BARBELITH underground
 

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


Warren Ellis to retire from comics?

 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
eddie thirteen
05:07 / 20.02.04
Well, number one, I'm afraid I just don't have the words for Ellis' summary of his own novel. I mean, I guess that sounds, I dunno, so irreverent and shocking...or something...or it would have when I was seventeen...*yawn*...what were we talking about? Oh, yeah. Yeah, um, that does sound like a literary tour de force. Thomas Pynchon, look out, 'cause those crappy artists aren't holding Warren back no more.

On a more important subject, I think a distinction kinda has to be drawn between the potential of comics as a medium for expression and the reality of comics as an industry that turns out material about violent men who wear funny-colored tights. I don't think comics the medium is inherently limiting to writers, or at least not any more than writing for stage or screen. Comics as an industry is clearly extremely limiting to any writer who actually wants to make a living writing comics. As has been noted elsewhere, people who work exclusively in an indie, self-publishing vein tend to take a long time with their work not just because they're perfecting it, but also because they're creating around working paying jobs. I.e., *not* their comics. Making a living writing comics means pandering to fanboys, and that means producing work that is probably not the best you could do.

So...why do so many people continue to read this shit? I have no idea. Fewer and fewer of them read it all the time. It could be that the comics industry's worst nightmare -- the dwindling number of people who religiously read garbage -- is the medium's salvation. It could also just mean that American comics publishers will buy the rights to more and more manga reprints. I kinda don't care, because while I love the medium, I'm so bored with what's being produced that I don't even really look at comics anymore, and am sorta over them, and have much more disposable income and less clutter.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:03 / 20.02.04
First up, Warren Ellis was never lucky enough to be a "hipster", nor were any of his fans. Follow the link I gave to Deathboy's page and check that photo - that's what Ellis acolytes look like.

I think one of Ellis' biggest problems is that at some point during the WEF's "height", he stopped writing comics and started writing solicitations. Seriously, those who used to lurk there will testify to this. He actually became really good at it for a while there - he perfected the art of the sneak peak: a synopsis here, a snatch of dialogue there, a piece of promo art, a logo, maybe even a few sample pages of script. Every time he did this, the fans went wild. Hell, he only had to mention that he'd been jotting down early ideas before bed last night - "something about a Knight of the Round Table who was a cock" - and the fans would go wild.

This is really seductive, but also very insidious, because writing pitches and sneak peaks is a lot faster and easier than finishing actual comic scripts. But every time I feel like posting my latest great idea in the Creation - "coming soon!" - before I've done any of the work, I remember the cautionary tale of Warren Ellis. Check out this update on the status of his forthcoming (or not) work - it's kinda tragic. Cancelled, no longer being published by that company, no schedule, no artist...

Bear in mind that Ellis has been a strong supporter of pre-ordering: I'm sure his reasons were genuinely not self-serving, but the reason why I don't pre-order has been glaringly highlighted by both the disappointing quality of some of Ellis' work over the last few years and the erractic (in)frequency with which it has appeared. A lot of the Ellis comics I've bought, I didn't need to buy, because I didn't need to read them, because it was all there in the solicitation. His work became 'high-concept' in the worst possible sense. Prime example: Ministry of Space. Concept: the British have a Space Programme. They smoke and swear Britishly and are bastards. The end. Comic: see 'concept'. No characterisation to speak of, no memorable dialogue, no real plot beyond the pitch. Some nice Weston art spreads, but you'd already seen the best ones on the net beforehand. Even some of the last half-dozen issues of Planetary (thought not all) have suffered from this: they just feel empty when you read them.

And recently, even the pitches have started to sound tired (Red? Reload? Two-Step?). Still, he's better than Mark Millar. Although that novel does sound like a vicious Ellis parody written by someone who hates him more than anyone on this thread...
 
 
Alex's Grandma
10:04 / 20.02.04
Comics as creative dead end.

Well maybe, maybe not. What does seem to be true though, as far as I can make out, is that comic writers tend to come pretty badly unstuck once they start getting ideas about " proper " fiction. I guess it's something to do with not having an artist there to flesh out the script, so the prose is either a bit too manic ( Grant Morrison, ) or just plain flat ( Neil Gaiman. ) The only exception I can think of is Alan Moore, but something " American Gods... " Am I alone in thinking the world could probably have done without that ?
 
 
Krug
15:56 / 20.02.04
No you're not.

Excellent post Flyboy.
 
 
eddie thirteen
17:26 / 20.02.04
"That novel does sound like a vicious Ellis parody...."

But the thing is, Warren Ellis himself sounds like a vicious Warren Ellis parody. Which is maybe the problem?
 
 
eddie thirteen
17:58 / 20.02.04
In re: whether comics writers who move to prose really suck, my own shallow commentary here is...um...

I liked American Gods. I mean, it wasn't the best book I ever read or anything, and it kinda fumbles into anticlimax in the last fifty pages or so, but it was hardly a piece of shit. What I found curious was how much less imagination seemed to go into it than had gone into Gaiman's comics work (which we might as well just amend to "Sandman," since I don't think anyone ever means anything else by it), as well as how very little work went into the creation of the protagonist, who -- quite frankly -- was sort of a dull sonofabitch. Come to think of it, the bland everyman protagonist of Neverwhere was also, y'know, pretty bland, though I liked a lot of the peripheral characters.

I think the only prose of Morrison's I've read is "The Braille Encyclopedia." It's been a long time, and maybe I wouldn't like it as well now, but I remember it as a very strong story.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
11:01 / 22.02.04
But short stories have to do much different things than long prose works, beyond being short I mean. I've got Morrison's 'Lovely Biscuits', it's mostly wee, except for the two play scripts in there. And how long has the world been waiting for a publisher to see the light and publish his masterwork, 'Imaginary Friends'?

Back at Ellis, reading the last year of 'Transmet' you can tell he wished he'd sold it as a four year series instead. I don't know whether it's particularly a failing in himself or rather problems with the industry of producing comics that don't suit his temperement, I'm just hoping that he finished all the scripts for Planetary ages ago and it's now just a matter of waiting for Cassady's art to go with it. If he's still writing it now it's going to fizzle out something chronic too.

But i bought the Avatar collection of his 'Bad Signal' columns and there's a lot to love in there. Maybe Ellis' millieu is 200 AD 'Future Shocks' with bald, smoking sweary blokes in them?
 
 
sleazenation
11:55 / 22.02.04
eddie thirteen said
I liked American Gods. I mean, it wasn't the best book I ever read or anything, and it kinda fumbles into anticlimax in the last fifty pages or so, but it was hardly a piece of shit. What I found curious was how much less imagination seemed to go into it than had gone into Gaiman's comics work (which we might as well just amend to "Sandman," since I don't think anyone ever means anything else by it), as well as how very little work went into the creation of the protagonist, who -- quite frankly -- was sort of a dull sonofabitch. Come to think of it, the bland everyman protagonist of Neverwhere was also, y'know, pretty bland, though I liked a lot of the peripheral characters.

Surely that's damning with faint praise, claiming Gaiman's lasted novel is not a piece of shit - having said which, the publisher's finite guarentee that American Gods was "as good as Stephen King or you money back" must also be seen as a bit of an own goal.
 
 
eddie thirteen
15:06 / 22.02.04
It's not really so much damning with faint praise as it is intended to bring the novel's quality into proper scope...a few posts back, someone said something like, "Am I alone in thinking the world could have done without American Gods?" which to me is a bit disproportionately harsh. I mean, if you compare the book to (let's say) the work of William Faulkner, then yes, American Gods comes up a little short. Even when stacked up against the work of (Gaiman admirer) Michael Chabon, or for that matter probably a whole ton of contemporary "literary" writers, Gaiman's novel starts looking a bit slight and superficial. Which it is.

However, when compared to the spinrack of airport books with which American Gods is actually competing for attention, Gaiman looks like a fuckin' genius -- a phenomenon not really that far removed from Sandman's brilliance when placed in relation to such early '90s comics "masterworks" as Spawn and Youngblood. In the same way, Gaiman's glowing reviews as a novelist have (I think) a little less to do with his gifts as a writer -- which, however exaggerated, do exist -- than with astonishment on the part of critics who are used to slogging through *total* shit that the novel is actually literate and entertaining. Basically, what I'm saying here is that if American Gods need not exist, Tom Clancy or John Grisham should probably have been killed at birth.

What's annoying about Gaiman is that he's overrated, by no one as much as himself, but (I think) it's pure reaction to that annoyance to imply that he can't write at all. He can. One could do worse than aspire to be the world's next great author of airport novels. It'd be nice if Gaiman and some of his more zealous advocates were to put it in perspective, sure, but hey.
 
 
sleazenation
16:00 / 22.02.04
I guess it comes down to how much you value, artistically and ecconomically, airport fiction and works of a roughly similar quality.

I could happily live without John Grisham's work and its presence in airport bookshops. Other people presumablely wouldn't.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
16:19 / 22.02.04
when compared to the spinrack of airport books with which American Gods is actually competing for attention, Gaiman looks like a fuckin' genius

So, not damning with faint praise at all, then. Glad we cleared that one up.
 
 
PatrickMM
19:25 / 22.02.04
In response to a few things on the thread.

I think the WEF certainly hurt Ellis' output, and gave him this reputation as one of the top writers in the medium, when (other than Planetary, IMO) he's never produced anything truly great, certainly nothing on the level of Moore or Morrison's better work. It always amazed me that he had time to read every single post on the WEF, and reply to hundreds of them a week, yet he was so slow writing the script to Planetary 16 that Cassaday had to take on six issues of Captain America to fill his time.

By the end of the WEF, Ellis had only Transmet coming out on any kind of a regular basis, and while still good, it was so decompressed that what would have taken six issues at the beginning of the book took 12-18 by the end. Look at Back on the Street, or particularly Lust for Life, versus the end of the book. The beginning had some tightly structured stories, that were well told. By the end, there were so many essentially pointless splash pages that reading it in 22 page chunks was futile. Ellis' greatest contribution to the medium is probably the two page spread which contributes very little to the story, but takes up space.

I think Ellis' greatest problem is the hypocriscy inherent in his writing vs. his online commentary. Ellis spent years on the WEF disparaging "pamphlets," and basically creating the wait for the trade atmosphere. Then, he creates Global Frequency, a book designed to be read in singles, targetted at an audience that has been trained to disparage the single. Not to mention, encouraging people to buy that run of miniseries he did, which should have been put out as OGNs, but instead were packaged as three issue minis.

This isn't to mention the fact that while spending all his time disparaging superheroes, he goes out and writes a series of miniseries that are basically superheroes without the capes. And, then he brings out Ultimate FF, which is going against all he's been talking about for years.

I used to post to the WEF on occasion, and it was a really strong community, that I wish was still around. But, it also gave Ellis an inflated sense of self worth. It was not a good place to discuss his work, becuase any attempt to even suggest a flaw would be met with flaming, often from Ellis himself. So, now without his promotional machine, his sales have suffered.

As for the question of whether there can be really good writing in comics, I think the answer is undoubtedly yes. Work like Watchmen and The Invisibles represents a strong artistic vision from the writer, and accomplish feats that could not be accomplished in any other medium. Bad writers give comics a bad name, but at its core, it's a much easier medium for a writer to get their vision across than film.
 
 
eddie thirteen
04:48 / 23.02.04
"I guess it comes down to how much you value, artistically and economically, airport fiction and works of a roughly similar quality."

Agreed. In the "works of a roughly similar quality" category -- this is me talking about well-written airport fiction, mind you -- I would place most good superhero comics, Morrison's NXM and JLA included. (I would not, however, place the best Sandman trades there, which is why I was a bit surprised by the empty-calories feeling I got from American Gods). I don't think there's anything wrong with books, movies, etc., that exist to entertain and not do much else. I mean, when stuck in a dentist's office, I'd probably rather have American Gods with me than Gravity's Rainbow.
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
11:31 / 23.02.04
American Gods is terribly slight, I agree. It reads like a prose distillation of a lot of the ideas played with in Sandman, without the passion and the characters. In other words, it seems like he had all the material sitting in a few dozen folders and stuff in his attic, and dug them out when he needed a quick moneyspinner.

Coraline, on the other hand, is wonderful. Scary and strangely warped. His short stories, for the most part, are also very strong. He's capable of excellent genre work when he sets his mind to it, sometimes on a par with Barker, certainly superior to King or Rice, who're the ones who are really trying to compete with Grisham and Clancy nowadays.

Ellis? I dunno. I'm confident that's he's capable of writing decent prose, again, when he puts his back into it, but I can't help but agree with Flyboy's post about writing solicitations and high-concept synopses more often than he does comics. In his case, being prolific and charismatic may have made him a star (in the tiny world of comics), but the two have combined over time to show off exactly how shallow and derivative he can be. We'll see.

For the record - the comment about comics being a creative dead end for writers holds, I feel. Despite lots of talk from afficionados of the medium, very few examples exist of comics that can be held of as shining examples of how Comics Is An Art Form Too. I've heard all about how Watchmen's narrative and framing structure is incredibly cinematic, and how Sandman and From Hell are works of literature, but I tend to find that just proves my point. Why describe the medium's greatest works in terminology taken from criticism of works from other media if the form can stand alone? You wouldn't describe Welles' Citizen Kane as a work of literature, or the latest Marquez as on a par with City Of God, not unless you wanted your critic's license revoked.

Only a few indie comics really try to do anything different to the regurgitative hackwork in mainstream comics, and self-publishing, I've found, leads to self-indulgence - what most writers need, more than anything else, is an editor. Haus is right on the money when he says that comics writers don't get the same critical lense that prose writers do, or Ellis would have been shredded years ago for his vapid characterisation and boil-in-the-bag HST-meets-Sterling ideas.
 
 
Krug
16:55 / 23.02.04
//Why describe the medium's greatest works in terminology taken from criticism of works from other media if the form can stand alone?//

I've been thinking the same thing for a long time. Not sure If I did say it here or somewhere else but it bothers me every time a writer or a lazy comicnewshack tries to promote/explain the book. Thanks for bringing it up.
 
 
CameronStewart
17:02 / 23.02.04
>>>I've heard all about how Watchmen's narrative and framing structure is incredibly cinematic...Why describe the medium's greatest works in terminology taken from criticism of works from other media if the form can stand alone?<<<

I think that's more a charge against lazy critics than the work itself. I don't think that Watchmen is "cinematic" at all, in fact one of its strengths is that it employs narrative techniques (e.g the symmetrical chapter) that can only be effectively exploited in the comics medium - hence the numerous failed attempts to adapt it into a workable screenplay.

This isn't really a thread about Warren Ellis any more.
 
 
eddie thirteen
17:41 / 23.02.04
I don't think it's critical laziness as much as the lack of comparable technical language applicable to comics. Terms like "mise en scene" came into existence because you had an exciting, innovative film like Citizen Kane that warranted the invention of new terms so that people could start to understand what the hell it was they'd just watched; what's more (and this *does* back up the charge of critical laziness present in comics "journalism"), in film you have a battery of serious academics who are capable of such analysis in a way that (I'm sorry) a walking "before" ad for zit cream in a pizza-sauce-stained Jay and Silent Bob shirt who writes for Wizard just never will be. Not to mention -- among the few serious comics critics -- there is a frustrated desire to have the medium taken as seriously as film or literature that compels them to compare something like Watchmen to Citizen Kane over, say, the Lee-Ditko Spider-Man or Archie Comics.

I've noticed that the thread is a lot more interesting now that it's *not* about Warren Ellis anymore.....
 
 
eddie thirteen
18:04 / 23.02.04
Um...y'know what? Never mind, because Cameron's right. Now that I think about it, the lack of applicable comics language can't really be the result of anything other than a failure on the part of the afore-mentioned tiny number of serious writers about writers to define terms. I'm not sure if that's laziness or just a failure of imagination, but either way, the opportunity to develop a vocabulary of comics techniques is there, largely untouched.
 
 
eddie thirteen
18:06 / 23.02.04
That is to say..."writers about comics." Gah. Think I'll stop here...
 
 
sleazenation
22:24 / 23.02.04
ok draging this back to Ellis (which is not to say the other stuff that has come up isn't important or interesting just that i'd like to see a whole topic devoted to it) I'm not sure that Ellis' decision to write stories that are more solicitations wasn't part of his plan. Ellis has written a variety of three issue series recently. I have a feeling that in these series Ellis attempt to create new intellectual properties quickly that he can sell the film and other rights to. They are not developed because there is no need to develop them, other writers can develop further films and comics and Ellis can reap maximum reward for minimum effort. This isn't really an attack on Ellis, I'm just think Ellis' priorities are making money for his family rather than anything else.
 
 
eddie thirteen
23:11 / 23.02.04
I wasn't aware that Warren's family was starving. That certainly does change everything. I wish the Ellises well in this, their time of trial, and pray that Mr. Ellis' persistence in producing derivative, halfassed comics can land him the movie deal that is his only conceivable means of escaping desperate poverty.
 
 
Mister Six, whom all the girls
00:19 / 24.02.04
You should IM him, I bet he's online. The man is a chump. He wrote on and on about how things had to change since the comics market will die with fans asking for revivals of Micronauts and look what happened, we have a Micronauts comic and a list of aborted Ellis projects. So he writes the FF and hopes his fans will let it go and buy it. and if they do, it'll most likely be a waste of money and they'll be furious at the hack he's become. Me, I'm still bitter that I bought his DRUID series! But those early transmet books were very very good.

I simply cannot, by the way, let this go "Despite lots of talk from afficionados of the medium, very few examples exist of comics that can be held of as shining examples of how Comics Is An Art Form Too."

I assume that we are all, if we think hard enough and honestly enough, not entirely exerienced in all that comics has to offer, but come on! Limiting yourself to the work done in the late 80's to early 90's with Watchmen and Sandman is quite poor.

The Marvel work of the 60's, Will Eisner's Spirit, Gil Kane's Green Lantern, Steranko's SHIELD, Gene Colan's... anything!, Carmine Infantino's Flash and Bruno Premiani's Doom Patrol came long before post-modernism and any attempt to make a new form of fiction out of the medium. Along with these artists were great writers like Eisner, Lee, Kirby, Ditko, Gardner Fox, etc who wrote stories that embraced the medium of panels and did amazing unique things that collectively are a step ladder to the very books mentioned on these boards with such praise. These examples I've listed, which I know lots about are only from my limited knowledge of the medium, and are examples of comics being a unique artform. Watchmen and Sandman et al are, while definitely worthy of merit, built on the foundation of these other seminal works. So don't feel so strapped for examples of comics as a new art form, just ask another guy at the store next Wednesday.

There's lots of great art out there!
 
 
Krug
03:09 / 24.02.04
From Bad Signal....

----

From :
Sent : Monday, February 23, 2004 6:37 PM
To : badsignal@lists.flirble.org
Subject : [BAD SIGNAL]"Ultimate Fantastic Four"

| | | Inbox


bad signal
WARREN ELLIS


Found at: http://www.marvel.com/news/

---------------------

Ellis and Immonen take over Ultimate Fantastic Four this June


When writer Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Millar needed some
relief from their duties on Ultimate Fantastic Four, they only
made one phone call and Warren Ellis was happy to pick up.

Ellis (Planetary) -- with artist Stuart Immonen (Incredible Hulk,
Shockrockets) -- will take over Ultimate FF with June’s issue #7
of the top-selling title. According to Ellis, who’s already
planned out two arcs for the book, the decision to return to
the House of Ideas really came down to helping out his mates.

"Millar and Bendis had found themselves committed to big new
things, and something in their schedules had to give," reveals
Ellis. "Unfortunately, that thing was Ultimate FF. So Millar gets
a hold of me and basically threw himself on my mercy. Which
usually doesn't work, and I have those people carried away and
sodomised behind the stables. But I've known Millar since he
was a choirboy, so I let him speak. Mark and Brian were in a
hole. I've known them both for years. You don't leave your
mates in the lurch. Simple as that."

For the full rundown on Ellis’ first two story arcs that focus
on Dr. Doom and the Negative Zone (as well as Bendis and Millar’s
comment about leaving the title) and new series art by Immonen,
check out Wizard #150, on sale in comic stores Wednesday,
February 25. -- by Wizard Staff Writer Mike Cotton, courtesy of
Wizard Entertainment/Feb 23, 17:24

-------------------------------------

I haven't received the nod from Marvel PR yet, so I'm currently
constrained from commenting.

I have a Plan for this year, you know.

Touch wood, the next announcement with my name on will
be for a brand new original creator-owned graphic novel.
The contracts arrived today.

Next up: downloading "The Grey Album" and thinking about
British history.

-- W

----------------
UNSUB:
http://www.flirble.org/mailman/listinfo/badsignal

------


Excuses excuses.

Does anyone remember this?

http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/index.cgi?column=cia&article=547
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:26 / 24.02.04
I have those people carried away and sodomised behind the stables.

Because sodomy = always worth a laugh - do you see? You've still got it, Warren!
 
 
Mister Six, whom all the girls
13:22 / 24.02.04
Yeah, male rape is a hoot, ain't it?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:39 / 24.02.04
I think it's even worse than that, in that there's this whole "because no man could enjoy being sodomised - unless he was one of the gays - who are HILARIOUS! - in fact by being sodomised these men are made into gays - again, HILARIOUS!" angle to it to. Can someone pop round to repossess that GLAAD award?

(No doubt I'm one of those namby-pamby over-sensitive liberals who Warren would scoff at, fearless foul-mouthed champion of free speech that he is.)
 
 
neuepunk
15:02 / 24.02.04
I realize I'm coming in late to the game, but here it goes..

Warren Ellis's work has always been about presenting what he finds cool in the most obvious manner. He has an amazing love for what he feels is part of his subculture, which starts somewhere in sci-fi, takes a detour through government conspiracies and horror, and ends up in cyberpunk. Or maybe it started in cyberpunk with Lazarus Churchyard and the rest is just built off of that well-trodden base camp.

Ellis has some sort of love/hate complex with "pop." He wrote for at least a year that he was trying to make "pop comics" and encouraged others to do the same. Comics that were self-contained, accessible, and away from the whole comic fanboy image. You can tell that the man desperately wishes he could take his work to a broader audience, despite the fact that he obviously would dislike the majority of those people. I've watched him rant against pop music on his website despite the fact that it's everything that he wants in his fiction -- and for the same reasons. No deep substance, catchiness, self-contained... it's great when it's "out there" with glowing mongrel eyes like the killer hound made of razor blades and your dead mother's brain, but apparently not so great when it's not so "subversive."

I really think that Ellison could pull all of his works together to make a tv show called "The CSI Files" in which an underground group is tasked with investigating bizarre crime scenes and criminals while using the latest in forensic science to find/capture/destroy the culprit. Wait, he did that and it's called "Global Frequency."
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
15:59 / 24.02.04
Yeah - actually, it's a phenomena called 'lasersharking', I think... you come up with an idea (say, a story about a shark). Brilliant! Except that you've got to give it a high-concept spin - it's a shark with a laser cannon attached to it's back! - and end up with an idea so specialised and detailed that you've said all there is to say in the pitch, and fed the damn thing to death in doing so. Look at Ellis's 'upcoming projects' lists and synopses - perfect example of lasersharking in writing, where each one has enough good ideas for several decent, if slightly derivative, stories - but he's gotta use them all. and he's not a good enough writer to pull it off. Alfred Bester was. And Warren Ellis is no Alfred Bester, ladeeez and gennulmen.

Mister Six - probably wasn't making myself clear enough. I was referring to writing in comics - the art you speak of was revolutionary for the time, and a lot of it still holds up today as exceptional in superhero comics - but at it's best, the writing was pulp fiction - sparse, economic stories told with panache. At it's worst, it was simple morality tales typed with boxing gloves, the same stories and characters over and over. There's no shining light of quality of writing in there - the best you got was gung-ho professional hack work.

As far as I can tell, it was the comics boom of the 80s that led to people trying to do something different, trying to push the envelope and create something that would show the naysayers what could be done with the medium. Don't get me wrong - there's good, solid genre stuff from before this period - but "good solid genre stuff", cross-media, also applies to the first three Star Wars movies, none of which are works of anything other than 'pop' art.

What writer is using the medium to tell stories that can't be told in other media, and doing so brilliantly? Alan Moore is probably the only consistently brilliant writer working in comics today - certainly the only one who comes close to possibly being considered a genius. Morrison is inventive and spunky, but can't create a decent narrative or plot structure to save his life (or he can - he has - he just doesn't bother anymore), and has the same problem with dialogue and character that Ellis has - they all sound and act like Morrison characters, not like people. Milligan seems content to paddle in the shallow end of gentle superhero/media satire. Miller's descended into lumpen hackwork. Name some others, go on...
 
 
eddie thirteen
16:31 / 24.02.04
This won't be as detailed as I would like later, I'm sure (I need to get some sleep), but I think what you have to consider here is the kind of work being done *in the context* of the other work in a given medium. Star Wars -- revolutionary as it may have been for its day in other ways -- was actually a gigantic step backward in terms of filmmaking when you consider that it was released just a few years after The Godfather, Mean Streets, Bonnie and Clyde, etc. People who took film seriously looked upon George Lucas as functionally retarded -- literally so, in that his film was a throwback.

What this means for comics is that when you examine the work of, say, the '60s, you have to frame what you're looking at in the context of what else was being published. Sure, someone like Robert Crumb existed, but what he (and other underground comix writer/artists) was doing was so far removed from the mainstream that his impact on someone like Gardner Fox could not have been any more than, say, the impact of Julie Taymor on the guy who just made a sequel to Road Trip. In all likelihood, mainstream comics people of the day were probably wholly unaware of the existence of fringe writer/artists; they were influenced by, and working in reaction to, other mainstream writer/artists. But the "fringe" elements did affect comics fans, who were also affected by "new wave" sf, which in turn introduced many fanboys to...y'know..."Literary" writers who had influenced the new wave guys -- and ten or fifteen years later you have Marvelman and Dark Knight and Watchmen and Grendel, but *not* because those writers and artists had spontaneously mutated into literate beings, but because their overall frame of reference had evolved naturally, and that newfound appreciation for literary and artistic sophistication found its way into their comic books.

Which is, to me, what makes the present state of comics so pathetic, because the medium does now exist in the context of sophisticated material. What is presently being churned out is, for the most part, crap, but it's crap that's being produced by writers and artists who should know better, and have no real excuse.

Um...find your own way back to Warren Ellis from here. I don't think it'll be hard.
 
 
Mario
16:35 / 24.02.04
"Name some others, go on..."

Christopher Priest _can_ write incredible stories, but he tends to burn out periodically. But he probably does the best "technothriller" books out there.

Then there are writers like Kurt Busiek, Fabian Niceza, and Walter Simonson...they don't write much outside superheroes...but they write superheroes WELL.

And, personally, I think Gail Simone has a lot of potential still untapped.
 
 
J Mellott
17:15 / 24.02.04
Coming in late to another argument.

I agree with many here that most of Ellis' output is crap. In the last year or so he's put out many forgetable little mini-series. Planetary seems to be his only work that holds water for me, as he's not nearly as good at writing "cyber-punk" material as he thinks he is. What annoys me about Transmet is that it betrays a theoretically simplistic understanding of US presidential politics, US political culture generally, and politics as a whole. But that's a whole other conversation.

Gaiman has much more talent, particuarly in writing and pacing, than Ellis. However, as has been pointed out in many places, Gaiman's supposed comic-book masterpiece The Sandman reads very differently when you're 14 than it does when your 24. Something about The Sandman makes it seem adolecent to me, probably its reliance on obvious literary allusions.

Generally, I think Moore and Morrison are in another stratosphere from Ellis and Gaiman, as their works have remarkable theoretical cohesiveness, particularly in-text cohesion, and lack the "talking head" feeling one gets from much of Gaiman's comic-book work.

I would say something about Milligan, but I have not read that much of Shade and most of what I'm familiar with is his Human Target & X-statix stuff.
 
 
Mister Six, whom all the girls
17:37 / 24.02.04
I'm still very confused by what you refer to as good writing. And it's funny that you say it was the same story over and over since the larger portion of my examples come from 60's Marvel which was anything but. Each issue lead to the consequences that brought you into the next one... Sorry if I'm being agressive, btw, I'm just unusually deep into those comis right now.

Moore's MiracleMan is a very unique and brilliant story, but it's not exactly a mind-blowing comic visually as the artists keep changing. With Stephen Bisette on it, yes you are talking genius, but some of it just ugly artwork. Still, I love the book like crazy.

For the definition I'm using for good writing, I'm referring to innovation and uniqueness as well as thoroughness (which is what probably keeps the Filth out of what I'd call good writing as it wasn't 100% thorough enough for me but was very innovative). The other point is that as it is comics we're talking about, it cannot just be writing, it has to be art as well. In the Marvel and DC 60's work, you have pulp work, but for the first time flawed heroes, social awkwardness (Hal Jordan, Barry Allen, the Atom and Peter Parker could not get laid to save their lives!), in some cases plots that are wild and inventive (look at the JLA story where the Flash gets attacked by the Royal Flush Gang and sees everyone as a modern painting or when Spider-Man gets defeated by Doctor Octopus and tearfully claims to never be a hero again). THESE are really new ideas for their time which are drawn in a way that influenced the genre from that point on.

As far as telling stories in a unique way, none of the above examples could be done as a film or an audio tape or even cartoon. They function as only graphic sequential tales. Take any Will Eisner story and you'll see my point. You see sound fx, motion, and light, but when you take those elements out of the comic setting, it doesn't funcion as you'd assume it would. Given the right director, Watchmen could work as a film. It would definitely lose things, but it would function. The Spirit? No chance. The Flash? It would look very very silly. But as comics, they are brilliant. The art portion of the medium allows you to mess with time, space, dimension and shape in ways few comics do. You can bring in crazy ideas and characters that share their thoughts with the reader while speaking something wholly other, just as one example. When all of these elements come together, ah, THAT is a work of art. Grendel is a great example, btw of genius. It reaches this crazy height at the end of the comico run where dialogue, caption and image are so interwined yet so divided that you sit back, thinking, "wow... I wonder what he'll do next?" and.. it got cancelled.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:25 / 24.02.04

When writer Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Millar needed some
relief from their duties on Ultimate Fantastic Four, they only
made one phone call and Warren Ellis was happy to pick up.


Jesus. That may be the worst copy line ever.
 
 
eddie thirteen
00:16 / 25.02.04
Mister Six: Yes. On, like, everything. You pretty much said what I was trying to say about looking at the work of decades past relative to what was being published concurrently. And you're right about the Marvel/Miracleman art, too; I prefer to remember the sweet John Totleben stuff (and not that of Chuck Beckum, better known as...sigh...Chuck Austen).

As to the sad fate of Grendel (WAY off-topic), Grendel wasn't cancelled -- Comico was. Though Comico produced some amazing comics, on a business level it was evidently a little, uh, suspect. At the time -- in those strange days before the Internet, when my then-barely-adolescent self had to read stuff like Amazing Heroes to get comics gossip that is now immediately disseminated via electronic means -- I remember Matt Wagner explaining that he'd made the artists stop work on Grendel because he realized no one was ever getting paid again, and shortly thereafter the company publicly went under. What exactly happened I'm not sure, but I get the impression it was slightly shady, and produced legal entanglements that account for why Wagner's full run of Grendel still isn't in print.
 
 
PatrickMM
01:45 / 25.02.04
A lot of the people in this thread recognize that film is the medium most often used as a comparison when reviewing comics, which leads some people to believe that comics are an inferior medium than film.

However, up until fourty or fifty years ago, film seen in a similar way to the way in which comics are now, namely an inferior medium that can only ape the tendencides of other media (at that time literature). In addition, at the time most directors worked in the studio system, without a strong degree of control over their work, much like your average comics writer can't really alter the corporate superhero title that they work for.

In the 60's, the auteur system emerged, and the individual director became more valued, even in the Hollywood studio system. I think this is what's starting to happen in comics right now. The writer is becoming much more important, as a marketing tool, and as a creative force, even in the corporate superhero title. And stuff like the Vertigo line is similar to the writer/director emerging in the 70's.

Until the emergence of the auteur system, a lot of people saw film as only a medium for staged plays. However, these auteurs were crucial to furthering the unique language of film as a medium.

Comics have been around for a while, but they're just starting to move beyond the "studio era." And I think as unique writers become more prevalent, they will sculpt even more so the unique visual language of comics.

And according to the classical definition of an auteur, an artist whose work has a thematic coherence, I think Grant Morrison and Alan Moore stand out by far as the only two comics writer you could really call auteurs.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply