| |
|
Hmm, comments in this thread and also in the SSS thread have made me consider that some unpacking of mine own attitudes to explicit comics, particularly in the wake of the collapse of the "It's sexy and it's not my business if others find it objectionable" defence, might be in order. But since we seem to have our discussion split rather awkwardly between two threads at present, I should probably wait until the dedicated thread, however it begins, starts up.
Talking of Philip Bond's stuff, people here who are the right age will probably remember his stuff from the Deadline era as part of their introduction to comics that felt sexy without being 'dirty' (no pretense at unpacking this BTW), yet I can also recall quite a few contemporary objections to that title's attitudes to and depictions of women - the girls in Bond's Wired World being disparaged as "cute sex on a stick" is a phrase that's stuck with me for some reason - and in retrospect, they seem hard to argue with. "Jamie Hewlett either needs to re-examine his attitudes to women or receive a good hard kick in the bollocks" is a vividly unarguable comment that was also made in the lettercol, in the wake of the oddly unpleasant Wacky Races-with-tits-and-eviscerations strip Fireball.
I'm with Decadent on the topic of Adam Warren's stuff, but there it's more about the comedy than the outright T&A. People continually finding themselves accidentally naked is such an established slapstick trope but he manages to make it equal-opportunities, silly and sexy while retaining the sense that these are people rather than hand-drawn ogling receptacles in these embarrassing and dangerous situations. |
|
|
