Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax4.fluke.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!fluke!moriarty From: moriarty@fluke.UUCP (The Napoleon of Crime) Newsgroups: net.comics,net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: Leeper's views on comics... Message-ID: <2597@vax4.fluke.UUCP> Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 02:02:57 EDT Article-I.D.: vax4.2597 Posted: Fri Aug 30 02:02:57 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 2-Sep-85 09:09:14 EDT References: <1075@mtgzz.UUCP> <2580@vax4.fluke.UUCP> <1094@mtgzz.UUCP> Organization: The Institute for Criminal Masterminds Lines: 76 Xref: linus net.comics:1757 net.sf-lovers:8705 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! <*>