Showing posts with label Little King. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Little King. Show all posts
Sunday, November 9, 2014
The John Stanley 1950s Bibliography is now on Amazon!
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Buy A Print Edition of the 1950s John Stanley Bibilography! Yow!
The deluxe (color interior) version, which includes a cover gallery in full color, is also available. THIS is the link for that edition.
I have print versions of the other two volumes in process. The 1940s volume will undergo some big revisions--mostly the inclusion of more text.
I think this is the first stand-alone book on John Stanley's work to be published. With any luck, this will just be the first of many...
Here's the full cover image, including spine and back panel...
Saturday, July 14, 2012
"The Little King" Pt. III: Stanley's 1950s Man-Child
Stanley had a number of sturdy structures at his disposal. By 1955, he could pretty much fill in the blanks of a series of self-generated "Mad-Libs"-style scenarios and produce high-quality comic book stories.
This didn't leave him much room for experimentation. The 1950s were Stanley's most domesticated years as a comics storyteller. And while his Lulu work is uniformly strong, at times one can feel him in creative doldrums.
Little Lulu didn't accommodate all the facets of his storytelling and comedy. For a period of two years, he tempered this with a series of wildly imaginative stories for the satellite book, Tubby, which he wrote and drew.
The energy and focus required by total cartooning was apparently too much for Stanley. He laid down his pen and brush in 1956, not to touch it again until 1963.
Among the few outlets afforded him, in this Lulu-centric phase of his career, were a trio of spirited, delightful one-shot books based on O. Soglow's pantomime newspaper strip The Little King. These comics mark the first faint inklings of John Stanley's 1960s sensibility. He clearly strives for something beyond the Lulu and Tubby stories he produced like a machine.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Henh! Henh! Hoppin' on the Little King Bandwagon: selections from Dell Four-Color 677, 1956
Gabriel's recent post over at Joyville put a bee in my bonnet to take another look at the three Little King one-shots of the mid-1950s. About two years ago, I posted one story from the first LK one-shot, and wondered aloud if this was Stanley's work.
General consensus says "yes," and other bloggers have shared stories from this trio of curious but welcome mid-career John Stanley comix. This short-lived series was quite of a piece with Stanley's ongoing Little Lulu and Tubby material. The stories got funnier and sharper as they continued.
Today's selection is from the last of the Little Kings. These are not good scans (and, like much of the material I post here, not my scans), but they'll do for online reading. "All In The Game" offers a strong preview of things to come in Stanleydom.
A more arch, brassy tone surfaced in Stanley's writing, by 1956, but there were certain modes that Little Lulu and Tubby could not support. Those series' well-defined settings, characters and its faithful readership demanded a status quo of more laid-back storytelling. That said, Stanley's work on the Lulu titles, from 1955 on, becomes more frantic and kinetic.
That energy is largely held at bay, and reserved for shouting matches between characters, and for the antics of rogue characters such as Gran'pa Feeb and The Little Men From Mars (Stanley inventions that didn't have to conform to the tight rules that governed the Marge Buell-owned cast members).
"All In The Game" anticipates the madcap-yet-dry likes of Stanley's late work--particularly his final effort for comics, the first issue of O. G. Whiz (which can be read, in its entirety, elsewhere on this blog).
"All In The Game" moves with a delightful vigor and acuity. Stanley's writing is fresh and sharp throughout, despite the regrettable, too-obvious-for-words moment of the custard pie on p.9. As with his work on Dell's Krazy Kat series, Stanley had just realized the possibilities of this new cast of characters and settings. One can see him recognizing their potential for formula-humor (a major factor in his Little Lulu writing) and relishing the departures therein from the constraints of Lulu... when the plug was pulled.
Custard pie abuse aside, there's not one wrong move, or wasted moment, in "All In The Game." Every character and story element is used wisely to raise the stakes, keep them high, and then provide a spot-on comedic kicker finale. Tati-like sight gags, executed with sublime comic timing, decorate this piece.
As I and others have noted, Soglow's little king is a noteworthy example of The Tubby Type. LK is narcissistic, tunnel-visioned, and convinced that the world turns all around him. Unlike most of Stanley's Tubby Types, he is in charge. As ruler of an un-named country, LK is attended to, humored by, and otherwise fully enabled by a massive staff of guards, politicians, service workers and toadies. He is free to do as he pleases, and to pursue paths important to only himself.
Only when outside problems directly (and literally) impact his agenda does this monarch recognize a larger world than his own. But he only accepts it as an annoyance that others are paid to correct. Wars, famines, natural disasters--all just buzzing gnats to be swatted away, so the King can continue his important work.
All the while, the King monologues, feeding his own endless loop of self-justification, narcissism, and irked recognition of the real world's constant intrusions of his bubble. As seen in the one-page gag below, the actions and talk of that real world are just so much BLA! BLA! BLA! to our addled emperor:
Stanley offers a gentle meta-wink at his readers when his characters read comic books. Wheels within wheels: Stanley characters reading comics invented by Stanley. One hopes that, in this fictive world, stories inside those comics refer to characters reading comics...
This "Henh! Henh!" business is curious. I don't recall its use by Stanley anywhere else. Stanley was fond of the use of laughter as a character "tell." His laughter is more often borne of cruelty than kindness, and a constant taunt to lower-status characters.
And now, here's "The Search," the closing story from this final Little King:
"The Search" wrings great comedy from a simple premise. The King's single-minded pursuit of Ticket No. 100, in an act of Tubby-worthy tenacity, causes him one status-shift after another. Humiliation is not in this King's English; he bears the downs as a necessary means to the single up he so strongly desires.
Yet, the King has a heart, as shown in this story's charming finale--a wrap-up that allows just enough sentiment in the mix to work right. It doesn't cloy--nor does it stop the story's wry humor. It's not an "awwwww..." moment. It just happens, organically and appropriately.
As well, it's necessary. Much as we may adore the scofflaw Tubby Types, we do need to know that there is a heart beneath their thick layers of self-absorption. An agenda-driven maniac is only appealing for so long (e.g., the screen careers of Woody Woodpecker and Donald Duck). Stanley understood his characters well, and skillfully inserted a few drops of redemption when needed.
We know that his Tubby Types aren't going to stop being themselves. But we are tacitly assured that they're not douche-bags. They become deeply flawed protagonists, and we love them for their quixotic faults and shortcomings. There is a consciousness under all the cognitive biases.
General consensus says "yes," and other bloggers have shared stories from this trio of curious but welcome mid-career John Stanley comix. This short-lived series was quite of a piece with Stanley's ongoing Little Lulu and Tubby material. The stories got funnier and sharper as they continued.
Today's selection is from the last of the Little Kings. These are not good scans (and, like much of the material I post here, not my scans), but they'll do for online reading. "All In The Game" offers a strong preview of things to come in Stanleydom.
A more arch, brassy tone surfaced in Stanley's writing, by 1956, but there were certain modes that Little Lulu and Tubby could not support. Those series' well-defined settings, characters and its faithful readership demanded a status quo of more laid-back storytelling. That said, Stanley's work on the Lulu titles, from 1955 on, becomes more frantic and kinetic.
That energy is largely held at bay, and reserved for shouting matches between characters, and for the antics of rogue characters such as Gran'pa Feeb and The Little Men From Mars (Stanley inventions that didn't have to conform to the tight rules that governed the Marge Buell-owned cast members).
"All In The Game" anticipates the madcap-yet-dry likes of Stanley's late work--particularly his final effort for comics, the first issue of O. G. Whiz (which can be read, in its entirety, elsewhere on this blog).
"All In The Game" moves with a delightful vigor and acuity. Stanley's writing is fresh and sharp throughout, despite the regrettable, too-obvious-for-words moment of the custard pie on p.9. As with his work on Dell's Krazy Kat series, Stanley had just realized the possibilities of this new cast of characters and settings. One can see him recognizing their potential for formula-humor (a major factor in his Little Lulu writing) and relishing the departures therein from the constraints of Lulu... when the plug was pulled.
Custard pie abuse aside, there's not one wrong move, or wasted moment, in "All In The Game." Every character and story element is used wisely to raise the stakes, keep them high, and then provide a spot-on comedic kicker finale. Tati-like sight gags, executed with sublime comic timing, decorate this piece.
As I and others have noted, Soglow's little king is a noteworthy example of The Tubby Type. LK is narcissistic, tunnel-visioned, and convinced that the world turns all around him. Unlike most of Stanley's Tubby Types, he is in charge. As ruler of an un-named country, LK is attended to, humored by, and otherwise fully enabled by a massive staff of guards, politicians, service workers and toadies. He is free to do as he pleases, and to pursue paths important to only himself.
Only when outside problems directly (and literally) impact his agenda does this monarch recognize a larger world than his own. But he only accepts it as an annoyance that others are paid to correct. Wars, famines, natural disasters--all just buzzing gnats to be swatted away, so the King can continue his important work.
All the while, the King monologues, feeding his own endless loop of self-justification, narcissism, and irked recognition of the real world's constant intrusions of his bubble. As seen in the one-page gag below, the actions and talk of that real world are just so much BLA! BLA! BLA! to our addled emperor:
Stanley offers a gentle meta-wink at his readers when his characters read comic books. Wheels within wheels: Stanley characters reading comics invented by Stanley. One hopes that, in this fictive world, stories inside those comics refer to characters reading comics...
This "Henh! Henh!" business is curious. I don't recall its use by Stanley anywhere else. Stanley was fond of the use of laughter as a character "tell." His laughter is more often borne of cruelty than kindness, and a constant taunt to lower-status characters.
And now, here's "The Search," the closing story from this final Little King:
"The Search" wrings great comedy from a simple premise. The King's single-minded pursuit of Ticket No. 100, in an act of Tubby-worthy tenacity, causes him one status-shift after another. Humiliation is not in this King's English; he bears the downs as a necessary means to the single up he so strongly desires.
Yet, the King has a heart, as shown in this story's charming finale--a wrap-up that allows just enough sentiment in the mix to work right. It doesn't cloy--nor does it stop the story's wry humor. It's not an "awwwww..." moment. It just happens, organically and appropriately.
As well, it's necessary. Much as we may adore the scofflaw Tubby Types, we do need to know that there is a heart beneath their thick layers of self-absorption. An agenda-driven maniac is only appealing for so long (e.g., the screen careers of Woody Woodpecker and Donald Duck). Stanley understood his characters well, and skillfully inserted a few drops of redemption when needed.
We know that his Tubby Types aren't going to stop being themselves. But we are tacitly assured that they're not douche-bags. They become deeply flawed protagonists, and we love them for their quixotic faults and shortcomings. There is a consciousness under all the cognitive biases.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Is This Stanley's Work? The Little King, from Four Color 494, 1953
Perhaps fittingly for Halloween, here's the first installment of a new Stanley Stories category--Is This Stanley's Work?
Subject: Dell "Four Color" one-shot 494, The Little King, published 1953.
Professor Thomas Andrae, of Berkeley, California, is a fellow student of John Stanley's work. We have been exploring the lesser-traveled byways of Dell's comics publications of the 1940s, '50s and early '60s, in search of John Stanley-written material that earlier scholars may have overlooked.
Andrae found this comic and brought it to my attention. Thus, I present it to the world as a very likely work of John Stanley.
I have recently become aware of a division of levels in Stanley's published work. It is obvious to me that multiple editors worked on his material.
When said editor ruled with a lighter hand--as on Little Lulu--we have Stanley at his best. Understandably, as Dell managed numerous licensed properties in its comics, book publishing and merchandise materials, it was important for writers' work to be scrutinized.
Carl Barks occasionally chafed under this scrutiny. Whole stories of his were jettisoned, due to an editor's feeling that the characters--Disney Studio properties, each and every one--were not behaving in an acceptable way.
This happened to Stanley at least once--with his infamous Little Lulu story, "The Bogeyman." Further, less severe alterations of work must have been a regular issue with all the authors who created licensed-property material for Dell.
Now: add to this the personal preferences of each editor. In our previous post, we saw that the editor of Ghost Stories (believed to be eccentric cartoonist L. B. Cole) may have compromised the clarity of Stanley's narratives by demanding shorter stories. (This is just a supposition; I wish there was some written history of Dell Comics!)
Other editors may have seen fit to soften Stanley's material, rewrite dialogue, and use other means to dilute his creative efforts.
Mind you, this is all supposition. I have no hard facts to back up anything I've said. I feel that it does seem likely. As Dell operated outside the regular comics community--they even printed their comics on-site--and thrived on the use of licensed properties galore, they had a unique set of standards.
They couldn't risk upsetting the owners of the many copyrighted characters they brought into comics form. In best-case scenarios--as with Marge Buell, creator of the Little Lulu cast--a harmonious creator/adapter relationship emerged.
(Buell, as you may know, eventually sold the rights to the Little Lulu universe to Dell/Western. I suppose she felt her characters were in good hands.)
This "Four Color" book has a number of Stanleyisms, from ellipses to one "Yow," which the heavy-handed editor apparently missed, having transformed many of them into "Wow"s.
Following is a page from the longer first story in this comic book. Here is a typical tell-tale Stanleyism: floating eyes in blackness. In this case, one eye is curiously deleted, but the effect still comes through, and with humorous impact:
And now, for your consideration, here is the shorter second story from this Little King one-shot. Keeping in mind that Stanley obviously had more than one editor, and that his writing was edited, and not simon-pure from his head to the printed page, it seems feasible that this could be his work.
The Little King passes one important Stanley Story rule: in the opening sequences, as he "roughs it" by walking to his mountain lodge, he emits a lot of what I call "Tubby Talk:" a monologue rampant with self-justification and childlike insecurity about status.
I feel that Thomas Andrae has made a new find in comix archaeology. While it's not top-tier Stanley, I truly think Stanley's hand is evident as writer, although the presence of an editor's blue pencil is also strongly felt.
While this is not exactly a chilling Halloween topic, perhaps the question will lightly haunt you as you go about your day... enjoy, and please respond with your opinions!
Subject: Dell "Four Color" one-shot 494, The Little King, published 1953.
Professor Thomas Andrae, of Berkeley, California, is a fellow student of John Stanley's work. We have been exploring the lesser-traveled byways of Dell's comics publications of the 1940s, '50s and early '60s, in search of John Stanley-written material that earlier scholars may have overlooked.
Andrae found this comic and brought it to my attention. Thus, I present it to the world as a very likely work of John Stanley.
I have recently become aware of a division of levels in Stanley's published work. It is obvious to me that multiple editors worked on his material.
When said editor ruled with a lighter hand--as on Little Lulu--we have Stanley at his best. Understandably, as Dell managed numerous licensed properties in its comics, book publishing and merchandise materials, it was important for writers' work to be scrutinized.
Carl Barks occasionally chafed under this scrutiny. Whole stories of his were jettisoned, due to an editor's feeling that the characters--Disney Studio properties, each and every one--were not behaving in an acceptable way.
This happened to Stanley at least once--with his infamous Little Lulu story, "The Bogeyman." Further, less severe alterations of work must have been a regular issue with all the authors who created licensed-property material for Dell.
Now: add to this the personal preferences of each editor. In our previous post, we saw that the editor of Ghost Stories (believed to be eccentric cartoonist L. B. Cole) may have compromised the clarity of Stanley's narratives by demanding shorter stories. (This is just a supposition; I wish there was some written history of Dell Comics!)
Other editors may have seen fit to soften Stanley's material, rewrite dialogue, and use other means to dilute his creative efforts.
Mind you, this is all supposition. I have no hard facts to back up anything I've said. I feel that it does seem likely. As Dell operated outside the regular comics community--they even printed their comics on-site--and thrived on the use of licensed properties galore, they had a unique set of standards.
They couldn't risk upsetting the owners of the many copyrighted characters they brought into comics form. In best-case scenarios--as with Marge Buell, creator of the Little Lulu cast--a harmonious creator/adapter relationship emerged.
(Buell, as you may know, eventually sold the rights to the Little Lulu universe to Dell/Western. I suppose she felt her characters were in good hands.)
This "Four Color" book has a number of Stanleyisms, from ellipses to one "Yow," which the heavy-handed editor apparently missed, having transformed many of them into "Wow"s.
Following is a page from the longer first story in this comic book. Here is a typical tell-tale Stanleyism: floating eyes in blackness. In this case, one eye is curiously deleted, but the effect still comes through, and with humorous impact:
And now, for your consideration, here is the shorter second story from this Little King one-shot. Keeping in mind that Stanley obviously had more than one editor, and that his writing was edited, and not simon-pure from his head to the printed page, it seems feasible that this could be his work.
The Little King passes one important Stanley Story rule: in the opening sequences, as he "roughs it" by walking to his mountain lodge, he emits a lot of what I call "Tubby Talk:" a monologue rampant with self-justification and childlike insecurity about status.
I feel that Thomas Andrae has made a new find in comix archaeology. While it's not top-tier Stanley, I truly think Stanley's hand is evident as writer, although the presence of an editor's blue pencil is also strongly felt.
While this is not exactly a chilling Halloween topic, perhaps the question will lightly haunt you as you go about your day... enjoy, and please respond with your opinions!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)