WFMU takes shot at mainstream comics

[phillyradiogeek]

I came across this entry at the blog of freeform radio station WFMU in New York/Northern New Jersey, and was turned off by its tone. I appreciated its plug for independently created minicomics, but it then went into a dig at mainstream comics in general and the usual target for derision, Rob Liefeld.

I left a comment there defending mainstream comics, and I'd like to see what the 11OC community thinks of the article. Who agrees or disagrees? Thanks!

http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2012/06/minicomics-vs-rob-liefeld.html

[TurningAsher]

Posted a reply of my own.

[evaD]

Sounds like someone in their mid to late twenties. Very preprogramed response to mass appeal, "if it appeals to the masses, it must be dumbed down and less valid" attitude. Of course, I could be way off with the age thing, it just sounds like someone who's learned some stuff but hasn't yet internalized the information and determined what they feel is valid and what isn't.

[JimN]

Sounds like someone in their mid to late twenties. Very preprogramed response to mass appeal, "if it appeals to the masses, it must be dumbed down and less valid" attitude. Of course, I could be way off with the age thing, it just sounds like someone who's learned some stuff but hasn't yet internalized the information and determined what they feel is valid and what isn't.

It certainly comes across that way, especially because they're just regurgitating old criticisms of the most criticized mainstream comics artist of the past 20 years (maybe ever).

I'm not a big fan of contemporary mainstream comics and I'm not a fan of Liefeld's work at all but I get sick of the low blows directed at him. I actually posted a reply in the blog's comments section too:

"Thanks to the Interwebs, you can find and buy minicomics without having to hang around the fringes of some distressing comic convention. If you want to buy American mass-market comics, though..."

... you can also buy them through the "interwebs". In fact, it's quite easy and you can even buy them and read them online, without ever leaving your home.

While I can appreciate the first half of this blog post and the virtues of some mini-comics, it seems the second of half of the post was nothing more than a flimsy excuse to blast Rob Liefeld, which is pretty ridiculous when the likelihood of running into truly awful art in a mini-comic is much greater than the likelihood of encountering it in a mainstream comic book.

[Kenney]

I think it is ridiculous to set out to raise something, by degrading something else. That is so lazy. I think the part about mini-comics is fine, and totally stands on its own, so I'm struggling to see why Rob Liefeld's name even needed to be invoked in that article. Would that space have not been better served talking about more mini-comics, or linking to specific places you can buy them?

And the attack on editors? Weird.

[Jeppe]

Sounds like someone in their mid to late twenties. Very preprogramed response to mass appeal, "if it appeals to the masses, it must be dumbed down and less valid" attitude. Of course, I could be way off with the age thing, it just sounds like someone who's learned some stuff but hasn't yet internalized the information and determined what they feel is valid and what isn't.

 

[steve bryant]

Sounds like someone in their mid to late twenties. Very preprogramed response to mass appeal, "if it appeals to the masses, it must be dumbed down and less valid" attitude. Of course, I could be way off with the age thing, it just sounds like someone who's learned some stuff but hasn't yet internalized the information and determined what they feel is valid and what isn't.

Actually, the author is former comics writer Bronwyn Carlton, who worked at DC (DCU, Vertigo, Pirhanna) in the 90s.

That said, I didn't disagree with much of what she said,* but the post itself was written in an unfocused, rambling manner—which is odd, considering she's a writer.  

* Granted, much of it sounds like it's coming from a place of "This is my experience, so it must be the same for everyone."

[evaD]

It certainly comes across that way, especially because they're just regurgitating old criticisms of the most criticized mainstream comics artist of the past 20 years (maybe ever).

Not just mainstream comics. Any mainstream medium or artform. If it becomes something accepted by the mainstream, it seems to be a knee jerk reaction to condemn it as inferior or the product of selling out. You find it in fine art, TV, music, movies, etc. While I don't believe it's exclusively attributable to the young, in my experience I find that attitude more prevalent among people under 30.

I'm not a big fan of contemporary mainstream comics and I'm not a fan of Liefeld's work at all but I get sick of the low blows directed at him. I actually posted a reply in the blog's comments section too:

I'm right there with you, and to people who want to bash him, I don't think you have to be a fan to recognize that he's been successful, so he did something right. Love him or hate him, he accomplished a lot. At this point, the man deserves respect for what he's accomplished. You don't have to like him, you may even marvel (   ) at how he managed to attain the status he has. But he is part of a small group of people who dramatically changed an entire industry.

[steve bryant]

And the attack on editors? Weird.

"That is correct. Yes, that’s exactly what happens. Mainstream comic book editors are wonderful examples of what Erroll Morris refers to as the Anosognosic’s Dilemma: They don’t know what they don’t know. They don’t know that they don’t know anything about art, because they don’t know that there’s anything to know. Same with writing. Same with editing. Same with any kind of business management. To know these things is not a requirement for the job. What comic book editors know is, for example, who inked issue 28 of Secret Origins in 1988."

But what she's saying about editors isn't necessarily false (and I suspect that it comes from her firsthand experience at DC). Most fans believe that an editor's job is to know continuity. Just look at how podcast forum threads spring up whenever there's a job opening at DC or Marvel; everyone in the thread always talks about how the continuity guy for this podcast or that podcast should apply. Often, it's less about someone that's steeped in Eisner, or Wally Wood, Kirby, or the craft of storytelling, and more about knowing how many times the Thing and the Hulk have fought in Manhattan.*

Again, her post is unfocused, and at times comes off like a drunk-dialed voicemail message from a jilted lover. But there are some valid points hidden amidst the ramblings.

* Of course, this isn't always the case. As in any job, there are good editors and bad editors. And most of us will never know the difference between them without first-hand work experience.

[evaD]

Actually, the author is former comics writer Bronwyn Carlton, who worked at DC (DCU, Vertigo, Pirhanna) in the 90s.

That said, I didn't disagree with much of what she said,* but the post itself was written in an unfocused, rambling manner—which is odd, considering she's a writer.  

* Granted, much of it sounds like it's coming from a place of "This is my experience, so it must be the same for everyone."

Wow. Well... maybe she should have read what she wrote before posting. It comes across as very lacking in perspective.

Confused about my statement, or annoyed by it? The only thing I can say in my defense is most people continue to grow, change and mature throughout their lives. As you get older you gain new perspectives on things and begin to consider things you might not have at a younger age. The statements in that post lacked some of the things you would expect from an older person. There was some idealism, a great degree of "black and white", and a very hipsterish attitude. Sorry if that bothers you, I didn't mean it in a dismissive or all inclusive way. There are certainly older people who act immature, and younger people who act more mature than their years.

[Jeppe]

Confused about my statement, or annoyed by it? The only thing I can say in my defense is most people continue to grow, change and mature throughout their lives. As you get older you gain new perspectives on things and begin to consider things you might not have at a younger age. The statements in that post lacked some of the things you would expect from an older person. There was some idealism, a great degree of "black and white", and a very hipsterish attitude. Sorry if that bothers you, I didn't mean it in a dismissive or all inclusive way. There are certainly older people who act immature, and younger people who act more mature than their years.

I was a little doubtful I guess, but thanks for taking the time to expound on it. I'm just a little put off by assumptions based on age in general, since I tend to see people as varying widely in terms of maturity and perspective regardless of age groups.

[Kenney]

That said, I didn't disagree with much of what she said,* but the post itself was written in an unfocused, rambling manner—which is odd, considering she's a writer.  

* Granted, much of it sounds like it's coming from a place of "This is my experience, so it must be the same for everyone."

See, this makes sense that she would look at Rob the way she does, if she was active in the 90s. Because that whole element of her column just seems hella outdated. Not that Rob is above criticism or anything like that, it just doesn't fit. It feels like her post was written from the perspective of the 90s, and not today. Rob is far from being "the man" in comics right now, and you really don't see his art unless you're seeking it out.

But what she's saying about editors isn't necessarily false (and I suspect that it comes from her firsthand experience at DC). Most fans believe that an editor's job is to know continuity. Just look at how podcast forum threads spring up whenever there's a job opening at DC or Marvel; everyone in the thread always talks about how the continuity guy for this podcast or that podcast should apply. Often, it's less about someone that's steeped in Eisner, or Wally Wood, Kirby, or the craft of storytelling, and more about knowing how many times the Thing and the Hulk have fought in Manhattan.*

I'm not concerned so much with what fans like myself might think editing entails, and more concerned with what is. You obviously have more knowledge about this than I do being a pro, but I would love to hear from some editors about how they would take her comment. Not in a "Oh no she didn't!" beef starting way, but just to speak on how right or wrong they feel that statement is.

[lugaru]

For me making fun of Liefield for his image days is like making fun of Justin Timberlake for his boyband days. Grownups dont even remember and kids are too young to care. They should throw in some Clinton jokes and maybe a youtube link to the lightsabre kid.

[Farrell]

I was disappointed there wasn't more Liefeld bashing.  I like reading it.

I'm right there with you, and to people who want to bash him, I don't think you have to be a fan to recognize that he's been successful, so he did something right.  Love him or hate him, he accomplished a lot.

Like Paris Hilton accomplished a lot?  Life doesn't reward people commensurate with how talented they are, or how hard working they are, or how lovely they are as a person, not all the time.   He has been successful despite himself, in my opinion.  Happens all the time, unfortunately.   He hasn't accomplished a whole lot, either.  Artistically, he's accomplished approximately nothing.  Financially, he seems to always land on his feet, but he's left a ton of unpaid artists and failed ventures in his wake.  He's a lucky dude.  Doesn't need any extra foot rubs from us.

[Jeppe]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/HPPj6viIBmU&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/HPPj6viIBmU&rel=1</a>

[LA Rabbit]

It seemed like it was written for people that already aligned with her thinking (mini comics good, mainstream comics are lamestream comics).  Mini-comics are a genre and it seems odd to say that they are better or worse than another genre.  Is non-fiction better than fiction?  Is haiku better than sonnetts?  They do have different characteristics that define them, but that doesn't mean that they are uniformly better or better executed.  I agree with those that say she would have been better pointing people to specific collections/websites, etc.  She does provide links to three of them from around the world but mini-comics are so wildly diverse in nature, style, execution, etc she could spend a lifetime studying and writing about them.  Alternatively she could have discussed more the history, or how she came to discover them or how to locate ones that might resonate with a particular person considering how broad the genre is.   

I think pooping all over comic book shops (some of which distribute mini-comics), conventions (which also distribute mini-comics and allow you to meet the people behind them), main stream comics (which are frequently the gateway drug to comics), its editors¹ and fans does her no favors.  I would think that comic book fans would be at least as likely if not more likely to actually buy mini-comics.  Instead she chooses to perputate the myth that you have to either like arty mini-comics or mainstream comics.  There is room on many people's shelves for both. 

There is so much negativity often around.  I understand that it may get you hits on your website (as show by this link here, as I would have never read it but for the link) but is anyone going to seek out more of your writing or new mini-comics based on this?  Also it allows you to make jokes easier.  I even checked out the links to the Liefeld's critique².  I am not bookmarking that site.  You can catch more flies with honey.


¹So this is a writer who thinks that her former editors were not good at their jobs. At least she is an unbiased judge. 
²I did read both top 40 lists.  I think it was quite a bit of silliness but I did like the specific artistic critiques offered.  I took the 90's off of comics so that period is a bit of a black hole to me.  I do check some of it out of the library but so far it hasn't really resonated with me.  Still can't write it all off based on a few examples or you would be correct to take me to task for hyposcrisy, surely not for the first or last time.

[Farrell]

For me making fun of Liefield for his image days is like making fun of Justin Timberlake for his boyband days. Grownups dont even remember and kids are too young to care. They should throw in some Clinton jokes and maybe a youtube link to the lightsabre kid.

His stubborn refusal to change one iota in 20 years keeps those references relevant today.

[evaD]

I was a little doubtful I guess, but thanks for taking the time to expound on it. I'm just a little put off by assumptions based on age in general, since I tend to see people as varying widely in terms of maturity and perspective regardless of age groups.

Perhaps if I put it in more personal terms. I remember going to college, learning how to create "art", how to think about art, and despite the lessons of the pop artists, there was still a high art/low art mentality. I remember absorbing so much information so quickly that it took a while to really sift through it and determine what was valid to me and what wasn't. I remember compartmentalizing, putting everything in it's place. I watched my peers do the same thing. I've watched many people through the years go through similar experiences. Due to those experiences and observations, the attitude that I was picking up in that article is something I associate with that age. Obviously, I wasn't accurate. Reading the article, I just pictured a pretentious, young hipster* full of book knowledge but short on experience. Right or wrong, that's what I thought of as I was reading it.

* Note: Not all hipsters are young or pretentious. Not all pretentious people are young or hip. Not all youth are pretentious or hipsters.

[JimN]

It seemed like it was written for people that already aligned with her thinking (mini comics good, mainstream comics are lamestream comics).  Mini-comics are a genre and it seems odd to say that they are better or worse than another genre.

Heck, they're not even a genre, they're a format. As you said, they're wildly diverse in nature, style, execution, etc. 

Jim

[lugaru]

His stubborn refusal to change one iota in 20 years keeps those references relevant today.

Oh yeah, but I'm not comfortable with him being used as the face of mainstream comics. Even back then he was neck to neck with the other image guys, with Jim Lee being the most hyped in my opinion, and deservedly so. For me using him as the argument is pretty flawed... maybe they should be using Greg Land but I dont think they are that up to date with cliche internet arguments.