOGRAPHY SERIES

I have compiled a detailed, fully illustrated (in color) story-by-story career bibliography of the comic book and magazine cartoon work of John Stanley, in three decade-specific oversized paperback editions. They're available in book form at Amazon.com.

You can read more about the 1940s volume HERE.

Check out the 1950s edition (the longest of the three books) HERE.

The 1960s volume can be previewed HERE.

Covers of the three books are seen below--and that of THE TAO OF YOW, a lavishly illustrated book of essays on John Stanley's world and his work, including expanded versions of essays first seen on this blog. TAO OF YOW may be perused HERE.

A FERVENT PLEA TO FELLOW BLOGGERS

I would like to suggest that the following grammatical and punctuation errors be avoided by one and all;

1) misuse of the possessive apostrophe-s. It's means "it is," not "its." Appropriate use, e.g.: "It's hot outside today." Wrong usage: "I looked at it's cover."

I see this horrid mistake committed hundreds of times daily on the Internet and elsewhere. If a word ends in an s, chances are someone will ram that apostrophe in there. (e.g., "Today's Special's").

Please, please, PLEASE--unless you intend to convey that a person, place or thing is being discussed, in the present tense, or is in use as a contraction of two words (i.e., "it is, let us, what is"), DO NOT USE THE APOSTROPHE!

2) misuse of the apostrophe in dates. Again: unless it is intended to convey the location or possession of a certain quality, such as "1867's drinking water supplies" or "1978's energy crisis," DO NOT USE THE APOSTROPHE! The same applies to the use of decade-connoting dates. It is the 1950s, or the '50s--NOT the 1950's or the 50's!

3) the two most abused words in the English language are "amazing" and "hilarious." It pains me to see these words used thousands of times a day in print and in conversation.

If everything is amazing and/or hilarious, then NOTHING is amazing and/or hilarious.

There exists a wealth of synonyms--delightful words that convey these two properties. Please, please, please use them in the place of these two horribly over-worked adjectives.

Visit synonym.com for easy access to other words that will help you communicate better and smarter.

4) When in doubt, use Spell Check.

Computer users have a luxury--we can instantly determine if a word we've typed is properly spelled. Any computer's spell checking program will inevitably have bugs, but most of the time it's quite helpful.

There is no good reason (aside from un-caught typos) that Internet writing should have spelling errors. We no longer have to interrupt our work, walk over to the bookshelf, pull out the dictionary, find the word, and return to our task. Right-click on a highlighted word and you'll know if it's correct or not.

The speed of the Internet sometimes inspires sloppiness--in myself and in others. In our excitement to get our writing on-line, it's easy to forget that finely-tuned prose may require a little more time.

It is worth the effort--and it takes little effort anymore--to double-check spelling before you make a post live. I often go over old posts and correct typos or poor writing. I feel it makes a difference, and that it supports my worth as a scholar and critic.

If this plea can prevent the egregious misuse of proper English in the blogosphere, my life will not have been in vain.