FOR TOMMY - DAN JURGENS
By Richard Johnston
I guess I'm looking for a particular reason you've survived,
prospered even, when Byrne, Claremont, David, DeFalco, Priest,
Busiek, Waid, Wood, Grant, Edgington, Weinberg, Lobdell, and
others have either fallen, been moved or had their books threatened
under New Marvel... yet Jurgens pushes through.
I wish I could give you a particular reason, but I can't.
Joe has told me he likes Thor...maybe it's as simple as that.
For me, it's as simple as writing the book the best way I
know how while trying to find something new to say about the
the incredibly compromising photos I have of certain Marvel
editors have nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Oh, you should see the ones I have of Axel Alonso and Felicia.
Who'd have thought she was really Bill Jemas in a dress after
all? What do reckon to our mystery informer anyway?
All I know, is that I'd like to meet Felicia. It's the biggest
mystery since "Name Withheld's" letter first surfaced years
ago. In a slow summer of news, it's nice that "she's" given
us something to yak about.
So how do you see the differences between Marvel and DC, through
your history with each, and specifically right now?
Right now, Marvel seems to have a sense of direction and energy
that DC is still trying to find. In many ways, what Marvel
is doing now is capitalizing on the things it's always been
able to do. It can make and implement decisions faster than
DC can, and as the market place changes, that can be quite
done a lot with DC over the past couple of years so I'm hardly
the authority, but I get the impression they're waking out
of a bit of a slumber to do some of those things as well.
has always been a more "in your face" company while DC has
always been a more "reassuring" company. They're a bit more
polarized in their approaches than usual, but that's fairly
typical. In some ways, they're just building off the same
traits that have existed for years.
There have been comments from some creators on increased levels
of editorial... let's say, involvement, coming from higher
up the hierarchy than your editor. Have you found Marvel editorial
in whatever form it takes to be more hands on of late? And
is it a blessing or a curse?
I don't know that I've been subject to a different creative
process on Thor than what we've always had. Tom Brevoort and
I have always discussed ideas and notions. Sometimes he'll
like an idea that I don't or he won't be crazy about something
I like. It's an exchange of ideas. This is a collaborative
medium, after all.
we're all aware that Marvel is moving more and more into TPB
territory. I don't see that interest as editorial interference.
honesty, I'm unaware of time in which anyone above Tom has
stepped in and said, "Have Dan do this," or "Don't let Dan
write that." I suppose it's possible that it's happened, but
I'm unaware of it.
America was a bit of a different story and situation.
Can you talk about that at all?
Cap was a bit of a strange situation from the moment I took
left in something of a hurry and Bob Harras called me up and
asked me about writing the book, as did Bobbie Chase who was
editor at the time. Harras wanted to see a different type
of story in the book, including some Cap-specific villains,
while Bobbie wanted me to pick up on some of Mark's subplots,
one of which was a talking dinosaur. Another was the matter
of Connie's brother.
I should have left that stuff alone and just started clean.
But I wanted to play fair with the readers, y'know? Particularly
since they seemed to like Mark's work on the book...a sentiment
I agreed with, by the way. In any event, I tried to satisfy
both Bob and Bobbie in terms of what they were looking for.
1 | 2
| 3 | 4
| 5 Continued