| Author |
|
Rob Hewitt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10182
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 11:10am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
I always was fond of the Marvel Girl name. I know many people thought it dumb. But to me that and Wonder Man (another name people make fun of) were just as valid as any other name.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Jim Yingst
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 29 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 866
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 11:38am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I figured Ariel was a reference to the character from The
Tempest. If you know that, the name's about as appropriate as
Sprite. But I didn't know that as a kid, which was the problem.
Marvel Girl, Wonder Man, and Mr. Fantastic always sounded pretty
generic
to me. I always thought of them as Jean, Simon, and Reed.
Moreso that I thought of other characters by their given names.
Gorgon and Karnak - their names didn't tell me anything, but Gorgon's
hooves and Karnak's enlarged head and hand bands gave me a visual hook
that related to what they did; I had little problem remembering what
they looked like when they used their powers. Black Bolt, I
remember his power only because they made a really big deal
about it when he actually used it. (JB's lunar relocation story
in particular.) Bishop on the other hand - just looked like a
generic badass. He had some sort fo energy bolt thing going on,
but I didn't remember until looking it up that it was actually driven
by his energy absorption powers.
Edited by Jim Yingst on 14 April 2006 at 11:39am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Rob Hewitt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10182
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 11:49am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Mr. Fantastic was probably the only name that, as a kid, gave me some troubles after reading a short time. It seemed a little out of character and not very good. But on the other hand, it fit the name of the team, and he was Mr. Fantastic Four, if any of them were. So it worked in its own way.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9695
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 11:56am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I remember having a similar problem and a similar conclusion as far as "Mr.
Fantastic" is concerned, Rob. Although, I must say since his identity is a
public one, I've only ever referred to him as Reed Richards.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 137369
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 11:59am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I've also never thought that her powers were
analogous to a shadow.
***
Any shadow that could pass THRU a wall would be a
shadow I would not want to be around!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 137369
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:03pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Marvel Girl, Wonder Man, and Mr. Fantastic always sounded pretty generic to me. I always thought of them as Jean, Simon, and Reed. Moreso that I thought of other characters by their given names.**** That would probably be #11 on my list.* In any case, Stan bent his rule, occasionally, as noted, but almost always when you could pick out the character by a process of elimination. Human Torch, Invisible Girl, Thing, Mister Fantastic. Not so tough, huh? Beast, Angel, Cyclops, Iceman, Marvel Girl. Only one chick in the group.
*Several years ago, I noticed that a friend and fellow pro had suddenly started refering to all the characters by their given names. So it wasn't Superman and Batman any more, it was Clark and Bruce. I registered it at the time as an indication that he might be heading down the wrong path when it came to working with superheroes. Subsequent work by him proved this to be, unfortunately, true.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7612
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:11pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Referring to characters by their given name rather than their superhero name seems kind of odd and implies an unearned personal familiarity-- like they're friends instead of (well) comic book characters. Besides which, I read about the adventures of Superman, Batman, et al., not really to see what financial woes may beset Bruce Wayne or whether Clark Kent's feature will make deadline.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7612
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:13pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
I know the above was a side point and not the main point of the name discussion, btw. I think names should be evocative and suggest the character's attributes, not be something that's generically "kewl" without having any connection to the character.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jay Matthews
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 October 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2468
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:16pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
I agree, and it's one of my favorite conventions about the fiction world of comics.
Can you imagine the Kingpin on an episode of "Law and Order?"
"What, me a crime boss? It's just a knickname!"
Edited by Jay Matthews on 14 April 2006 at 12:16pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 137369
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:21pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Referring to characters by their given name rather than their superhero name seems kind of odd and implies an unearned personal familiarity-- like they're friends instead of (well) comic book characters. Besides which, I read about the adventures of Superman, Batman, et al., not really to see what financial woes may beset Bruce Wayne or whether Clark Kent's feature will make deadline.*** It's in the same region, tho on a slightly elevated plane, as "Supes" and "Bats" and "Maggie". (And before some peabrain leaps to remind us that it was Stan who originated "Spidey", let us remember that such a nickname was appropriate to the character, as was the character calling his foes names like "Doc Ock". Same as the Thing calling Johnny "Torchie".) It is a subtle and insidious kind of rot, and it betrays a lack of respect for the characters. Go down that road too far and you end up with -- well, far too many "fans" and "professionals" today.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Rob Hewitt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10182
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:23pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Spider-man I refer to as Peter as much as Spider-man and read the books for both. and usually say Spidey anyway.
Cap I would never refer to as Steve Rogers.
Reed and Sue, but Thing not Ben. Torch or Johnny Storm interchangeably.
Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman
Wally or Flash, Green Lantern
Hulk
Iron Man and Tony Stark interchangeably.
Aquaman.
Hmm. My affection for Marvel and its emphasis over the years on both identities has clearly affected which one I refer to by superhero name as opposed to regualr name. Exceptions? Cap cause there really is no different character of Steve Rogers, and Wally/Flash, and Wally was very Marvelesque to me in the early days.
I don't think it is a lack of respect. In fact it shows a fondness for certain guys.
(I never have felt comfortable with saying Namor though. I like saying Submariner).
Edited by Rob Hewitt on 14 April 2006 at 12:24pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14960
|
| Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:30pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
For me, it depends on the context in which I am talking about the characters. If I'm talking about Superman fighting alongside the Justice League, he's Superman. If I am talking about a scene with Ma and Pa Kent, he's Clark. I also tend to refer to characters with legacy names by the secret ID, just to avoid confusion.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
