Spicy Adventure December 1934
Argosy All-Story Weekly February 1924
All-Story Weekly November 1916
Pan Am Clipper ad
Stuart Immonen 2012: Beast character redesign sketch
The story goes like this: incoming X-Men writer Brian Michael Bendis likes classic George Perez-era Beast. However, X-Men editor Nick Lowe has vested interest in not changing the character just for nostalgia’s sake. Neither side budges an inch until Matt Fraction lays down some Solomon-type wisdom:
Can we not just say to Stuart, what does new Beast look like and let Stuart just go be genius Stuart and come up with some amazing new look?
Just out of curiosity: which version of Beast do you all prefer?
This one, actually. It’s really bottom heavy, which I think is a neat choice for a character whose main feature is is intelligence. I also like how he almost has hair?
I am very fond of the New X-Men Frank Quitely cat god design, though.
I love this design for Hank. I also love his original, furrless design, and his original furry design. Actually the only design I don’t much care for is precisely Quitely’s version, which exemplifies everything I think is wrong with Morrison’s mainstream super-hero work: it’s just a retread of old and not even obscure or forgotten ideas from other creators who worked on th same characters.
Look at Morrison’s Swamp Thing, X-Men, JLA, Batman: it’s all a modern retelling of classic Silver & Bronze age stories, repackaged for the current audience. It’s smart, it’s shiny, brilliant at times, but it doesn’t bring anything new to the table in terms of content.
Oh god famous people can be assholes
WTF. Fashion Police de mes ovaires.
Something doesn’t bother you here? So, if your huge because you’re pregnant, it’s OK. And if you’re huge because you have weight, what do you have to do, hide yourself? The only acceptable reason to be accepted when you are a woman who have belly is pregnancy?!? Otherwise you are a monster and you deserve criticism? It’s a good thing to defend this person but saying that she shouldn’t be criticized because, hello, she’s pregnant (and not because we shouldn’t make fun of people who are (have?) overweight, regardless of the reason of this overweight), it’s the same as saying that if she wasn’t, she could have been mocked. That disturbs me… (pardon my English)
Rien ne vous dérange dans cet article? Donc, si vous êtes énorme parce que vous êtes enceinte, c’est bon, on peut vous défendre. Mais si vous êtes énorme bêtement parce que vous avez du poids, il ne vous reste plus qu’à vous cacher (vous aurez bien mérité les moqueries)? La seule raison acceptable pour une femme d’avoir du vendre (ou du poids), c’est le fait d’être enceinte?!? Autrement vous êtes juste un monstre et vous méritez ce genre de critiques? C’est une bonne chose que de défendre cette personne mais de dire qu’elle ne devrait pas être critiquée parce qu’elle est enceinte (et non bêtement parce qu’on ne se moque pas du physique des gens, quelle que soit la raison d’être de ce physique), ça revient à dire qu’elle pouvait l’être si ce n’était pas le cas. Ca me dérange…
In 1952, an American attaché in Moscow was innocently fiddling with his shortwave radio when he heard the voice of the American ambassador dictating letters in the Embassy, just a few buildings away. He immediately reported the incident, but though the Americans tore the walls out of the Ambassador’s office, they weren’t able to find a listening device.
When the broadcasts kept coming, the Americans flew in two technical experts with special radio finding equipment, who meticulously examined each object in the Ambassador’s office. They finally tracked the signal to this innocuous giant wooden sculpture of the Great Seal of the United States, hanging behind the Ambassador’s desk. It had been given as a gift by the Komsomol, the Soviet version of the Boy Scouts.
Cracking it open, they found a hollow cavity and a metal object so unusual and mysterious in its design that it has gone down in history as ‘The Thing’.
‘The Thing’ had no battery, no wires, no source of power at all. It was was just a little can of metal covered on one side with foil, with a long metal whisker sticking out the side. It seemed too simple to be anything.
That night the American technician slept with ‘The Thing’ under his pillow. The next day they smuggled it out of the country for analysis.
The Americans couldn’t figure out how ‘The Thing’ worked, and had to ask the British for help. After a few weeks of fiddling, the Brits finally cracked The Thing’s secret.
That little round can was a resonant cavity. If you shone a beam of radio waves at it at a particular frequency, it would sing back to you, like a tuning fork. The metal antenna was just the right length to broadcast back one of the higher harmonics of the signal.
The resonator sat right behind a specially thinned piece of wood under the eagle’s beak. When someone in the room spoke, vibrations in the air would shake the foil, slightly deforming the cavity, which in turn made the resonant signal weaker or stronger.
As the attaché discovered, you could listen to this modulated signal on a radio just like a regular broadcast. ‘The Thing’ was a wireless, remotely powered microphone. It had been hanging on the ambassador’s wall for seven years.
Today we have a name for what ‘The Thing’ is: It’s an RFID tag, ingeniously modified to detect sound vibrations. Our world is full of these little pieces of metal and electronics that will sing back to you if you shine the right kind of radio waves on them.
But for 1952, this was heady stuff. Those poor American spooks were up against a piece of science fiction.
Today I want to talk about these moments when the future falls in our laps, with no warning or consideration about whether we’re ready to confront it.
Another amazing talk by the creator of Pinboard. I first heard Maciej speak at XOXO, he blew me away. This transcript of his Webstock talk was also amazing.
The amazing story of “The Thing” that eavesdropped on the US ambassador to Moscow for seven years.
Richard Avedon Ban the Bomb demonstration, Times Square, New York City 1963
"I’ve photographed just about everyone in the world. But what I hope to do is photograph people of accomplishment, not celebrity, and help define the difference once again." Richard Avedon
fisheypixels asked: Do you have any advice on getting inside the heads of your characters? This is something I'm really struggling with lately.
though I don’t personally do anything like this I know it helps some people
I don’t think there’s any formula. I think you need to use real-life. like an artist uses gesture drawing and life drawing to find themselves as an artist I think you need to do the same thing as a writer. I think you need to write the world around you even if you’re writing fantastical science fiction or genre material.
I base my characters on people that I know or think I know. I try to see the world through their eyes.
like Gene Hackman’s character in heist I try to think of someone smarter than myself and ask: what would they do? :-)
The official web site of Arthur Leipzig (1918- ), American photographer perhaps best known for his photo essays on New York life in the 1940’s and 50’s.
Hey guys, sorry for being MIA, but I highly suggest checking out Arthur Leipzig’s photography; a lot of the popular photos posted here were taken by him. And the really cool thing is that he’s still alive today, at 95 years old!
Pages 6 - 11 of Stumptown issue 1, original pencils and inks by the stalwart Matthew Southworth.
Dell Books (March, 1959)
Before he was engineering burglaries in hotels named Watergate, E. Howard Hunt was a pretty good pulp author who wrote under the pseudonym Robert Dietrich.