On the Internet forums I visit, I see a lot of debates — some about important stuff, some about trivial matters, much of both about things that aren't going to change one bit because of any online discussion. You and I could fill several Facebook Forums arguing over whether Joe Biden should stay in the race, Donald Trump should be in prison, this side in the Israel/Hamas War should make this concession, that side in the Ukraine/Russia War should make that concession, et cetera, et cetera…
…and all those bytes won't change a thing except maybe (maybe!) one of us will feel some moments of triumph in this battle that won't change anything or some onlooker will be comforted to see one of us agree with him.
Those are the Important Stuff debates I was just talking about but I'm also talking about the Trivial Matters variety. And a lot of those debates are about matters in the past like which was the best Star Wars movie, who was the best James Bond, who drew the best Spider-Man…that kind of thing. So nothing's really going to change. One self-described "Three Stooges Fanatic" practically wanted to challenge me to a duel with live ammo over my opinion that there were good performances by Third Stooges not named Curly.
(Actually, if he was a real "Three Stooges Fanatic," his weapons of choice would have been cream pies at ten paces. "Turn and lob!")
At times, I kinda enjoy the Trivial Matters Debate because they're spectator sports. No one dies. No blood is shed. Generally, no one even loses money. And most people don't lose in any sense because, for example, it's not a fact (in the real sense of that word) that the best Star Wars movie was The Empire Strikes Back, the best James Bond was Sean Connery and the best Spider-Man was drawn by Steve Ditko. The only way you can really lose that kind of debate is if you make the mistake of stating your opinion as an established fact…
…like "Everyone agrees that Calvin & Hobbes was the greatest comic strip ever."
Someone said that on a Facebook Forum once and the next seventy zillion comments were along the lines of "I don't." And just for the record, I don't.
Debates about Things That Really Matter can get really nasty at times, especially when someone seems to be stubbornly defending some unlisted Constitutional Right to state a belief and not have to see anyone offer a competing one. Or sometimes they cite the First Amendment and argue that it can have a "Chilling Effect" on their Free Speech if anyone else enjoys The Right of Rebuttal. Or if someone — gasp! — exercises any sort of right to not listen.
I'm writing this, I guess, because it's 123 days until this country picks its President for the next four years and I'm already sick of debates. I don't mean like the Trump/Biden kind because that kind, for good or ill, actually matters. I mean like the ones certain friends want to have with me like we're going to settle the whole matter on the phone. I'm especially weary of "No one could disagree with…" statements with which a great many people obviously disagree. Your candidate, whoever it might turn out to be, is not likely to win this thing unanimously.
I'm also writing this because recently while searching my e-mailbox for a message about something-or-other, I came across the following exchange. A fellow I don't know had been engulfed on some web forum duel-to-the-death over who was the best of the many inkers who, over the many years, inked over the pencil art of Jack Kirby. As some consider me kind of an authority on Mr. Kirby and his work, this person wrote to me for The One Right Answer…
All these guys in the discussion are saying it was Wally Wood or Mike Royer or Chic Stone or someone else. You and I know the absolute best inker Kirby ever had was Joe Sinnott. Could you please give me a statement I can post online so we can settle this once and for all that it was Sinnott?
My reply went something like this. (Well, not "something like this." I cut-and-pasted it so it went exactly like this)…
That's an opinion. You can sometimes settle factual matters once and for all, though even then someone may call your fact a fake and their fact a real fact. With regards to Kirby inkers, some folks prefer the kind of inker who didn't impose his own style on the work and who let what Jack drew shine on through and some prefer the guys who fixed this or changed that and toned down some of the extremes. Once upon a time, I was in the latter camp but as I've grown older, I've moved to the former camp. I like Kirby art that looks like Kirby art and keeps all the power and emotion largely intact. Obviously, those two camps will never agree on a single name.
I do not see any reply from this person in my emailbox but I recall that later, someone sent me a link to the discussion forum. And on it, the guy who wrote to ask me wrote, "I checked with Mark Evanier and he says the best inker for Jack Kirby was Joe Sinnott. Case closed." Well, I guess that settles it.