Ferran Delgado's picture
Posted by: Ferran Delgado | April 3, 2012


Mark Evanier commented the following about Shores in Facebook:

"Regarding Syd Shores inking Kirby: I liked some of it, didn't like some of it. The printing and coloring on those issues were poorer than usual and a lot of Shores' fine line work muddied up.

Shores had a special problem on those jobs because Stan was grooming him to take over as penciler so Jack could be rotated to another book. Shores kept being told that he was to ease the book towards his style so he changed Kirby more than he might have if he hadn't been told that. But Stan kept then telling him he'd screwed up a lot of what Jack did, especially in the faces. So Shores got very confused as to what he was supposed to do and they eventually took him off the book. He never became its penciler."


I don't understand why people keep judging Shores so harsh, putting him in the same level like Colleta.

Imho, his style is crude but he knows how to draw faces and he knows about lighting and he knows how to draw eyes at the same height and pointing at the same direction, as opposite to Colleta. Even his crude strokes have some beauty on them. The main complain is that he changed so much on Kirby's art, but as pointed out by Evanier, it was not his fault, it was Stan's with his confusing art direction.

For example, imho Sharon in the fourth panel looks right to me, even pretty, and lighting looks right to me since the focus of the light is the shot. I wish Colleta would do a similar work in Thor, with his RANDOM little lines and his strabismic eyes. This way I could even take a look at those comics without feeling frustrated.

nick caputo's picture
Posted by: nick caputo | April 3, 2012

Ferran, I tend to agree with


I tend to agree with Mark for the most part. Shore's inking was hurt due to poor printing and coloring, although there are quite a few very nice pages by him. His inking on Cap did evoke a different era. Shore's was an incredible talent, dating back to his drawing Cap in the 1940s. He was an exceptional artist on westerns, and in the 1960s I thought his best inking was over Gene Colan on Daredevil (Colan thought very highly of Shores, who he learned quite a lot from when he worked at Timely-Atlas in the late 1940s).

Special note to Tom Kraft. It was a pleasure to meet you at the New York Con. I wish I wasn't running out and we could have chatted longer.

Speaking of the con, I found an undiscovered Kirby cover alteration in an unexpected area, and discuss it in depth at my blog:


patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | April 3, 2012


I don't see Shores as crude at all. His inking looks really accomplished to me. The only reason I don't like Shores inking KIrby is I like Kirby's line, and favor replication of it in the inks. If Shores had been one of Marvel's pencilers in the '60s I'd make an effort to collect it. He could have been right up there with Bill Everett as one of the best stylists at the company.
His inks on Kirby are interesting when well reproduced, but one issue would have been enough.

Comment viewing options