HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cen@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
Subject: Sandman: pdorsey question/tweaver oops
Date: 11 Sep 92 01:58:47 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620


 pdorsey@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:

> 	In a post of 9 September, tweaver refers obliquely to Gaiman not
> killing off Rose. If memory serves (and mine is more often than not a buffet),
> the last ish had Morpheus trotting off into the sunset with Delirium to go 
> look for the Prodigal. Was tweaver referring to Dream's mercy with Rose way 
> back at the end of the Doll's House arc, or have i REALLY missed something 
> here? 

<grin> "tweaver" sounds like an unpleasant surgical instrument. I'm Tanaqui (&
yes, I'm posting from a different site today. Want to make something of it?)
 
I was referring to the _Doll's House_ arc.

Anyway, it's egg-on-face time, because Neil doesn't think he was ever going to
kill Rose. The ending did change: he was certainly going to make much more of
Gilbert being revealed as Fiddler's Green and so forth, but never really
expected her to die. He was, however, prepared to kill her if that's how things
went. There's a difference there, and I guess we're back to the stories being
character-lead.

And _Men of Good Fortune_ definitely belongs in the _Doll's House_ storyline.
Neil says #25 should have made that explicit (is that the one where Dream goes
to Hell after a last drinky? - I'm terrible at numbers)

Tanaqui
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: mfterman@dae.Princeton.EDU (Mutant for Hire)
Subject: Re: Dave Sim (Cerebus) -- The Usenet Interview (VIII+)
Reply-To: mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu (Mutant for Hire)
Organization: Mutant for Hire, Inc.
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:07:03 GMT

In article <fyvn0l.dani@netcom.com>, dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>Okay, so that answers the question that people have been asking here.
>Unless Sim changes his mind on this, the resurrections result from
>the presence of Cerebus, rather than from the subjects' being magicians.

I'd say its a combination of the two. After all, lots of people have
died in Cerebus' presence without coming back as spirit beings. There
have only been a few magicians who have done so. The only one who
hasn't done that sort of thing was the magician Cerebus killed in
issue #1. (yes, remember way back then?) That magician not coming back
could be a simple oversight, or the fact that Cerebus did the killing
may have had something to do with it.

-- 
    Martin Terman, Mutant for Hire, Mad Scientist, Priest of Shub-Internet
    Disclaimer: Nobody else takes me seriously, why should you be the first?
mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu mfterman@pucc.bitnet terman@pupgga.princeton.edu
"Sig quotes are like bumper stickers, only without the same sense of relevance"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc

In rec.arts.comics.misc, kyrie@coos.dartmouth.edu (Thomas S. Marlowe) writes:

> acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams) writes:
> 
> >There are some obvious ones: Sandman is probably the most likely,
> >and, almost as likely, the Watchmen. Maybe a few of the top quality
> >Claremont - Byrne X-Men. The Dark Knight is a possibility. So, what's
> >the net.opinion?

X-men.  Probably not.  Watchmen maybe, because it was so aware
of the media and used it in clever ways.  Snadman.  Can't say.
Never cared for it enough to spend time reading it.

I would not rule out comics being considered literature some day,
but it is difficult to believe if for no other reason that 
that the mass opinion that seems to 'create' the literary
canon is unlikely to ever really stop looking down its nose
at comics.  If enough comics are created that are not obviously
just pandering to sex and violence and juvenile power fanasies,
it may happen that they will work their way into the literary
canon.

> 
> I remember reading a stint of Batman (the title) where I noticed
> a lot of striking imagery and use of archetypal themes that were
> on par with some of Kafka's inner-demon and any famous author's
> use of archetypal themes that human beings have to deal with.
> 
> Maus, imo, is quite compelling and will be viewed as literature of
> a fine degree sometime in the future.

Maybe and maybe not. 

> 
> That's all I can think of.  Perhaps I am forgetting something, but
> I can't think of anything else I have read that has much artistic merit.

What about Moonshadow and Enemy Ace and Arkham Asylum.
I am not saying these are literature, but they are examples of
comics transcending the noise.      

> 
> My guess is that some real cruddy shit will become classic literature
> just because that's how a lot of classic literature is .. shit (like
> Dickens, for example. Or Steinbeck.  Two awful authors.)  So, probably
> some of the stuff that is quickly cancelled, but where the author tried
> some really wierd, stupid storylines, will become famous.

I detest Dickens, but it is entirely self-indulgent to call it shit.
There are good reasons why he is in the literary canon.  The
same goes for Steinbeck.

doug
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael)
Subject: Re: Batman: the TV series
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:49:41 GMT

In <79330@ut-emx.uucp> chris@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Chris Casey) writes:

>In article <92249.202228JVI100@psuvm.psu.edu> JVI100@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>> was the way Bruce Wayne was drawn. He looked more like Clark Kent. 

>Actually, he reminded me of Captain Stern from the Heavy Metal movie.  But like

*laugh*  hadn't noticed that till you pointed it out.

>you said, it's something I can overlook.  To me the good parts outweighed the
>bad by a very *large* margin.  In fact, I think the only other thing I didn't
>like was the fact that the Batmobile was so damn long.  But who knows, that 
>might be realistic since we don't really know what's under the hood (although
>I suppose someone out there does).  Anyway, my 2 cents....

Well, I chalk up the unusual shapes in the whole series to artistic style.
The art in this show is something I'd expect more out of a comic than
a cartoon.  On the whole, I'm very impressed indeed.

    Michael Stanley

    jstanley@uafhp.uark.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: sadasiva@utkvx3.utk.edu (Sadasivam, Krishna Madur)
Subject: Fist of Khonshu
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:02:00 GMT

While I really like Moon Knight as a character, the Infinity War issues have
been less than impressive. (Except for MK # 42, with all those guest
artists...)

Things are beginning to look up, however, with the artwork. I talked with the
series writer Terry Kavanagh at this years' Atlanta Comics Expo, and he was
understanding when I mentioned the art sucked. He said he was getting a new
artist on the book, a guy named James Fry. He showed me a few panels of artwork
from MK # 45, and it looks sweet! I must say, the artwork to come will
definitely smoke any of the previous artists' stuff on the book. The inker will
be Chris Ivy. 

Krish


Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: tgt33358@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Deus Imperator)
Subject: Re: Maybe it's a hoax (was Re: Superman to Die?)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 19:55:08 GMT

In article <1992Sep5.190652.11662@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> kogutt@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (SCAVENGER) writes:
>Ok.  We've all seen the previews that say Superman dies in #75.  What if it's
>a hoax.  In an interview with Dan Juregins(?) in Diamond Previews he makes
>an off-hand coment--"Since it's (the issue) wouldn't it be a great joke
>if we actually marry Clark and Lois at the end" or some such thing.  This 
>is ment as a joke. 
>BUT what if Dan was actually clueing fans into a secret.
>
>Here's some reason's why Supes dying is implausible:
>
>1)  They've said it's a real story (not imaginary) so to bring him back
>	would be like doing one of Marvel's stunts.
>2)  Killing him off pretty much ruins Clarks life for when they do bring
>	him back. (CLARK: Gee Perry, I was visiting Smallville for the past
>	months.  Sorry I didn't call.)
>3)  It's not like Gaiman will let them use DEATH so you can do some neat
>	things with Supes being dead.
>
>Also, has anyone actually seen the art for Supes being dead, mo just
>the cover of the book.   
>
>just think about it
>
>-----SCAVENGER
>
In the Previews article, the Powers that Be stated _blocks_ of Metropolis will
be levelled in their fight, a la _Destroy_.  Clark Kent will be assumed to
be a casualty, buried under mounds of rubble. 

-- 
Thanatos, DeathUrge, Master of Everything But Love tgt33358@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
"Oh God, does this mean we have to fight?"
			-Selina Kyle, _Batman_ 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: ss@sparkplug.WPI.EDU (Scott Streeter)
Subject: Re: Batman: the TV series
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
	<SS.92Sep6170145@wpi.WPI.EDU> <Bu9K67.E53@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:39:02 GMT

>>>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 1992 14:27:28 GMT, dpearson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Pearson) said:

dpearson> ss@wpi.WPI.EDU (Scott Streeter) writes:

>>>>>> On 6 Sep 92 17:16:00 GMT, dpearson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David
>>>>>> Pearson) said:

>dpearson> <JVI100@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>dpearson> I thought he was drawn too much out of proportion, but I
>dpearson> felt the same way about him in THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and
>dpearson> that's one of my favorite stories.  I'd just like his ears
>dpearson> to be longer and his suit to be all black, but I still
>liked dpearson> it.

>Why do you want the suit all black? Becaues of the movie? Hell
>everyone in the movie wears black. Kind of unimaginative.  The
>originals are far better looking.

dpearson> It's just my opinion.  I've always felt that from the
dpearson> beginning.  I have no problem with the grey and blacks, it's
dpearson> just a preference.

dpearson> Was there an episode on yesterday?(labor day) I missed it
dpearson> because our fox station decided to show a baseball game all
dpearson> afternoon.

In my area, there are 2 FOX channels. Batman was on the other FOX
channel than the one from Saturday and Sunday. Maybe your area has the
same type of thing??
--
                        Scott Streeter
                        ss@wpi.wpi.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: Montague_Kevin@Tandem.com (Kevvy Kev)
Subject: Re: Green Lantern Rings
Organization: In Effect Enterprises
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:10:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.191117.7451@stsci.edu>, wmorgan@stsci.edu (Windsor A. Morgan) writes:
> 
> 
> Is a Green Lantern's ring intelligent?

This is a question I've been pestering DC about for some time, and have gotten
absolutely no answer about.  I don't think they've decided.  I think it'd make
a Great story, or miniseries, or arc.  

--Rick Jones (albert@chain.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu) sez:
	It's not intelligent in a "artificial intelligence" sense.  From what
I've seen, it's got a voice/mental interface that allows the weilder to 
ask it questions about various things (how much charge is left, "can I do this"
questions, "what's the fastest way to Antares from here?", etc), but it
doesn't offer it's own opinions about anything, ferinstance.  
	Essentially, it's got a Star Trek (or better) quality computer in
it, but it's not sentient.
-- 

Hmm.  So why is this not intelligent in an "artificial intelligence" sense?
Seems like this is what you're describing.  Interesting that you think it
doesn't have opinions on anything. . .one of the things I pester DC about,
in trying to get them to address this, is the fact that the ring chooses
the successor, when the current [owner?] dies.  Potentially the most important
decision in the ring-wielder's tenure is made by the ring.  Very weighty issue,
very much ignored by DC.

--E n r i q u e  C o n t y (conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (OtakuRoach)) sez:
I suspect it's sentient, but no, you can't talk to it.
--

This is not true.  You can talk to it, there's an almost-funny story in the
last GL Quarterly that has a running conversation between a GL and his ring,
as he tries to stop a giant yellow cosmic lawnmower.  The interesting thing
that comes out of this story is the little tidbit that, apparently, although
the rings are powerless against yellow, they cannot be destroyed by a yellow
object.  That is, the "yellowness" of an object will not help it to destroy
a GL ring.  

Kevvy Kev

* Prediction: In 19?? the Anti-Monitor will reappear.  However, *
* Superman will trick him into saying "Rotinom-Itna" and every- *
* thing will go back to where it was before the CRISIS.         *
*  -Bruce T. Smith                                              *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: ins598w@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Roger Tall)
Subject: Superman dead, I don't believe it!!!
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:44:14 GMT

I have read in newspaper reports that DC are going to kill off Superman
in an upcoming issue.  I hope this will not be true or if somehow he will
come back (maybe he will meet GOD).  

Anyhow I would like ANYBODY'S thoughts to this statement (about dying that
is, not meeting GOD!) as I have had trouble accessing some of the news items
that have been posted up relating to the topic.

I have been a fan of the "Supester" for only about 3-4 years but that has
been more than long enough for me to know that I don't want this situation
to take place.

Are the Superman titles not selling well enough for DC to continue them?
I cannot believe that!!!! 

Hope to hear from you soon!!

Bye for now!!!!

--

Roger Tall
2nd Year Computer Science
Monash University (Clayton)
AUSTRALIA 

e-mail:  ins598w@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au

	"Have you ever heard of the Klingon proverb:
	 That revenge is a dish best served cold...
	 It is very cold in space...!!!"

	(Khan:  Star Trek II - The Wrath Of Khan)
From: bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
Subject: Re: Batman Animated: Feat of Clay
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:40:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Sep10.131411.26608@midway.uchicago.edu> prec@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Let me begin by saying my opinion of the show as a whole is
>that it is great. The best translation of comic-to-screen I've
>seen in a LONG time, perhaps EVER. 
>
>Now the down side: I thought Tuesday/Wednesday's episode,
>"Feat of Clay" was the weakest shown so far. I knew it was
>going to be trouble as soon as I saw Marv Wolfman credited
>with the story. (Does anyone think he is a good writer?)

I think he USED to be a good writer.  Read The New Teen Titans (Vol. 1),
not the current series, and you'll notice a vast difference between
what he used to be like and what he is like now.  Lately, he's
been wasting his potential.

>Some of my MAJOR problems with the script:
>
>- Batman using blatant methods of illegal coercion (i.e.,
>lifting the crook with his plane and threateninmg to drop
>him) to obtain information. Ditto for the guy in the hospital
>lab with the jar of "germs". (I know it was a trick, but the
>point about coercion remains). Portraying Batman as judge,
>jury and executioner is not an admirable role-model.

I agree.  Batman isn't a bully.  He may use questionable methods
at times, but I don't think he should be portrayed as some
ultra-violent vigilante hell-bent on doing what he thinks his
right, ignoring the law as he sees fit.  Batman respects the law,
and (I believe) will work within it as much as possible.

>-Speaking of picking the guy up with the Batwing, I'd like to
>know how that could be done without A) smashing into a tangle
>of metal and flesh and B) why it didn't blow like a cherry bomb.
>
>-OK, the one that bugged me the most: Clayface's full power. Has
>Wolfman ever heard of the Conservation of Matter and Energy?
>How does a normal, 180-pound man transform into a blob of
>clay that must weigh 500 pounds? How can this creature spit
>off giant chunks of itself or extend its arms fifty feet and 
>remain the same size?
>
>Now I'll probably be told "it's only a cartoon, don't worry about
>stuff like that" but that's not good enough. Sloppy writing 
>undermines my suspension of disbelief in an instant.

It depends on how sloppy.  Minor physics quibbles I can (sometimes)
overlook, but when the writing is complete tripe, I can't
handle it.

>And I forgot to mention the ultimately trite ending of having
>the monster break off its deathstroke when Hagen saw himself
>on the video. You probably heard me groan across the country.

Oh, is that what that sound was?   I was wondering.         :)

>Anybody else think this episode was inferior to others
>we've seen? I think the Mr.Freeze episode was the best so far.

I haven't seen all the episodes so far, so I can't really judge.
My favorite scene was Batman's face slamming into the blimp
in the Man-Bat episode, but I don't have a favorite episode
yet.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: lf7z@ellis.uchicago.edu (glenn alan carnagey jr)
Subject: Re: Rick Veitch's "The One"
Reply-To: lf7z@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 07:53:34 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.175010.549@zooid.guild.org> ecurrent@zooid.UUCP (Greg Clow) writes:
>
>Hey.  I'm a big fan of Rick Veitch's BRAT PACK and MAXIMORTAL, and I was
>wondering if his earlier series, THE ONE, is worth checking out.  I've seen
>copies of all six issues at a couple of shops for cover price, so, I'm
>considering picking it up, but I'd like some commentary first.  Post or email,
>it's up to you.

It's been a while since I've looked at this one, but I'll give it a
stab.  I like it at least as well Brat Pack and a lot better than what
I've seen of Maximortal so far.  The artwork is much better, IMO than
the followups, but the story was probably much easier to appreciate in
it's own time zone, i.e. concurrent to Watchmen and prior to
Miracleman, because today it doesn't feel as original as it was, even
though it was ahead of it's time in a lot of ways.  It's more preachy
and pseudo-cerebral than Brat Pack, and has a more serious tone to it,
but I think you'll love it if you like his other work.  BTW, the TPB
has a roundtable in the back, with Neil Gaiman, Tom Veitch and Steve
Bissette discussing "revisionist superheroes" that I thought was a lot
of fun, and includes all the covers in the front, so it make a good
alternative.  The One is definitely one of my all time faves, and you
gotta love that Ubermaus :^).

............................................................
"Kill the giant rat!  It's a direct presidential order!" 
   --- Black Veitch
g-carnagey@uchicago.edu, if you must know
............................................................
From: rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
Subject: Re: hey, that's WALT simonson doing superman!
Date: 11 Sep 92 17:40:45 GMT
Reply-To: rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI

In <BuEK7F.KGs@queernet.org> rogerk@QueerNet.ORG (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.020315.8110@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
>dvandom@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David VanDomelen) writes:
>|> A #2 is unlikely, given that this issue was A: in the can for several years
>|> before being published this month, and B: a post-crisis retcon of a classic
>|> 1970's Superman story under Denny O'Neill's editorial helm. 

>A: Nope.  The story was just completed recently.

It seems to take place before Clark revealed his identity to Lois, though.
Also, it's been "in the works" for some time, though this doesn't preclude its
actually only having been finished recently.

-- 
Michael Rawdon				 rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

"I tried to go back, as if I could.  All spec house and plywood,
 Tore up and tore up good, down on Copperline.
 It doesn't come as a surprise to me; it doesn't touch my memory.
 Man I'm lifting up and rising free down on Copperline."
						- James Taylor
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
From: tmw4r@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU (Thomas Munroe Walsh)
Subject: Re: % made on comic books
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 04:00:49 GMT

In article <92254.222849JVI100@psuvm.psu.edu> <JVI100@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>        Just out of curiosity sake, I was wondering how much money a comic
>  company and a comics store makes off an individual comic.
>
>        For example, take DC's Batman at $1.25. I know that the Philadelphia
>  Inquirer sells at $.35 a copy, and Batman probably has the same circulation
>  as the Phil Inq. I know that the Inq. doesn't sell at a loss, so it costs
>  them less than $.35 a copy to make, and there is much more paper and people
>  to pay for each copy of the Phil Inq than DC does for each Batman book. So
>  if we say that each copy of Batman costs $.25 to produce, there is an entire
>  $1.00 unaccounted for for each copy sold. if DC splits that $1.00 profit
>  50/50 with the comic shop selling it(and they probably don't), and they sell
>  50,000 copies of Batman, DC is making about 25,000 a month off just that one
>  title. Up till now I just thought that comic book companies weren't really
>  that successful monetarily. Guess I was wrong. If my numbers are way off, and
>  they probably are, I am really interested in finding out for just curiosity
>  sake. Also, would this be considered price gouging?
>
>
>                                       Thanks,
>                                              Jimothy

The figure I've heard thrown around for the cost of a comic to the store
is 50% cover price for non-returnable merchandise.  (Newstands get a
smaller discount because they can return any unsold copies and therefore
receive guaranteed profit on every issue they sell.)

Actually, now that I think about it more, I'm not sure if the 50% is the
store's cost or the distributor's cost.  Oh well.  I'll ask the owner of
the shop I go to and see if he is willing to part with this information.

,------------------------,-------------------------------------------------,
| T. J. Walsh            | "Is that how you get your kicks, by plotting    |
| University Of Virginia | the death of innocent people?"                  |
| tmw4r@virginia.edu     | "No, by causing the death of innocent people."  |
`------------------------^-------------------------------------------------'
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc
Subject: Re: Cerebus: What If Sim Doesn't Make it to #300
Date: 12 Sep 92 00:45:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Arthur C. Adams (acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil:
>After the recent thread about the hypothetical Cerebus #300, I've
>been thinking: what if Dave Sim doesn't make it to #300 (polite
>way of saying what if he dies?)

If he dies while drawing Cerebus, does he get resurrected?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc,alt.fan.pratchett
From: ins769v@lindblat.cc.monash.edu.au (Veltyen)
Subject: Re: NOT the "Good Omens" sequel
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 05:25:01 GMT

ANDREA HOSTH (hoahosth@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au) wrote:
: In article <1992Sep10.173219.1@fnalo.fnal.gov> morrow@fnalo.fnal.gov (An Elmo of Their Own) writes:
: 
[stuff about "668: neighbor of the beast" deleted]
: 
: Well, I doubt he stole it from Gaiman/Pratchett. That pun has been around 
: for donkey's years.
: 
: Ankh

A similar pun to " 693: number of the Bus "

(693 is a bus route I used to catch)

-Veltyen
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc