For the most part, the comics that came out as part of Marvel’s “Giant-Size” line in 1974 and 1975 featured stories that, while generally understood to be in continuity with those in the regular-size titles, didn’t directly lead into and/or out of those books. Such had been the case with Giant-Size Avengers #1 (Aug., 1974), a standalone that was written by Marvel’s editor-in-chief (and former Avengers scribe) Roy Thomas, rather than by the man who’d been authoring the monthly adventures of Earth’s Mightiest Heroes since August, 1972, Steve Englehart. But with the second issue of the Avengers’ new quarterly vehicle, Englehart was given the reins — and he decided to treat the book as an extra, if plus-sized, issue of the monthly title.
Of course, that didn’t mean that the contents of the “Giant-Size” version of the series shouldn’t be special. And with Giant-Size Avengers #2, Englehart and his artistic collaborators definitely delivered on that idea, giving readers a twenty-nine page epic that stands to this day as one of the all-time Avengers classics — perhaps even, as writer Kurt Busiek (author of more than a few great Avengers yarns of his own) said in 2014, “the uncontested, anyone-who-says-otherwise-is-sadly-mistaken best single issue of AVENGERS”.
That’s a pretty big claim, and while your humble blogger might not agree with Mr. Busiek 100% (I lean more in the direction of 1977’s Avengers Annual #7 for my personal GOAT in this category), I definitely understand where he’s coming from. Perhaps you do too — or will, after perusing this blog post. Let’s find out, shall we?
Giant-Size Avengers #2 proclaims its arrival with a cover by Ron Wilson and Frank Giacoia (and possibly John Romita), whose imposing giant-size figures of Kang the Conqueror and Rama-Tut (“The Mad Pharaoh!”) clearly indicate that this book follows after Avengers #129, which had been released two weeks earlier — and which featured Kang as the main bad guy, and concluded with the sudden and unexpected appearance of Kang’s past (?) self, Rama-Tut. (The cover also ominously, and as it turns out quite accurately, promises the “Death of an Avenger!” — but we’ll set that matter aside for the moment.)
Of course, if you had read Avengers #129 before you picked up this comic, the way you were supposed to, you might have been surprised by its first page, which — rather than picking up directly from #129’s final-panel reveal — offers a pin-up style splash panel featuring the return of a former regular character… albeit one who hadn’t been seen in an Avengers comic (at least, not as an active-duty, in-good-standing member of the home team) since issue #109:
Along with being startled by “the rowdy return of Hawkeye the Marksman”, many readers in August, 1974 (my seventeen-year-old self included) were probably at least mildly surprised by the second name listed in this issue’s credit box, that of artist Dave Cockrum. Not that Cockrum was new to the feature, exactly — after all, not only had he inked three recent issues in succession (#124, #125, and #126), but he’d also at least partially inked another consecutive trio of stories (in issues #106, #107, and #108) almost two years before that. But he was still largely unknown as a penciller to Marvel Comics fans — unless, of course, they also happened to be readers of DC Comics, and most especially of the “Legion of Super-Heroes” feature in Superboy, which Cockrum had drawn on a fairly regular basis from early 1972 until quite recently… when he’d had a falling out with that publisher regarding their policy of not returning original artwork, and had abruptly relocated to Marvel in response.
Of course, having your first major pencilling job — actually, your first major full-art job, since Cockrum inked as well as pencilled this story — for your new employer be a 29-pager featuring almost as many costumed characters as there’d been in an average LSH yarn would present challenges for any artist. And the specific challenges that Cockrum faced with “A Blast from the Past!” would result in a couple of oddities that aren’t reflected in the straightforward rundown of credits seen on the page above — oddities we’ll have more to say about as we go along…
“…it’s been a pretty nostalgic night for him already — ” As the editorial footnote helpfully indicates, this is a reference to Hawkeye’s surprise guest appearance in Captain America #179 earlier this month… and is about as close as this story will come to justifying the erroneous inclusion of Cap on G-SA #2’s cover. (Yep, he’s there; feel free to scroll back up to check it out if you need to.)
Hurrying inside Avengers Mansion, the bowman finds it deserted — something he immediately realizes he should have expected. But even as he begins to castigate himself for this lapse in foresight…
We mentioned a little earlier that there are a couple of oddities regarding Dave Cockrum’s artwork for this story, and the page above offers us a good opportunity to discuss the first of them. We’ll start by sharing the original art for the page:
Take a close look at that top right-hand panel. Notice those extra lines just outside its borders? That’s visual evidence of the work of Steve Englehart, who while officially credited here only for “story”, was the de facto editor of the comics he wrote (as indeed most of Marvel’s writers appear to have been during this era). As has been reported in several venues, including Sean Howe’s Marvel Comics: The Untold Story (2013) and Brian Cronin’s 644th “Comic Book Legends Revealed” column for CBR.com (to which I’m indebted for the above scan), when Englehart first received Cockrum’s finished art for the book — this would have been after the story had been plotted, but before the final script had been written — he was unhappy with some of the artist’s storytelling choices, and (in Brian’s words) “cut up the pages to re-arrange the panels.”
In an article published in Back Issue #86 (Feb., 2016), Englehart offered the following explanation:
Dave Cockrum did his usual great job. However, that story was so complex that any problem could not be overlooked, and Dave, stepping right into the middle of the thing, left out or otherwise made the wrong choice in a few places. I had those places fixed, and he didn’t like it, and continued to not like it thereafter. I was sorry about that, but the story took precedence, and evidently that was the right decision, since a lot of people considered it a success.
Your humble blogger has searched the resources available to him for an account of the same incident from Dave Cockrum’s perspective, but hasn’t come up with anything. (The artist passed away in 2006, and his personal web site appears to have been inactive for almost that long.) Nor have I been able to find any more specifics regarding exactly which pages were cut up, other than the example shown here; if anyone out there reading this has more information regarding this matter, I’d greatly appreciate your sharing it in the comments.
“He’s not a bosom buddy…” It’s hard to argue with Clint Barton there, given that the Swordsman’s first attempt to kill him stone dead goes all the way back to the archer’s boyhood, as first told back in Avengers #19 (August, 1965), and later recapped in Avengers #65 (June, 1969) …in which the then-villain came pretty close to ending his life again (though at that time, Clint was using the codename and powers of Goliath). All things considered, I’d say Hawk’s being pretty chill about all the past history between him and “Sword”.
Why does Kang go after “the American Secretary of State“, and not the POTUS,himself? Perhaps because at the time Englehart was writing his script — June, or thereabouts — no one knew exactly what the status of the latter office was going to be by the time this issue reached stands. (For the record, this comic was released on August 27, 1974, just eighteen days after Richard M. Nixon’s resignation as President.) On the other hand, it might have been a sly nod to the fact that in an issue of Captain America published just four months earlier, Steve Englehart had a thinly-disguised Nixon shoot himself; the author may have meant to imply that, in the Marvel Universe, there was as yet no replacement for the deceased Commander-in-Chief. (My thanks to the guys at the “Marvel by the Month” podcast for this insight, which I nicked off their 229th episode.)
For anyone who may have forgotten, the Vision’s first episode of being struck by a “mysterious weakness” occurred in Avengers #118, while the second came in issue #122. In both of those earlier instances, the android hero’s sudden incapacitation could have had serious consequences: his own demise in the first case, that of an enemy in the second. Here, though, Vizh’s weakness appears to have no demonstrable impact on the present story’s plotline; after all, our guy has already been immobilized by Kang’s technology, and if the Macrobot drawing its power from his body is at all slowed down by this development, the script gives no indication of it, either here or later in the scene. So why has Englehart chosen to include this piece of business at all? Probably because the mystery of the Vision’s unexpected shutdowns will, along with the “Celestial Madonna” theme first introduced in Avengers #129, will be the main drivers of the storyline that will run through both Avengers and Giant-Size Avengers for the next six months, and the writer is keen for us not to forget about it.
Yikes. The Vision-powered Macrobot proceeds to clean the clocks of both Hawkeye and Swordsman over the next page or so, while the disguised Rama-Tut simply stands by…
As retirement plans for reformed super-villains go, I’d say that resuming the role of an absolutely powerful yet also beloved ruler of a great ancient civilization is a pretty sweet one.
“PLOOG!“? Sure, why not? I reckon the surname of the well-known comics artist then working on Marvel’s Man-Thing and Planet of the Apes served as well for the sound effect made by Hawkeye’s ink-filled (?) trick arrow as anything else would’ve.
Whatever that black stuff is, it does the job intended — blocking any sunlight from reaching the Vision’s jewel through the Macrobot’s eyes, while simultaneously blinding the Macrobot so effectively that he can’t land a blow on either Avenger, and thus flails away until he finally runs out of juice and falls down. “We did it!” exults the Swordsman. “We won! We beat Kang!”
For the young’uns among you (as well as the old’uns with failing memories), “expletive deleted” was the phrase used in the redacted transcripts of the Watergate tapes so that the American public wouldn’t have its tender sensibilities bruised by the profane language regularly used by Nixon and his aides in the White House.
Later Marvel stories would make the whole business of Kang meeting himself at different points in his timeline much more complex, with alternate universes and divergent selves and so forth; this was probably an inevitable development, and perhaps even a welcome one (your humble blogger has, after all, enjoyed more than a few of those stories). Still, there’s something very satisfying and even pure about the relatively straightforward time paradox Englehart presents here — a classic causal loop, where Rama-Tut remembers what happened to him when he was Kang, so he can take the very actions that he will later remember, with no clear beginning or end point.
And here’s yet another Nixon reference, this time in regards to his 1972 state visit to China.
While acknowledging the implicit sexism of this catty exchange between the Scarlet Witch and Mantis, it’s worth noting that regular Avengers readers would have been aware of an important fact that Wanda Maximoff wasn’t, as yet — namely, that while she and Agatha Harkness were busy battling for their lives against Necrodamus back in Avengers #129 (which was just a few hours ago in comic-book time), Mantis was simultaneously making an overt play for the Vision’s affections… a play that had been politely, but firmly, rejected by her would-be beau. Englehart is subtly letting us know here that Mantis is not quite ready to take that “no” as a final answer.
Meanwhile, Hawkeye decides that if his “blackout ” arrow worked on the first Macrobot, it might also serve for the second one — a dumb idea, frankly, as is less than helpfully pointed out by the Swordsman after Hawkeye gets knocked back on his ass. Not that Sword himself fares any better…
Um, what was that? Shorting Iron Man out would kill him? But… didn’t Tony Stark discover back in Iron Man #58 (May, 1973) that his problematic synthetic heart had healed well enough so that he could live without his chestplate power source for at least a stretch of time? If that’s still the status quo, then it doesn’t seem like the armor shorting out should be an instant death sentence. But, whatever; honestly, Marvel went back and forth so much regarding this situation in the ’70s that it’s hard to fault Steve Englehart for not being able to keep up with the latest developments (assuming he did make an error here, which I’m not 100% sure was the case, anyway).
Under the direct control of Kang himself, the Macrobot seizes up the still-recumbent Iron Man, whose armor immediately begins to glow with blue flame “as the raw power of the pride of Asgard rips through that golden shell!”
Did the Scarlet Witch actually just use her hex power not only to snag a meteor in outer space, but to aim it exactly where she needed it to go? Yes. Yes, she did. Pretty damn impressive, if you ask me. (If, on the other hand, you ask Mantis…)
I adore both Englehart’s dialogue for, and Cockrum’s portrait of, Thor in that last panel. Sure, we’ve all seen the God of Thunder rage with the fury of a thousand storms plenty of times… but how often have we gotten to see him acting peevish?
Oh, wow. That three-quarters-page splash panel. Still rocking me back on my heels, a half century down the line.
Many of you reading this won’t need any explication of this panel’s imagery, I’m sure; still, I hope you won’t begrudge my offering the following key for those who might appreciate it. Starting from the top left and going clockwise, we have:
- Doctor Doom — who, in 1974, had not himself yet been ruled out as a possible alternate identity of Kang/Rama-Tut (an intriguing, though highly improbable idea originally floated by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby in the pages of Fantastic Four Annual #2 [1964]).*
- The Scarlet Centurion — a confirmed alternate identity of Kang/Rama-Tut, first (and, as of 1974, last) seen in Avengers Annual #2 (Sep., 1968).
- Black Panther, Goliath (the Clint Barton version), and Quicksilver — who, if we make allowances for Pietro Maximoff’s costume being colored its earlier green rather than the era-appropriate blue, served together as active members from Avengers #75 through #88… a good solid run of issues, though not one in which any iteration of Kang played a role, to the best of my recollection. Perhaps either Dave Cockrum or Steve Englehart misremembered the specific issue in which Pietro had returned to the team after a long hiatus, and thought he’d been on hand (as T’Challa and Clint had been) for the first appearance of…
- The Grandmaster — who challenged Kang to a life-and-death-stakes game the last time the Conqueror appeared in Avengers, back in issues #69–71.
- Captain America and the Vision — who, judging from the background, are shown here as they were around the middle of issue #118, when they were invading the Dark Dimension of the dread Dormammu alongside their fellow Assemblers (as well as their new allies in the Defenders). Again, that’s not a story in which any version of Kang played an on-panel role; that said, its being referenced here does help demonstrate how past, present, and future are currently colliding, while also allowing for the use of some cool Steve Ditko-style psychedelic imagery.
- Rama-Tut’s Sphinx-shaped time machine — first seen in Fantastic Four #19 (Oct., 1963).
- Ravonna — Kang’s tragic lost love, whom, as noted by Rama-Tut earlier in this issue, “lies as though lifeless in suspended animation!” She’d first appeared in Avengers #23 (Oct., 1965); the last glimpse we readers had of her slumbering form had come in issue #71 (Dec., 1969).
- Janet van Dyne and Henry Pym — the Avengers’ original married couple, seen here in their guises as the Wasp (Jan) and Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Goliath/Yellowjacket (Hank). Another good way of showing how the timestream is broken (or at least suspended) at this juncture of our story.
- Hulk — a former Avenger whose presence here may simply be a nod to the team’s earliest days, and thus another example of broken time… though it’s also worth noting that the Emerald Behemoth had fought Kang not too terribly long ago, in the 135th issue (Jan., 1971) of his own title.
- Iron Man — as with the various superheroic identities assumed by Hank Pym, the evolution of Tony Stark’s armor over the years provides one last illustration of how time has ruptured.
Whew! After all that, it’ll surely be a relief to turn the page to find… another montage-style splash panel (though this time, the multiple images pretty well speak for themselves) — and a full-pager, to boot:
While this splash hasn’t remained as indelible in my memory as its predecessor, I still think it’s pretty great. (Although if you want to see a real fan of this page — especially of its central portrait of Mantis — look no further than my friend and fellow blogger Ben Herman; or, more specifically, look at Ben’s right leg.)
The character arc that Steve Englehart provided the Swordsman over roughly a year and a half’s worth of Avengers stories still stands as something of a master class, even half a century later, in how to take a “C”-list character and do something absolutely remarkable with them.
In some ways, the saga that began with the first tease of the Swordsman and Mantis’ imminent arrival, in a handful of panels back in Avengers #112, has followed the lineaments of a conventional redemption narrative. The longtime villain, then known only by his codename (his given name of Jacques Duquesne would be awarded him only posthumously, in an issue of Avengers Spotlight published in 1989), shows up and announces his intention to reform. Over the course of multiple adventures, he proves his sincerity, but only manages to fully attain his goal of unconditional acceptance into the community of heroes with an ultimate, fatal act of love and sacrifice.
If that had been all there was to it, we might still today recall this story as a moderately affecting tearjerker — but I’m doubtful it would have received all the accolades that it has, and still continues to garner, five decades later. Englehart’s great achievement here stems from the tension he sets up between the Swordsman’s sincere wish to do good as an Avenger– which isn’t really in question after his and Mantis’ first few outings with the team — and his actual ability to make good on that desire. Does the Swordsman have the right stuff to be an Avenger? We’re never really sure. Some of his problems seem to stem from simple bad luck, of course… but not all of them. We witness the Swordsman’s confession of succumbing to physical torture in issue #123, and while we may sympathize (would we have held up any better?), we may also find ourselves feeling at least a small degree of disdain (aren’t heroes supposed to be stronger than this?). We observe his anguish following his being unequivocally rejected by Mantis in #128, and while we probably can’t help but feel sorry for the guy, we also have to wince when it seems that only the intervention of Iron Man prevents him from calling his supposed beloved an ugly name. This dichotomy lasts all the way through a good hunk of “A Blast from the Past!” itself, as our empathy for the clearly strung-out Swordsman in this story may be tested by one last temptation to snicker at him, when in one panel Englehart has him exclaim “Avengers Assemble!” silently, just to himself. Through it all, Englehart has made it easy for us to pity this would-be hero, while never making it nearly as simple a matter to admire him.
And so, at last, we find ourselves here on the story’s final page, having just witnessed the Swordsman’s taking of one final decisive action that may well have seemed as inevitable to us as readers as it did to Rama-Tut in the narrative itself. And even here, as we stand in attendance alongside his fellow Avengers in the Swordsman’s final moments, we’re not allowed — or at least not encouraged — to have just one, simple, uncomplicatedly cathartic emotional response. The Swordsman draws his last breath still believing himself to have ultimately been a failure, and never hears Iron Man’s solemn, lionizing declaration that “Every Avenger counts”. It’s a denouement that’s at least as much existentially bleak as it is inspiringly tragic; a complicated conclusion that’s underscored by Englehart’s terse, emotionless final caption: “Termination”.
Of such writing are timeless masterpieces made… though it’s doubtful whether Englehart’s plot and script would have landed with nearly as much impact as it did without the artistic contributions of Dave Cockrum. That’s a claim I’m happy to make, despite the fact that we may never know the full extent of Englehart’s cut-and-paste job on his collaborator’s artwork, and what impact it had on the story’s visual storytelling — as well as by the fact that, according to multiple sources, Cockrum required some help getting the story finished on time… help which ultimately came in the form of star artist (and former Avengers illustrator) Neal Adams.
This is, of course, another of the “oddities” I alluded to earlier in the post; and like the previous one (i.e., Englehart’s cutting-and-pasting activities), I wish I had more specific details to share with you. As far as I can tell, no one is exactly sure how many pages Adams worked on, or whether he “merely” inked Cockrum’s complete pencils rather than provided finished art (i.e., pencils as well as inks) over rough layouts. About the one thing we do know for sure is that both artists worked on the story’s all-important final page… because both of them signed it:
If you’re looking for Adams’ masterful touch on that page, it’s easy to see. And the art looks great, no question. But, having said that, I’m not prepared to say that the page wouldn’t have looked just as good (though obviously different) had Cockrum done the whole job himself. His work throughout “A Blast from the Past!” is just that outstanding, in my humble opinion.
While the almost-30-page “A Blast from the Past!” dominates Giant-Size Avengers #2, it doesn’t take up all of the book’s non-advertising interior pages. Like all of Marvel’s giant-sized fifty-centers of this era, it includes some reprint material. And if we had to have a reprint, it’s hard to imagine a story more appropriate than the one selected — despite the fact that the Avengers themselves aren’t even in the thing:
As I recall, the closest I’d come in 1974 to reading Fantastic Four #19 was watching its animated adaptation on the FF’s 1967-68 Saturday morning TV cartoon series, so I was pretty happy to finally have access to this key story by the team of Lee, Kirby, and Dick Ayers. (I might have felt differently had I already owned it in its original form, of course… but then, as now, I’m good.)
In any event, that brings us to the end of Giant-Size Avengers #2 — but not, of course, to the end of the Celestial Madonna saga… or even to the end of the current schemes of Kang the Conqueror, Thor’s last-page declaration that “Kang’s threat be ended!” notwithstanding. There’s lots more time-traveling trippiness yet to follow; I look forward to sharing it all with you in the months to come.
Additional cover art credits, per the Grand Comics Database and Mike’s Amazing World of Comics:
- Giant-Size Avengers #1 (Aug., 1974): Rich Buckler and John Romita
- Avengers #19 (Aug., 1965): Jack Kirby, Don Heck, and Frank Giacoia
- Avengers #65 (Jun., 1969): Gene Colan, Frank Giacoia, and John Romita
*At some point, Dr. Doom was evidently supposed to play an active role in the story, as indicated by an early, unused version of GS-A #2’s Wilson- Giacoia cover. One might speculate that this adjustment is reflective of the alleged “complexities” (to borrow Steve Englehart’s term) that ended up creating challenges for Dave Cockrum in the pencilling stage of this issue’s production.
Hi Alan,
it’s been a while since I commented on any of your write-ups, though I’ve been faithfully following them all.
But I wanted to very quickly mention something about the art in this story. I actually got to meet Dave Cockrum at a con in 1975 or 1976, and I asked him about the clear Adams presence in this issue. He mentioned that, due to deadlines, Adams as well as the other Crusty Bunkers helped out on the last pages of this book. He specifically said that Adams inked not only the last page but also the splash of the Avengers attacking the Thor robot.
Speaking of Thor, I’m willing to bet that one of the other Bunkers inked the page with the Thor dialogue you cited. Look at Thor and Iron Man’s faces in that last panel, and I think it’s clear that other hands were involved.
Thanks for this write-up of a story I still put on the shortlist of great AVENGERS issues!
Another superb rundown on a comics classic, Alan! As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I missed out on getting this when it new on the racks, although I got it maybe in 1982 or so, when I had more cash on hand and found a comics store in San Jose that happened to have it, albeit for a bit more than 50 cents! Of course, I already knew which Avenger was fated to die in this issue, but it still rather heart-wrenching. Unlike Hawkeye, who had more of less blundered into his brief foray as a super-baddie, in part enticed by the Black Widow when she was still a Soviet spy, the Swordsman had gone all in as a baddie for years before opting to reform, although both Lee & Thomas had shown hints that he had some touches of potential nobility, even if both also showed Swordsman as seemingly irredeemably rotten and potentially murderous. Under Englehart, Swordsman became a struggling hero. His intent to reform and make up for his past misdeeds was portrayed as genuine and not any sort of ruse, but ill luck dogged him and he was often too rash. Even in this issue, his swan song, Swordsman leads the charge to help free the captive Avengers, but time and again he is outshone by the far greater powers of his teammates, although in the end he is taken down while attempting to save the life of the woman he loved more than life but who had previously scorned him.
Mantis’ change of heart towards him at the end might seem a touch unbelievable, particularly with all her squabbling with Wanda about her desire for Vision. But, well, my experiences and observations of life and how humans relate to one another lead me to think that it’s not all that preposterous for Mantis’ feelings to change after witnessing Swordsman unflinchingly sacrifice his own life for hers, and to feel shame for her behavior. Over the last few issues, Englehart had written Mantis as ever more difficult to like, but as with the Swordsman, for all her skills she was also far too prone to human frailties, willing to hurt others for her own selfish desires — up to the moment the Swordsman took the blast meant to kill her. Many readers, I’m sure, hated her for her previous behavior, as well as even for her speech pattern. She definitely made for some heavy drama within the team, and was rather fascinating even without all the weird business of her true origins and cosmic future, which for the most part would be left to our imaginations. The whole idea of a “Celestial Madonna” strikes my adult self as far more silly than profound, and clearly based on mythic/religious tales. Yet, still made for some entertaining reading!
Agreed with your analysis of just why the arc of the Swordsman’s story is so compelling. Steve Englehart resists the urge to make him any sort of decisive, effective hero with a clear-cut redemption arc. Swordsman keeps trying, and he keeps failing. He’s incredibly flawed and makes one mistake after another. There’s a sort of tragic nobility inherent in the character, in that he really wants to succeed, but he just doesn’t have what it takes. It’s only at the very end that he truly accomplishes anything, saving Mantis’ life, but even then, it’s at the cost of his life.
As for Mantis as the “Celestial Madonna” I love the cosmic implications and vast scope of the story. I really appreciate that Englehart took a character who he initially envisioned as a “dragon lady” femme fatale type and developed her into this flawed, complex woman with a mythic destiny that tied in with the history of the Marvel cosmos. It’s not a perfect storyline, by any means, but I admire the ambition, the width & breath, of Englehart’s vision.
This blew me away when i first read it. it’s still impressive. While the later add ons of the Council of Kangs and Cross-Time Kangs were interesting, they never packed the power of Englehart’s run on Kang here.
In *Hulk* #185, President Ford comes to the Hulkbuster Base and meets an imprisoned Bruce Banner. Bruce addresses him as “Mr. Vice-President,” and General Ross apologizes to Ford for the error.
(For what it’s worth, Ford is quite gracious about it, recognizing that given the Hulk alter ego, Bruce may not be entirely up on current affairs.)
But…
Under the 25th Amendment, the succession to the Presidency begins with the Vice-President, and then goes to the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. The Secretary of State comes after that.
I suppose this was because in 1974, a typical reader would know that Henry Kissinger was Secretary of State (he’s in an issue of *The Hulk* himself, #174, lamenting the apparent death of Ralph Roberts and the possibility of developing a cobalt bomb), while they might not know that Carl Albert was the Speaker of the House or that James Eastland was President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
After all, in verifying my issue numbers online, I find that the entry for *Hulk* #174 refers to “Vice-President Kissinger” and “Secretary of Defense Kissinger,” both of which were wrong.
Exit, pursued by the realization that Kissinger, as a foreign-born U.S. citizen, could never become President…
… or Vice-President. At least we were spared a President Spiro Agnew! I suppose Englehart wanted to play it relatively safe and not include a reference to President Ford until after Ford had actually become U.S. President in the real world even if in the Marvel universe Nixon was dead and Ford had already succeeded him. But they didn’t want to make that explicit.
Perhaps Action Comics #309 still haunted comics people in 1974, with its President Kennedy lending the Man of Steel a hand in protecting his secret identity a month after the actual Kennedy had died in Dallas.
You reminded me of Jules Witcover, who wrote two books about Spiro Agnew.
The first was The White Knight, when Agnew was Vice-President.
The second was A Heartbeat Away, after Agnew’s resignation.
Sic transit gloria mundi, or, in Elvis Costello imagery,* the road to glory ends up a hard-luck story. (For Agnew, if not for us.)
For a good laugh, check out the National Lampoon issue from November 1974, which offers a parody of the novel Agnew was supposed to be writing at the time.** Agnew depicts himself as Strongly Handsome Goodfellow, whose ancestors came over on the Merrimack (the ancestors of his wife, spoiled Southern belle Picky Cotton, came over on the Monitor) and Nixon as President Wishy Backstab, while the National Security Adviser is Vassar Radcliffe Smith.
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is a woman named Harmonica Savingsbond. Another character in it is Antonio MacGreenberg who’s in charge of either the C.I.A. or the F.B.I. (memory fails me).
The “every Avenger counts” farewell put me in mind of Michael Connelly’s Harry Bosch, who in pursuing malefactors makes “everybody counts” part of his personal code.
I don’t miss Captain America here, but given his distrust of the Swordsman — which lasted longer than that of the five teammates who welcomed him back to the ranks in Avengers #114 — it would have been even more poignant to have the envoi come from him, rather than from Iron Man.
(Working on the Nomad identity, eh, Steve? Think carefully about the cape!)
*
The Costello song is “Radio Sweetheart,” which I first heard from the talented Carlene Carter.
**
Agnew’s novel would be The Canfield Decision, published in early 1976. How it compares to what we see in National Lampoon I have no idea.
Due to haphazard distribution in these parts, I missed this issue, and it’s only really now that I’m getting a good look at it. A couple of observations…
OK, I really am getting microscopically fannish with all this, and I’m probably wrong on all counts, but you’ve done a bang-up job breaking down the events of this issue…it really has me thinking “Awp! Was that really 50 years ago?”
This is a great summary to a great issue. While maybe not quite as all-in as Kurt Busiek, I do agree that this issue is among the best of the Giant-Sized issues, not in small part due to Cockrum (and crew’s) artwork. Wanda and Mantis in particular are rendered beautifully and dynamically. It’s also the major step forward in the Celestial Madonna storyline, which is one of my all-time favorites.
Steve really lets all the characters shine as well, utilizing their skills, courage, and determination shine. Swordsman’s death is profoundly powerful, and Mantis’ change of heart at the end, and subsequent shame of her treatment of him really helped rehabilitate her character in a natural and believable way. She’s still one of my favorite characters to date.
I’m very much looking forward to your summaries of the subsequent issues, and always enjoy reading your posts.
Yep, even 50 years after it was published and over 40 years after having actually read it, and even knowing the Swordsman’s fate going in, re-reading that death scene still provides an emotional punch for me. And, fortunately, while ghostly doppelgangers have haunted Marvel pages in the time since, the true Swordsman remains dead.
I always take that as a compliment to the original story.
See also Mar-Vell and Paul Kirk.
Yes, it’s true, I have a tattoo of Mantis on my right leg. That splash page of “Time becomes visible to the naked eye” absolutely blew me away when The Celestial Madonna collection came out in 2002.
The irony is that Dave Cockrum flat-out stated “I never liked Mantis. Most of the marvel staff at the time hated Mantis’ guts. I think it was mostly that ‘this one’ crap.” I suppose it speaks to Cockrum’s professionalism that even though he had no love for Mantis he was able to produce one of the definitive versions of the character. His artwork for Giant-Size Avengers #2 is, in my opinion, among the best of his entire career.
Here’s a thought on the Celestial Madonna I’ve had the last year or so: She is to marry the most powerful man on Earth and have a powerful star ruling savior of a son. Slott had Mantis’ son be a defeated madman and proponent of universal genocide. This leaves open the possibility Mantis is not the Celestial Madonna and the almost certainty that the Cotati fueled Swordsman zombie was not the father of the powerful son Kang spoke of. That means there’s a story waiting to be told of Mantis meeting the true father of her powerful child.
More thoughts. I loved the multiple meanings that could be given to the story title, including the highlighted return of Hawkeye on the splash page after an absence of a year and a half. His comeback echoed that of Captain America back in issue #23. In both cases, the Avenger had left the team in a bit of a snit and had no intention of returning to the fold — until they got word that Kang had snatched their old teammates, and their sense of duty and comradery overcame their petty grievances and they came back in to help their friends. Of course, Hawkeye took quite a bit longer to come back, but when he did he even overcame his long held legitimate grudge against a man who had tried to kill him at least twice in the past, working for the common good with him as well as another man he had good reason to be suspicious of. A great example of the use of thought balloons to show all the conflicting thoughts going through Hawkeye’s head on the circumstances he found himself in. Hawkeye had matured a bit since Englehart had taken over the mag two years earlier, no longer quite as hotheaded and excessively judgmental, unlike his other former partner from the Kookie Quartet era, Pietro, who had gotten worse.
These sort of long character arcs are one thing that can be done by certain writers over the course of a series that last for many years (or decades now), playing off what had come before for interesting new character developments that’s somewhat more difficult to do well in one or even a trilogy of films covering a much shorter period. The Swordsman’s story played out over nearly a decade since his introduction in Avengers #19, and Englehart took him in directions neither Lee nor Thomas likely would even have thought of, but Englehart played well off of aspects that they had brought to the character.
And now an attack from a fifty-year-old letter column!
I believe it was Jana C. Hollingsworth who did a meticulous analysis of the various chapters of the Avengers/Defenders Clash and expressed delight that Hawkeye fought Iron Man for his segment of the Evil Eye.
“Stan or even Roy would have brought back the rivalry with the Swordsman.”
I don’t know whether Englehart thought that the events of Avengers #65 had settled who was better and that it was just more fun to have Hawkeye battle Iron Man again (as Ms. Hollingsworth noted, in his encounters with Tony in Tales of Suspense, Clint did very well, despite not having any super-powers)…or that one sword-wielder should battle another, but I think that he made the right choice.
I just have to say, no matter how many times I read it, that final page of Giant-Size Avengers #2 is a genuine gut punch. The combination of Steve Englehart’s script and Dave Cockrum’s artwork gives it all such a palpable impact.
Wow. Not much to add here. This truly is one of the best Avengers stories ever and holds up remarkably well after 50 years. The ending still saddens me. A few observations. I believe Dave Cockrum was his own best inker (although he has certainly had several good inkers), which is why this issue looks so good (as would Giant Size X-Men in 1975). I believe I thought it was the “Crusty Bunkers” (one of whom was Neal Adams) that were assisting on this issue since I also recognized their work on Conan 44 which came out in August 1974 and they would also pitch in on Conan 45. Those Crusty Bunkers were busy. I did not remember that FF 19 was reprinted in this issue; it has been a long time since I looked at this issue although I remember “A Blast from the Past” very well. That was another interesting fact that there was an earlier cover with Dr. Doom added to Kang and Rama Tut. Most likely it was decided to cut that since this story was pretty packed already, and not clear how Dr. Doom could have fit in, although if anybody could have a figured out a way to do it, it was Steve Englehart. Hard to believe that now the Celestial Madonna story line was just getting started! It’s interesting to consider that although much more would be seen of Kang in the pages of Avengers and Giant Size Avengers, he would not appear on any other covers over the next year. Excellent review. Thanks Alan.
Englehart managed to make the later issues featuring Kang diverse enough – with the Legion of the Unliving and later the Avengers split up between those dealing with Kang in the Old West and the others facing off against the Squadron Supreme that there was really no need to keep featuring Kang on the covers. But it does remind of one of the most famous Spider-Man storylines to feature Dr. Octopus – the Master Planner Trilogy of issues 31-33, three issues on which not only does Doc Ock not appear at all, he’s not even mentioned on any of the covers. Of course, he would feature much more prominently on the next Doc Ock epic, as drawn by Jazzy Johnny Romita. Otto must have gotten himself a better agent to ensure he wasn’t left off the covers again.
What of Rama Tut’s court wizard Shamaz? Shazam?
Shazam was originally “Shazamo” (the “O” denoting “Oggar, the World’s Mightiest Immortal”), so could “Shamaz” once have been “Shamazo”?
(Nah, sounds too much like a dry run for Professor Ivo’s Amazo.)
This was my first Avengers purchase, in part because Captain America was on the cover (oops) and in part because I saw that Dave Cockrum was illustrating and I had loved his LSH artwork.
Needless to say, I was a bit confused but I managed to track down a few issues of Avengers (including the previous issue), so I at least had a clue. It took a while but I eventually caught up.
I was able to keep up with most of the rest of Englehart’s tenure with Avengers, and his subsequent work with Justice League and Detective Comics. I really liked the way he wrote his characters….to me, it was different from the other books I was reading at the time.
This was one of my first avengers issues – due to me being a Dave Cockrum fan – read it with very little knowledge of the team (I’d read a few Byrne issues in the 180’s) but those splash pages just were perfect – a Cockrum book without a montage isn’t a Cockrum book!
I knew that Dave and Neal had collaborated on the cover of Bat Man #246 but didn’t realise they’d worked on this one too, so thank you for that. Neal was instrumental in getting Dave looked after in his final years and declining health – by getting Marvel to contribute some restitutions for his X-men creations.
Thanks for the knowledge and entertainment!
I read this post yesterday, but didn’t get a chance to comment. Here we go:
I never read Giant-Size Avengers #2 back in 74. Didn’t read the Avengers at all, back in the day as none of the individual characters really appealed to me-didn’t like Iron Man, didn’t like Cap, didn’t like Thor, and so on and so on-so why in the world would I like them all together in one book? Not saying I didn’t catch an individual issue from time to time. I had friends who were huge Marvel Maniacs who would occasionally foist individual issues off on me and would insist I sit there and read it while they watched me do it, but I missed this one. Looking back fifty years later (and with my pro-DC bias securely in check), this was indeed a good one. One of many great comics I missed, simply because, other than Spider-Man or Daredevil, I didn’t care for the Marvel roster of heroes as much as I cared for the DC bunch.
I do have to comment on the fickle heart of Mantis, however. I’ll be gentle since most of you really seem to appreciate her arc here, but having a cat fight with Wanda over Vision’s affections under the most inappropriate circumstances (honestly, when it began I thought it was going to be a diversion for an escape attempt) one minute to crying over Swordsman’s dead body and swearing her eternal love to him the next was crazy! I know the poet speaks of “the inconstancy of woman,” but it’s a wonder Mantis hasn’t got whiplash after that spectacular turn-around! Actually, it reminds me of those threats we used to make in our heartbroken imaginations after being dumped by our girlfriends, “I’ll show her! I’ll go out and do something crazy and heroic, and get myself killed! Then she’ll regret leaving me! That’ll show her!” You’re all being very quiet. I’m I the only one who ever did that? Apparently, Steve Englehart was right there with me because all those dark, angst-filled teenage dreams come true in that final scene between Mantis and Swordsman, just as Swordsman thinks, “I knew it would work! Now, we’ll be together for–oops.”
I’m actually a bigger fan of the Swordsman arc and how it comes to an end, than I am his romance with Mantis (with all due respect to Ben’s leg tattoo). It’s difficult enough in a huge company with a large roster of characters to maintain the characterization of anyone over a long period of time, but Swordsman’s transformation from “zero to hero” was well-done and was truly a testament to Englehart’s skills as a writer. Sure, it was a little two-dimensional in spots, but welcome to comics in the 70’s, kids! Of course, the fact that it was the Swordsman, a character with little agency anywhere else in the Marvel universe; a character no one else was using or really seemed to want to do anything with at all certainly helped, but Steve turned Swordsman into “a real boy” so to speak and gave him an arc that certainly justified his existence and made him “matter,” at least within the context of this story, if nowhere else. Still, the fact that Swordsman remains unresurrected to this day, highlights the fact that no one else really knew what to do with a guy whose only power was his swordsmanship (now if he only used arrows! That would be something!). The Swordsman is probably better off in the land of Truly Dead superheroes. He was used briefly as Kate Bishop’s step-dad in the Hawkeye TV show, and he should take that bow and say good-night.
Alright, enough of that! Englehart’s story was great and Cockrum’s art was excellent, no matter who inked it, and if you guys tell me this was one of the best Avengers stories ever, I can certainly see why you feel that way. Thanks, Alan!
From a much older adult perspective, I find it amusing how we comics readers often divided into camps for a variety of reasons back in the day, not so much based on the quality of the writing & art but on the name of the company publishing the work. I think economics certainly played some part as most of us simply could not afford to buy everything published and once we got hooked onto one company that was as good a reason as any to stick with them, at least until something happened to cause us to try something from the other side. For me, it was a matter of becoming an adult with a job and more money and an increasing curiosity to check out other stuff which eventually not only meant DC output, but also independent publishers and underground comix, etc.
My tastes in comics fare changed quite a bit from when I was 12 to when I was 22, never mind now being 62! But, the best of what appealed to my 12 year old self still holds up pretty well, IMO, as does some of the DC material I passed up as a kid but checked out later, such as Englehart’s Batman stories, not to mention the O’Neil & Adams Batman and Green Lantern/Green Arrow tales, etc. Of course, I was also reading a lot of other things, such as actual novels, history, science, philosophy, etc. I went from the “comic book kid” to the “bookaholic”!
I really enjoyed this week’s blog. I have this issue and will be digging it out for a reread this week. I especially liked the fact you showed the unused cover which I had not seen since reading Foom 8 where I first saw it 40 years ago. Another one to dig out this week.
On Wanda weaponizing lava and meteors, Englehart said he hated that throwing a couple of hex spheres left her exhausted, which was the norm at the time he came onboard. He resolved to amp her up, and succeeded.
I loved Cockrum’s Legion work and liked this issue and GS X-Men #1. but I wondered whether Cockrum got a hand with the inking or was just playing around with inking styles on this issue.
Wasit more friction with Englehart alluded to or issues with Giella’s inking of GS Avengers #3 that caused Cockrum to move over to the X-Men and Englehart not to join him?
The few comments I’ve found made by Cockrum about his Giant-Size Avengers work don’t mention issue #3 at all. But, if anything turns up in my research for my post about that issue (coming in November), I’ll include it.
I have always guessed that if Shooter had been EIC when Cockrum came over, he would have kept him as an inker and designer, as he did with Earnie Chan.
As an 8-year-old in August 1974, I doubt I thought twice about the cover blurb announcing “the Death of an Avenger”, but I do remember taking a long time to read what was for me at the time the longest comic book story that I had read to that point. I’m pretty sure I took in the full-page montage-style splash page without noticing the details at first read, but upon re-reading it over the next several years, I realized that Dave Cockrum had foreshadowed the ending in the four-panel close-up of the Swordsman’s face where one of his eyeballs is drawn as a skull. Echoing everybody else, Englehart & Cockrum’s tour-de-force was so fast-paced that it took me a while to realize that the Swordsman had truly met his demise. My first superhero deaths were Wing and the Red Tornado in JLA # 102, and I had encountered the deaths of Invisible Kid in Superboy/LSH # 203 and then Manhunter in Detective # 443 just one month before Giant-Size Avengers # 2. I recall these deaths as final (although Reddy got better only to die again, and then get better once more), with no expectation that any of them would or should be revived. It would take me some time to learn that Lightning Lad had been the first Silver Age character to die and then be revived, with a decently plausible explanation. I consider Marvel’s first casualty to be Uncle Ben, the Rawhide Kid’s uncle, in the Kid’s origin story in Rawhide Kid # 17 (Aug. 1960) by Lee and Kirby, two full years before the death of Spider-Man’s Uncle Ben in Amazing Fantasy # 15 (Aug. 1962) by Lee and Ditko. Alan, thanks so much for this great review!
The first super-hero death I experienced was Ferro Lad in Adventures #353 in 1967, which was roughly the third year of my comics reading. As best as I can recall, it was a permanent death, but I could be wrong.
Not counting the Zero Hour reboot Legion, he stayed dead.
“upon re-reading it over the next several years, I realized that Dave Cockrum had foreshadowed the ending in the four-panel close-up of the Swordsman’s face where one of his eyeballs is drawn as a skull”
Yes, that’s a haunting piece of storytelling by Cockrum, and yet another reason why the “Time becomes visible to the naked eye!” page packs such a powerful impact for me.
Some observations
I’ve had the story from Giant-Size Avengers #2 in both the Celestial Madonna collected edition and in the black & white Essential Avengers for a number of years, but for quite a while I’ve hoped to find an affordable copy of the actual comic book to add to my collection. I was finally able to do so last week when I bought a copy of GSA #2 at New York Comic Con.
Congrats!