From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Who should join Image
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:38:13 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <Bx9KKK.H04@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tpjg9663@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Johnston) writes:

+>visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) writes:

+>>In <1992Nov3.180635.5843@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dvandom@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David VanDomelen) writes:

+>>+>Hmm.  The Image-inaries seem to be out in force today.  At least one person 
+>>+>that list, PAD, has about as much chance of joining Image as Ross Perot 
+>>+>for Bush today.  All indications are that PAD harbors a certain (perhaps
+>>+>degree of ill-will toward Image in general and a few of its artists in 
+>>+>specific.  Of course, I'm waiting for Time-Warner to buy Malibu so it can
+>>+>in on the money....

+>>	Company robots always hate anything where people outside the 
+>>"plantation(s)" have the chance to make money.  You see, your supposed
+>>to be "loyal" to your company which always has your best intrests at

+>What does this have to do with PAD?  In the past year he's written for
+>Marvel, The Little Mermaid (Disney/Gladstone ?), Creepy (Dark Horse or
+>Harris?), done a column for Comics Buyers Guide,
+>and soon will be doing Aquaman (DC.)  It seems to me like he
+>writes where he's welcome.  Why label him (to paraphrase) a company
+>drone?

	Read some of what he has said about Image, the way he has gone
after people at image and people who work for image.  It seems to me
that the attitudes expressed are either a personal grudge against
certain people at image or sucking up to marvel.




+>>heart.  And if the company orders you to put out books with bad plots and
+>>silly stories, thats just the way things are.  

+>Bad plots and silly stories?  Well, not everything can be Maus.

	I'm glad you picked up on this "rationalization" because its 
the same one used by most people who put out substandard hack work.

Now there are two ways that creative people can respond to being told
to do hack work.  They can move on or away.....or they can participate
willingly in creating trash.  Once such people develop enough fans, they
can reach a point where no matter how BAD the work, their drone-like 
fans will refuse to be critical of it.




+>>You take what the master's
+>>say is a reasonable cut and keep quiet.

+>PAD keep quiet?  He seems to be very opinionated in his CBG column.

	In a very selective way.  Very opinionated toward image in 
particular.


+>>	I mean the whole idea of image....creators actually owning characters
+>>and taking a large share of the money is absurd and evil.  Besides which
+>>anyone who leaves marvel has no talent anyway.

+>Where are these remarks coming from?  Are they quotes?  Paraphrasals?
+>Or just your opinions?

	I find it difficult to understand why particular people would go
out and devote lots of energy to attacking Image and the people involved.
The last paragraph was meant to give some of them a motive consistant
with their behavior.
	I can't really understand why anyone would "hate" or attack image
unless they were trying to suck up to the company.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc