Writing this from work at 11:45ish on a Tuesday night. In the process of writing up proposals and grant applications for TCAF 2005, which should be pretty awesome.
Peter just called. "What are you still doing there? It's a good thing you are though, because we forgot to upload the order. Can you do it?"
I'm at work until midnight, exhausted and bleary eyed. A year ago this week, we held the first Toronto Comic Arts Festival. As completely wiped out as I am right now, it's a fucking cakewalk compared to the few weeks before TCAF. :)
Hahaha... Poor children. Don't you see? Ultimates Volume 2 was never going to launch on time. The last round of "no, this time we're serious!" had the book running bi-monthly, with three issues in the can before starting. Let's do the math. It takes two months to do each issue. Issue 13 wasn't done until, at the earliest, the beginning of March. That means that three issues wouldn't be done until the first week of September. Three issues done, soliciting in September would have the book out in November at the absolute earliest ANYWAY. Today they just put-aside the double-speak and let you in on the 'secret'. It's always sad when you find out there is no Santa Claus. Well, you can cry on my shoulder guys. Cry and sob and wail and scream or whatever.
My friend and Previews Review partner Scott Robins has just started his own blog, All Ages, at http://allages.blogspot.com/. You should go and read that while I'm on hiatus, as Scott knows his shit.
I plan to listen to David Sedaris' BAREL FEVER and other stories, HOLIDAYS ON ICE, NAKED, and ME TALK PRETTY ONE DAY audiobooks on CD before continuing to blog. I plan to return to blogging rested and emminently more fabulous.
Response. Very Long, addressing a number of points. Probably not of interest to you, so feel free to skip unless you want to read extended critical discourse on Powers, Alias, and Daredevil.
�Chris�s special twist on the anti-superhero schtick is that creator-owned superheroes are fine, but corporate-owned superheroes are bad, they�re bad even if they�re good.�
I�ve been arguing on the internet for about 12 years now, I think. I�ve learned a great many things. The first is, stop making broad statements that won�t hold up under any examination. Which is why, for example, I point out that it�s too bad a specific creator is not doing more creator owned work, because Ienjoy it more than his non-creator-owned work. I don�t say stupid things like �Corporate Superheroes are bad.� If I have, I�m really sorry, and if someone could point it out specifically I�d like to address it. I do say very specific things though, about creators, books, companies, and trends, and I�m more than happy to discuss things on those levels.
So yeah, that is not my �special twist on superheroes are bad�. Because they aren�t. As a sub-genre, they are not inherently unable to tell a compelling story. I�m surrounded by tons of books that prove otherwise. I�ve never made that argument, and have recently debated otherwise.
I did, however, make an argument about a specific creator�s career. Let me address that.
First and foremost, and this is to all of the creators out there who couldn�t give a fuck what I think, please go on about your business. If you want to write something, draw something, work for somebody, go ahead. I wish you much success on your book, and I hope it makes you a lot of money and you find personal satisfaction. I mean this, I�ve been saying it for a few years now with no exceptions I can recall. The fact that I even need to point it out ahead of time is pretty fucked, admittedly, but yet. And it�s not like you needed my �permission� in the first place. But I just want to put the right context on the discussion that follows.
(I do reserve the right for a �Fuck CompanyX� occasionally, when said company behaves unethically on a business and personal level to a friend of mine though. That�s my right, and I�m fairly certain that �Fuck you� is still constitutionally protected speech in the land where all of my writing is distributed from.)
Moving along.
I like some books better than other books. Being human, and this is what humans do. They read things, and enjoy them or don�t. Sometimes they like things �the same� but for different reasons, sometimes they appreciate different facets of different works. Then there are times where personal enjoyment of stimulus is not a qualifier as to its objective quality. This means, �Just because I like it doesn�t mean it�s any good.� Again, humans feel this way sometimes. (I�m working from the assumption that everyone reading this is human by the way, I hope you�re all still following me.)
I like Powers better than Alias, and Alias better than Daredevil. That�s my personal preference. Brian Michael Bendis is the writer of these three books, and has differing amounts of creative freedom on all three. Let me explain this to you, because apparently some people Just Didn�t Get It.
- He is the co-owner of Powers and has essentially unrestricted creative freedom with Powers. Examples of this include the fact that, sometimes storylines will run 28 pages. Sometimes storylines will run every page in the book and the back cover too. The characters can swear, or fuck, or there can be ultra-violence. Superman can go insane and blow up the Vatican, frying the pope on his throne. He can have his characters can, say, smoke a cigarette if they want to because his publisher isn�t accepting money from the government Not to show smoking. He can have a pouty red monkey vagina pointed at the reader and show a graphic rape scene�of that monkey. Essentially unrestricted creative freedom.
- Bendis has, to the best of my knowledge, an unspecified creator-participation deal for the creation of Jessica Jones, the lead character in Alias. A vested financial interest. Alias appeared as part of Marvel�s �MAX� line, which had looser restrictions on content than most Marvel books. The swearing, the mature themes, violence, off-panel sex, no real nudity. The restrictions were quite a bit tighter than essentially unrestricted creative freedom, mostly because Alias is part of a shared universe of superhero characters, which the publisher tries to insist are for teenagers. So Alias is an �R� rating, essentially. The series was cancelled a while back. Not due to falling sales, but due to the fact (and this is taken from interviews and letter columns with and by the writer) that there are stories he wants to tell with the Jessica Jones character, that can�t be told with violence or swearing or sex because of corporate edict. Because corporate doesn�t want to associate their big movie property with something that would be unsafe for kids. So they relaunched the book with a different title, kid-safe, and now Jessica Jones and Spider-Man can meet. This is what is known as a compromise. Compromise is significantly less creatively free than essentially unrestricted creative freedom.
- Daredevil, on the third hand, is even-more situated in the mainstream Marvel Universe (despite being �edgier� and under a different banner). There�s no swearing, no sex, no nudity, and only some rough-and-tumble violence. No one�s face gets melted off. There�s an awful lot of restrictions on the creators of this book, even working with a good editor or whatever. Just because, well, it�s a movie now as well and the kids are going to want to see it. Sometimes characters move back and forth between the books too, or they used to when they were being published. When Jessica Jones is in her own book she can say �FUCK�, but when she guest-stars in Dardevil, she�s got to keep it clean (she swears like a sailor). I personally believe this damages the integrity of both works, actually, and it�s only one example of why my personal preference is the way it is. An easy one.
�and let me just state for the record again that the writer is free to work on whatever he wants, this is just my opinion and it was asked of me yadda yadda yadda�
There is an obvious and distinct correlation between my personal opinion of Bendis� major works, and the amount of creative freedom he is allowed on each work. I made the following comment last week at Previews Review:
�Oh, and for those of you who would argue that we don�t need another JINX, or that ALIAS and DAREDEVIL are the new JINX�s from Bendis, all I want to do is point out the difference between POWERS and even Bendis� most mature Marvel work. The differences, what he can and can�t do, are obvious. Plainly stated, particularly when you put the two works in sharp contrast. POWERS is the one that people are going to remember 10 years from now.�
Now, the only quality judgement in that paragraph (tone aside) is the last sentence, that I think Powers is going to be the work that people remember 10 years from now. Also, it is obvious when you place Powers in sharp relief with Alias and Daredevil, that Bendis� creative freedom on these books (�What he can and can�t do�) is very different book-to-book, and very obvious. And Even If It Isn�t, I�ve Been Nice Enough To List Them Above.
Now as for Powers being the work that�s going to be remembered? Well, let�s look at it objectively:
- Powers has 5 trades in print, and will have 8 by the end of the year, and the series is ongoing. Powers can survive its publisher folding. Powers is more unfettered creatively. Set artist, with a vested interest in the book. The storyline has come to a convenient conclusion point, so that even if POWERS v2n1 never comes out, it still works as a self-contained series.
- Alias has already been cancelled, after running under 30 issues. Four trade paperbacks total, and Marvel has a demonstrated reticence to keeping them in print. The hardcover collections of Alias were discontinued. Its replacement series has been slowed to bi-monthly, with no set artist (and the original artist has left the book). It did come to a satisfactory conclusion at the end of volume 4 though. Other �facts not on record�: Historically, publishers (and particularly Marvel) prefer to invest in books which they own entirely, rather than creator owned or creator participation books. Looking back at the �who owns what� jobs on early Epic and Vertigo books specifically, like Moonshadow (which is now out-of-print from both Marvel and DC). I�d lay odds that Alias will continue to remain in print sporadically at best, and considering it wasn�t the critical or even sales �hit� of notable exception Miracleman, being out of print tends to kill interest in projects, in favour of ones that are in print, or better yet, continue.
- Daredevil is a TM corporate icon, who has been through a hell of a lot of revamps and excellent creative teams prior to Brian Bendis and Alex Maleev�s run on the character, and will continue on afterwards. Frank Miller is still considered the definitive creator on the character, and given tendencies towards nostalgia and the vast difference in readership between the Miller and Bendis runs (entirely putting aside quality which I�m not willing to debate), it would be unlikely that Bendis would be considered by the masses to be the �definitive� run on the character. I further submit that it would be unlikely that Bendis would be remembered for his Daredevil run (of the three listed) if he�s not going to do the definitive Daredevil. Daredevil does have a lot going for it though, in that his work on the title has remained fairly consistently in-print with very few artistic hiccups. I�d hear arguments to the contrary on how Daredevil is going to be the work that defines his entire career.
I personally think that creates a pretty clear picture of the chances for each.
Now to address the tone of the whole statement, including the relevant bits of the preceding paragraph from the original document:
�I think that one day, maybe if Bendis gets bored with superheroes, He and Maleev (or he and his �ALIAS� artist Michael Gaydos) are going to start turning out the best crime graphic novels that the comics industry has ever seen; the new work will make the excellent JINX and TORSO look anemic in comparison. If this were the Japanese comics industry, we�d already have it too. We�d have Kazuo Koike and Goseki Kojima doing LONE WOLF & CUB. But this is America, and so we get a good run of DAREDEVIL, which will inevitably end and be followed up by CHUCK AUSTEN, which is� Well. Anyway, best not to think about that and just enjoy the ride hmm?
�Oh, and for those of you who would argue that we don�t need another JINX, or that ALIAS and DAREDEVIL are the new JINX�s from Bendis, all I want to do is point out the difference between POWERS and even Bendis� most mature Marvel work. The differences, what he can and can�t do, are obvious. Plainly stated, particularly when you put the two works in sharp contrast. POWERS is the one that people are going to remember 10 years from now.�
Specifically, I should have said �any comics publishing industry in the world except for North America� where I said Japanese, so as not to open the whole argument up to bullshit responses, so My Bad.
Anyway, here�s the translation of the above, for the reading-impaired:
�I do not believe, in my critical capacities, that Alex Maleev is ideally suited to superheroics as an artist, and I think that he and Bendis would do a really great crime graphic novel together. Were this any other publishing industry, it would be immediately financially viable for both creators to do such a book, but it ain�t and that sucks. Particularly when their good work could Easily And Quickly be followed-up by a writer of considerably lesser ability or perhaps fall out of print entirely (someone sell me a trade paperback of Ann Nocenti and JRJR�s excellent Daredevil run! No?). In the end I believe that because of these reasons [and the ones stated above], Powers is going to be the career-defining book for Bendis, from this point. The one that is remembered 10 years from now, in much the same way that Warren Ellis� Transmetropolitan is more representative of him and his work than his critically acclaimed run on Excalibur, or Grant Morrison�s Invisibles typifies him still more-so than JLA or the completely out-of-print Doom Patrol. Seeing as I am not handing down this opinion or these facts on a stone tablet, if you would like to debate them, you know where to find me. I even include my e-mail address at the end of the column.�
So I hope that�s sorted.
Now, onto the larger issue of how I �hate� corporate superheroes. I�ve decided that I�m going to call bullshit on you. Quote me, otherwise, take it back. Quite simple.
I don�t like bad comics. I think that there are too many superhero comics on the market, and that their prominence and position in the industry deliberately choke out anything else. I think that corporate superhero publishers are grafting �adult themes� (or what Steven @ Peiratikos is referring to when he writes �superheroes aren�t fit for psychologically realistic characterization�) onto books that are ostensibly for children, ensuring that the only people who can read them are those already inured to the idea of men in rubber suits enacting violent justice and no one calling them on it. I think that this is not a good thing, as this is not a market that tends to grow. I think that most superhero books published by DC and Marvel are aggressively mediocre, and of the rest there are more that are very bad than good. I�m not such an asshole that I can�t read a great comic and say �this is a great comic�, despite whatever �political� beliefs I hold on the creator/publisher/genre.
I think that you can do a really well-done superhero comic without the �psychologically realistic characterizations� like New X-Men (written for smart 14 year olds and aggressively about tearing down �comic book realism�) and that�s great. I think that you can do a really well-done superhero comic that explores the tropes of superhero comics and comments on them, engaging in �psychologically realistic characterizations� and that�s the point, like Superman: Secret Identity, or DC: New Frontier, Top Ten, Alias, or Invincible, and I enjoy those. I think you can do great big stupid cartoonish superhero books like Superman/Batman and that�s fine too. Hell, you can even do the stuff for younger readers like Batman Adventures, that simply ask you to suspend your belief for as long as it takes to tell a 22 page story (and not an ongoing cross-linked never-ending soap opera) and that works really well.But when you try to get the �realism� or �adult themes� without any sort of acknowledgement that a superhero universe would just fall right the fuck apart, and I�m thinking of Gotham Central, The Ultimate books, Wanted, Most Superhero Comics, no. Forget it. It doesn�t work. And the most egregious offenders of this just happen to be� corporate superhero comics. They have the motive, means, and opportunity (so to speak), and they did it. It�s not every book, not by any means, and it�s not only �corporate� superhero books that do this, or superhero books at all for that matter. But the DC and Marvel superhero titles, they stick the knife in and twist, and calling them on it while still being able to enjoy other books they publish doesn�t seem like flip-flopping or a unique new form of comics snobbery, it seems to me like a pretty clear-cut difference. (I should also point out that, employed as a comics retailer AND critic AND creator that I tend to see things from more than one angle. I am happy to point out a book that is very good but not to my specific tastes in Previews Review, even if it goes against whatever �philosophies� I have that can be gleaned from the above. That�s not going to change.)
More importantly, all of the above is my interpretation of events, and constitutes an ongoing dialogue on the nature of comics publishing in North America. History, present, future. Despite the �no, you�re just wrong and/or a player hater� bullshit I got to read this week, there�s no final answer on this. Seeing something in a blog, and I am looking directly at Sean Collins for this one, that basically says �Everything he�s saying is wrong because I say so and I�m really mad about it� doesn�t contribute a god damned thing. I thought I was being pretty clear in the statements that I made, but apparently it was gleaned that I �hate superhero comics� or �corporate superhero comics� so Not Clear Enough. I hope that, 6 pages in, this straightens everyone right out.
I�m not a big fan of the �End of discussion. Period.� school of debate, so you know, you got something to say, I can be reached by clicking the �resources� page up top. Just FYI.
"...the funniest thing about these outraged rants against the tragedy of good creators working on superhero comics, for me, is always the moralistic tone. (And here I?m also thinking of Tim O?Neil?s review of The Filth in The Comics Journal, but I haven?t read that myself..."
You're talking out of your depth then aren't you? That's a trend that continues throughout your little rant.
"I know a lot of people will laugh at me or feel sorry for me because I think such a question as "Might a corporate superhero comic like New X-Men be as good art as Alice in Wonderland?" even requires consideration before answering "No."Sorry, I don?t believe in high-art/low-art hierarchical dichotomies."
You should probably try to think outside of the box, because the correct answer is "Well what's better, music or visual art?" as Alice and X-Men aren't even the same medium of work. "What's better, Michaelangelo's sculpture David or the film 2 Fast, 2 Furious?" I don't believe in high-art/low-art hierarchical dichotomies either, but I do believe in straw-man arguments. You get a little bit closer in comparing the Maltese Falcon to Citizen Kane, and the answer seems obvious to me (which one has resonated more down through the ages and other media, which has great historical significane, historical impact, is cited for movie making achievement?) but even then, as I'm not a student or critic of film, I don't feel comfortable making that kind of judgement...
"I think the weird thing about that passage there is that he says he wants to point out the differences between Powers and ?even Bendis? most mature Marvel work? (which would be, I guess, Alias?), and then says the differences are obvious,"
...I did make a mistake here, I assumed that you, as my audience for the column, were smart enough to see the differences yourself ("The differences, what he can and can't do, are obvious."), and given your complete inability to do so (snarky joke or willful ignorance? You decide!) I have obviously erred, my bad. Your first clue is that Marvel probably wouldn't let Brian blow up Vatican City in the Marvel Universe. I can go on, and probably will have to now because Sean Collins doesn't seem to get it either.
"There's a big difference between Jessica Jones getting mixed up in a murderous sex scandal involving Captain America, and Jessica Jones getting mixed up in a murderous sex scandal involving a Captain America parody."
...and there's a big difference between 'parody', 'satire', and 'creating an analogue of a character' as well, and might I recommend the excellent Planetary to show you what having analogues of existing characters standing in to say things that you otherwise couldn't with those characters might look like, when done successfully?
"...if you want to write something about Captain America you have no choice but to play along with Marvel.
...or you could just buy the rights to The Fighting American, or create the Captain America analogue character in The Authority, or you could write about Captain America from an educational point of view.
"As a final note, one obvious response to all this is that maybe Bendis doesn?t want to say anything about Captain America and is only working for Marvel because he needs money and benefits and stuff. Sorry, don?t care!"
...that might be the only thing you got right. I'm the first one to stand up and say that having creative freedom means having the freedom to go where your muse takes you, to whatever project it takes you to, for whatever reason. I have no problem whatsoever with even Warren Ellis running off to do Ultimate Fantastic Four, which is seen by many to be the ultimate hypocriscy or whatever. I honestly don't care, I like it when creative people make money. I'm the first person to say this, and have probably wished creators well on their corporate projects 3 or 4 times in print alone already this year, and steadily since the month after Quesada took over Marvel. Which you would know, if you weren't talking entirely out of your depth (as pointed out in my first point).
As for your follow-up, it seems slightly more reasonable (see what happens when you go back and actually read what you're writing about?), and is the stepping-point towards my eventual point. If you go read here you'll see that the specific two entries you're addressing are part of a larger dialogue that I've been engaging via PreRe and 212.net. I don't know if you're interested in 'a larger dialogue', you might just be doing hit-and-runs on the internet behind a screen name, in which case I've pretty much wasted some time here.
But the one thing that you and Sean need to both learn is that this isn't "repetitive predictability", it's an ongoing discussion about what corporate superhero publishing's effect is on the North American comics market. I have my ideas on the subject, and my perspective, and I'm happy to elucidate. But your attack-bullshit? THat doesn't really accomplish much, besides making the people who already agree with you (shock) agree with you and the people who don't agree with you phone/e-mail me to tell me some retard is talking shit about me on his blog. For someone who has a whole sidebar on his site dedicated to his Textual Criticism, you certainly didn't display much intelligence in your writing today.
Although it's certainly interesting to be the windmill for a change.
I'm at work right now, I can't really respond to it in depth right now, but I do wanna clarify something.
Whatever anger I have towards the behaviour of indivduals working for Marvel, is down to their behaviour. It has nothing to do with Bendis working on Avengers or Morrison leaving X-Men or any of that. Utter fanboy nonsense. It has everything to with professional behaviour towards other professionals in the field of comics, simple as that. I was pretty much entirely wrong to post another "Fuck Marvel" message because of the potential for mis-interpretation ("Dude, why are you so angry? I thought you didn't like Chuck Austen anyway?") and everyone's been asking. Simply, I can't say, that's it. But I believe I'm in the right on this one.
As for the other stuff, me being the poster-child for wishing that creators would stop trying to crowbar on 'mature' themes to kids books... Well, yeah. Essentially. I mean, when even Alan Moore is saying that he wishes people had taken a need to relentlessly innovate from Watchmen instead of just superheroes swearing and the occasional bit of tits... Alan Moore wouldn't lie to you, you know.
Anyway, apparently I'm writing an essay now to respond to Sean's... interesting take on things. It'll be up later. Sufficed to say, I think Sean may be mischaracterizing my point of view somewhat.
An instant messenger conversation between myself and one Mr. Andrew Dabb.
[01:08] Christopher: How come everyone always does comic adaptations of nerd movies and tv? Why aren't people doing adaptations of LOST IN TRANSLATION or even ADAPTATION?
[01:09] Andrew: Because no one would read them?
[01:10] Christopher: I suppose.
[01:10] Andrew: Some people were trying to get the Kill Bill license, but I don't think they did.
[01:11] Christopher: I bet Adrian Tomine would do a really good Lost In Translation.
[01:11] Andrew: He probably would, yeah.
[01:11] Christopher: Hm.
[01:12] Andrew: But there is no real audience for it. So why do a license when he could do a LIT-like story that would sell almost as well? Aside from the publicity.
[01:13] Christopher: Publicity, mostly. I mean, isn't that the only reason
to do an adaptation? Either for the career boost, or because they want to be
part of the mythology of something they love?
[01:15] Andrew: I think, generally speaking, it's more the latter than the former. I guess if someone really loved LIT that much they could go after the license. It could be an interesting experiment.
[01:16] Christopher: would you do 'the further adventures of' or a straight
adaptation?
[01:18] Andrew: Well, that's the think with LIT. To do further adventures of you'd have to reunite the characters and I think the movie is to a large part based on them meeting for a few days, then moving apart. I think it would be more interseting to do a sort of parallel story. Something that happened to them while they were together in Tokyo that we didn't see in the movie, but that plays with some of the same themes.
[01:19] Christopher: Really? You don't think a paralell story after the fact
would work? Something like, the two of them going about their day, split screen
almost, with them intersecting?
[01:21] Christopher: (not on camera, you know, but almost co-incidentally)
[01:21] Andrew: I think it could work, but for me that movie is as affecting
as it is because of the fact you know their relationship is over, but its changed
both of them. I suppose if they never met, if there was a close call at
the end but that's it, it would be doable. But it wouldn't be my first
instinct.
[01:22] Christopher: yes, they should never meet again.
[01:24] Andrew: Right. Anyhow, it would be something interesting for sure.
But who knows of Coppola even wants to do something with the project?
That's the thing about cartoons and stuff, huge corporations own them. And huge
corporations just want to make money, they have nothing personal invested.
[01:26] Christopher: I'm watching LiT now. It's... it's really well written.
They just know when to use the dialogue, and no when not to. It's pretty outstanding.
[01:27] Andrew: It's a good movie for sure.
[01:27] Christopher: Well placed silence.
[01:28] Andrew: Yup.
[01:33] Christopher: I liked this conversation. Can I blog it?
[01:34] Andrew: Sure, if you wan to.
[01:34] Christopher: It saves me from having to have to have a coherent thought
on a lost-in-translation movie.
[01:36] Christopher: I wish my apartment was this cool.
[01:36] Andrew: I wish your apartment was that cool too.
[01:36] Christopher: i'd totally let you come over.
[01:37] Christopher: but with it is as it is now, it'd just be awkward.
Ray Smuckles has just updated his blog/advice column, and I sincerely recommend you all go check it out. He's like the Dan Savage of Cartoon cats (except for being a self-loathing republican, Ray isn't about that).
I stole the following wholesale from Graeme's Excellent blog, Fanboy Rampage. I'm really sorry Graeme, it won't happen again. But it really, really perfectly sums up my feelings on superhero comics for adults.
Graeme: Richard L, I don't know who you are, but this is the best thing I've read on Millarworld in a long time:
"You can have adult super-powered characters or superhero-like characters for adults but I'm afraid Batman isn't one of them - the only way to do that is to recreate him as an essentially impotent character struggling to reconcile his own need for a violent outlet for trauma (Dark Knight ends with him finding a better way for a reason). Let's face it 'I'm a multi-billionaire genius and the best way I can find to help the people of Gotham is to dress as a giant rat' is not an approach you can take with an adult sensibility and not conclude that he's mad as a hatter. Both Watchmen and Dark Knight were taken as heralding a new age - an 'adult' approach to superheros when infact both were about the impossibility of treating these iconic characters as "adult" and having them continue to behave in the way we have come to expect.
"Comics can be for adults and some of the most challenging and interesting modern literature for adults comes in the form of a comic book. But the mainstream characters - the archetypes and the bit-part players that surround them - simply cannot be written as adult characters with out appearing utterly ridiculous to all concerned. Like I said, that doesn't mean you can't write these things in a way that both young and (relatively) old people can enjoy, just that you should not be trying to approach Superman with an adult sensibility.
"That's why we get these constant arguments about his actions - because the greying audience increasingly expects Superman to act in a manner psychologically authentic to the adult reader when, of course, the character simply cannot hold that weight - he becomes something completely different. The key, I would argue, is that for the mainstream superhero, ditch the 'adult' garbage and accept these characters for what they ARE, limitations and all. Stop trying to make them something completely different - which is what being 'adult' with them (what Moore called last week the current 'intellectual posture' towards them) does."
Graeme: Reminds me of the "Being clever's a fine thing, but sometimes a boy has to leave the house and meet some girls" bit from Flex Mentallo, which is never a bad thing. I'm waiting to see if there's any backlash against this opinion...
You know. Everyone, every sane person, questions their actions, their beliefs, their motives. Particularly in comics. I personally try to be as objective as possible, you know? "Am I treating this creator/comic/company fairly?" Sometimes, I change my mind. Other times? The jury is out. Every once in a while though, something happens that just re-enforces my opinions 100%, and I wonder why I ever questioned myself in the first place.
Street Angel #1 By Jim Rugg & Brian Marucca $2.95, 32 pages, Slave Labor Graphics
In the first issue of this new ongoing series, we are introduced to the bold and deadly new heroine STREET ANGEL! With her edgy, gritty demeanor and martial arts skills, she's out to clean up her city...
While the above is technically true, it certainly brings to mind an image of this series that is closer to this than reality. And what is the reality of Street Angel #1? It's an all-ages series (shh! don't tell...) that has more in common with MADMAN, The Tick, Dean Haspiel's work, and STRAY BULLETS' Virgina Applejack/Amy Racecar character than it does some hideously deformed Jim Balent abortion. Oh, and it's really good too, did I mention that?
"Street Angel" is a mouthy, obnoxious 14 year old girl with the presence and strength to back up her attitude who tries to get by and do right by her friends in an unforgiving city. When you're practically homeless and gotta make ends meet by washing dishes at 14, when the cops won't stop hassling you for the crime of being poor, when ninjas lurk around every corner... Well, it's not easy being a kid.
This issue, the mayor's daughter is kidnapped by a maniacal villain, and it's up to Street Angel to rescue her. That's kind of besides the point though, the plot is really just fodder for some excellent gags, great action sequences, and some great jabs at contemporary 'hero' comics. Much like The Tick walked a very fine line between satire and becoming the thing it was satirizing, so too is Street Angel walking a pretty tight line between adventure comics and tearing down the cliches of the genre. When this is done right, you end up with stories that are rocket-propelled and fantastic, and Street Angel is done very well.
It's hard to talk about the specifics of the book without 'giving it away', you know? There are so many surprises and twists in the story that I'd hate to lessen your enjoyment of the book by 'spoiling' them ahead of time. Which isn't to say that it's only the surprises that make the book successful, I've read the first issue a few times and it holds up really well...
...and that's kind of the point, isn't it? The most successful books, the 'cult' favorites, are the ones that you can read over and over again, issue-by-issue, and still enjoy and get something out of. Books like Johnny, Squee, I Feel Sick, Dork, Milk & Cheese, Optic Nerve, Dirty Plotte, Stray Bullets, Tick, Bone, THB, and newer titles like Bear or Prison Funnies... You can read these over and over again and just love them every time. Maybe it's the quirkiness, the density of the story, the fact that each issue tells a story on it's own, who knows? Whatever the case, these are the books that catch peoples' attention and stay fresh and readable on the rack no matter how 'old' they are. I think that Street Angel has managed to enter this elusive clique of cult favorites, and I look forward to it sticking around a very long time.
My friends are getting married Monday, and even though they could get married pretty-much anywhere I'm incredibly, incredibly proud that they're getting married here in Toronto. Whether 'contract law' or the expression of commitment or whatever marriage means to you, the fact that it is between two people makes it a much, much more meaningful institution to me.
To everyone out there, wherever you are, keep fighting the good fight. I'm happy to show Toronto as an example that the battle can be won.
At Previews Review, I don't get a chance very often to say what I ACTUALLY thought of a book. Most of the time I'm talking on titles based upon promotional material, an incomplete preview, or even just how much I'm anticipating it. So I figured that I might take a little time, because I've got a little to spare, to talk about some books that I actually enjoyed this week.
Spooked GN By Antony Johnston and Ross Campbell $11.95, 160 Pages, Oni Press
Oni's Original Graphic Novel program has been pretty hit-or-miss, for me. For everything that speaks to me and that I just enjoy, there's another book that feels cramped at 160 pages, or just has nothing to say at all. Spooked, the new graphic novel from Antony Johnston, falls into neither camp. It's just long enough, certainly does have something to say, and says it all very well. It's just... a bit abrupt, and I think that will hurt it in the eyes of many readers.
A young girl with the unlikely name of Emily Spook can hold ghosts in her head, and these ghosts are a source of creativity for her work as an artist. After a long dry-spell with no ghosts and no art, the arrival of the spirit of a magician becomes the catalyst for an explosive confrontation, with deathly consequences.
The art is quite lovely, first off. Campbell is a real find and, aside from some problems with perspective, the art is perfect throughout. Fitting not only the characters but the dark, mystical moodiness of Johnston's london. The lead is quite attractive, without ever becoming comic-book attractive, and all of the characters are distinct and well-handled. The art reminds me a little of Oni mainstay Steve Rolston, though with a healthy dose of goth.
Johnston builds up a startling little suspense story, each chapter becoming more and more tense and twisted, and the revelations themselves are generally quite good. It's the climax that is... less than climactic. Johnston chooses to just pull the camera away half-way through the Climax, and moves from 'showing' the events to 'telling' them, in a conversation between two characters. It's a very, very odd choice. I can't tell if it's a deliberate stylistic choice that I don't understand, or if he just ran out of pages for the story and needed to get in a lot of exposition in a much smaller space than he had alotted. Whatever the case, it does give the last chapter an abruptness that's unwelcome after 4 chapters where we get a great rising tension and a carefully laid out mystery. Let's just say, it was an odd choice.
So the book was an enjoyable read, with an ending that could have stood to be a bit better explained and a bit better laid out plot-wise, but altogether a successful outting. I'm looking forward to the next book.
I can't recall seeing it mentioned anywhere in my daily travels, but it appears that Marvel is promoting the MARVELS 10th ANNIVERSARY HARD COVER with a pretty nice site. Lots of previews of the new material, and it looks like they're doing a very good job of it too.
I enjoyed MARVELS a lot when it came out. Given the advances Marvel has made in printing technology, the hundred+ pages of new material, and that I've got a funny feeling that this will be a hard cover in the same fashion as all of Marvel's new hard covers have been (the big over-sized format), I think that this one might be worth picking up. Even at $50 ($68 Cdn).
I apologize in advance if this causes him to take it offline, but I was always taught to share. If you want to take a sneak-peak at what Scott Kurtz has got cooking up for the next little while (including the final cover version of his "Caption Contest" and the cover to his forthcoming but I think unannounced trade paperback), check out:
I think this is where the infamous "Dazzler" pic was that pranked Rich Johnston a few weeks ago... Dunno though. Of particular interest to me was the one (1) comic strip he archived, where he attacked Penny Arcade for daring to be a better, more popular strip than him. Why The Nerve.
I really like my buddy Bryan Lee O'Malley's LOST AT SEA graphic novel. But, with him being my buddy and all, maybe you don't take my opinion at face value? Well, wonder no more, Chris Allen's new BREAKDOWNS column has lots of nice things to say about it:
"O�Malley has a thick, confident line, and his characters are cute and affecting, looking appropriately childlike for their eighteen year old innocence rather than like magazine models. Like Craig Thompson, it�s a stylized but very warm, earnest style of art. And as with Thompson�s style inBLANKETS, it�s an extremely complementary style for a story of an adolescent�s intense emotional turmoil. "
For those of you following at home, flip to page 9 of this month's PREVIEWS catalogue (Spawn/Firestorm covers). In the item promoting Archie Comics' new 'manga' take on SABRINA THE TEENAGE WITCH, you can find the following paragraphi promoting the bold new changes to Sabrina.
"It's a new look for Archie Comics, and readers are sure to be surprised by the caliber of Rio's work in Sabrina #58, which introduces a thrilling new world of romance and relationships to Sabrina's life. See how in "Spellfreeze," Sabrian rubs shoulders with fellow witch Shinji - who has her eyes set on Sabrina's squeeze, Harvey!"
You know, I would have actually bought that. Granted, it's nothing you don't see in most shoujo manga that appeal to the same core teen demographic as Sabrina does, but I've always believed in rewarding good behaviour by publishers.
Sadly, Archie has already issued a 'clarification' that states Shinji is actually interested in Sabrina, not Harvey. Actually, the correction to the last sentence reads:
"See how in �Spellfreeze,� male witch Shinji has eyes on Harvey's main squeeze, Sabrina!"
Which to me, seems more like a storyline was changed, rather than having promotional text muddled... That and in the correction, it's ARCHIE apologizing for the confusion and not Diamond (Diamond usually writes the promotional text where this 'error' appeared).
I know that Tania del Rio is online a lot, I wonder if anyone who knows here could ask about this one...? I'd really love to know if Archie backed away from a potentially controversial story or not... I don't have a terribly high opinion of them considering the Dan DeCarlo lawsuits, but even so I'd like to at least maintain the appearance of impartiality...
Sure, link to the article so now all the people will go see it. That's the last thing I need, Brian Bendis e-mailing to yell at me because he's gotta defend Sangiacomo... Fuck, there's a conversation I don't want to have. "Yeah, but Brian, he's a fucking putz, come on."
(For the record, I actually quite like Bendis. We've known each other for something like 8 or 9 years, which is terrifying now that I think about it... But yeah.)
This is a German comics mail-order site. Now, click on "READ ABOUT REVIEWS COMICS" in the upper right hand corner.
How's THAT for fucking wierd?
So, you know, before anyone else gets a big head or whatever, there is only (apparently) one link for Germans to read about comics, and that fucking link is me (and Scott and Patrick too).
Heh. Shit-porn, David Hasslehoff, and Previews Review. I hope this isn't when they start judging us by the company we keep...
From the Image Comics press release for Mike (hack) Sangiacomo's Phantom Jack #1:
"Everyone in the industry respects San Giacomo?s writing about comics.
With the release of PHANTOM JACK #1, the rest of the world will get a
peek at his writing for comics."
Hahahaha. No.
Not to put to fine a point on it, but not only is Sangiacomo not respected by 'everyone' in the industry, he's not really respected by most people in the industry. Admittedly, he has some friends at Marvel, but let me be clear: You should be very supsicious of "investigative journalists" (to quote the Image Press release again) who are good friends with the subjects of their work.
Hey there. Just a quick note to let you know that we've updated PreviewsReview.com with both this week's Shipping List, by myself and Scott Robins, and the Previews Review for April, by myself and Patrick Neighly.
The April Review is full of excellent, excellent books that just aren't going to make it to many stores. I strongly urge you to go check out the Review and order these books from your local retailer. Nothing we recommend is so limited that it will not be available to you, so don't take no for an answer.
Even better? If anything in the Review sounds interesting, Talk It Up! If you're reading this you probably have a blog, or post to message boards, or you know whatever, talk up the upcoming books that sound interesting. Getting the good stuff into people's hands starts with you.
This has been your pointless activism moment of the day :)
Just a brief note that the nice folks at Radio Comix have gotten their online store working for the first time in a good long while, at http://www.radiocomix.com/.
Though they're primarily known as the producers of the 'red-headed stepchild' of the comics industry, "Furry" comics, they're also the only company doing gay erotica/porn in comics. So far they've released five books; GENUS MALE #1, GENUS MALE #2, and GENUS MALE #3 are furry anthologies featuring anthropomorphic characters in funny, sexy stories and naughty positions; SEXUAL ESPIONAGE #1 featuring a spoof on Metal Gear Solid as two (human) secret agents get into sexual hijinks; and DANGEROUS #1, an anthology of manga-style sexual short stories (featuring human characters as well).
I have four of the five of them, and like many anthologies the contents can be a bit uneven, but for the most part they're really pretty strong. Editor Elin Winkler has been putting together work for a very long time now, and it seems all of the contributors involved have gone above and beyond to put the work in on their material. Good stuff!
All of these books are available through their online store, and if you're curious, I'd say take the plunge. It's worth your hard-earned bucks.
We interupt your regularly scheduled broadcast for this important bulletin...
Diet Coke... with lime!!!!!
It's totally perfect in every way. HOLY SHIT.
After the abysmal failures of Diet Coke with Lemon and Vanilla Coke/Diet Coke, this is an amazing achievement! It tastes exactly like it's supposed to: A glass of Diet Coke with a slice of lime squeezed in. No chemical taste, no aftertaste, just perfect.
Here's my response, which got eaten by his commenting system.
David-
While I appreciate your "Won't someone please think of the Children!" tone (I actually agree), I think you might be confusing some other issues you have with the children's publishing industry with what Parker actually said. I hate to stop anyone on a rant, but I'm pretty sure that Parker would be the first in line to recommend his book to younger readers, despite the more mature and complex themes inherent to it. He's kept it 'kid safe' while still creating a compelling action serial for adults. He gets it.
He also has opinions on the viability of the superhero publishing industry, and how faintly ridiculous many of the books have become because they insist on trying to make material for children, even 'mature' material for children, engage on an adult level by adding more violence, sex, and swearing throughout.
There's a difference between creating a work from whole cloth for an adult audience, a WUTHERING HEIGHTS, and taking the Smurfs and show barely-concealed on-panel fucking.
There's a difference in methodology, and a difference in intent. A clear difference.
I woke up this morning realized I didn't shoot a link over to Alan David Doane's interview with Alan Moore. I read it and recommended it to a few people in the store yesterday, but forgot to show the world at large. Granted, I'm pretty sure that litterally every person who reads this blog has either seen or been told about it already, but I still feel kind of bad about not mentioning how much I enjoyed it. Go check it out:
"And, as for how that's affected comics, I really don't know. Sometimes, on my darker days, I tend to feel that most of my influence upon comics has been negative, that perhaps people who read the early Swamp Thing or Watchmen or a lot of the work that I was doing in the '80s, that what they took from it wasn't its urge to experiment or its urge to stretch the limits of the form and the medium. It seems that perhaps what a lot of them took from it was the violence, a certain kind of intellectual posture...a few other things, and it seemed to condemn comics to a lot of very depressing and grim post-Watchmen comic books. Maybe that's too bleak, like I say, it depends from day to day, it depends what sort of mood I'm in and you've caught me on a tired day today, so, I'm perhaps being a bit pessimistic there. " - Alan Moore, http://www.addblog.com/archives/2004_02_29_archive.html#107834845239659235
Meanwhile, in other Alan Moore news, Neil Gaiman has completely refuted rumours that Alan Moore pulled his name off of the upcoming HELLBLAZER movie after seeing the script. In reality, he pulled his name off of it well before he ever saw a script. Which, you know, good for him.
"Oh, it's true that Alan's rejected the money for CONSTANTINE and assigned it to his cocreators, but he's now done that for all films of his and things he's done that might one day be filmed. ... His share of Constantine was redistributed among his co-creators, John Totleben, Steve Bissette and Rick Veitch and to Jamie Delano and John Ridgway." - Neil Gaiman, http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2004_02_29_archive.asp#107843129647479552
"And of course manga is currently responding to exactly that hole in the market. I think we in the mainstream comics community should be ready to respond when the manga bubble inevitably bursts - not to fill the hole in the market with more manga, but with whatever the kids are going to want next." - Andy Diggle @ PopImage
Why doesn't anyone ever ask when the video game industry is going to burst, hmm? Actually, people did. Just like they did about the Internet (a curmudgeonly older man I used to know refered to it as the C.B. Radio of the 90's, at one point) too. And my, don't they all look like idjits now eh?
Andy, I think you're a great guy and all, but what the fuck?
Just another brief note to let you know that Previews Review has been updated again, with the March Previews Review. For items shipping... in March. Right.
I think Jeff Parker is swell. Jeff is a writer/illustrator, and his freshman graphic novel THE INTERMAN out-actions and out-adventures pretty much anything else on the market. Sequential Tart just did an interview with him, and it turned out a lot better than their interviews usually do. I'm putting it down to the extremely talented Barb-Lien Cooper conducting, but really, Parker was firing on all cylanders(sp) today. This was of particular note:
Jeff Parker: I get this symbolic image of a guy my age or older grabbing up superhero books from a shelf, with a little kid jumping around him trying to grab the books back. It's an allegory of course, I've never seen this actually occur in a store. But there it is: my peers clinging madly to what they loved years ago, but now they've matured and want stories that explore relationships and heavier themes. Yet they can't let go of the cape book, and the superheroes start killing each other and sleeping around, drinking, gambling, talking a whole lot ... the kid has wandered off by now in search of something where good guys fight bad guys in a fun way. Back at the store, our adult has squeezed the bunnies to death. The moral? Give the kid his damned books back! Adolescent power fantasies are for powerless adolescents. Read a goddamned crime comic, or a romance book to meet those needs! We're actually wondering why manga is doing so well now with kids? It's pretty obvious � they're writing to a young audience, using imagination and thinking about what would be fun. We can't take any lessons from that? No, we look at it and think "hmmm� the big eyes must be what they find appealing, or maybe these speedlines in the background ..."
Give them back their books, and move on. Stop influencing what caped characters do. Stop having opinions on the X-Men. Our nostalgia gets credit for supporting the comics industry but what it really does is kill it. http://www.sequentialtart.com/indy_0304.shtml
I think the 'squeezed the bunnies to death' bit is particularly apt.
The whole interview is that good, go check it out. Oh, and apparently Parker has a blog as well, which you can visit at http://parkerspace.blogspot.com/.
Alan David Doane's 5 Questions interviews have been very interesting so far. Enjoyable and well done. Today he tackles Dave Sim, on the occasion of the (near-)end of CEREBUS. As Alan says in the introduction, I really do think Dave represents himself very accurately here, his core beliefs on creativity, religion, and his work are all on display. Check it out.
Sure, everyone likes to complain about how bad the Warren Ellis Forum used to be, but go stop by Millarworld or Bendis' board at Image, and see what the modern, enlightened age has brought us:
- Today on Brian Michael Bendis' board, board regulars pick between three women working in comics and decide which they would like to fuck, which they would like to marry, and which one they would have to kill. The best part is when Jamie S. Rich, Bendis' Editor on Powers, comes in and says that there really isn't anything wrong with any of it, except for the fact that it offends some people. Good Show. http://www.imagecomics.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?t=23382&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
- Today on Millarworld, message forum regulars dogpile on some poor schmuck who dares to think that the figures in his asperational empowerment fantasies should be attractive (perish the though). Rational discourse would be calling this "a spade is a spade", because point out a plain-looking or unattractive character in a superhero book where their plainess or unattractive characteristics are not the sole point of their existence. Hell, even the JSA members who're pushing 80 are pretty fucking fit, and not one of the 15 year old TITANS characters who should still have their baby fat are less ripped than professional body builders. But instead of a discussion about the nature of this in comics, we get pages and pages of " I only have a few things to say; Fuckwigget, asstocking, jizzbuffer. There, I have creatively expressed my anger for this walking ejaculatory mistake." Oh yes, bravo. http://www.millarworld.biz/index.php?showtopic=22083&st=0
On the plus side, thanks to Grame McMillain's Fanboy Rampage for providing me with these links, and reminding me why I don't visit creator-specific forums anymore. If it isn't the sycophants jockeying for position by tearing everyone else down (particularly those with a contrary opinion), it's the forum host and "comics" "Professional(s)" themselves jumping in to incite said activity. Pathetic, though admittedly somewhat amusing when viewed from a great distance.
Just a brief note that my other site, PreviewsReview.com, has been updated with the new list of comic titles that are shipping this week. Every week myself and my buddy Scott Robins run down the new releases and give our take. There's some really good stuff out this week too, I humbly suggest you check it out.
From this week's Publisher's Weekly, an all-in-one wrap up of the Del Rey controversy from last week. This won't be available online anywhere, but I Have My Sources. I thought you all might like to see what the official word on the matter was from an entirely unbiased source:
Manga Censorship Flap Defused at Del Rey
Random House is now two for two in averting potential crises. A couple hours after sidestepping a Da Vinci Code dispute over a derivative title coming from Thomas Nelson, RH quickly defused a possible censorship dispute over nudity in a forthcoming book from Del Rey's new manga line.
On February 26, Ken Akamatsu, the creator of the hit Japanese manga series Negima, which Del Rey will publish in April, posted on his Web site that Del Rey was censoring several panels in the book that depict nude or semi nude characters. Later, ICV2.com, a comics news Web site, ran an interview with Dallas Middaugh, the director of Del Rey Manga, noting the house planned to alter about 10 panels in the book that depict seminude girls.
Semi-nude depictions are commonplace in Japanese comics, and Ahkamatsu's comics, including the Tokyopop hit Love Hina, invariably place teenage characters in seemingly sexy situations without any real sex ever happening.
However, Random House spokesperson Stuart Applebaum told PW that the matter has been very quickly sorted out and settled. Negima vol. 1, Applebaum said, will be published "without any alterations whatsoever." Apparently, said Applebaum, "a national book retailer that is excited about manga" offered the best solution: shrinkwrap the book with a cover sticker noting that the book is for ages 16 and up. He declined to name the retailer.
"The book will be published exactly as the author intended," said Applebaum--Calvin Reid, Publisher's Weekly
Sorry to beat the horse here, but I want this to be the signal flag that goes up for every other publisher who looks at the booming manga market as a cash-cow with no need to pay attention to things like the integrity of the work. Your immense hubris is not welcome here.
Christopher
Butcher: Is 29 years old and lives in Toronto Canada. In addition to the manager of
world-famous comic book store The Beguiling, he is a freelance writer
and comics production artist and the co-founder of the Toronto Comic Arts Festival. He can be contacted at chris at beguiling dot
com , though chances are it will get caught in the spam filter. You're better
off posting in the comments field.
Comics Blogs
I Read & Like: Bags & Boards: Tom McLean's media-focused comics blog. The Beat: Heidi MacDonald, dishing and digging up dirt (now at PW). Beaucoup Kevin: Kevin talks about all of the comic books. Big Sexy Arune: Comic journalist Arune Singh's blog. Brill Building: Ian Brill's blog. The Comics Reporter: Tom Spurgeon's all-in-one website featuring newsblogging, interviews, reviews, and more. A great site. Comics Worth Reading: Johanna Draper-Carlson reviews and recaps with a unique eye for comics. Completely Futile: Excellent commentary on manga. The Cultural Gutter: Toronto blog about video games, comics, and all manner of low-culture. Drawn.ca: Lots of Canadian Illustrators and artists linkblogging the best art of the internet. Neat. Egon: Grand-daddy of art-comix coverage. Forbidden Planet Blog: Brit Comic Retailer Forbidden Planet. Galleycat: About publishing, including comics. Gumpop:
Sophie Yanow runs a very cool blog about comics, that I enjoy reading. Jog The Blog: Like the similarly singley-named Cher, Jog contributes something precious and unique to the world. Johnny Bacardi: Comics coverage, and the promise of alcohol. Journalista!: Dirk Deppey sacrifices martyrs his social life for comics. Bless. Kelly Sue's Pro Blog: Kelly ends up re-writing manga I love. Also, she has a personal blog. Kochalkaholic: Alan David Doane's living tribute to cartoonist James Kochalka. Love Manga: Exceptionally thorough manga blog. The Low Road: My buddies Ed and John talk about comics and stuff. Manga Blog: Accurately named! Considered manga commentary. MangaCast: More manga than you can shake a stick at. Mystifying Oracle: Jeff Parker's very cool blog. NeilAlien Has been blogging longer than I have. Blog @ Newsarama Graeme and Kevin Melrose live here now. Panels and Pixels: Dude, it's comics and video games all in one. I find this excellent. Peiratikos: Rose and Steven's unique, contrary views on comics. Polite Dissent: Unique comics criticism and examination, through the eyes of an MD. Precocious Curmedgeon: Manga, North American Comics, and the industry. A fabulous read. Postmodern Barney: Dorian blogs about comics, homosexuals. Progressive Ruin: Mike Sterling's chronicle of funny superhero nonsense and working in a comic store. Read About Comics: Greg McElhatton's new reviews website. Riot! Blog: Blog for a new indy-friendly comic book store. Rocketship Comics: Blog for an indy-friendly Brooklyn-based comic book store. Royal Academy of Illustration and Design Blog: A fabulously talented studio of comics and illustration peeps. Savage Critics: From sunny California... Splash Panel: Comics reviews and discussion from a talented artist. Sporadic Sequential: Huzzah! It's John Jakala blogging again! When Will the Hurting
Stop: Tim O'Neil, man of action. When Fangirls Attack: A big 'ole round-up of women's issues as they relate to comics. Yet Another Comics Blog: Even with its strange preoccupation with superhero books, I still find myself enjoying this one.
Comics Artists and Friends: Radiomaru: Bryan Lee O'Malley, creator of Scott Pilgrim and etc. HopeLarson.com: Hope Larson, creator of Salamander Dream and Gray Horses. KeanerDotNet: Kean Soo, creator of Jellaby. The Rey: Corey Lewis, creator of Sharknife and etc. Gobukan: J. Bone's G-Rated Illustration Blog. Bone's Men: J. Bone's much naughtier Illustration Blog. Vera's Sketchblog: My friend Vera's awesome sketch blog. Salgood Sam: Sketch blog and work diary. Ink Skratch: Eric Kim, artist of Love as a Foreign Language. lowbright.com: Derek Kirk Kim's site, with lots of great comics. Bolt City:
Street Angel #1
Spooked GN
Marvelslous
I apologize in advance if this causes him to take it offline, but I was always taught to share. If you want to take a sneak-peak at what Scott Kurtz has got cooking up for the next little while (including the final cover version of his "Caption Contest" and the cover to his forthcoming but I think unannounced trade paperback), check out:
Just another brief note to let you know that Previews Review has been updated again, with the March Previews Review. For items shipping... in March. Right.
From this week's Publisher's Weekly, an all-in-one wrap up of the Del Rey controversy from last week. This won't be available online anywhere, but I Have My Sources. I thought you all might like to see what the official word on the matter was from an entirely unbiased source: