Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site uw-june Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!dtuttle From: dtuttle@uw-june (David C. Tuttle) Newsgroups: net.comics Subject: Re: God Loves, Claremont Kills Message-ID: <345@uw-june> Date: Wed, 5-Feb-86 03:07:00 EST Article-I.D.: uw-june.345 Posted: Wed Feb 5 03:07:00 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 7-Feb-86 20:39:10 EST Organization: U of Washington Computer Science Lines: 54 > Subject: God Loves, Claremont Kills (the theme, that is) > Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot, Centram Systems West, Berkeley > Now, as for the X-Men graphic novel. Why is everyone so crazy about this > thing?... > ...It rarely makes one choke on its absurdities, unlike most > superhero comics... > But it is completely unoriginal. The plot is just like a million other > superhero comics... > But the worst part, and also the truest to the infantile conventions of > superhero comics, is the villain... Are you criticizing one comic book, or a whole genre of comic books? I like "God Loves, Man Kills", and I consider it one of the best superhero comics I own. I like it as a superhero comic. I do not judge it under other pretenses. Therefore, I cannot defend this comic on your terms. My apples, your oranges... > Such essentially mindless and frivolous entertainment has its place... Absolutely! And, apparently, you are not in that place, while I would venture to guess that most readers of net.comics are. Let's not lose sight of the fact that comics are entertainment, mindless, frivolous, and otherwise. I am reminded of the old joke about the man who dropped a coin in a dark room, and looks for it in another room because the light's better... > Overall, I don't understand why this altogether typical and unoriginal > superhero comic is being treated as the greatest thing since sliced bits. > I've read it several times looking for some vestige of a theme, an original > plot, or complex characterizations, in vain... Perhaps you are looking for the wrong things. Or perhaps you are looking too closely, or for too much. I won't explain why I think this is a great comic -- I couldn't do it justice, and it probably would be in a context that you have already discounted as mindless and frivolous. I am genuinely interested in what you consider to be "original" or "complex". The references you make to Layton's work strike me as either irrelevant or contradictory. Further elaboration may help resolve this matter (but then again...). ========== ========== David C. Tuttle Department of Computer Science, University of Washington [ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax]!uw-beaver!uw-june!dtuttle dtuttle@uw-june.ARPA ========== ========== POSTSCRIPT: > Would someone care to enlighten me on the virtues of this marvelous piece > of work, without feeling the need to insult me in the process? (Ha ha ha...) Net.comics is the best-behaved newsgroup I read. I, too, would like to keep it that way. I, personally, find the tone of your news postings to be mocking and condescending, containing (in moderate quantities) those very elements that you seek to avoid in our responses. So, please, let us "stop wishing for bad luck and knocking on wood." (John Prine, "Dear Abby")