Marvel Comics blabbery

Steve Gerber could go on at length like nobody's business.

I mean, all these Marvel writers are taking their cues from Stan the Man, who overwrote like crazy as a way of asserting himself on the product (and lol at the 'story' credit on this one):

https://www.comicsbookcase.com/features-archive/daredevil-comic-1966

https://i.imgur.com/LOYDFzn.jpg

How will you know that some real shit is going down if Betsy isn’t talking about the focused totality of her psychic powers?

LOL at Foggy already scheming about Karen.

xp lmao

Stan did have a flair for titles.

I may be alone in this but I think Claremont and Ann Nocenti are two of the better over-writers in comics. They can be purple and weird but they're very readable. Gerber, on the other hand...

Meanwhile I'm also rereading Milligan's Shade and some of those Vertigo titles are just as bad as Marvel.

... how would you be alone in liking Claremont in Nocenti, they're fairly beloved

I mean, it's a cliche that they're both a bit prolix. But I don't really see that - I think they're some of comics better sentence writers, i.e. wordy but easy to read. So often, reading comics feels like wading through sludge, and I don't get that with them.

I think it's relative. Compared to Alan Moore or some later writers, maybe they read as corny. But compared to the writing in most of the mainstream comics at the time they were on another level. Definitely soapy and wordy, but they helped bring more nuanced emotions into superhero books.

Well Nocenti is really a post-Claremont writer - she’s at the very tail end of the ‘overwriting’ era, a Shooter writer (whereas Claremont is very much a Roy Thomas writer).

Steve Gerber a million times better than either of them, of course.