Thursday, March 29, 2007

The hardest part of maintaining this blog is trying to come up with non-descriptive titles for my posts

-Oh man, stuff like this makes writing a blog of this nature so much easier. Dirk Deppey has this to say about Heidi McDonald:

"It’s rare to see Heavily Networked Heidi taking a bold stance on anything, even if it’s only on the extent to which I suck. It’s a nice start, and I’d hate to discourage such behavior. Who knows? Perhaps one day, she’ll voice an opinion that might make one of her friends, industry colleagues or possible gossip sources frown a bit! One can only guess at the sort of interesting things she’d write after that happy day has dawned…"

Well, she referred to something I wrote as "clueless" recently, but I don't know if that counts as "a bold stance." (UPDATE: McDonald responds, but it's mostly stuff about how well 300 is selling. Bo-ring.)

-Also via Mr. Deppey, this Seattle Weekly article on the Ellison v. Fantagraphics suit, beginning thusly:

"Here’s a line you’re unlikely to hear the next time Dan Clowes does a signing at the Fantagraphics store in Georgetown: 'Hey, dude, didn’t you pitch your tent next to mine outside the Cinerama before Revenge of the Sith?' There’s a reason their books aren’t shelved together, often aren’t even stocked in the same stores and newsstands: You see, comic dorks and sci-fi geeks just don’t get along; they’re two different breeds. It’s like cats and dogs, Vulcans and Klingons, DC versus Marvel, Chris Ware against Stan Lee. Some people doodle in their unlined black journals; others play massive multiuser games online. I collect vintage issues of Plastic Man; you religiously TiVo every episode of the new Battlestar Galactica. There’s ComiCon (this weekend at Paul Allen’s QwestField) and the Star Trek 40th Anniversary Gala Celebration & Conference (last September at Paul Allen's Science Fiction Museum), and the laminated pass from one won't get you into the other."

That is some lazy-assed writing. So it's just my imagination that seemingly half of all comics bloggers talk about Battlestar Galactica and/or video games? (Instead of relevant stuff like Takanori Gomi's chances at 155 lb., or the best combination of herbs, cheese and nuts for a tasty-yet-affordable pesto.) What's equally stupid is the implication that all comics fans are Fantagraphics supporters, which is demonstrably untrue (and it's not a subtle nuance or anything--30 seconds at Newsarama would make it clear). Worst of all, I frequently see graphic novels housed in the same vicinity as science fiction! Anyway, there are a few other howlers (most notably a truly wretched passage about the brief confluence of sci-fi and underground culture), but the author manages to make a pretty good case that Groth seems to have a history of actively seeking trouble with Ellison. And there's no ill-informed speculation on Fantagraphics' insurance policy either, which is certainly a plus.

-Stuff I've read so far this week dept:

Batman still isn't great, and I wonder how much of it is Andy Kubert's art. It's just so vacant. This is not a problem of lacking detail--it's just that the details are utterly unconvincing. Kubert draws the least majestic Alpine vista imaginable. His depiction of a restaurant interior makes me wonder if he's ever gone out to eat in his life. The lower half of characters' bodies disappear during a fight scene. And his composition is just plain weird, almost like they were distorted with Photoshop or something. I mean, just look at that opening splash page! What the fuck is going on there? Morrison's story isn't really doing much for me either, but I might be distracted by the art. I feel like there must be some link between the two halves of the story which I'm missing or something. Maybe it will become clearer next issue, which I'll probably buy like a sucker.

52: I'm having a hard time remembering what happened this issue. The art was better than usual, making me wonder how closely Camuncoli followed Giffen's breakdowns. The art in the backup feature was very nice indeed, making me wonder why DC is letting a talent like Kerschl go to waste. I've always liked his stuff, but this was light years beyond what I've seen in the past. All in all, an issue full of wonder.

Fables: Kind of a waste. I think I chuckled a couple of times.

Everything else: Haven't cracked open yet, too busy reading Shadowland (which I bought last week but haven't had the time to finish).

-Mike Sterling's dissection of the stuff in Previews is one of the few blog-related things that I find genuinely funny. Wow, I think that last sentence actually might read as an anti-endorsement: "Rarely do I laugh, but if it's unavoidable I suppose Mike Sterling is as painless as any other method of inducing mirth." Really, even if more bloggers miraculously became funny, I would still find Sterling's musings on She-Dragon statutes pretty uproarious.


MarkAndrew said...

Shadowland was...

Well, I don't think the plot worked, or meant anything, or held together AT ALL, after about the first third.

But it was absolutely gorgeous. Like there's a "Wow, that looks COOL"moment on each and every page, or damn close. And probably worth the cover price just for the first chapter, which was damn near perfect.

Nik said...

Jeezus, that is a terrible lead on the Seattle Weekly piece. Funny thing is rest of the article is actually quite good as far as it goes - wonder if an editor had a heavy hand on it or something...

Jones, one of the Jones boys said...

Well, the Beat is supposed to be a news site, not an opinion site. At least that's what it says on the lid.

Dick Hyacinth said...

So all that stuff about 70s comics was news?

Jones, one of the Jones boys said...

It was news to me...

Thanks very much; I'll be here all night.

Anonymous said...

I know what you mean. But when I run out of ideas I just go to and get a post in the topic I wish.