BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Changing nature of comics

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
rakehell
22:09 / 09.12.02
I'm re-reading "Shade The Changing Man" in singles and I find myself stopping at the end of almost every issue and thinking "Fuck, I like this book", something I don't do very often with comics anymore. I'm certain that if I went through and re-read "Doom Patrol" I'd get the same feeling, yet most comics leave me fairly cold. "The Filth" doesn't excite me nearly as much as "The Invisibles" did and though I'm enjoying "New X-Men", it doesn't have the depth I like.

Reading "Vertigo Pop: London" made me realise how much I miss captions, and comics "like that". I don't have any better description for them, sorry. Perhaps my complaints can best be levelled at Vertigo, but there haven't been many comics from other companies I've like recently. There are definitely waves or themes which run though comics and this unfortunately current or "widescreen" stream doesn't do much for me. I know that one of the reasons is density, where it takes me a couple of minutes to read most modern comics and it used to take a bit longer than that.

So would new readers today, dig - like I did - time and/or dimension travelling and neat literary references and abstract concepts/plots and all that? I realise that this is all horribly vague, but if those comics from 10 or so years ago were published today, would they succeed or flop? Some sort of answer, to this question at least, will be provided when the Shade TPB comes out next year.

Is this just whinging in the order of "I liked it better when there were cities in bottles and everyone wore hats."?

(Perhaps as a postscript I will add that this questions concerns left-of-centre mainstream comics rather than "alternative" ones. They are in different categories and I have enjoyed more than a few of the latter recently. Obviously there's no "widescreen" movement going through the Fantagraphics books.)
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
22:17 / 09.12.02
Right. No widescreen in the Fanta books. And a series like Shade would do as well today as it did back in the day: relatively poorly. Good books and popular trends do not often line up. As true for comics as for other artforms/entertainment media.

Actually...maybe a book like Shade would do even better nowadays for its sheer novelty value (in regards to those aspects of which you spoke).
 
 
Chubby P
09:03 / 10.12.02
Some comics are timeless. Some aren't. Morrisons Animal Man (which I'm reading for the first time) still comes across as a very solid read over 10 years later. Doom Patrol and Shade I've been collecting recently and those are all good books today.

I think its todays comics that are lacking.

I've been pondering my enjoyment of Morrisons latest work. I'm not enjoying New X-Men as much as I enjoyed JLA and I'm not enjoying The Filth as much as the Invisibles which has led me to two theorys.

1) Grants writing isn't as good as it used to be. He's recycling old ideas and not stretching himself like he used to. He's got to a stage where his writing comes across as lazy.

2) Grants writing is as fresh as it was 5 years ago but due to me becoming familiar with his writing my sense of wonderment is gone.

I have to say that when I go back and read Kill Your Boyfriend and The Mystery Play I do lean towards theory 1.

Some books today do come across as timeless. X-Force / X-Statix is a great book and I think Milligans failure with The Minx really kicked him into gear. I'm also currently enjoying Fables and Y - The last man.

Comics are closer to films these days than they are to books. We used to get into the characters heads that would add depth to the story but now its all no thoughts and no captions. I recently found my copy of JLA/Titans from the late 90s and was surprised that the panels weren't all widescreen and there was a lot of text on the pages. When I first read this story this didn't surprise me at all. I've become so conditioned to Widescreen storytelling that I'm now surprised when I actually have to "read" a book. Hopefully things will swing away from this widescreen approach. I want single issues of comics to take 15-20 minutes to read not 5.
 
 
Tamayyurt
15:48 / 10.12.02
Chubby, I agree with New X Men and the Filth. They're better than most thing out now but they aren't as good as, say, The Invisibles, Flex Mentallo....

But what about things like Fantastic Four:1234 and Marvel Boy. These titles still sparked my sense of wonder! I think Grant is just getting bored with NXM and the Filth is supposed (I think) to make the super stuff look boring and the human stuff shine (despite all the filth).
 
 
some guy
16:43 / 10.12.02
There's a speech in Trainspotting where Sick Boy describes his philosophy of life: You've got it, and then you lose it. And there ain't no going back.

I sort of agree with this. Morrison's first mainstream stuff is all more vibrant and vital than anything he's doing now, climaxing in the masterpiece that is Flex Mentallo and of course The Invisibles. But the current stuff is starting to feel old hat. Better than the competition, but stale nonetheless. And some of it, like Marvel Boy, has made the unforgivable mistake of being dull.

You can spread this out a little and see the same thing happening with other writers - it obviously applies to Claremont, but also to people like Moore and Miller, who are both past their heyday and don't really look set to return.

The industry desperately needs new blood. This touches a little on a comment made in one of the X-Men threads, that it's hard to take Morrison as a writer for the new generation now that he's a successful old man. I'd even go so far as to say that another writer could have written all of Morrison's issues of New X-Men, and that's not a case I could really make for some of his earlier stuff.
 
 
Tamayyurt
17:10 / 10.12.02
So then it's settled. It's really quite obvious. We're being groomed to be the next generation in comic book writers. When do we young 'lithers make the evolutionary leap from board to comics?
 
 
Perfect Tommy
17:37 / 10.12.02
Specifically on Morrison, I go with the hypothesis that we're familiar enough with his core ideas that we can't be as shocked by him anymore. That said, I think I prefer what I've read of New X-Men to JLA. I think the JLA ideas were flashier, and exploited the iconic nature of the characters really well (so that everything seemed Olympian), but NXM seems, I dunno... more mature? more political? having better real-world philosophy?

My take on The Filth is similar. It seems to pace like a long short story--"once, a thing happened to someone". The Invisibles was paced more like (how's this for a fucked analogy) Lord of the Rings--high fantasy, Good Vs. Evil (on the face of it at any rate), many characters that affect me to this day.

Side thought: The Filth as the experience of someone long after the Invisible hypersigil hits them and transforms them--looking back on it all and not sure that anything really happened. Whoever theorized that Greg Feely is KM in the Outer Church, fat and old and watching telly, I'm starting to agree.

At any rate, yeah. Like Warren Ellis mentioned a year or two ago, how the hell can Ellis and Morrison be the enfants terrible of comics if they're both in their 40s?

When do we young 'lithers make the evolutionary leap from board to comics?

Painting ourselves with the gold that rubs off of our idols: What are our favorite authors' weaknesses, holes, bad habits, sloppy thinking, wrong assumptions, and what is our refutation? When we know that, we evolve.

(Is that interesting enough for a new thread or am I talking out my ass again?)
 
 
dj kali_ma
17:59 / 10.12.02
I'd certainly be up for a new thread regarding that, just as long as it didn't turn into a large mudslinging contest and end in arguments such as "And if you're so smart, why aren't you published, like X?"

You know what I mean?

::a::
 
 
some guy
18:53 / 10.12.02
I suspect this thread is shortly going to degenerate into the old saw about "the only people still reading comics are the people who want to write comics." If that's true, the medium is fucked.

What are our favorite authors' weaknesses

They're just so damn repetitive. Ennis and his pubs, Ellis and his grumpy bastards, Morrison and his damn meta-reality theme. Whoever's coming up next is ideally going to leap from genre to genre, changing tone and style so quickly we can never quite be sure the same person is actually writing all the books...
 
 
Pepsi Max
19:36 / 10.12.02
Libertarian likes Morrison and Moore - rather irrelevant but thought I'd lob it in.
 
 
arcboi
19:40 / 10.12.02
Don't care what anyone says. The Filth is deffo the best comic out at the moment. So there.

Also, having read GM's latest interview, courtesy of Yawn and Tom, he's still coming out with lots of interesting ideas and opinions IMHO.
 
 
PatrickMM
19:55 / 10.12.02
In comics, there seems to be a general trend of writers writing their epic ongoing series that sums up what they think, and what is important to them, then never reaching those heights again, and spending time writing less important stories. This trend is probably best exemplified by Garth Ennis who hasn't written anything meaningful since Preahcer ended, but is true for Neil Gaiman, Warren Ellis (none of his current books look to have the scope or importance of early Transmet), and Grant Morrison. I'd assume that after spending five years writing a book, it's probably tough to come right back with new stories that are on that scale. After Invisibles, Grant has not written anything on that scale, and The Filth, while still a good comic, is so far not anywhere near its epic scale. I agree with what Tommy said above, that The Invisibles has a much greater scope than The Filth. It's tougher for Grant to put out material with the same impact after finishing the book that is the summation of all his ideas. That's not to say that he won't do worthwhile work, but it's just that nearly anything he attempts will look insignificant next to The Invisibles.

I'm enjoying The Filth, particularly the "real" moments with Greg Feely. The end of issue 3 was one of the most affecting things I've read in comics, and I think in TPB form, it's going to be an even more mindblowing series. New X-Men is also fun, and I'm looking forward to the third trade.
 
 
moriarty
20:42 / 10.12.02
"I liked it better when there were cities in bottles and everyone wore hats."

That's me, right there.

I've heard this same refrain from so many different people for so many different eras. The birth of Marvel. 1986. Early Vertigo. I'm a victim of this myself. I remember when I first discovered Vertigo comics and found a shop that had tons of them for a buck each. Bought over a hundred. They were a nice step in a different direction. And I've been moving since, throughout the history of comics.

Maybe that feeling you had when reading these comics was from that particular place and time. For me, I don't feel that kind of temporary excitement as much as I used to, but my appreciation for the work I choose today is deeper and more satisfying. I have no doubt that there are kids today that are picking up the odd comic and getting that same feeling you used to. Maybe the comics have changed. Maybe you have. Or maybe both you and the comics have changed, and that point where you met will never happen again.

Seems to me you're satisfied with your alt-comics purchases, but still holding out hope for something that will amaze you again. My recent rediscovery of old comic strips may not "blow my mind" in the sense that I remember from my youth, but they do open up a way into something rich and meaningful to who I am now.

So far as older comic creators losing it, that may be true, or in some cases they may be dealing with subjects or themes that are no longer of interest to you, either by not changing or by changing too much. Regardless, it doesn't mean that there aren't other people out there getting just as much from them now as you did way back when.

There's an incredible amount of new blood out there. But like people who chose to embrace the status quo and saw no reason to examine the early groundbreaking works of Morrison, Moore, etc, to their detriment, many fans of early Vertigo work (or insert rose-tinted era here) refuse to let go when the work no longer means anything to them other than for nostalgia.

Oh, and many 'Lithers are hard at work on comics. Where have you been?

I don't see anything wrong with comics readers being interested in making their own comics. If, LLBG, you meant people with dreams of grandeur who aren't willing to take a risk, rewriting each new issue of Green Lantern in their heads and on the message boards, fine. But I think that almost any medium has their fair share of dreamers who imagine what they would do if they could skip all the hard work and dedication.

I'd say my favourite cartoonists' weaknesses (I don't have many favourite comic writers, and those I do like my work wouldn't resemble) is the business model which they're stuck in, namely restrictions on content, pressure from revenue sources, and only very rarely digging deeper into their characters due to deadlines. I'm thinking mainly Noel Sickles, Milton Cainiff, Harold Grey and Frank Robbins, but I imagine the same points apply to so many others.
 
 
some guy
21:23 / 10.12.02
The Filth is deffo the best comic out at the moment.

Like all minis I'm waiting for the trade. Or I'll just snap up the complete run on eBay in the end for $8 or something.

Also, having read GM's latest interview, courtesy of Yawn and Tom, he's still coming out with lots of interesting ideas and opinions IMHO.

While I applaud Yawn for the interview, I found it very dull indeed. Morrison didn't really seem to be covering new ground, and as much as I love his older work the waffling is getting a bit boring.

Warren Ellis (none of his current books look to have the scope or importance of early Transmet)

Latter Transmet didn't have the scope or importance of early Transmet. It should have been a one-year deal.

Maybe that feeling you had when reading these comics was from that particular place and time.

I don't think so - I got a similar buzz from the first three issues of Morrison's New X-Men. I appreciate what you're trying to say, but I think it's ducking the issue somewhat. Nobody's going to make the case that Claremont's as good as he used to be, but we're just too jaded, are they? We see the same thing in other media - directors in particular seem to arc through a pattern where the greatest work is among their first, and then they peter out (often they're still very good, but that's not the point).

Where is today's From Hell, to illustrate? There really isn't one.

I don't see anything wrong with comics readers being interested in making their own comics.

No, me neither. There's nothing wrong with the people who want to make comics. My point is that if those are the only people left, the industry is doomed, because almost by definition it's disappearing up its own backside.

I'd say my favourite cartoonists' weaknesses (I don't have many favourite comic writers, and those I do like my work wouldn't resemble) is the business model which they're stuck in

I'm not sure "stuck in" is a good word choice - Morrison for example makes no bones about actively choosing the current model over the more liberating alternatives.
 
 
dlotemp
22:32 / 10.12.02
I'd like to pick up on an undercurrent that I don't think has been adequately expressed and one that I'd like to hear people's comments. Where could comics thematically and narratively expand? What topics are waiting for someone to dip their crowquill pens into them?

The honest truth is that comics like any medium is made up of 20% worthy material and 80% crap. I think we can all agree on this point. I think we'll all agree that the value of those worthy books vaciliate on society's trends and perceptions. Not everyone like FROM HELL, but damn if that wasn't one of the great pieces of sequential fiction since the medium formed. Who else has been able to synthesize a library's worth of research into a gripping and dramatic read? Not many. Let's face it: the book was ambitious. Moore uses it as a detective story but also as a political polemic. It takes a person with real convictions and character to conceive something like that.

I've been pondering the evolution of comics of late and wondering where it could go. I for one would like to see more ambitious projects. I'd like to see more journalistic comics like PALESTINE, or books that ask what is the role of faith in our spectacle world. Too many current books are wrapped up in the soap opera and lack the substance.

I think we should spend more time wondering what could be done or where we could take comics than whether Morrision, Ennis, et.al. have lost their touch. Otherwise we start to sound like junkies who are starting to lose the high. Comics have changed and will change but the one constant is that they require our imagination to make them real, and we so I wonder where others feel regarding the possibilities of comics.
 
 
arcboi
23:16 / 10.12.02
Laurence - Indeed, get the TPB of The Filth when it comes out because clearly it was designed for that format.

As for GM's interview: I have to be honest here and say that I haven't read quite as many interviews as probably the majority of people here have. Neither have I got Anarchy For The Masses and there's more than a few of GM's projects that I haven't read. So I don't think I've immersed myself in his work enough to say I'm bored yet.

I simply find GM's way of thinking to be similar to Robert Anton Wilson's - it just seems to switch on parts of my brain that weren't switched on before. I don't think I could dream up smarter questions that yawn does for a typical GM interview, but I could listen to his ideas all day long. I'd draw the line at wanting to shit in his toilet tho

I always like to read challenging stuff so I'm not that nostalgic for the comics I read when I was younger (at least not yet). At some stage I will get off my lazy arse and do my own comics.
 
 
moriarty
00:44 / 11.12.02
LLBG, it's been awhile since I've posted, and I've obviously become sloppy. I meant to suggest that what I said was only an alternative. I should have mentioned that "The writer has really gone downhill" is also an option, but since it had already been covered thouroughly, I didn't. Mainly I was countering the idea put forth near the beginning of this thread that comics in general aren't the way they used to be. I can concede that they may not be the same, but if that's the case I'm glad that the industry is constantly changing.

There are two diametrically opposed arguements here that aren't quite clashing like they should. The comics I used to enjoy no longer exist because the writers no longer writes the way they used to, and the comics I used to enjoy no longer exist because the writers keep running over the same old ground. Considering that I no longer read the current of works of Morrison, Moore, Milligan and co, I'm afraid I can't offer an informed opinion on that specific subject.

LLBG, you are also partially correct about my use of the phrase "stuck in." I say partially only because I was talking mainly about the four cartoonists I named, and not Morrison and co, though I did say it could apply to others. I do realize that Morrison chooses to do business the way he feels best. I should have worded it differently.

So far as "buzz" goes, I didn't mean to suggest that it's not possible to get that feeling again. In fact, I think I do allude to that possiblity. What I was getting at was the idea that maybe that connection one felt for a writer or artist in the past may or may not be duplicated in the future. I was thinking of The Filth in particular. I haven't read it myself, but it seems that among people who enjoyed the Invisibles there is a point of disagreement on its worth. Based on one of Morrison's comments in Yawn's interview (quick aside, I may not read his comics anymore, but I do enjoy his interviews, go figure) The Filth is targeted at a different group of people. Some people may not like the series because it seems to be an almost anti-Invisibles, and that brings them down. Other's may enjoy taking a critical look back on that series and that time. Or maybe it's just crap. Or great. U-Decide.

I like what Dlotemp has to say. The thing about his statements is that I see this happening right now, and it has been for years. Artists are pushing the boundaries of what comics can do. Many of these comics, because of the way the industry currently works, may never reach it's potential audience. The other trick involving comics that push the limits is that it creates more diversity, and therefore might not interest the people who call for their creation. That's why I feel that the last few years of Vertigo has been superior to its beginnings. Instead of a number of books that everyone can agree on, there are a number of books of which a person might only be interested in a few at most. So instead of a small group of people picking up a large number of books, you have a large group of people picking up a small number of books.

From Hell is great, but there will be people who won't enjoy it or for whom it won't interest them. There are books being created right now that are better than From Hell in their own way. They might not interest you or me, but so what?
 
 
some guy
01:06 / 11.12.02
Mainly I was countering the idea put forth near the beginning of this thread that comics in general aren't the way they used to be. I can concede that they may not be the same, but if that's the case I'm glad that the industry is constantly changing.

I think comics aren't the way they used to be, because writers are no longer interested in honing the craft of the monthly comic. They're all writing for trade paperbacks, which means slicing a larger story into (often random) 22-page segments. This is likely contributing to the lack of the "pop buzz" factor.

On the other hand, I think in general there are more good comics out now than there has ever been at any given time. However, this appears to come at a cost - the major, ambitious works such as Watchmen or From Hell. I haven't seen anything of this calibre hit the scene recently, nor do I see anything on the horizon. The batting average has improved, but at the cost of grand slams.
 
 
--
02:32 / 11.12.02
Eh, I don't read much comics, I wouldn't really know. While I think The Invisibles is better then The Filth, The Filth is a more gut-wrenching, emotional read for me. It's kinda cool keeping up with it every month too, I wasn't able to do that with The Invisibles cuz I got on the wagon late...
 
 
Perfect Tommy
19:07 / 12.12.02
dlotemp is wise.

I'd like to see more journalistic comics like PALESTINE, or books that ask what is the role of faith in our spectacle world. Too many current books are wrapped up in the soap opera and lack the substance.

Hm... perhaps current writers are trying to get away from some of the, I dunno, defensiveness ("No, no, I read Sandman cuz it's literature--superheroes are crap!"), by working on making superhero stories relevant and summer-blockbustery? "Our soap operas are at least as good as yours"? And it's funny that you bring up journalistic comics; I keep mulling over what the comics version of the best math textbook in the universe might look like.

I think we should spend more time wondering what could be done or where we could take comics than whether Morrision, Ennis, et.al. have lost their touch.

I'm a little obsessed with the touch of Morrison & Co. right now, not because I think they've lost their touch, but because I want to explore their negative space. Of course, GM writes *about* negative space, which tends to distract me...
 
 
some guy
19:46 / 12.12.02
I'd like to see more journalistic comics like PALESTINE

Is comics an adequate medium for journalism?
 
 
Jack Fear
19:49 / 12.12.02
That strikes me as a fundamentally absurd question.
It's words and pictures. You can do anything with words and pictures.
 
 
some guy
22:22 / 12.12.02
That strikes me as a fundamentally absurd question.
It's words and pictures. You can do anything with words and pictures.


Surely the point of journalism is to provide news coverage as quickly as possible, to the largest possible group? With this in mind - is comics an adequate medium for journalism?
 
 
Jack Fear
22:27 / 12.12.02
You're equating "journalism" with "news." Related, but not synonymous.

And don't call me Shirley.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
22:53 / 12.12.02
Yes, Jack is correct, journalism is a lot more than just reporting time sensitive news and information. Editorials and feature articles are definitely parts of journalism that can translate into comics fairly well.
 
 
dlotemp
23:51 / 12.12.02
And art. For instance, the Ashcan School of painters brought great attention to the plight of the poor and growing urban indigent during the early 20th century. Comics are possible vehicles for journalism.
 
 
Dave Philpott
00:56 / 13.12.02
Perhaps the buzz is killed by over-analyzation.

When a story is new and anything is possible, well, there lies your buzz.

When a story has been beaten to powder (and everyone has THE correct answer) your buzz is dead.

I'm not specifically talking about THE INVISIBLES here. Well, maybe I am...

I think so much has been said and theorized and postulated about GM's writing and "what does it all mean??" that we've got the jump on his newer endeavors. Partially his fault, though, for having a common undertone to most of his works.

Same with Garth Ennis. Almost all of his stories have someone with a laughable disfigurement and/or a speech impediment. Someone will threaten to kick yer friggin' ballicks in. Someone will be shot in the face. And so on. We could play this game with them all, really.

But would we accept a style-switch from any of them? Or would we shoot them down the way we scorch Madonna for trying to act?

Warren Ellis has the right answer: comics will get better when we have significantly MORE to choose from.
 
 
some guy
00:02 / 14.12.02
You're equating "journalism" with "news." Related, but not synonymous.

My point is that Joe Sacco could reach a lot more people if he didn't choose to go through comics. For journalism, his decision seems to defeat the point somewhat.
 
 
Boy in a Suitcase
00:19 / 14.12.02
Young Turk Shitslinging Contest:

Here is what I think comics need in the future. This is what I'm working on right now:

1. The return of thought bubbles, goddamnit.
2. A step away from widescreen, like people have been saying. Comics need to stop emulating movies and start doing what only they can do. I'm sick of seeing Jerry Bruckheimer-type comics.
3. Much more information packed into the page.
4. A turn away from the mainstream. Morrison, Millar, Moore, etc. have been all up on the mainstream recently, and have been saying that the mainstream is where it's at, where they can get visibility for their "message." But, basically, they're old sell-outs. Fuck that, man, I don't want my storytelling neutered in any way. Maybe we should start new companies.
5. No more spookiness or magic for magic's sake. We've all been told all about it by the last generation. We all should use it and incorporate it into our comics, but it should be invisible, right under the surface. I don't want my comics to be boring theoretical exegesises, and I'm sick of the symbolism and kinds of stories generated by the straight occult approach. You don't need to have the comic be about magic to have it be magic.
6. No more comics influenced by Bill Hicks, love him to death as I might.
7. No more nostalgia.
8. No more comics that are just riffs on comics history.
9. No more goddamn goth comics. Somebody burn down Slave Labor (but not until me & Nelson publish our comic there!)

Maybe we should start some kind of Dogme 95 for comics, because nobody's going to save the medium except us.
 
 
Perfect Tommy
01:34 / 14.12.02
I think that's a brilliant idea.
 
 
bio k9
06:13 / 14.12.02
My point is that Joe Sacco could reach a lot more people if he didn't choose to go through comics. For journalism, his decision seems to defeat the point somewhat.

Anyone looking to reach "the largest group possible" should immediately ditch the comic medium. God, this whole bit is just silly. More people watch television than read books, should historians give up writing and work for The History Channel?
 
 
The Photographer in Blowup
08:42 / 14.12.02
1. The return of thought bubbles, goddamnit.

Thought ballons? Again, after Moore put an end to that crap twenty years ago? Forget it. I'm tired of reading some Lex Luthor-type villain plotting in a dark room against his archenemy with his thoughts opened wide to everyone - remember that rule of writing? Show, don't tell. Characters have to show the reader what they are going to do through actions, not by sharing telepathy with the reader.

Thought Ballons! What about sound effects? You also like those? Every time a bomb explodes in a comic there's that awful BOOM; the hell is that? and more information per page? You must be a fan of Claremont; he knows all about filling pages with mindless narratives.

Moving on, i hope comics don't become a medium for guys who read comics only, or we can say goodbye to good writers like Morrison, Gaiman, and Moore, or you think those guys learned all that stuff they pack in their work by reading comics? Hell no, by reading literature, non-fiction books; one of the things i like about Morrison, is that his science fiction always seems real, for he explains it, not some mindless crap from the guy who is currently writing Fantastic Four (read that cheap issue a few months ago and hated - never liked the team anyway)

But i also believe Morrison, Moore, Ennis and Ellis are losing their steam and revamping their earlier stuff (Moore went as far as to have thought ballons in Promethea, one of the reasons i don't buy it), and think it's up to the next generation of comic book writers to bring new ideas - but that won't happen if they only read comics: Sandman; The Invisbles; Swamp Thing aren't made of air; they actually had to be researched.
 
 
bigsunnydavros
09:05 / 14.12.02
Ach baws!

Sound effects are fucking brilliant and the sooner people get over their hatred of them, the better!

Look at Paul Pope's 100% for example: the panels are bloody pounding with the bastards! "BOOM-BOOM-BOOM-BOOM!" it goes, and it looks and feels fucking BRILLIANT!

Sound effects can be crappy, but that doesn't mean they always have to be! They're one of the unique elements of comic book storytelling, and when they are used properly they are utterly ROCK!

Thought bubbles are a similarly tricky case- when you think of them, you think of clumsy overwritting, but methinks that if someone had enough imagination then they could do some very cool things with them in terms of both story and design.

Chris Ware did some interesting things with thought bubbles in Jimmy Corrigan didn't he? All those little visual symbols he stuck in them were brilliant, and again were something that worked perfectly with the comic book medium.

Course, they cans till be used in a straightforward way too. The last issue of Dan Clowes Eightball had a couple of fun little thought bubbles going on, my favourite ones being those used in the first Random Wilder strip. Was good fun so it was. "I'd rather visit a gas chamber!" and all that. Takes you back, what?

So, basically, though ballons/sound effects do not equal "mindless narrative".
 
 
Perfect Tommy
02:03 / 15.12.02
If "show not tell" were a rule, instead of a very important guideline, Hamlet would be lots shorter. Seriously--isn't "To be or not to be" in a thought balloon? And every line that follows the stage direction "aside"?
 
 
sleazenation
10:42 / 15.12.02
Perfect tommy - to see how Hamlet's t be or not to be speach can be used in comics to great effect with showing leading the telling see Will Eisner's seminal text "comics and sequential art"
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply