oz@rlgvax.UUCP (THE GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ) (02/09/84)
Recently, I have found my self with an interesting problem when I read my comics: I enjoy them, but I really am not too sure what is going on. As I have mentioned in earlier postings, I find myself gravitating away from Marvel and DC and more towards the "alternate" comics. This had led to many enjoyable moments of comic reading (The Badger for one), but also had led me to saying "whats going on here" to (at various times) AMERICAN FLAGG SOMMERSET HOLMES CEREBUS (the latest issue) MARVEL SUPER HEROS (well actually I didn't say "whats going on here?", I said "Why did I but this?") Is this a common occurance out there, or am I the only one that wonders? OZ seismo!rlgvax!oz
eric@aplvax.UUCP (02/09/84)
You left out my favorite for the "is something really happening here?" award - Thriller. I keep telling myself that it makes sense, but then I re-read it and decide maybe not. Its not just the rather odd panel sequence (I think I now have most of the panels in order), but the plot itself seems to leap huge sequences, leaving one with only brief glimpses as to what is going on. The other one you left out is a little more justified. After all, it has been well over a year since Ms Mystic #1 came out, can we help it if #2 sent us scurrying back to the stacks to find out just what is going on? -- eric ...!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!eric
crd55611@ihuxk.UUCP (Chuck Dobrovolny) (02/10/84)
I ask myself that, too, once in a while. Sometimes with American Flagg!,
but moreso with Thriller ("Forward shields on maximum, Mr. Sulu. We're
being bombarded with flames...."). Thriller has lots of potential and
yes, it does make the reader think, but it also demands that the reader
Pay Attention to a greater degree than almost any comic. Sure, it helps
to concentrate to some degree with almost any task--work OR pleasure--but
reading Thriller is more like an exercise in literal and symbolic
interpretation rather than an entertaining shot of escapism in somebody
else's universe. I'm not looking for super-hero fluff, mind you--just a
compromise between read-between-the-lines dead serious and if-you-show-me-
your-super-power-I'll-show-you-mine.
As far as Somerset Holmes goes, that plot will get a lot thicker before
anything major (who she is, who's after her, and why) is revealed. Good
mysteries sell, and if PC wants to ensure SH's popularity, they'll work
in another mysterious plotline before they resolve this one.
....somewhere under a pile of
to-be-read comics, allowing
only occasional trips to the
bathroom and refrigerator,
Charles Dobrovolny
ihuxk!crd55611ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (Mike Ciaraldi) (02/13/84)
Yes, I too wonder "what's going on?" This divides into two categories: 1) Comics so badly written and drawn that what they are trying to say is unclear. This includes "Thriller". 2) Comics where you can tell the author is trying to tantalize you, and you want to match wits with him/her. e.g. "Elfquest". The new "Cerebus" is in the second group. What bothers me is that I have read every single issue, but I don't have them all stored together, so I can't go back and try to reread them or read the letters columns, which often have additional info. I HOPE that next month will make this clear. Who is wipingm out whom, and why? Sim has been pretty good about all this so far, tying up at least the most obvious loose ends. But, we know that the priceless bird statue everyone was looking for is central (he said so) to the plot of the whole epic. In addition, he is pretty scrupulous about telling us only what Cerebus himself would know, rather than having lots of "omnipotent narrator" stuff. If next month does not clear it up, mamybe a letteris in order. If only we could get Dave Sim on the net... Incidentally, I think "Ronin" is mostly in the second category, but the biggest problem I have there is not being able to remember who everyonr is, because the drawing is so scratchy and distorted at times. "American Flagg" I think is going OK, because I have faith we will find out more of the forces behind the scenes when Reuben himself does. Chaykin is trying to set us up with these scenes that Reuben never gets to see, so when they come to fruition we won't think he pulled the plot device out of nowhere. Mike Ciaraldi ciaraldi@rochester
scott@yale-com.UUCP (Walter Scott) (02/16/84)
Regarding Mike Ciaraldi's comments about Cerebus:
Don't hold your breath waiting for things to be "cleared up" by next issue.
One of my favorite things about Cerebus is the fact that I know I will
*never* know the full story. When Dave Sim pulls out some new subplot or
character, we may find out the *truth* about it in the next issue, or in
10 or 12 issues, or maybe it will all come out somewhere in the 180's,
or the 290's.... or maybe we'll never *really* know. But we can guess,
and try to "match wits" with him until 2003. I find it all extremely
fascinating and endlessly entertaining. Remember, if Sim ties up the
Albatross matter, or the Cirinist/Kevellist/Illusionist/Weisshaupt/?/?/?
power struggle now, or even in a few years, he won't have it to spring on
us down the road, and he's got another 242 issues to go. Be patient...
Also, a word of advice: if your collection is scattered about, by all means
get it together, blow off a weekend sometime and reread the whole damn thing
from issue 1 to now (or at least from the beginning of High Society). You
will be amazed at how much more you enjoy it, and how many more details you
remember, when you get it all in one sitting. The many letters of the past
several issues have attested to this fact.
And to all of you on the net who have no idea of what this conversation is
about: go to your dealer/best friend/roommate/whoever and buy/borrow/steal/
etc. as many back issues of Cerebus the Aardvark as you can. You will be
hooked for life (or until issue 300). This is, in my humble opinion, the
*best* thing in comics today. And it comes out monthly, unlike (grunt growl
snarl) SOME alternative publications...
End of, I say, end of plug. Endorsement, that is.
--
"Out of the void, into your mind..."
>From the ever-weary fingertips of... Walter Scott
Yale University
yale-comix!scottarmstron@sjuvax.UUCP (02/16/84)
I agree with you on some points, but certainly not on RONIN. While Miller's (fantastic in my mind) art is "different", I would certainly not call it "scratchy". The connotation here is much too negative. I rather prefer to see Miller's art as innovative and stylish. It, unlike most comic art of today (not that I don't like comic art... I do !) challenges the reader to pick up the Miller's mental image of this futuristic land and the complex science it subscribes to; therefore, Miller's art is also complex... Oh well, it was a good thought anyway. Return of the Dragon, Len Armstrong St. Joseph's University.
ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (Mike Ciaraldi) (02/19/84)
Concerning RONIN: What I meant by "scratchy" is that many pictures turn out to be made of overlapping crosshatched straight lines. The probelm is that you lose a lot of fine detail this way, even i the pictures look nice. The result is that sometimes I can't tell what Miller is drawing a picture of, and sometimes I can't tell the characters apart. I have a similar problem with THRILLER. What good is having extreme closeups on eyes, when you can't tell whose eyes they are, because of the way the story jumps around? Mike Ciaraldi ciaraldi@rochester