|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 5, 2015 16:20:25 GMT -5
I have to say that I've read easily a dozen interviews with Warren Ellis and while he may be opinionated I've never seen him as being arrogant in any way. Indeed he's usually pretty self-deprecating. You can not like his work, that's fine. But attacking his character because you don't like his work is pretty unnecessary. Here's just one of the quotes that I've come across...and hey, it's in regards to Morrison and his detractors... "Since most people who cite a 'convoluted mess' in regards to Grant's work turnout to be unable to pass a high school English comprehension test, said citation tends to be viewed as comedy." - Warren Ellis Sure sounds like an uppity douchebag to me Sounds accurate to me. Most people are stupid. “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Dec 5, 2015 16:29:26 GMT -5
Here's just one of the quotes that I've come across...and hey, it's in regards to Morrison and his detractors... "Since most people who cite a 'convoluted mess' in regards to Grant's work turnout to be unable to pass a high school English comprehension test, said citation tends to be viewed as comedy." - Warren Ellis Sure sounds like an uppity douchebag to me Sounds accurate to me. Most people are stupid. “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin So if you think that Morrison tells convoluted stories with plotholes and loose ends all over the place...you're stupid? That's ridiculous I've read Shakespeare. I've read Melville. I've read Cormac McCarthy. I've been able to firmly grasp just about all of it. So something tells me it shouldn't be so difficult to grasp the works of someone whose books are primarily aimed at 10-13 year old boys. That's a Morrison issue. Not a comprehension issue.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 5, 2015 16:34:54 GMT -5
Sounds accurate to me. Most people are stupid. “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin So if you think that Morrison tells convoluted stories with plotholes and loose ends all over the place...you're stupid? That's ridiculous I've read Shakespeare. I've read Melville. I've read Cormac McCarthy. I've been able to firmly grasp just about all of it. So something tells me it shouldn't be so difficult to grasp the works of someone whose books are primarily aimed at 10-13 year old boys. That's a Morrison issue. Not a comprehension issue. No. I think Ellis was taking the piss and you're taking it personally. I think a lot of Morrison's work is brilliant. I also think a lot of it is crap. Supergods was unreadable drivel. And comic books haven't been aimed at 10-13 year old boys for over a quarter of a century. Morrison's work definitely isn't aimed at 10-13 year old boys and never has been.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 5, 2015 16:43:24 GMT -5
I also think that there's a major problem with American readers reading interview with British writers...especially ones with deep working class backgrounds. They seem to come across as very abrasive to Americans when they're largely having fun. See in addition to Ellis, Alan Moore, Robert Rankin (outside of comics), John Cleese and a host of others.
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Dec 5, 2015 18:07:08 GMT -5
I also think that there's a major problem with American readers reading interview with British writers...especially ones with deep working class backgrounds. They seem to come across as very abrasive to Americans when they're largely having fun. See in addition to Ellis, Alan Moore, Robert Rankin (outside of comics), John Cleese and a host of others. And "bigger than Jesus." Yeah, you make a great point here Slam.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 5, 2015 20:45:36 GMT -5
I think in that statement Ellis is also understandably defending his colleague from attack, so it isn't surprising if he's a little acerbic. This is also the case with a lot of the Alan Moore quotes that seem to drive superhero fans into a frenzy: they come off as if Moore is gratuitously attacking their beloved genre but usually his comments are in response to a leading or provocative question by the interviewer, and that context makes a difference.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Dec 6, 2015 1:34:49 GMT -5
I enjoy acerbic British wit, particularly from Alan Moore, in this context. I will say that a article Ellis wrote in 1994, just after Jack Kirby died, irked me and soured me on him from the start. I get the gist of what he was trying to say: mainstream comics (really Marvel) need to stop imitating Kirby, obsessing over his creations, and go their own way. I agree to a point, but the execution of this message, and his general tone, came off as classless and disrespectful (I might think differently now. It's only been 21 years since I read it.).
When I read Alan Moore or Neil Gaiman criticizing mainstream comics, they come off as well thought out and they don't seem to let emotion cloud the issue as often. (Though Alan was clearing spitting venom during the Before Watchmen mess.)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 2:00:00 GMT -5
I enjoy acerbic British wit, particularly from Alan Moore, in this context. I will say that a article Ellis wrote in 1994, just after Jack Kirby died, irked me and soured me on him from the start. I get the gist of what he was trying to say: mainstream comics (really Marvel) need to stop imitating Kirby, obsessing over his creations, and go their own way. I agree to a point, but the execution of this message, and his general tone, came off as classless and disrespectful (I might think differently now. It's only been 21 years since I read it.). When I read Alan Moore or Neil Gaiman criticizing mainstream comics, they come off as well thought out and they don't seem to let emotion cloud the issue as often. (Though Alan was clearing spitting venom during the Before Watchmen mess.) I read the same comments by Ellis about Kirby, and I read them very differently than you. I don't think they were disrespectful to Kirby at all. To me Ellis was saying that Kirby was Kirby because he was a trailblazer and followed his own creative muse, the result of which was a prolific body of work, and if people truly wanted to honor Kirby they would follow his example instead of trying to harvest the field he had already plowed. He was tone was directed not at Kirby, but at what he viewed as ghouls feeding and growing fat on what Kirby left behind and not being like Kirby and creating their own things and following their own muses. To that end, I agree with him totally. The House of Ideas needs to be a house of ideas, not a house resting on the laurels built on the foundation of someone else's ideas and doing nothing but growing fat on the work of others. The same is true of DC too. Be like Kirby, create. Don't redo what he already did and try to harvest the same land over and over again, because at some point the field dries up and needs to lie fallow. -M
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Dec 6, 2015 7:44:37 GMT -5
I enjoy acerbic British wit, particularly from Alan Moore, in this context. I will say that a article Ellis wrote in 1994, just after Jack Kirby died, irked me and soured me on him from the start. I get the gist of what he was trying to say: mainstream comics (really Marvel) need to stop imitating Kirby, obsessing over his creations, and go their own way. I agree to a point, but the execution of this message, and his general tone, came off as classless and disrespectful (I might think differently now. It's only been 21 years since I read it.). When I read Alan Moore or Neil Gaiman criticizing mainstream comics, they come off as well thought out and they don't seem to let emotion cloud the issue as often. (Though Alan was clearing spitting venom during the Before Watchmen mess.) I read the same comments by Ellis about Kirby, and I read them very differently than you. I don't think they were disrespectful to Kirby at all. To me Ellis was saying that Kirby was Kirby because he was a trailblazer and followed his own creative muse, the result of which was a prolific body of work, and if people truly wanted to honor Kirby they would follow his example instead of trying to harvest the field he had already plowed. He was tone was directed not at Kirby, but at what he viewed as ghouls feeding and growing fat on what Kirby left behind and not being like Kirby and creating their own things and following their own muses. To that end, I agree with him totally. The House of Ideas needs to be a house of ideas, not a house resting on the laurels built on the foundation of someone else's ideas and doing nothing but growing fat on the work of others. The same is true of DC too. Be like Kirby, create. Don't redo what he already did and try to harvest the same land over and over again, because at some point the field dries up and needs to lie fallow. -M Just off hand, The only creator that I can think of that created something new and exciting was Mike Baron. He came up with original concepts like the Badger and Nexus. Other than him, I only see Spider-girl, The Image guys with carbon copies of well known teams and other blatant rip off concepts.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 10:58:24 GMT -5
Hmmm creators coming up with new stuff-well let's see...Jeff Smith Bone, Ellis himself with Transmet, Colleen Doran with A Distant Soil, Gaiman with Sandman, Sakai with Usagi Yojimbo, Ostrander with Grimjack, Chaykin with Flagg! Stalin with Dreadstar, I could run down a bucnh of Eclipse books, Vertigo books, Epic books, First Books, self-published books, and still have plenty more to list well into tomorrow. Just not anything by mainstream DC or Marvel, and actually there were even a few from DC (things like Chase, some things about Robinson's starman, etc.) but that ended pretty quickly by the turn of the century. The only MArvel book that I can remember trying something really new this century that wasn't an Icon book was Book of Lost Souls by Doran and JMS, but no one bought it (it's not just publishers who won't embrace the new and cling to what was created decades ago).
If you are not seeing new and creative concepts in comics since Kirby, you aren't looking hard enough. But if your thing is to just enjoy the classic stuff, that's your bliss follow it. Just don't say there are no alternatives out to that stuff out there. There is, but it's not going to feature the capes and tights crowd created in in the 30s-60s.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 6, 2015 12:16:28 GMT -5
Just off hand, The only creator that I can think of that created something new and exciting was Mike Baron. He came up with original concepts like the Badger and Nexus. Other than him, I only see Spider-girl, The Image guys with carbon copies of well known teams and other blatant rip off concepts. ... That's borderline insulting, especially considering your avatar picture. Or maybe it's just because you didn't specify any context to that statement and meant one very restricted. "Something new" also should have scales : Alan Moore's Lost Girls using 24 different innovative comic book storytelling techniques, that's a huge accomplishement (he only too 15 year or more to create the damn thing, go figure), Acme Novelty Library, Bone, all great accomplishements, different scales. EDIT : Oops... I forgot in which thread I was, hahaha! Good one Icctrombone
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 12:58:12 GMT -5
Alan Moore's Lost Girls using 24 different innovative comic book storytelling techniques, that's a huge accomplishement (he only too 15 year or more to create the damn thing, go figure), Acme Novelty Library, Bone, all great accomplishements, different scales. EDIT : Oops... I forgot in which thread I was, hahaha! Good one Icctrombone Well Alan Moore helped himself to Alice, Dorothy and Wendy, none of whom were his creations, and turns them into pornographic sex acts in Lost Girls. Dorothy and a horse? Really? But when people do Before Watchmen, he incites the riot act, and this to tremendous applause from his staunch fanboys.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 6, 2015 13:07:10 GMT -5
Alan Moore's Lost Girls using 24 different innovative comic book storytelling techniques, that's a huge accomplishement (he only too 15 year or more to create the damn thing, go figure), Acme Novelty Library, Bone, all great accomplishements, different scales. EDIT : Oops... I forgot in which thread I was, hahaha! Good one Icctrombone Well Alan Moore helped himself to Alice, Dorothy and Wendy, none of whom were his creations, and turns them into pornographic sex acts in Lost Girls. Dorothy and a horse? Really? But when people do Before Watchmen, he incites the riot act, and this to tremendous applause from his staunch fanboys. It's not about what he uses but about HOW he uses it. He created new storytelling techniques. If the matter is to our taste or not is besides the point. As every archetype may have already been created, expending on those is where the challenge is. And I find it indeed more exciting to read about those old characters with a new exciting spin then on most new crafted ones if not on those original archetypes as well. And I don't see how Nemesis the Warlock, Judge Dredd, John Constantine or Jim Woodring's Frank are any less new and exciting concepts as Badger or nexus
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 6, 2015 13:12:57 GMT -5
Alan Moore's Lost Girls using 24 different innovative comic book storytelling techniques, that's a huge accomplishement (he only too 15 year or more to create the damn thing, go figure), Acme Novelty Library, Bone, all great accomplishements, different scales. EDIT : Oops... I forgot in which thread I was, hahaha! Good one Icctrombone Well Alan Moore helped himself to Alice, Dorothy and Wendy, none of whom were his creations, and turns them into pornographic sex acts in Lost Girls. Dorothy and a horse? Really? But when people do Before Watchmen, he incites the riot act, and this to tremendous applause from his staunch fanboys. I think if you look really really closely, you'll see more differences between Lost Girls and Before Watchmen than just the use of previously existing characters. And if you look really really closely at what Alan Moore actually said, you might notice that he saw them too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 13:14:39 GMT -5
My point is Alan Moore has built his career using characters that aren't his...but doesn't act graciously when his own creations are used.
|
|