Username: 
Password:    
Remember Me

Search by :  Username E-mail Region Interest AOL IM ICQ Number Yahoo! ID MSN Username Jabber

psychop_rex (psychop_rex) wrote in scans_daily,

But, see, I don't think that IS the case with Norman. The whole haircut thing is really only an object of debate amongst serious fans - for the general public, Norman Osborn is not 'inextricably associated' with his hairdo, he's inextricably associated with his alter ego - the Green Goblin is far more iconic than Norman himself could ever hope to be. Especially since the movies came out, I think the general non-comics reading public thinks of Norman Osborn as Willem Dafoe.
And yes, the hairdo is certainly inconsistently drawn, but any comic that lasts for more than a few years and is worked on by more than one artist will have problems like that. Look at Superman's spitcurl - one could argue that that distinctive hairdo is an iconic part of the character, yet it's been drawn in about a million different ways, from a subtle thing that's barely noticeable to a great big honkin' twist of hair dangling down between his eyes. The fact remains that, however it's handled, if something in comics remains drawn a certain way for long enough, that depiction of it becomes canon, of a sort - not because it's a necessary part of the character, but because the artists think of the character that way when they're drawing him. In short, I don't think that Marvel is keeping the Osborn cornrows because of some greater purpose, they're keeping them because, after all this time, everyone is simply used to doing them that way.
(Anyway, I could be wrong, but I think that the Osborn haircut IS possible in real life - it's just something that would be difficult to maintain on any sort of long-term basis. You'd need a hell of a lot of styling gel and a sympathetic barber.)