Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics

In rec.arts.comics, teo33398@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Doctor Zero) writes:

> hgarcia@sw.stratus.com (Henry Garcia) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> >	This is a general comment on the recent (or perhaps not so recent)
> >	Rob Liefield discussions. It seems to me people are taking the 
> >	'destruction' or the ruining (sp?) of these characters and blowing 
> >	things way out of proportion.  Come on, these are comic books, it's 
> >	not like they really mean anything.  They are supposed to be for 
> >	entertainment.
> 	
> 	What in the hell is that supposed to mean???  Comic books are no less
> viable an art form than books or movies or music.  Just because they have,
> for the last 50 years, mostly been musclebound morons in tights beating the 
> spit out of each other doesn't mean that the medium is limited to that.

The comic art form may have the ability to trancscend mindless
pugilism, but it rarely happens, and it happens especially rarely
in the major publishing houses.  They know their market.  Their
market is largely young boys or people who have now grown up but still
get a nostalgic kick from reading them.

The market HAS discovered a more sophisticated audience, but 
occasionally this sophistication involves mere sex or mor
graphic and subtley motivated violence.  Actual works of
visual and literarly art in the field are fairly rare in my opinion.

> Saying of comic books, it's "not like they really mean anything" just shows
> that, like most people, you've fallen in to the narrow tunnel-vision of
> thinking that comic books are and will always be kid stuff.

If you are rounding off the answer, this conclusion is completely 
correct.  Comic books are just kid stuff, and anything with 
and X in the title belongs solidly in that category as does
new mutants, wildcats, spawn, etc. etc.

> 	As for the ruining of the characters, I think it most certainly IS
> something to get mad at.  For god's sake he destroyed our DREAMS!!!  He 
> took something that was once good and twisted it into a stranger, something
> that repulsed us.  How would you feel if a friend of yours whom you had known
> and liked all your life suddenly changed into a real *sshole one day, with
> no explanation why???  That's what happened with New Mutants.  That's why
> he ticks me off.

I am capable of distinguishing between real human friendship and
cheap pulp entertainment.

> 
> 	Sure.  Like Elvis.  And Donny Osmond.  And Vanilla Ice.  They come,
> make their splash, set the industry back a decade or two and THEN they 
> disappear.  

It is curious that you think Elvis had a negative effect on the
rock and roll industry and that you think Vanilla Ice had any
effect whatsoever.


>The sad thing is that Rob will NOT be forgotten.  (BTW, as often
> as the word "lynching" has been used in this series of threads, you could at
> least spell it right.  I'd suggest looking in the OED2.)

Let me tell ya' something.  Rob L. is a nobody. 
He does not need to be forgotten.

> 	If you didn't want to change anyone's opinions, you wouldn't have
> written the article.  But seriously...
> 	I think Rob sucks.  That's okay;  I just don't buy his stuff.  But
> I will definitely not tolerate anyone calling him one of the comic's greats.

The fact is that Rob L. couldn't draw a proprely foreshortened limb
to save his soul.  Jim Lee probably could save his soul by drawing
a foreshoretened limb, but he ain't never gonna paint the cieling
of the Sistene Chapel if you know what I mean.

As for Rob L's writing ability, I cannot comment, because I have
yet to be silly enough to waste my good time reading anything that
he has written.


doug
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics