Bruuuce!



Art © 2011 Evan Dorkin. Hulk ® Marvel Characters.

I just realized that the post title means nothing if your only Hulk experience is with the late-'70s TV series, in which his scientist side was named David Banner. A round of the opening theme to the very first Hulk cartoon from a decade earlier should set you straight.

The Update-a-Tron comics-weblog aggregator prompted me to peruse Evan Dorkin's LiveJournal blog
for the first time in a while. I was sucked in out of curiosity over what Dorkin had to say about his sketch of Peeper, an extremely throwaway Jack Kirby creation; the stream-of-consciousness post reads like a less choreographed, non-fiction prose version of one of Dorkin's great Eltingville strips, mixing the mirthful delight of pure-id fantasy with the melancholy of reality. After realizing that — like so many of the places I land via leading links — there was way more fun stuff than I had time to spend scrolling through, I grabbed the above Hulk sketch and left. Yes, I stick to a self-imposed ban on outright swearing on this blog, despite the occasional racy remark, but I can't bring myself to bowdlerize Dorkin's drawing; besides, it's not like Mr. Green Genes is using the F-word (or something worse).

Just the other day I was thinking of starting up an Existential Hulk feed on Twitter. I quickly had to admit that I have too many commitments as it is and that somebody must already be doing such a thing, never mind that I don't even have my own Twitter account, but it was a fun, fleeting daydream while it lasted. A Google search turns up confirmation that there are loads of Hulk feeds on Twitter — including a Buddhist Hulk and Hamlet Hulk, if no Existential Hulk per se — many of them helpfully catalogued by Jason Kottke, whose cabinet of wonders merits further poking around. I think that Editor Hulk is my favorite based on a short sampling of each, although the Drunk Hulk entry on Kottke's page is outright hilarious with bonus points for sticking with stereotypical Hulk-speak, which otherwise entertaining feeds don't really do successfully.

No comments: