75 Years of DC erases all mention of Chuck Dixon
One of Dixon's own readers informed everyone on his own board that 75 Years of DC Comics: The Art of Modern Mythmaking, by Paul Levitz, contains no mention whatsoever of one of the most successful Batman writers of modern times:
In fact, if the following is correct, Tim Drake's inclusion as a character isn't clear either:
I'm not a legal expert, but if there's any legitimate grounds for a lawsuit, I do think Dixon should sue, and would be making a big mistake not to. What he should do is try and go on talk radio, for example to discuss how they've slighted him. And again, this is sufficient reason why nobody needs to pay hard earned money for a book published by people with no gratitude for writers who helped to improve their sales record back in the day. No wonder they're plummeting as we speak.
The thing that really really irks me is that in this entire tome, there is not a single mention of Chuck Dixon or any of the work he did for DC Comics.In that case, I'd say it's simply not worth buying, and while I'm sure Levitz isn't the only one at fault here, he's still proven he's one of the biggest things wrong with DC today.
Chuck's name is not even mentioned. While he worked on NIGHTWING, BIRDS OF PREY, GREEN ARROW, there should have been something acknowledged with his long long run on DETECTIVE COMICS and the legacy he left with writing Tim Drake on the ROBIN series.
But there was nothing. Nada. Not even mentioned in the index with a footnote or a bio with all the other creators in the back with the cute little cartoony sketches. His name is not mentioned while all sorts of others are. It is as if in the overview of history of DC Comics, according to Levitz's book, Chuck and his work didn't even garner a need for mention. He's been erased.
[...]
It is a beautiful book, but I believe it has it's political agenda and a skewed view of it's own history.
In fact, if the following is correct, Tim Drake's inclusion as a character isn't clear either:
Red Tornado gets more lovin' and page count than even Tim Drake Robin.Good grief. Dixon's work on Robin was by far the best of the spinoff series he wrote, along with Birds of Prey, and they don't give him any mention either? Indeed, they've been trying this past decade to get rid of a considerable amount of the contributions he'd gone to such pains to create. This could explain why so little of his Robin run has ever been published in trades, if at all. Even Jerry Siegel/Joe Shuster, Gardner Fox, John Broome and Robert Kanigher never got as much disrespect as this.
Seriously, looking at the index, Tim Drake version of Robin isn't even listed in the index either, but the other versions of Robin are there.
I guess they couldn't write much about Tim Drake Robin without evoking Dixon's name is what I believe.
I'm not a legal expert, but if there's any legitimate grounds for a lawsuit, I do think Dixon should sue, and would be making a big mistake not to. What he should do is try and go on talk radio, for example to discuss how they've slighted him. And again, this is sufficient reason why nobody needs to pay hard earned money for a book published by people with no gratitude for writers who helped to improve their sales record back in the day. No wonder they're plummeting as we speak.
Labels: dc comics
Honestly, (as opposed to dishonestly!) I doubt Dixon would stoop to DC or the Didiot's level. I believe he has top much integrity to make a stink. Levitz was in charge when Dixon was unceremoniously kicked to out of DC's good graces. Like most conservative comic writers & artists the powers that are in charge of the Big Two tend to (dare I say it,) blacklist them.
I always wonder why Hollywood (just look to a comment Cher made about Sonny back when he was still alive,) and other so called creative communities do the same thing to those of a conservative view that they complain happened during the McCarthy era.
On Peter David's blog when I added a post that contained a comment Dick Chaney was known for using that nothing to do with the war in Iraq . I was asked how deep was my nose in Chaney's butt. (I cleaned the reply up.) Yet no one came to my defense. I just shake my head, and tell myself those who ignore history...
Bobb
Posted by
Bobb |
4:07 PM
I suspect Chuck has way too much class to sue, but the way the DC brass are treating him is nothing new. Look at the way the company treated Siegel and Shuster for years until Neal Adams (a somewhat conservative fellow himself, I'm led to understand) shamed the higher-up into doing the right thing.
I don't plan on buying any of the books DC's putting out that are written by their staffers, mainly because from what I've read about them, they are all propaganda (sic?) tomes telling an ever-decreasing how great they and their company are.
As for ol Petey, I have to admit I enjoyed his multi-year run on Hulk, but the stuff I've seen him post on his website has led me to believe he is truly a legend in his own mind. And the David-heads who chat regularly on his blog echo his lefty views so much I can't look at it for more than 90 seconds before I feel as though I am going to fwow (sic) up.
Geez, I really miss the late 1970s-early 1980s era of comic books...
Posted by
Thnunumber6 |
10:00 AM
Oh man, the Bronze Age. A little bit of poop here and there, but mostly great stuff overall. Clean enough for kids, intelligent enough for adults.
When artists actually had their own styles instead of today's endless factory of Jim Lee wannabes. None of this computer cartoon crap. Occasional dumb politics, but not the overwhelming, obnoxious din of constant one-sided shilling.
You'd walk into the gas station/ comic store with 5 bucks and come out with a pile of books.
Posted by
degu |
5:37 PM