-I think I'm starting to realize why the out-of-context wacky panel is so popular among comics bloggers--it's easy content on days when you have little to say, yet you feel obligated to post. Unfortuantely, the scanner is in my wife's office; otherwise, you'd be looking at a panel from Epileptic or maybe House with a hilarious caption. ("Way to go, spazzmoid" or "Oooh, that's gotta hurt!" would work for either, right?)
-Man, I've made that joke before, haven't I? Was a week a long enough vacation?
-Speaking of that break, I'm still not caught up on the San Diego news. Was the announcement of Warren Ellis on Astonishing X-Men really the big news? Cause there's not a whole lot to say about that which isn't crushingly obvious, really. And the Engine is shutting down? I can't say I ever went there unless Spurgeon or MacDonald or someone linked to a thread there. I just found it very difficult and unpleasant to navigate. Plus it was, you know, a message board. I thought the internet had evolved past these things (and I'm guessing--SPECULATING--Ellis agrees, and that his next major web presence will be via a blog, probably in podcast format or some similar, iPhone-friendly format).
Bonus Ellis content: I'm guessing Bill Willingham is not a fan of Transmetropolitan, based on these comments (re: his doubts about pitching Fables):
"I didn't think it was a really good Vertigo book, since all of their books kind of had a universal look at the time, of pouty teenagers with lots of face shrapnel and tattoos, railing against The Man."
-So I've read exactly one book from this week so far--Batman #667. I assume that, for the next week, bloggers will be occupied with identifying which artist JH Williams is homaging with each character. On my first read, the only one I recognized for certain was Howard Chaykin.* I'm pretty sure Dave Gibbons is in there somewhere as well, but I'm not sure about the rest. I almost want to say Steve Rude and Mike Mignola, but those seem wrong somehow. Anyone?
*Speaking of whom: I flipped through that coffee table book featuring cartoonists in their work spaces, and that's not how I thought he would look.
-I'm still planning on doing the Rob Liefeld retrospective, starting this weekend probably. It looks like the timing is just right, given his impending return to Image. Anyway, I was planning on diving right into the New Mutants material, but it occurs to me that he first gained notoriety on the Hawk & Dove mini. For those who were Liefeld fans back in the day: should I start there?
-I guess that's it, because a quick browse of the usual sites isn't yielding much in the way of viable topics. Are things that slow? Is there some kind of interconventionary torpor plaguing the blogosphere?
EDIT: Okay, here's something (via The Beat): a recap of the "Comics Are Not Literature" panel which I found to be the only really compelling reason for anyone to go to San Diego (in a purely hypothetical sense). I have to say--it seems a little disappointing. "Comics need a space to just be awesome" is not the level of discourse I would have hoped for. But then you read this in the comments:
"Comics not literature? Read "The Death of Captain Marvel" by Jim Starlin and get back to me..."
Oh man. But that's Newsarama for you--I'm way more disappointed by the comments left at The Beat, which (of course) has a much more intelligent readership. Some people just can't seem to understand this is not a highbrow/lowbrow question, despite repeated attempts to explain this to them. There's also a lot of "Aaargh! Semantics! Me am no like!" there. (I don't understand the mentality which causes people to run away from semantics. How on earth do you go about expressing yourself to others if you're so thoroughly repelled by examining the nature of the words you're speaking? Stupid modernists.) And there's also a lot of people wanting to bury their heads in the sand and hide from questions which grown-ups might ask about comics. Very depressing. Maybe my expectations aren't really in line with reality, I don't know.