From: tpjg9663@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Johnston)
Subject: Re: Jack "King" Kirby: ripped off by Marvel
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:18:43 GMT

4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque) writes:

>[...] What a shame. Maybe I should start a new cause - based on
>comments Howard Chaykin made in numerous interviews - like Comics 75.
>"Comics are shit for teenagers to jerk off over and have no relevance 
>whatsoever". He has stated that he wants to write garbage and that he
>really hates the medium. It seems a lot of weenies in this group seem
>to take this approach (like Libelman) - and I thought - hell, if comics
>are not art then comics are trash. Maybe Chaykin is right.

Anyone have any idea what the quoted material above is supposed to
mean?  JLR is talking about starting a new cause based on Chaykin's
cynical view of comics.  And then JLR reaches a conclusion that
comics are trash.  The logic involved escapes me.  What is the new
cause, and how does it relate to Chaykin's views?

>Don't get me started - I'm having a bad day.

If you're going to post, try to do so coherently, regarless of
what type of day you're having.  Everyone who reads your posts
will be thankful, and less likely to dismiss your views out of
hand.

>Jack Kirby is nothing but a construction worker. He is a hack. Comics are not 
>art. Comics are shit. Comics will never have any relevence. Comics are for
>pea brained children. Acclaimed works like the Watchman and the Dark Knight
>are the last gasp of comics to gain the notoriety that it will never deserve.
>Adults will never fully accept this medium as a medium for adults - and 
>looking at the products out today - can you question them. Comics are an
>assemply line - with pitiful art and stories every month from all of the
>companies. Comics = toothpaste = construction work = blow jobs = beer =
>shit.

It's wrong to make any all-inclusive statement about comic books.  Some
are aimed for adults, some are aimed for children, some are done well,
some are done poorly, etc.  Also, some adults will accept the medium
and some will not.  Do I care?  Nope, I'm just going to read the books
which entertain me, and skip the rest.  The equation "Comics
= toothpaste ..." doesn't deserve comment.

>Marvel, DC, Image, Aardvark-Vanaheim, Coors Beer - what't the fucking 
>difference. 

>I suppose that this is what some of the weenies here want to believe. And
>after being hounded by these weenies every time I have written on the
>subject - I will now espouse the above to the fullest degree possible.
>And every time anyone defends comic book professionals I will shove the
>latest Marvel Age down their weenie throats and say "Comics = toothpaste
>= garbage". This is what my detractors tell me. And this is what I am
>going to tell them - bigtime. comics = shit. think about it.

Nah, I have respect for comics creators.  I just believe that when one
does work under contract for a company, he should abide by the terms
of the contract and not complain later about how unfair it is.

Believe it or not, I have a lot of respect for the Image creators for
deciding to leave the guaranteed audience (and paychecks) of Marvel
and go out on their own.

The reason why your posts draw a lot of criticism, or even flames,
is because you overstate your opinion, and try to pass it off as
fact.  Refering to your detractors as 'weenies' just invites more
criticism, IMHO.  As for shoving Marvel Age down people's throats,
why not instead sample the work of whatever comic book professionals
are being defended?  Maybe you'll find a new title you enjoy, or
maybe you could offer some critique of the creator related to the
creator's work, rather than condemning all comics due to some 
obsessive belief that "All comics are X"

Tom
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc