moriarty@fluke.UUCP (The Napoleon of Crime) (08/25/85)
I'm here to put out a smoldering ember before it becomes an inner-newsgroup flaming (literally) inferno: In article <1075@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: >[...] Then I did not read more than a comic book a year >until relatively recently. What I did read convinced me that comics were >maturing a little but were still silly and banal. Recently a friend who is >a big comic fan got me reading a few. My conclusion is that my distaste for >super-heroes rules out the vast majority of comics sold. At some point, I >will probably write a general article about my conclusions about comic >books. Well, Mark, I read a fair number of comics, although a small amount of the total output of the varied publishing companies, and my general conclusion about the maturity of comics is this: Sturgeon's Law, i.e. 90% of everything is crap. Goes for comics. Goes for films. Goes for (gasp!) science fiction and mysteries and novels. Goes for net news articles (and as this one seems to be headed for the larger of the two percentages, let me sum up). I don't know about comics becoming more mature -- mature, to me, means being polite and reasonable, and, By George, you couldn't ask for a quieter and more well-behaved tenant in that basement or attic or guest room than a box of comics. I think comics have *improved* a good deal over the last 10 years, due mostly to an older group of people reading them, who have gotten tired of cliches and have developed the demand for more refined (more complex, more realistic characterizations, more IMAGINATION and ORIGINALITY -- the latter two are the most important, and the most frequent of pleasant surprises in the latest wave of comics). The increase in the number of independent publishers and the introduction of the direct-sales (to comic shops) market have made this market viable, and thus we have gems like CEREBUS and ZOT! and AMERICAN FLAGG! and AMBUSH BUG and JOURNEY and etc, etc, etc. We unfortunately also have G.I. JOE, A REAL AMERICAN HERO and MARVEL SECRET WARS, but hey, we call it T.S.'s law because it is a LAW, like gravity, light speed, and death & taxes. Well, anyway, I bet all you sf-lovers are sick of this discussion, so from now on, how about any follow-ups going to net.comics? Alright... "Living without hallucinations is like breathing with only one nostril" Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer ARPA: fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA UUCP: {uw-beaver, sun, allegra, sb1, lbl-csam}!fluke!moriarty <*> DISCLAIMER: Do what you want to me, but leave my employers alone! <*>
moriarty@fluke.UUCP (The Napoleon of Crime) (08/30/85)
In article <1094@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: > > >I'm here to put out a smoldering ember before it becomes an > >inner-newsgroup flaming (literally) inferno: > >Such emotion. Jeez! Just trying to head off a plethora of flames from laying waste to both our houses... >Slight correction. It seems to go for the comics that people >recommend, not just comics in general. The ones I read were the ones >that comic readers told me were the best of the lot. Of course there >may be a multiplicity of opinions. As I remember, the one that was >recommended was a "relevant" Green Arrow that presented some pretty pat >views of race relations. Depends on who recommends 'em. If you're talking about those old Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams Green Lantern/Green Arrow comics, I agree with you -- their race relations stuff is extremely pat, though it was advanced in 1969 when it was first published, just for talking about the subject -- it had been pretty well ignored up to that point in comics. > >a quieter and more well-behaved tenant in that basement or > >attic or guest room than a box of comics. > >If that is how you measure if a comic is mature, I can agree with you. *Sigh*. So much for an uneven attempt at lightening the atmosphere... > >I think comics have *improved* a good deal over the last 10 > >years, due mostly to an older group of people reading them, > >who have gotten tired of cliches and have developed the demand > >for more refined (more complex, more realistic > >characterizations, > >I was loaned a copy of X-MEN that had a two of the super-characters >having a deep soul-searching discussion in a whirlwind half a mile >above the ground. I can stand outside of my fandom of science fiction >and laugh at the tacky look of certain Star Trek episodes. Surely you >can be big enough to admit there is something pretty weird about this >sort of juxtaposition if serious discussion and silly image. Why are two characters have a soul-searching discussion in a whirlwind any less plausible than discussions in strange locations in SF stories? (conversations via playing cards in the Amber series seems plausible enough...). I don't have to be "big" enough to admit that it was a poorly scripted scene; I agree that this *is* mediocre writing, but it is not inherently bad due to characters or setting, it is due to a writer whose imagination has dried up lately. Besides, who picked X-Men as the zenith of comics writing? What I disliked in your original article is that you are saying the amount of crap in comics is greater than what Sturgeon's Law (which I assume is mutually accepted) allows for from a scant reading of what is out there. I do not presume to go beyond SL in regards to SF because other than Cherryh, Poul Anderson and Roger Zelazny, I haven't read much SF (besides, I believe SF has a lower crap quantity than SL specifies). If I understand your arguments correctly, the only qualifications you have for condemning the entire media of comics are reading X-Men and Green Lantern/Green Arrow and laughing at Star Trek (the latter seems rather cruel, like kicking an extremely talented handicapped person). I have no problems with any critique of an individual comic, whether I agree with it or not; any intelligent person understands the inevitability of disagreement about creative works. I also have no problem with casting the spectre of Sturgeon's Law on comics; I find that it applies everywhere else. The bone of contention is that you claimed comics are worse (i.e. more % crap) than SF in ignorance of the subject you were slamming. Do a little more background work before slapping a misnomer on, will you? "I can give you my word, but I know what it's worth and you don't." -Nero Wolfe, _Over_My_Dead_Body_ Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer ARPA: fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA UUCP: {uw-beaver, sun, allegra, sb1, lbl-csam}!fluke!moriarty <*> DISCLAIMER: Do what you want with me, but leave my employers alone! <*>
jeff@qubix.UUCP (Jeff Bulf) (09/03/85)
[m leeper] > Slight correction. It seems to go for the comics that people > recommend, not just comics in general. The ones I read were the ones > that comic readers told me were the best of the lot. > >have made this market viable, and thus we have gems like > >CEREBUS and ZOT! and AMERICAN FLAGG! and AMBUSH BUG and > >JOURNEY and etc, etc, etc. > > I will watch for those. I'd sure like to second the nomination for both Journey and Cerebus. These are the two that got me reading comics again. (If you've no use for costumed super-heroes, you'll appreciate Cerebus' "Cockroach" at least.) Fair warning though, Mark -- grown-up stories seldom fit into a single comic book. If you sample only a single issue of either Cerebus or Journey you are likely to end up more confused than informed. On t'other hand, if you like the humor or whatever, you'll go out and find enough issues to make sense out of it, so maybe I'm warning for nothing. -- Dr Memory ...{amd,cbosgd,ihnp4}!qubix!jdb
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (09/03/85)
As a man with roughly 3,000 comics in his collection, a long-time fan of both comic books and science fiction, and a reader of the classics, I would like to thank Mark Leeper for his perceptive comments on comics. Until we fans come to realize that, yes, this crap is usually pretty bad, it will remain bad. Fans often seem unable to distinguish between relative appreciation of a comic (case in point: O'Neil/Adams Green Lantern/Green Arrow, which was far better than most comics of the day, but as Mark pointed out, presented very pat answers to very difficult sociological questions) and its absolute quality, the same standard we would use to judge a novel or a movie. I also appreciated his point about heavy emotional scenes in the middle of whirlwinds; this is one of the oldest and stupidest of comic book cliches. One of the few good points of Simpson's "Megaton Man" parody was the scene in which the hero is being beaten on by fifty assorted super-villains while breaking up with his girlfriend. There are a few comics these days that measure up to a stndard comparable to the standards for novels and movies. For example, Swamp Thing, Cerebus, Love and Rockets, Journey, V for Vendetta (in Warrior), and once upon a time, American Flagg. There are also good graphic novels, though not from the two major companies (save "Elric"). We should encourage these comics as being the next step in the growth of the genre, not defend the idiocies and tritenesses of modern superhero comics, which more than anything else keep the field in a disrespectable and shabby ghetto. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (09/04/85)
>I'm here to put out a smoldering ember before it becomes an >inner-newsgroup flaming (literally) inferno: Such emotion. Jeez! > >In article <1075@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) >writes: > >[...] Then I did not read more than a comic book a year > >until relatively recently. What I did read convinced me > >that comics were > >maturing a little but were still silly and banal. > >Recently a friend who is > >a big comic fan got me reading a few. My conclusion is > >that my distaste for > >super-heroes rules out the vast majority of comics sold. > >At some point, I > >will probably write a general article about my conclusions > >about comic > >books. > >Well, Mark, I read a fair number of comics, although a small >amount of the total output of the varied publishing >companies, and my general conclusion about the maturity of >comics is this: Sturgeon's Law, i.e. 90% of everything is >crap. Goes for comics. Slight correction. It seems to go for the comics that people recommend, not just comics in general. The ones I read were the ones that comic readers told me were the best of the lot. Of course there may be a multiplicity of opinions. As I remember, the one that was recommended was a "relevant" Green Arrow that presented some pretty pat views of race relations. >Goes for films. Goes for (gasp!) science fiction In spades! >and mysteries and novels. Goes for net news >articles (and as this one seems to be headed for the larger >of the two percentages, let me sum up). I don't know about >comics becoming more mature -- mature, to me, means being >polite and reasonable, and, By George, you couldn't ask for >a quieter and more well-behaved tenant in that basement or >attic or guest room than a box of comics. If that is how you measure if a comic is mature, I can agree with you. >I think comics have *improved* a good deal over the last 10 >years, due mostly to an older group of people reading them, Elric is certainly a step in the right direction. I would be VERY impressed to see something like Robert Forward's DRAGON'S EGG done as a comic. Now that has images I would like to see an artist do credit to. >who have gotten tired of cliches and have developed the demand >for more refined (more complex, more realistic >characterizations, I was loaned a copy of X-MEN that had a two of the super-characters having a deep soul-searching discussion in a whirlwind half a mile above the ground. I can stand outside of my fandom of science fiction and laugh at the tacky look of certain Star Trek episodes. Surely you can be big enough to admit there is something pretty weird about this sort of juxtaposition if serious discussion and silly image. >more IMAGINATION and ORIGINALITY -- the >latter two are the most important, and the most frequent of >pleasant surprises in the latest wave of comics). The >increase in the number of independent publishers and the >introduction of the direct-sales (to comic shops) market >have made this market viable, and thus we have gems like >CEREBUS and ZOT! and AMERICAN FLAGG! and AMBUSH BUG and >JOURNEY and etc, etc, etc. I will watch for those. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper