|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jun 6, 2014 21:57:29 GMT -5
I have not read Story of the Eye but based on just now looking at the synopsis I want to. I was very censored as a child and teen griwing up by my folks religion. Most of the "controversial" books finally acceptable to literature class in school at my time like Of Mice and Men, I have read. But it's works from Charles Bukowski or Henry Miller that are either ignored, ostrisized or censored that intrigue me. Either of the above mentioned great writers aren't material for my boys now but at a soon reached age if they reach for Women of Nights if Love and Laughter I'll let them know how much I liked both works. I think both of these two men are some of the greatest writers of the last century. They wrote to write. To get the words out of their brains bit to appease anyone. Those are the last writings that should be censored. As I've done with any movie, game or book my boys have wanted ... it's not the violence, sex, human behavior or emotions I censor, if I do, it's the context. Watching Tenchi Muyo with nudity in public bath houses is no reason for censorship. Nudity isn't inappropriate at any age really. It's the context of said nudity. So in a comic book sense, Knightsend/fall with Bane that my son likes, okay. The Killing Joke, not so much ready for.
|
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Jun 12, 2014 17:45:27 GMT -5
I'm beginning to rethink this project based partly on responses here. Suffice to say that while I wouldn't expect to make money on any critical work on comics, I would like to feel like I had a shot at accruing some measure of Internet fame, for purposes of publicizing other projects. But the more I think about it, the project I outlined here really requires that the target reader have some passion for comparing all the different critical "takes" on superheroes specifically and comic books generally. And in most of the forums I've visited, I get the impression that most comics-fans don't care that much about how, say, Critic A's attitude toward superheroes differs from Critic B's.
However, comics fans do care about what Artist A's attitude is in respect to Artist B. Maybe that would be a more fruitful approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jun 13, 2014 8:52:33 GMT -5
What you might be feeling is a... I don't know if "resentment" is the right word, but a negative feeling among some fans toward the way that superheroes still define the comic medium to non-fan audiences (as well as to a large and visible portion of fans.)
|
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456 
|
Post by ironchimp on Jun 13, 2014 10:29:18 GMT -5
i think the problem is a defense seems unnecessary because no-one is stopping you reading them. Until then any attack on the genre is often just a question of taste - which is basically subjective and circular argument. The harshest critics of superhero comics have often come from within the industry itself - we've just had Ennis dismantle the whole genre in the most brutal fashion possible in the Boys, creators have drawn so many parodies pointing out the ridiculousness of the genre for decade after decade, so that the criticisms of critics "outside" of the industry often seem superfluous. There are definitely arguments to say the genre is racist and sexist - with its pros and cons - but that whole thing seems done to death.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Jun 13, 2014 10:43:38 GMT -5
i think the problem is a defense seems unnecessary because no-one is stopping you reading them. Until then any attack on the genre is often just a question of taste - which is basically subjective and circular argument. The harshest critics of superhero comics have often come from within the industry itself - we've just had Ennis dismantle the whole genre in the most brutal fashion possible in the Boys, creators have drawn so many parodies pointing out the ridiculousness of the genre for decade after decade, so that the criticisms of critics "outside" of the industry often seem superfluous. There are definitely arguments to say the genre is racist and sexist - with its pros and cons - but that whole thing seems done to death. Gary Groth's The Comics Journal has probably published tens of thousands of pages on this very subject within the last 30 odd years |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jun 13, 2014 11:17:05 GMT -5
i think the problem is a defense seems unnecessary because no-one is stopping you reading them. Until then any attack on the genre is often just a question of taste - which is basically subjective and circular argument. The harshest critics of superhero comics have often come from within the industry itself - we've just had Ennis dismantle the whole genre in the most brutal fashion possible in the Boys, creators have drawn so many parodies pointing out the ridiculousness of the genre for decade after decade, so that the criticisms of critics "outside" of the industry often seem superfluous. There are definitely arguments to say the genre is racist and sexist - with its pros and cons - but that whole thing seems done to death. Gary Groth's The Comics Journal has probably published tens of thousands of pages on this very subject within the last 30 odd years Did they manage to break the loop those arguments seem to get stuck in and reach any conclusions ? i'm guessing not if its been 30 years! |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Jun 13, 2014 16:40:28 GMT -5
i think the problem is a defense seems unnecessary because no-one is stopping you reading them. Until then any attack on the genre is often just a question of taste - which is basically subjective and circular argument. The harshest critics of superhero comics have often come from within the industry itself - we've just had Ennis dismantle the whole genre in the most brutal fashion possible in the Boys, creators have drawn so many parodies pointing out the ridiculousness of the genre for decade after decade, so that the criticisms of critics "outside" of the industry often seem superfluous. There are definitely arguments to say the genre is racist and sexist - with its pros and cons - but that whole thing seems done to death. Of all the defenses of genre-fiction I've read, none have ever been motivated by the fear that Big Brother or anyone else might interfere with one's reading choices, with the exception of authors responding to the Frederic Wertham diatribes-- which certainly would have been the death knell of comics, had Wertham been able to have the medium forbidden to the under-fifteen audience that formerly sustained it. Perhaps "defense" is misleading, and what I'm really talking about is more like an apologia, a species of rhetoric, Wiki tells me, "in which an orator defends himself or his actions against an accusation." In this case, the accusation is that the genre in question is worthless and beneath the notice of thinking individuals. True, you're never going to convince someone whose tastes run counter to a given genre-- be it superheroes, science fiction or nurse novels-- that the genre is worth their time. The real function of apologias/defenses is for the reader already invested in said genre. |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Jun 13, 2014 16:41:31 GMT -5
Gary Groth's The Comics Journal has probably published tens of thousands of pages on this very subject within the last 30 odd years Did they manage to break the loop those arguments seem to get stuck in and reach any conclusions ? i'm guessing not if its been 30 years! By "loop" you're talking about the inarguability of taste you mentioned before? |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jun 13, 2014 18:21:04 GMT -5
Did they manage to break the loop those arguments seem to get stuck in and reach any conclusions ? i'm guessing not if its been 30 years! By "loop" you're talking about the inarguability of taste you mentioned before? well in cases of racism and sexism there seem to be certain pros and cons where you could argue strongly either way that perhaps go beyond just matters of taste. We have an objective definition of those terms which to measure things by but the evidence either way often seems contradictory - hence the loop. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jun 13, 2014 20:12:36 GMT -5
i think the problem is a defense seems unnecessary because no-one is stopping you reading them. Until then any attack on the genre is often just a question of taste - which is basically subjective and circular argument. The harshest critics of superhero comics have often come from within the industry itself - we've just had Ennis dismantle the whole genre in the most brutal fashion possible in the Boys, creators have drawn so many parodies pointing out the ridiculousness of the genre for decade after decade, so that the criticisms of critics "outside" of the industry often seem superfluous. There are definitely arguments to say the genre is racist and sexist - with its pros and cons - but that whole thing seems done to death. Of all the defenses of genre-fiction I've read, none have ever been motivated by the fear that Big Brother or anyone else might interfere with one's reading choices, with the exception of authors responding to the Frederic Wertham diatribes-- which certainly would have been the death knell of comics, had Wertham been able to have the medium forbidden to the under-fifteen audience that formerly sustained it. Perhaps "defense" is misleading, and what I'm really talking about is more like an apologia, a species of rhetoric, Wiki tells me, "in which an orator defends himself or his actions against an accusation." In this case, the accusation is that the genre in question is worthless and beneath the notice of thinking individuals. True, you're never going to convince someone whose tastes run counter to a given genre-- be it superheroes, science fiction or nurse novels-- that the genre is worth their time. The real function of apologias/defenses is for the reader already invested in said genre. I think the problem is in how you are presenting the case for prosecution as calling comics "worthless" and "beneath the notice of thinking individuals" - to me at least that kind of description has come in the past, and does have implications of moral and intellectual degeneracy leading to social problems leading to censorship. this was the language that both wertham and the nazis used for their own art persecution and an argument that comics lost. Ok it wasn't a fair fight but that kind of language of criticism comes with heavy connotations in comics. While any impending sense of censorship in comics is very fanciful at present (apart from isolated instances) this is largely because of a legacy of comics code imposed tropes, reader expectations based on those tropes post code, and corporate censorship ie. today superhero comics work within a pretty tight framework - a kind of censorship imposed by companies and readers that makes them largely innocuous. However, that argument has gone on to be played out in every other medium up to today - horror films, violent computer games, rock and roll, rap, metal etc. It's only because of a kind of self censorship that comics havent been dragged back into that debate. It's a different argument to "comics are just bad literature" and a formal critique of dialogue, plot development, characterisation etc. I think a defense of that argument could be a lot of fun to read. |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Jun 14, 2014 13:58:07 GMT -5
What you might be feeling is a... I don't know if "resentment" is the right word, but a negative feeling among some fans toward the way that superheroes still define the comic medium to non-fan audiences (as well as to a large and visible portion of fans.) I think some comics fans do resent superheroes for taking over the industry, with varying degrees. Some fans don't like superheroes at all, while others may like the better exemplars of the genre but wish that the fans would support other genres at the same time. But in that post I wasn't talking so much about the feelings the hardcore fans may have for superheroes, as their general disinterest in any sort of sustained criticism of comics. What I'm now curious about is, how many people who read my initial posts felt their eyes glazing over with frosty disinterest when I started talking about "the way in which Jules Feiffer chose to refute Doctor Wertham was to say..." blah blah blah I should emphasize that I'm not saying anything against the general intelligence of comics fans. I said earlier that you have to have a passion for criticism to explore all of its convoluted byways, and that I'm suspecting that the kind of book I originally envisaged-- one whose purpose would be to expouse my own views, no less-- would not be of great interest to comics fans. I'm reminded of a recent episode of the relentlessly silly TEEN TITANS GO episode, a spoof on the whole "Reading is Fun-damental" thing. Long story short: the Titans all get nutty about reading, except when Raven tries to dissect their books with intellectual observations. So I'm more or less in the position of Raven, spoiling all the fun with Deep Thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 15, 2014 1:05:29 GMT -5
So I'm more or less in the position of Raven, spoiling all the fun with Deep Thoughts. People who ponder about the depth of their own thoughts, are usually in the habit of fishing in ponds. |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Jun 15, 2014 11:56:50 GMT -5
So I'm more or less in the position of Raven, spoiling all the fun with Deep Thoughts. People who ponder about the depth of their own thoughts, are usually in the habit of fishing in ponds. It's at least true that there are a lot of people who don't know the difference between the shallow and the deep. |
|
