What Klaus Janson thinks of Dark Knight Returns 4 decades on

CBR recently interviewed veteran artist Klaus Janson, who worked as an artist with Frank Miller on Dark Knight Returns, which is now 40 years old, and what he thinks of it. And there's also a few other subjects, like why comic art didn't or doesn't find the same reputation as some other types of mediums:

In terms of this new show, what is the most important thing that you hope to get across to an audience member with the choice of the artwork selected for the show?

I’ve always felt that the public at large has a mis-conception of comic books. There’s a lack of respect that hangs over what we do. Even at an early age when I really knew very little about what goes into creating a page, I couldn’t understand why some art deserved to hang on a wall while comic art didn’t achieve the same status. And now, when I have a better understanding of the complexity, versatility and possibilities of sequential narrative, I’m even more shocked. So if there’s anything I’d like to communicate to an audience, it’s the amount of thought, depth and learning that is required to create a page. The theories behind storytelling in comics is no less than the theories behind any other storytelling medium.

Also-I hope the level of fun that we all experience in the creation of a page is communicated to the viewer. There’s really no point in doing anything unless you enjoy it.

There can be no doubt the low opinion of comic art still prevails, and the only reason comicdom's supposedly looked at higher today is because of the dollar signs perceived by Hollywood. Based on which, public opinion hasn't changed at all. It's just that the view of the medium as something to exploit for money, not merit, has taken a sad form of precedence in the modern age.

As we're celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Dark Knight Returns, what is it like for a relatively short project to have such an oversized reaction from people decades later? You and Frank Miller, for instance, worked together for YEARS on Daredevil, and yet those four issues of The Dark Knight Returns get so much more attention. And your Daredevil run gets a LOT of attention, so we're not talking about some obscure work here. Your Daredevil run is HISTORIC, and yet Dark Knight Returns takes up so much of the oxygen in the room. How unusual of an experience is that?

It’s amazing that DKR casts such a long shadow! No one at the time predicted such longevity. I had the opportunity to reread DKR when we started doing Master Race with Andy Kubert and Brian Azzarello, and I confess-lol-I was really impressed with it. There’s so many brilliant pages that have so many layers of meaning. I find myself discovering new things every time I look at it. It’s a joy to be a part of it.

Daredevil has a real soft spot in my heart, btw. When we talk about evolution, that was one of the jobs (I think maybe Defenders with Sal Buscema was another) where I definitely evolved as an artist. It’s obvious to me that both Frank and I were really pushing ourselves and that last year on DD was just explosive.

On this, they have an interesting point. Miller's DD run may be well regarded, but if DKR gets far more gushy receptions, that's downright mystifying and inexplicable. What's so special about a story that seems to have been written for the precise purpose of making Batman look like a control freak, which was certainly the kind of personality forced upon characterization the following decade or so, to the point it led to situations where he'd be portrayed belittling his allies? One of the worst results this led to had to have been the leadup to the War Games/Crimes crossover, where Batman ends up belittling Stephanie Brown, who was pointlessly shoehorned into the Robin role. Speaking of which, around the same time that occurred, the father of the 3rd male Robin, Tim Drake, was put to death in Identity Crisis, and that curiously may have remained in place until now, as all the while Tim was subjected years later to shocking abuse, recalling this humiliation from the past several years. If Marv Wolfman, Tim's creator, never said said anything about it, how come?

DKR may not have been crafted for the sake of changing the Batman narrative as badly as occurred, that's rather obvious, and Miller, to his credit, didn't write his 1987 take on Bruce Wayne that way years before. Even so, the whole premise of DKR was overrated at best, and that the editors/publishers in later years would mandate such a direction is definitely disturbing. But there's also Miller's failure to address that mandate that's troubling, and if he never acknowledged it's head-shaking how DKR was influential for the wrong reasons, that's saying something.

Also interesting they bring up Azzarello, since he was an earlier example of a woke writer, recalling what his Wonder Woman run was like in the past 15 years. And Miller collaborated with him on one of his followups to DKR? How fascinating, and surely telling what's wrong with Miller's MO. What it indicates is that he remained a leftist for many years, and of course, by the end of the past decade, he all but stopped defending his 2011 GN Holy Terror. Of recent, based on what he put into his documentary, American Genius, this is why I've found him increasingly alienating, but I realize it's not necessarily surprising.

Too bad Janson doesn't have what it takes to address such issues, and CBR's interviewer unsurprisingly doesn't bring them up. I think Janson's a talented artist, possibly more so than Miller. But his persistence in upholding DKR as though it's the most important piece of literature on earth is appalling, and isn't improving the sad situation with comicdom, mainstream or otherwise.