You know, I'm of two minds on this.

For one, Rude is a great comic book illustrator. I love THE MOTH. I didn't pick up on all these details when I read it.

Could it be Rude was having trouble with this sequence himself? How about that? A creative guy having trouble with his work. Who'd a thought?

That's not mind-reading, folks, that's fact. If Rude was having space considerations, if he wasn't quite sure where he was going, if he was in a hurry to get to that awesome panel smack in the center of the page...I could give a damn. It's good enough to get the point across.

Yeah, studying it, Rude may have taken liberty with that white border which invites us readers to "fill in" the time/space issue comics so easily overcomes compared to prose or even film.

And sure, one of Rude's dudes goes from wearing a turtleneck to wearing a shirt and tie. All right. The Dude's focus is off on the details.

It just doesn't matter to me. We barely have enough good to great clean and clear artists as it is and we bust one of them's balls because WE think something's wrong?

You can't read THE MOTH and get the very clear and clean idea that Rude loves the character, the world he inhabits? You can't get the idea Rude really wants to tell that story? You aren't able to commit to a conspiracy of F-U-N with Rude and the Moth because of a couple off panel selections?

Where's this stuff end? We also get retarded commentary on Rich Buckler's swiping...but he still created Deathlok and produced a horde of good solid comics back when. It's the old joke about making love to thousands of women, that's a great man, but suck one c**k and you're a c**ksucker for life.

Buckler's a swiper, Vinnie Colletta is an art-maiming ape, Steve Rude's an unprofessional dabbler...and yet each of them could earn a paycheck doing what us wanna-be's can only dream about.

Are we really saying that Steve Rude is an unprofessional dabbler? Toth certainly suggested nothing of the sort. A lot of us are merely agreeing with Toth on his criticism, because as he points out the flaws in Rude's storytelling they become obvious.

Now, one would presume that when Rude asked for a critique, he wasn't asking for praise, but pointers on how to improve. And Toth tells him exactly what he needs to do in order to improve.

Rude's own account of his reaction suggests that he was too busy making excuses to appreciate the lesson. The page from The Moth is an example of later work where he exhibits the same storytelling problems that Toth warned him about. That is its relevance.

There is a lesson in this, and I'd say it is that when you ask someone you respect for advice you should listen to it, no matter how much you don't want to hear what is being said. And that's a lesson that a lot of aspiring artists, like myself, would have benefited greatly from not realizing first hand. A decade or two too late.

As for Buckler being a swiper and Colletta "maiming" art? Well, it's the truth. Certainly it should be accompanied by their positives (When he wanted to, Colletta drew or inked some of the prettiest women in Romance comics) but it's not the case of the bad behaviour being a small part of their career, either in volume or significance.  

Using your analogy, the "cocksucking" would be Buckler not swiping or Colletta  not "hacking".  

Sorry Ray, not suggesting the Dude is above reproach or criticism. As I was reading through the thread, I was thinking of other external criticisms I've read elsewhere about Rude. That's where "unprofessional dabbler" comes from. My choice to actually put a title to it, the culmination of a lot of hard criticism of Rude's work, as if the man is slumming or something, or he can't take the time to learn his craft. I doubt that's the case.

As far as "that's fact"? I'm writing a 400 page novel and I know how hard it is to get through some parts of it. You start taking short-cuts, you start justifying sloppy continuity, you even go full-hack and rip somebody else off if you're desperate. Sometimes you just can't stand to write another word of That Chapter, or you're in a hurry to plow through to what DOES interest you. And anybody who's trying to produce work like that is bound to run into the struggle.

I'm overprotective of Rude, to a degree. I think the man has loads of talent AND his head is in the right place where it concerns what comics are/should be. He wants to return comics to a certain place in time, a better place, and he's willing to put his money where his mouth is (well, he WAS...don't know about now, as I'm still waiting for the good word on new Moth material, or new Rude in general from his company); I wish to god there were more like him.

It's the same lapse in the published version. Moth is shown taking out the thug pulling the gun, who pulled it right handed but has it in left hand above, and in the published.

In the published it isn't so noticeable, as the gun COULD be falling from either pinned thug hand.

But I much prefer this version of panel 4, even though the published both establishes Moth better and emphasizes his agility (which admittedly would be hard for anyone to pull off, considering Moth's initial face kick with both feet would push him back...even Spider-Man might have trouble making a flip off a face-kick).

Paulo, you're right about the gun make as well.

Bryan, I can only say Toth doesn't come off as a mean bastard to me. He just comes off as a guy who expects the best out of someone as talented as Rude. In Toth's eyes, Rude was shirking. And I imagine Toth is railing against a new comic book culture who doesn't take as much pride in the work, and with Rude being the rare talent who not only could, but could redefine the talent around him and influence others toward better art, he's serving tough love.

That's my take. Of course, the Allred thing sounds like Toth was also prideful in other ways, and maybe mentorship wasn't his bag to begin with.