tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post7874507929865156314..comments2024-02-22T02:31:34.108+00:00Comments on Too Busy Thinking About My Comics: The Pyrrhic Victory Of The New 52 Pod People: On Animal Man #16, 2013Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-58320649724297533862013-03-16T11:14:06.376+00:002013-03-16T11:14:06.376+00:00[cont]
I know that there’s this belief in the com...[cont]<br /><br />I know that there’s this belief in the comics internet community that you need to drop the darkness and the violence and the sex in order to reach more readers. I disagree. People are already watching shows like True Blood or Game Of Thrones or The Walking Dead. Many play video games that are often very violent. It’s not like the Saw franchise didn’t have millions of viewers. I don’t believe there’s a shortage of people who would like what comics are offering. They just don’t know that this stuff even exists. Nobody that I showed my copy of Catwoman #1 to (men and women alike, mostly university students, no rumpy simpleton to be found) was turned off by that, everyone was like: “Wow, they’re actually FUCKING? This doesn’t seem like it’s for kids, is this like a serious thriller or something? Are comics always like that? I might just get interested in them…” <br /><br />Rumpers and Flakkers: I know what you’re getting at, but certainly a small group of ignorant fans isn’t exclusive to comics. Every community and every subculture will have them. And I do believe that the majority followers of weird tales and fantastical fiction tend to engage with their material, as silly as it may often be, in ways that the average consumer of soap operas, casting shows or other popular entertainment certainly doesn’t. Mind you, if I had my way, I’d make everyone read Dostojewski, Proust and Kafka first to get to the really great art. I’m not arguing that the average comic is anywhere near that sphere. But as far as popular culture goes, I think they’re doing quite alright, sometimes even crossing that said border to the realm of transgressive art. <br /><br />I envy the experience you describe with The Birthday Party. Seeing as I was born in 1984, I didn’t exactly get the chance to catch them live. I have seen The Birthday Massacre live numerous times, though there’s not really a relation there and I doubt they’d be to your taste. But certainly I do know about feeling just SO alive afterwards. The best concerts always do that. And now I’m off to let you continue with other things – and to find out about that Flaming Carrot you mentioned again. I have no idea who that is, but he sounds like fun. Take care and have a great weekend! :)<br /><br />- BjörnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-60662025480790475962013-03-16T11:11:42.364+00:002013-03-16T11:11:42.364+00:00Hello Colin, thanks for the long and thoughtful re...Hello Colin, thanks for the long and thoughtful response again. I fear I’m derailing your blog by checking in so infrequently and then going on and on and on but thanks a lot for clearing up so much.<br /><br />I usually tend to think of my English as very good, yes, but then that’s an illusion that can easily be shattered as soon as I’m asked to point someone the way and forget basic words like “railway station”. Well, at least I really don’t sound like Uwe Boll (you should, however, totally buy every movie of Uwe Boll just to listen to the hilarious audio commentary; I realize that there is certain cult following out there for these now, but I very much pride myself on discovering the glory of Boll commentaries before they were officially cool). <br /><br />I may indeed have associated you with arguments you have not made in that form. I apologise for that. Certainly I have read in your comments section that you’re not against any kind of horror or gore in general – I have to admit, though, I took that more for you trying to be polite. What I read was basically: “Well, I would of course recognize a good dark ‘n grim story…if only such a thing existed.” Combined with comments you made in one blog post about “wasting my youth on the bleakness of post-punk” (not the exact wording, but I can’t find it right now) I came to the conclusion that maybe the reason why you can’t find quality in everything from Animal Man to Batwing to anything written by Brian Azzarello…is because you wouldn’t recognize quality in that particular type of story anyway. Which really wouldn’t even say anything bad about you. There’s a reason why I don’t review any Jazz in that part-time music journalist writing of mine; I wouldn’t know good from bad and I don’t particularly like the genre to start with. I think being critical is important - writing reviews on works you are prejudiced against from the beginning, however, is a pointless exercise. So, yes, that’s where I was coming from. Again, my apologies for making so many assumptions from so few blog posts. I very much thought I might be on to something and I had discovered why we often get to such different conclusions. I see now it’s not THAT easy to pin that all on you. :)<br /><br />One very important thing you said: you’ve seen all this before. That is of course something I have to take in account. I myself have NOT seen most of this anytime before anywhere. I watched cartoons as a kid, I read manga like Death Note and Elfen Lied when I came across those, I collected Preacher and looked into Sandman. That’s my ENTIRE comic book knowledge up until September of 2011 when I decided it would be kinda fun to get a #1 issue of Detective Comics…and, well, the whole thing did get a little out of control and more of a passion than I thought. Maybe I will get tired of this stuff a year or two down the road. I recognize that these never ending Superhero stories probably do get repetitive at some point. <br /><br />But, you know, up until 18 months ago I pretty much believed that mainstream comics still had heroes fighting space apes while jumping from giant typewriters. Yes, I knew about The Dark Knight Returns I believed those were out-of-continuity elseworld takes that basically came along once every five years when they had some “serious artist” take on these “silly funnybooks”. So in many ways, I’ll admit that, I am indeed an enthusiastic and excitable boy when it comes to these things, they still feel new to me. I had NO IDEA that monthly comics are the way they are. And most people have no idea of that. Which I think tells a devastating story of how bad DC and Marvel are in promoting their properties, even with all those successful movies. Comics are just so far off the radar, they are completely out of the public eye. <br /><br />[cont]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-4976211097129475492013-03-12T13:18:02.504+00:002013-03-12T13:18:02.504+00:00Cont;
So my objection isn't to horror, or vio...Cont;<br /><br />So my objection isn't to horror, or violence, or anything of the sort. Much of my favourite art is concerned with little else. My objection is to use of such conventions in a way that's nearly always about hooking an audience with SHOCK for no purpose, and with no longterm aim. I won't argue with Mr Synder's words. Horror can indeed do such things. But as I argued in my piece about Batman #17, I don't think that was a well-told tale. It has moments of genius, as I did say, but its construction was often careless and its morality was appalling. My objection to it, therefore, isn't to do with anything you've explained. I just don't think that it was technically and ethically strong enough.<br /><br />I can understand why you wouldn’t want to feel insulted by my reference to “Rumpers” and “Flackers”. You’ve given me a lot to think about there. Yet there clearly is a significant audience who associate unthinkingly with DC’s product and respond with force to anyone who criticises charges of sexism, homophobia, senseless storytelling, and so on. I never wake up without having a comment or two of at best snearing contempt to delete from the blog. Yet it was never my intention to label everyone who enjoys these books with the same term. My criticisms have always been of those who unthinkingly swallow what I fear I regard as thin and often objectionable fare. You’re clearly not doing so. You’re debating your points in an inclusive fashion and I’m grateful for it. As such, you’re by definition not a “flakker”, who’ll do anything to protect a thin argument, or a “Rumper”, who consumes without thinking whatever the company delivers. Yet you have given me grounds to think about my use of these terms. I promise you that I will give the matter some serious thought.<br /><br />In closing, I don’t think that we’re so far away from each other. We both believe that transgressive art can inspire, challenge and entertain. We both think those things are important. I don’t think that DC is using the mass of its books to tell stories which are well-wrought, let alone challenging. You, on the other hand, think it is. That should be our point of difference, because that’s all that we disagree upon. I’m with you on art which stares into the abyss. <br /><br />As for winning your points with reference to as many comics as I’ve read! I promise you, I know very little about the history of comics and its associated arts. I hardly know anyone who reads comics who isn’t an expert on a whole series of areas which I’m ignorant of. Indeed, with your knowledge of the Nu52, you’re undoubtedly far ahead of me there. As Bob Burden’s Flaming Carrot discovered, the race doesn’t go to the person who’s read the most comics :)<br />Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-82109121985652779622013-03-12T13:07:34.104+00:002013-03-12T13:07:34.104+00:00Hello Bjorn:- First off, your English is excellent...Hello Bjorn:- First off, your English is excellent, and in the context of it being your second language - or perhaps 3rd or 4th - what you say makes perfect sense.<br /><br />Can I perhaps suggest that you may have been associating me with arguments which I have never made. I can understand why you would, if such was so. It's common for people who take a stand against the kind of, for want of a better word, body-horror which has become a Nu52 convention to be folks who don't see the point to anything that's disturbing and visceral. But I've never made that argument. I have nothing to say against any form of art whatsoever. My opposition to the use of body-horror in the Nu52 isn't that it exists. Rather, it's that it is used so ineptly. It's thrown around in a diluted and careless form for the low-level SHOCK of it all, but it's rarely done in a way which USES the conventions of body horror in a way that disturbs or challenges. Constantly stabbing superheroes is not, for example, an example of art which is disturbing, thought-provoking or innovative. In fact, it's banal, predictable and wearisome.<br /><br />Now, if you were to suggest to me that body-horror - to focus on this one trope - could be used in a way that was genuinely disturbing in the Nu52, and that it could be made to shake the reader's prejudices and peace of mind in general, then I'd say GO FOR IT!!!! I can think of little better than a superhero book which challenges its readers. But the Nu52 doesn't. Even the recent death of Robin was as commonplace as it could be. We've seen all this before, and seen it done far better than this.<br /><br />Now, you're assuming,. for example, that I'm not aware of how a really good zombie movie can raise all sorts of pleasures and issues. But that's simply not so. I'm well aware of the way in which art can operate in such a way, and have often enjoyed material which set out to shake those who are experiencing it. For example, since you mention you're taste for Goth, I can recall a Birthday Party gig in Brixton in 1982 which was a full-on 90 minutes of deafening noise, screams, confrontation, and so on. It was one of the most extreme physical as well as artistic experiences I've ever had, and I can still recall walking through the early-morning streets of London afterwards feeling SO alive and thrilled by the whole process.<br /><br />Similarly, I'm not known amongst those who know me as someone who's content with the word and keen to turn away from challenging art. I do think that the Nu52 is producing ersatz body-horror. But that doesn't mean that I don't want the horrors existential or physical of the world to be discussed. Indeed, I'd suggest that this bloke often expresses my belief that the superhero book ought to be doing FAR more of that. Indeed, one of my favourite comics at the moment is Jennifer Blood. You'll see it in last week's posts about the best books of the year so far, and in several posts I've put up in the past. Now Jennifer Blood is an extremely violent comic book. In fact, it makes anything the Nu52 has published look tame and meaningless. But when writer Al Ewing has an eye torn out or a body blown into pieces, he does so in a way that's (1) imaginative and (2) purposeful. He's USING horror to discuss a host of things, and he's having fun with it too. In addition, he playfully and yet also seriously discusses the consequences of extreme acts of violence. I love his work, and would never dream of criticising the blood and gore which it contains.<br /><br />Cont:<br /><br /><br />Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-34342118283165159572013-03-12T12:18:45.457+00:002013-03-12T12:18:45.457+00:00[continued]
Or: "And that moment gave me th...[continued]<br /><br />Or: "And that moment gave me the chills, you know, Batman sees himself mirrored in the Joker, like we all see a glimpse of him in us. I couldn’t cheer him on as a hero at that point, I actually hesitated to even turn the page, for the Joker was truly winning in this moment, turning Batman into a monster himself. Like, honestly, we all could be turned, like maybe we all could actually murder someone when the ones we lose the most are hurt. Scott Snyder got through to me and made me afraid of the thought of what I might be able to do in extreme circumstances. It really shook me. I was still thinking about that three nights later. So, I tell you, friends, we really need that cathartic experience via works of art so as to keep the war inside ourselves in check. You buying the next round?" <br /><br />And (now here’s MY broad stroke, ha!)…I tend not to be able to have that kind of talk with kind-hearted people who spend their time enjoying kind-hearted works of art. Those people tend to be simply…nice people. And those nice people tend to look at me and say “But there is enough bad stuff already out there in the world. I just went to be happy and enjoy myself when watching a movie, reading a book or listening to music.” I then tend to look at them and feel that there’s not much of any worth in those fluffy and kind-hearted and nice things they enjoy. Myself, I don’t even really want to necessarily “enjoy” my works of art. Yes, I I’m certainly getting a handful of comics monthly that are more of the popcorn-blockbuster-variety. But generally speaking, I’d watch a Lars Von Trier movie over a Michael Bay one any day. I want to be shaken - to the core, if possible. <br /><br />One of my favourite musicians who I interviewed more than once for a German music magazine once said to me: “But that is not how it works. There is no “time out” in which I’m listening to a “nice record”. That is not how it works. What do those “positive people” even have to offer? Art is no vacation from yourself.” I like that so much that I’ll still repeat that five years later and also used it as the title of said article: “Kunst ist kein Urlaub vom Ich.” Good art is no vacation, good art is (drumroll for pathos...) when you let the abyss gaze back at you. Or, as Scott Snyder said about Batman and his family recently: “You suddenly realize how scary the world can be because, you know, you always have a piece of your heart out there that can be attacked […] I knew I could really scare myself - and that’s the best feeling, when you’re getting stuff that deeply frames you about your own deepest sort of nightmares and the questions that really keep you up at night.”<br /><br />Which is just about the best explanation I can give to show where I’m coming from. I fear I might still have forgotten something or that I appear to be sidestepping parts of the conversation. I really didn’t mean to, I just thought if I leave a dozen of anonymous posts on your blog and criticize you, I should at least try to make myself understood better, even if it is weeks later. And since, like I said, I won’t be winning any battles about specific Animal Man or comic book knowledge, I’ve done this in rather rambling style, hoping to address in general the underlying principles on which I judge works of art in general, since they directly inform why the “New 52 style” works for me and is much more to me than to you. And why I think you repeatedly draw an unfair line from “likes to stare at gory pictures” to “is a blithering idiot who won’t take sense or ethics or deeper meaning in consideration”. <br /><br />I hope there was something of interest in here somewhere. If not, I fear that’s all on me. Thanks for reading through this, anyway. Have a very good day, Colin, and be well!<br /><br />- Björn<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-79993381578298936812013-03-12T12:16:50.698+00:002013-03-12T12:16:50.698+00:00Hello, Colin, sorry that I never really got back t...Hello, Colin, sorry that I never really got back to you on some questions posed in the comments above that we made weeks and weeks ago. I did actually start a response twice, only to find it get completely out of control and to see myself going on about "plot" storytelling versus "theme" storytelling in very boring detail, making footnotes about everything from Foucault to the aesthetics of disgust and the tradition of the Gothic Novel, eventually actually accusing you of being the one who is very much cynical and desensitized because you always see "torture porn" whenever any violence is depicted in any way, whereas I am still sensitive (or simple-minded) enough to still actually, yes, be shocked and moved and to feel goosebumps when horrific things happen to characters that I care about in (comic book) fiction...<br /><br />...and as you can see, it involves all kinds of ridiculous run-on sentences, no doubt further damaged by the command that I may sometimes lack over the English language. I am usually quite confident that I can make myself understood but if once again I use “rage” where “anger” would be more suitable – please, please be patient with me. It’s enough of a challenge to us Germans to get the “th” right and not to sound like Uwe Boll when speaking English. So most of the nuances I want to include might sadly get lost in translation, as they say. I hope I’m being clear enough and I hope I never sound rude in my choice of words. I of course fully intend to disagree with you always and completely, but hopefully in a very friendly manner. :)<br /><br />So, for the leftovers of my rambling: I still very much appreciate the discussion, although I'm still not very fond of you regularly brushing lovers of what you identify as that horrific "torture porn" with the broadest of strokes as "rumpish fanboy blokes" or similar choice of words. Then again, I found that you were in a much better mood in the comments on "Batman #17" and the discussion you had with other very bright commenters there cleared a lot of stuff for me, giving me a more precise sense of where we disagree. I would be curios to know how many awful interactions you personally must have had with the "fanboy bloke" type, though. I'm still not very immersed in the comics culture outside of the internet, having not that many friends to share the love (that I only really live out since the start of the New 52, which compared to a lifelong reader like yourself of course still makes me terribly inexperienced; as such, I have not yet read Grant Morrison’s famous Animal Man; I fear I won’t win this discussion based on comics reading experience) but as a fan of horror and very much an Alternative/Goth guy I find that people who are willing to subject themselves to art that is uncomfortable or disturbing are the ones you can actually have the best talks about serious topics with - a conversation about a zombie film can quickly evolve in quite the enthusiastic talk about the conditio humana in general etc. <br /><br />I have also yet to meet that mythic fanboy bloke person that appears to be your mortal enemy that goes "Batman is so kewl for brutally beating up the Joker/Michael Myers is my hero for slicing bitches up alright". <br /><br />In my experience, the talk over a beer or three is always more like: "And that's why Michael Myers is a better horror villain than Freddy Krueger: he's just pure, unexplainable evil. Evil is out there. Evil is random. He's very much a force of nature, he's not to be reasoned with and he is the antithesis to free will. Speaking of, have you read the book by Prof. XYZ on determinism?"<br /><br />[continued]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-81018429083149163972013-02-21T14:06:03.128+00:002013-02-21T14:06:03.128+00:00Hello Bart:- I really should emphasise that I enti...Hello Bart:- I really should emphasise that I entirely agree with you about "blood and guts and gore in comics". I couldn't care less one way or the other. If it's used well, I'm all for it. If it's not, I'm not. I think Miracleman is, as you say, a prime example of a story which both couldn't work without violence, and which serves an ethical purpose too. In that, the SHOCK of it all doesn't matter. It's a chimera. What counts is the story, The problem of what happens when you put the SHOCK before the STORY is what is damaging DC so at the moment.<br /><br />I will probably be taking another look at AM in a few months time. If I been a right grump about about a book, I tend to return in the hope of being able to write a better post. Fingers crossed! Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-72870868392050378162013-02-21T13:55:26.040+00:002013-02-21T13:55:26.040+00:00Colin,
As far as the blood and guts and gore in c...Colin,<br /><br />As far as the blood and guts and gore in comics go, I don't mind it at all, but there's a difference here.<br />It just all seems to be some pointless exercise.<br /><br />If you take a look at Miracleman/Marvelman for example you'll notice that each violent action presented there had such an impact! It felt horrific and at the same time you sympathise with the victim (scene with a nurse and Kid Marvelman).<br /><br />Animal Man is filled with flying guts, creatures slicing each other etc. but it looks like it doesn't matter to anyone.<br /><br />I'm giving up on this title; will give it couple months and see what the reviews are (here maybe? :)<br /><br />All the best,<br />BartAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08718427542620880415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-2612274115911506852013-02-20T16:01:18.915+00:002013-02-20T16:01:18.915+00:00Hello Bart:- Thank you :) I've never heard of ...Hello Bart:- Thank you :) I've never heard of TooBusyThinking turning up on a search engine like that, and yet, given how critical some of the posts here are, it makes perfect sense! <br /><br />I'm hearing more and more about folks getting shot of their New 52 runs. Not all of them, and not all at once, but several others have mentioned the same in just the last day or so. Hardly a scientific sample, of course, but I do suspect that there's a limit to how far the reader's good will can be stretched. Fans want the books they've bought into to be worthwhile. They'll hang around to see their investment returned. But in the end, enough will be enough.<br /><br />It is a shame. I suspect the creators could do much better, I really am. Perhaps there'll be a freer hand granted in the months to come.<br /><br />But until then, lots of blood, gore, Justice League cameos and a never ending cycle of events is what we'll be given. As you say, sad times.<br /><br />Here's to them passing them quickly! There's been great runs on Animal Man before. I hope there's more to come.Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-53051354145825616512013-02-20T14:19:54.298+00:002013-02-20T14:19:54.298+00:00Hi Colin,
Couple days ago I finished reading Anim...Hi Colin,<br /><br />Couple days ago I finished reading Animal Man #17. I've noticed every time new AM arrives and I start to read it I feel ashamed.<br />It's like when you watch a really bad movie and you cringe thinking this is so lame!<br />Same happens here; I think it's actually almost disgusting what DC does with this title. I'm not sure if they keep Mr Lemire hostage and force him to keep writing AM the way he does or do they spoil him with unhealthy amounts of money...<br /><br />So I've typed in Google 'New Animal Man is shit' hoping I will NOT find anything, you know, maybe I don't know a good book when I see one... But then your blog popped up and I have to say I'm relieved, because you've nailed exactly what's wrong with this title.<br /><br />I've decided I can't go on like this and I'm flogging my current run of AM on eBay as I think it can only be worse. <br />It looks to me that the title is money-driven to the max, like an excuse to throw in as many cross-overs as possible, but you've covered all that.<br /><br />I loved Travel Foreman's illustrations in the first issues, but it's not enough to let those 17 issues occupy the precious space on my bookshelf.<br /><br />Sad times.<br /><br />All the best!<br />BartAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08718427542620880415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-39714542721481496932013-01-30T09:20:56.940+00:002013-01-30T09:20:56.940+00:00Hello Brigonos:- I don't know if you watched t...Hello Brigonos:- I don't know if you watched the excellent Gerry Conway interview that was posted on Bleeding Cool a few weeks ago on the subject of his short time as Marvel's Editor-In-Chief. If not, Google it up, because it's terrific. In particular, he discusses the blackmailing he received from the coven - no, I'm not making it up - in Marvel's production department, as well as the fact that he couldn't get his secretary to work, and couldn't sack her, because she was Claremont's girlfriend. By which I mean, the truth of what goes on in any company - comics involved - is indeed so much more complex than most folks seem to be willing to credit. <br /><br />I think much of what passes for analysis of the big companies on the net assumes that industries work like machines, and that the main conflict within them relate to artistic visions. Yet that quite ignores the broader and entirely human obsessions with wealth, status and power. To suggest that folks might not be concerned with their careers, for example, would be to presume that they're not human. To imagine that there's not a huge range of influences - from principles to sheer malice - at work anywhere would be ... misguided. And whether it's witches or a cadre of fanboys or a grand overarching artistic vision, the way the comics industry functions is of course about far more than a matter of one man's choices.<br /><br />Having said that, DiDio has made so many misjudgements, or at least been associated with them by dint of his position, that it's hard not to feel that he's been a disaster for DC in everything but the quarterly spreadsheets. An important issue, obviously, but there were other ways to make a profit, and let's be honest, the broad mass of DC books beyond the core a-fool-could-sell-these franchises are even tanking commercially, let alone in terms of quality. As someone who read the latest Teen Titans, Ravagers and Red Hood in the past 24 hours, it seems safe to say that his artistic vision doesn't have much to do with, er, art. Or selling comics.<br /><br />btw: I have such fond memories of Alan Grant's run on Batman. But producing fine work which also sells was never any guarantee of success in the industry, was it?Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-91320857154150945652013-01-29T23:39:09.339+00:002013-01-29T23:39:09.339+00:00In fairness to DiDio, he gets it in the neck a lot...In fairness to DiDio, he gets it in the neck a lot because he's made himself the "face" of DC in the same way Marvel have Stan Lee, but I get the impression from comments made by Warren Ellis and Alan Grant that a great deal of the creative problems plaguing DC come from a staff of fanboys in the production office who resent upper management and creative talent in equal measure, and take every opportunity to undermine the efforts of both to change "their" books to the extent that the preference is to see books burn rather than prosper in other hands. Grant's tales of his final days on the Batman titles are quite remarkable, especially the palpable sadness behind his anger when he relates the story of how Dennis O'Neil was rendered powerless by people working under him not because they'd ousted him, but because they'd simply stopped listening to him.Brigonoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05284882511370405132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-80107876101940051362013-01-23T12:17:40.666+00:002013-01-23T12:17:40.666+00:00Hello Sergeant Hartman;- You can add a host of oth...Hello Sergeant Hartman;- You can add a host of other creators to that list, can't you, who've objected to the editorial regime and upped sticks. It's been a shocking waste of talent, and for what?<br /><br />But I don't think it's baffling that DiDio should find himself in the position he's in. He's enthusiastic, ambitious, evidently able in working within corporate structures, capable of making daring moves which consolidate his power, successful in short-term gambits which raise sales; he seems to me to have a host of very attractive, productive qualities to offer employers. Unfortunately, what he doesn't seem to have such a strong grasp of is the key matter of how to either write a good comic - his record is very, very poor - or enable its creation as a publisher. Still, the ability to accumulate power and stimulate profitibility are different skills to storytelling.<br /><br />I can understand why you might want to disengage from the New 52. In so many ways, these AREN'T the characters you've invested so much time and money in, and the quality isn't strong enough on a linewide basis to justify keeping buying in into DC's product. With much of what's left of DC's top-notch talent disappearing - Morrison, Cornell etc - the standard of what's left just keeps declining. I'll be posting a review of a collected edition of a comic tomorrow which has gone in two years from very fine indeed to, quite frankly, appalling. The problem with having folks in charge who don't understand storytelling is that their only strategies to cope with failure involve DOING ALOT MORE OF THE SAME. (If nothing else, adopting a broad range of strategies which they've previously rejected would involve tacitly admitting that they've been wrong.) And more of the same leads to more failure, with the exception of a few franchises and few creators.<br /><br />But the presence of a few good books in the N52 as well as the fact that I have to keep in touch for the Q column means that I'll keep on buying a couple of diffferent books a week. There are comics I wouldn't want to miss - Batgirl, Dial H For Hero - and a few that are interesting despite my having problems with them - Batman, Wonder Woman - and some car-crashes that it's just hard not to rubber-neck. Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-82674356528455592932013-01-23T07:29:08.686+00:002013-01-23T07:29:08.686+00:00Just to touch on what Brigonos was saying earlier,...Just to touch on what Brigonos was saying earlier, I've been doing a lot of research on Dan DiDio, and I cannot find any meaningful accomplishments in his background that would justify his current position. And during his tenure at DC Comics, just look at the assortment of creators that he's alienated: <br /><br />Chuck Dixon, Dwayne McDuffie, Ed Brubaker, Mark Waid, Greg Rucka, Peter David and others. <br /><br />Its truly baffling and quite disturbing that such an individual could be made the caretaker of some of the world's greatest fictional characters.<br /><br />But anyway, yesterday I informed the owner of my local comic shop that after this month I'll be dropping the few DC titles that I have remaining on my pull list and will no longer be purchasing any books from DC for the foreseeable future. Its not just that the N52 is a gigantic clusterf*ck -- its that its progressively getting worse and there seems to be no end in sight to this nightmare. It doesn't really seem like a big deal to just stop reading their books and say "to hell with it" right? I guess in the overall scheme of things it really isn't. However, this is a particularly tough ordeal for me because being the quintessential geek, I've invested so much time, emotion and money into these characters and their mythos that to divorce myself from them completely is just agonizing. Not to mention that the owner of my local comic shop is a dear friend of mine, so I'm also hurting his business and he's really struggling right now. At the same time, I feel a sense of relief knowing that there are some great books being produced by other publishers that are well-worth my time and money. <br /><br />Sergeant Hartmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-9354295104258771432013-01-22T10:18:27.713+00:002013-01-22T10:18:27.713+00:00Hello Yamandu~:- No problems :) And I think you hi...Hello Yamandu~:- No problems :) And I think you hit the nail on the head. There are a whole range of ways which can help make a comic welcoming to new readers without bogging it down in exposition and over-literalness. That in itself is a skill which marks out the great creators from the also-rans. Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-57827486118527573562013-01-22T01:51:54.720+00:002013-01-22T01:51:54.720+00:00Ok, thanks. I do sympathize with the cause of maki...Ok, thanks. I do sympathize with the cause of making every single issue accessible to a neophyte, although I do think that has less to do with spelling out all of the internal rules of the franchise for all of those who haven't been brought up with the secret codes and handshakes and more to do with making everything that happens in the given work have a meaning that is accessible regardless of if you've been following the series for years or if this is your first time. Gorgotiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01127537063741698747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-73449283819527147342013-01-21T09:25:57.893+00:002013-01-21T09:25:57.893+00:00Hello Yamandu:- Thank you for getting me to make m...Hello Yamandu:- Thank you for getting me to make myself clearer! Jim Shooter's reign as Marvel's Editor-In-Chief included the imposition of a series of principles designed to make each issue as clear as possible to new readers. Shooter was very aware that each comic was somebody's first, and that the weight of backstory combined with indulgent and/or sloppy storytelling could scare away new readers. As such, he insisted on a characteristically literal-minded approach to storytelling which involved every character being named at the beginning of tales, every super-power being quickly defined, each key aspect of the story being re-established, and so on. Where artwork was concerned, he was very keen indeed on the traditional virtues of absolute clarity, and valued the transparent over the imaginative, it seems, every time. Of course, his preference was for artists who could deliver both qualities at the same time.<br /><br />Much of what Shooter argued for made perfect sense. It's hard not to look at a great many of today's books and - where some of today's art in particular is concerned - think that the advice he gave out in the early years of his control of Marvel is desperately needed. Yet his influence became more and more doctrinaire and stifling as his years as EIC continued, and his tenure is far more remembered more for that than the value of some of his beliefs. During his time in power, there were notably few outstanding series, though there was usually a basic level of competency to be found across Marvel's range of titles. For my money, "Marvel" was, for all its faults, a stronger line of books than were to be found until the Quesada/Jenas years. Miller's Daredevil, Simonson's Thor and the Byrne/Claremont X-Men in particular prospered under his range, although the latter was well underway before he became EIC, and there were a fair number of good titles too. But overall, his was, I think, common-sense taken to a homogenising extreme.Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-16469114442784713162013-01-21T02:34:05.871+00:002013-01-21T02:34:05.871+00:00Could you define "Shooterism"? Jim Shoot...Could you define "Shooterism"? Jim Shooter isn't a writer I am very familiar with. Gorgotiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01127537063741698747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-47684837342261124562013-01-18T00:17:17.418+00:002013-01-18T00:17:17.418+00:00Hello Brigonos:- Thank you. You're an egg. Of ...Hello Brigonos:- Thank you. You're an egg. Of course, I can understand Bjorn's frsutration that the opinion of the New 52 he holds to isn't shared amongst most of the commentors as well as the blogger himself. Yet, as he says, many folks do love Animal Man, and the fact that a few folks here might not feel enthusiastic about the book at the moment is neither here nor there. In the end, what counts is, er, whatever Dan DiDio says.<br /><br />Strangely enough, my experience of reviewing, here, at Sequart and at Q, has been exactly the opposite of yours. I always feel that there's nothing objective about anything I write, and sadly, typos ahoy, that includes the basic info about who, what and where.<br /><br />Speaking of basic info, I received a copy - a personally purchased copy - of a book called Babble this afternoon. Its cover purports that it's the product of your own enterprise. How bloody wonderful, eh? Congrats!Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-40353367565125026772013-01-17T14:43:27.217+00:002013-01-17T14:43:27.217+00:00I feel "Rage, anger and sadness" suggest...I feel "Rage, anger and sadness" suggests a rather dismissive attitude even before the double standard of negating one online opinion with another.<br /><br />Colin is also too polite to brandish it, but if we want to use criticism as any kind of barometer of quality, he reviews comics for Q Magazine and last time I checked print journalism trumps online, if only because <i>even I</i> have served time as a reviewer for a comic book website - although I may be undermining my point about opinions ultimately being subjective to individual taste and experience because I recall <b>always being correct about absolutely everything.</b>Brigonoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05284882511370405132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-44905136031268361412013-01-17T10:51:36.476+00:002013-01-17T10:51:36.476+00:00Hello Emmet:- Yes, it's all YOUR fault!
Well...Hello Emmet:- Yes, it's all YOUR fault! <br /><br />Well, yours and quite a few others ...<br /><br />I've been reading a fair deal of JL's work in the past month. He seems to me to be what ought to be recognised as an honest creotor, but beyond a certain degree of warmth and a knowledge of certain genre conventions, there doesn't seem to be much that's insightful, original or particularly controlled about his work.<br /><br />Even the much-lauded Underwater Wielder seemed to me to be placing conventions associated with meaning onto the page rather than bringing them to life. In this, I know, I remain in the minority ... Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-9032741620152957902013-01-17T04:48:29.532+00:002013-01-17T04:48:29.532+00:00I have this horrible feeling I am one of the folks...I have this horrible feeling I am one of the folks who recommended Animal Man to you. <br /><br />I do remember a certain rush at the opening issues. Lemire appeared to be citing Morrison's family drama and Delano's love of the macabre. I can't recall what issue I stopped at though, but the storyline had already outstayed its welcome. I am beginning to wonder if the epic tone it seemed to aiming for was overambitious - from what you describe above, the penultimate issues have become deflated. <br /><br />emmetocuanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14446997439436492721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-87249612549676160112013-01-16T13:52:01.626+00:002013-01-16T13:52:01.626+00:00Cont:
“Also, of course you're missing someth...Cont:<br /><br /> “Also, of course you're missing something with the speaking cat. It is a totem spirit thingie from the weakened Parliament of the Red that has left its realm to guide and assist Buddy and Maxine. And it's absolutely not happy about being in the form of a cute kitty cat called "Socks". An idea that, while not entirely new, Lemire has some fun with.”<br /><br />I like the cat. I thought the cat was fun. Mind you, the scene he was in was entirely predictable. It was a sequence composed of types and not people, written according to convention rather than brought to life with a personal touch. <br /><br />“It's more that I don't want to feel so alone as that one crazy guy from the "limited pool of bloke-fans" who only enjoy their "silly-serious grim-porn comics", if I just may quote you. Well, obviously I still am, but then again you get that I say this with my tongue in my cheek. Still, you COULD one of these days stop insulting me personally in every second blog post. ;)”<br /><br />It’s a good point. Am I insulting you? Well, if you think you’re a bloke-fan in the sense I mean it, then I guess I am. But then, only if you think that someone expressing a different opinion to yours is attacking YOU. Surely it doesn't matter what I say and believe? Why would you want to be in the slightest bit affected by what I write here? Why would anyone? It's lovely you turn up, it's invigorating that you engage me and do so in such a civil way, but surely my opinion couldn't be any less important? Why would it ever matter on even a passing level?<br /><br />I certainly don't think you or anyone else who buys into the New 52 is "crazy". But I do think that it’s perfectly valid to regard much of the New 52 as "silly-serious grim-porn comics". If you think differently, what does my opinion matter? If I’m THAT wrong, then you know that my opinion shouldn’t be listened to. <br /><br />I was accused of being condescending over the introduction to the latest piece on Batgirl. It seems that I expressed the opinion that many of the New 52 books were poor comics. I must admit, I’m baffled about the idea that a “critic” should produce work which agrees with anyone else's, or which doesn’t express his own beliefs with some force. I’m sure I could increase the readership of TooBusy by a significant degree if I just blanded its contents out. But that’s not the point. Here’s where I express my opinion. I am genuinely sorry that you feel it attacks you on any level. But what kind of criticism would it be if I wasn’t offending people? To express an opinion is to offend. The blogosphere is full of folks producing bland work which would rarely offend anyone. I’d rather not write than write that.<br /><br />Yet, as always, and with absolute sincerity, I wish you the best of days :)<br />Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-74022488371683958882013-01-16T13:46:57.205+00:002013-01-16T13:46:57.205+00:00Hello Bjorn:- “May I also suggest that you and you...Hello Bjorn:- “May I also suggest that you and your kind visitors are actually in the minority when it comes to evaluating Animal Man?”<br /><br />You may, but it isn’t relevant. The value of an opinion has nothing to do with how many people do or don’t agree. In my far-too-many years, I’ve known periods in various pop art forms where utter nonsense was held by the majority to be true, and held with a fantastical devotion. I’ve sat through long years when The Beatles were regarded as quite unimportant, for example, and where Philip K Dick was seen as a hack fit only to earn enough to eat horse-meat. And during that time I’ve believed things which I’ve later thought were ridiculous, and then gone back upon myself again! No, it’s not about being right or having lots of folks agree. It’s simply about expressing an opinion. I couldn’t care less how popular Animal Man is, or any other comic book. Whether work is loved or not has nothing to do with its quality. Work that’s loved by a minority can be as terrible as can be work that’s loved by millions and millions of folks. For example, I think Star Wars – and by that, I mean all 6 movies with the exception of some of part 5 – is appalling piffle. And the fact that it’s so well loved and admired just isn’t relevant. By the same token, I adore the first 40 minutes of the 1978 Battlestar Galactica, which most folks would regard as camp and unwatchable. <br /><br />“Wow. That's some rage, anger and sadness in the comments section. Fascinating to read, even if I'm not ready to agree.”<br /><br />Mmmm. Is there rage there? Rage is an extreme word. I’m not even sure there’s anger. Irritation, Regret. Weariness. Certainly sadness and frustration. Even contempt in places. But it doesn’t come across to me as rage or anger. <br /><br />“In fact, I think what makes the book work most of all is specifically his concern for his wife and children & his beautifully written daughter Maxine who at times was more of the centerpiece of the book than Buddy was. You may lament the absence of a political stance but I think that an exploration of the theme of family and interpersonational relationships is a more than sufficient replacement for that. Please do not forget the way Buddy's wife objected to him even engaging in superhero activities until the threat of the Rot was so big that there was no other choice.”<br /><br />Yes, the wife who doesn’t want her husband going into danger trope. It never appealed to me. And again, I think – as you and I tend to – that we’re just hitting differences in taste. I have read more than a third of the AM issues. I do think that any book which needs to be read month-to-month for a year and a half - as you're suggesting - in order for the reader to have a valid opinion isn’t being particularly welcoming. Certainly, the New 52 was promised to us as being a line in which each issue would stand on its own. As for the family relations in Animal Man, they seem quite stereotypical and pleasant as far as it goes. But that doesn’t go far. Yes, it's good to see a father who loves his kids, but that in itself isn't enough to float month after month of story. Perhaps you’ve read the Grant Morrison run on the character? As an investigation of family in the light of comic’s obsession with grim vigilantes, it had me feeling absolutely heartbroken and – finally – joyous. By comparison, this is stiff, obvious stuff. <br /><br />contColin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15246781681702128600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5618879740460069575.post-13267793471533360862013-01-16T12:55:06.852+00:002013-01-16T12:55:06.852+00:00Wow. That's some rage, anger and sadness in th...Wow. That's some rage, anger and sadness in the comments section. Fascinating to read, even if I'm not ready to agree. <br /><br />While I will admit that I have found the build up to Rotworld stronger than the 4 issue long final battle we are witnessing now, I still hold Animal Man in very high regard and I still think of Jeff Lemire as a phantastic writer. Surely some of your reading experience is tainted by the fact that you've not been along for the whole ride with these characters. Sure, reviewing #16 as a stand-alone-issue (and I know that you think it should function as such while I don't really mind the long arcs; doesn't mean either of us is necessarily wrong) there is no character development to be found. However, Lemire has rightfully received praise for the portrayal of an average family life in his early issues. In fact, I think what makes the book work most of all is specifically his concern for his wife and children & his beautifully written daughter Maxine who at times was more of the centerpiece of the book than Buddy was. You may lament the absence of a political stance but I think that an exploration of the theme of family and interpersonational relationships is a more than sufficient replacement for that. Please do not forget the way Buddy's wife objected to him even engaging in superhero activities until the threat of the Rot was so big that there was no other choice. And please, when looking at this run, think about the (somewhat meta) excellence of #6 - where Buddy, who in his private life is an actor now, stars in a movie about a failed superhero who lost his marriage and kids because of the toll his superheroing took on them. The contrast between the tender, caring moments and the unbelievably creepy horror is what makes the story - that and Buddy Baker desperately trying, even literally walking through hell and coming back from the dead to not only save the world but also his marriage...to prevent this fate that has been foreshadowed.<br /><br />That's all stuff that happened in the first 8 or 9 issues and it lays the foundation for you to be engaged in these characters' fates now being decided. It's also way more interesting than a Zombie Justice League, I'll grant you that. Then again, these final battles tend to always disappoint me, that's not something unique to this particular event. As soon as all the charming and mysterious stuff is revealed and cast aside for the 45 minute special effects battle at Helm's Deep, it is usually time for me to visit the toilet and grab some new snacks. <br /><br />Also, of course you're missing something with the speaking cat. It is a totem spirit thingie from the weakened Parliament of the Red that has left its realm to guide and assist Buddy and Maxine. And it's absolutely not happy about being in the form of a cute kitty cat called "Socks". An idea that, while not entirely new, Lemire has some fun with. <br /><br />May I also suggest that you and your kind visitors are actually in the minority when it comes to evaluating Animal Man?<br />http://www.comicbookroundup.com/comic-books/reviews/dc-comics/animal-man/15<br /><br />And I post that link not so much to persuade you to another viewpoint or to suggest that I'm absolutely and objectively right. It's more that I don't want to feel so alone as that one crazy guy from the "limited pool of bloke-fans" who only enjoy their "silly-serious grim-porn comics", if I just may quote you. Well, obviously I still am, but then again you get that I say this with my tongue in my cheek. Still, you COULD one of these days stop insulting me personally in every second blog post. ;)<br /><br />Have a good day, sir!<br /><br />- BjörnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com