All of these stories are taken from scans available at goldenagecomics.co.uk. My mindless ramblings follow.
Pretty much right off the bat, when I first saw a story drawn by Fletcher Hanks, I was a fan. His artistic style, compared to nearly every other Golden Age artist, was unique. Over the last few years, I've noticed other people around the 'net talk about Hanks and his work, but usually in a "it's crappy so it's funny" kind of way. Well, that's not My Opinion of his work. What I see is a guy that was a really good artist, who was smart enough to adapt his style to produce action-packed stories. If I can believe anything that anyone has said about his life, Hanks was a professional artist who took-up comic book work just to have a job for a while. Based on the fact that he only stayed in comics for just over a year, it's clear to me that he had no interest in making a career out of it. That's a shame, as he was certainly better than half of the artists working for companies like Fox Features who cranked-out "artwork" that makes me feel darn good about what I doodle late at night. Sure, there are Golden Age artists who are more popular than Fletcher Hanks, but better? That's a matter of opinion.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteReally? The first comment I get is someone pluggin' a book? Jesus, people, if you're going to say something, at least make it worth reading. Besides, Karasik's book wasn't enlightening at all as far as Hanks' life goes. The only thing included within those pages that I hadn't read or seen anywhere else was the still-life drawing. I wish I could honestly say "Buy the book, it's totally worth it" but I can't. If I had a high-quality printer, I could have saved myself some money.
ReplyDelete