Dan Decarlo's outwork, particularly when penned by Frank Doyle, from the first half of the 1960s was a high-water mark in the field of comics.
I don't know how controversial or groundbreaking that statement is-- Decarlo's reputation in the fields of comics has risen twice during the past few years -- the first time with sympathetic support for his lawsuit, the second time after his death. If I had stated that 5 years back in a sort of random corner of -- er-- "comic fandom", I may have received some rolled eyeballs admist some fond childhood nostalgia of "yeah, he was nice", and a question of "who? OH... that's rather lame."
Actually, I probably elevated him too high. Really. Certainly Kurtzman, Krigstein, Stanley, Wolverton, Cole, and various others are more "essential" (whatever "essential" means) of this era. But, I could easily toss him into the next bundle -- maybe lump in with creators who's work was limited by genre considerations and general lack of depth: Johnny Craig...
It's difficult to access why Decarlo works-- but it holds up, and proves effective. There are worse cartoonists for a cartoonist-in-training to study to try to glean some tricks from... though, s/he'd be wise to aim for something higher. "A perfect marriage between form and semi-content", if I remember the Comics Journal's orbituary correctly.
In looking over what I have-- reprints from carefully picked up digests, and analyzing Decarlo's early 1960s stories beyond what the average reader would, we a few curious narrative devices tossed around: crafty breaking of the fourth wall, a distorted sense of timing that I can't quite put my finger on... several factors which would fall apart if the characters didn't move gracefully on the page, or if the page was cluttered with more lines.
Oh, and the inherent sexism is always amusing.
But there's a time capsule at work with Decarlo. Prior to the early 1960s when the iconic style cemented-- maybe 1958 or 1959-- he was still awkwardly copying Bob Montana at least for this company, as was the want of Archie Comics. Post mid-1960s-- as far as I can tell, some over-extension of Decarlo at the company and curious editorial directions at the company (trying to cash in on various trends, and trying to grow and create a brand-name with cross-over success to bad animated cartoons and bad bubblegum music) took its toll. The times changed, and the company went on with their awkward balance of change and steadfast conservatism that continues on to this day...
Seth, in his odd Comics Journal look of obscure John Stanley comics, called "1959-1965" the company's "good years". That actually sounds about right. Samm Schwartz left in 1966 -- returned a few years later. The company did god-awful campy Batman knockoffs with these characters. They decided to mix their properties around -- ie Josie. And, signs of the apocalyse, they were just a few years from putting out "Sugar Sugar".
If Archie Comics was intelligent -- which they really aren't, and not vindictive -- which they really are-- they would release a series of Decarlo reprints from this era, packaged in whatever way they want to... not situate it in digests where 50 percent of the comics have no redeamable value. It would certainly sell... Decarlo was their biggest star, and those in the know consider this the highlight of Decarlo's career. The problem here is the company sucks, and may be afraid the Decarlo reprints would outsell whatever they're trying to do these days -- and I think it's in the company to avoid marketing anything but the corporate licenses -- no "big" "names".
Curiously enough, a random search for "Decarlo" does show a mention of the lawsuit on the company's website in a reprinted article -- a couple of paragraphs of briefly mentioning some negativity in an otherwise upbeat puff piece. Curious.
--------------------------------------------------
Local comic book store just bought someone's EC collection. I was there last weekend as they were being processed. The store clerk laughed at two particular covers -- both of which I'm familiar with: Weird Science #20, and Crime Suspenstories #22. Look them up... they both really are pretty striking for two entirely different sardonic reasons.