11OCC Episode Archive

[Andrew]

Art is anything created to be art, and/OR anything deemed art by an audience.

I can draw something right now, poorly, and burn it in a fire, never to be seen by anyone (else). If I say it was art, it was. A mid-city alleyway that's been plastered with concert posters for decades, the poster collection suddenly collapsing under it's own weight revealing a mish-mash of layers and colours - if I see that and say it's art, it is.

You may not like either piece, but if someone says it is art: it is.

[Wood]

Picked up Xombi #1, and it WAS legit. Seemingly random occurrences were laced throughout the book, yet it all made sense. It's not easy for a #1 issue, with principally new characters for most of us, to have concepts as far ranging as molecular alteration, superpowered nuns, density physics, possessed children, and the optimization of energy and mass all rolled into one -- yet still be an entertaining yarn for 22 pages.
 

[Shawn P.]

Vince drinking malt liquor? WHOA. That ish will kill you quicker than White Castle. 

Someone needs to play Vince "One Million Bottlebags" by Public Enemy from the album "Apocalypse 91... The Enemy Strikes Black."

[Wood]

Vince drinking malt liquor? WHOA. That ish will kill you quicker than White Castle. 

Someone needs to play Vince "One Million Bottlebags" by Public Enemy from the album "Apocalypse 91... The Enemy Strikes Black."

Vince don't know but it flow,
Out the bottle during the show,
He call it gettin' fucked up yo!
Like we ain't fucked up already
See the man they call Crazy Vince B
Liquor man with his johnson in his hand

He give the liquor man ten to begin
Wit' no change an' he run
To get his brains rearranged
Serve it to the homies while on Skype
To do without the voicemails
Beside what's inside, ain't worth the hype

[Shawn P.]

Vince don't know but it flow,
Out the bottle during the show,
He call it gettin' fucked up yo!
Like we ain't fucked up already
See the man they call Crazy Vince B
Liquor man with his johnson in his hand

He give the liquor man ten to begin
Wit' no change an' he run
To get his brains rearranged
Serve it to the homies while on Skype
To do without the voicemails
Beside what's inside, ain't worth the hype

TRUTH. 

[slurmo]

Vince don't know but it flow,
Out the bottle during the show,
He call it gettin' fucked up yo!
Like we ain't fucked up already
See the man they call Crazy Vince B
Liquor man with his johnson in his hand

He give the liquor man ten to begin
Wit' no change an' he run
To get his brains rearranged
Serve it to the homies while on Skype
To do without the voicemails
Beside what's inside, ain't worth the hype

TRUTH. 

QTQFT!

[Wood]

 

[Dotanuki]

The thread now defeats Living Baseheads!

[NiceAndBlue]

The real question is whether Vince poured the first sip on the ground to toast any fallen homies?

[jack239]

The real question is whether Vince poured the first sip on the ground to toast any fallen homies?

i assume Vince makes daily offerings of spirits and fine meats to the Shrine of Kirby. something for the king to eat and drink in comic book Valhalla.

[slurmo]

LAST! 

[JimN]

Picked up Xombi #1, and it WAS legit. Seemingly random occurrences were laced throughout the book, yet it all made sense. It's not easy for a #1 issue, with principally new characters for most of us, to have concepts as far ranging as molecular alteration, superpowered nuns, density physics, possessed children, and the optimization of energy and mass all rolled into one -- yet still be an entertaining yarn for 22 pages.

I agree, which is why I didn't like it. It entertained me for about 1/2 the issue and then I felt like it went off the rails. I don't think I'll be back for another bite.

Jim

[Wood]

I agree, which is why I didn't like it. It entertained me for about 1/2 the issue and then I felt like it went off the rails. I don't think I'll be back for another bite.

Jim

Absolutely understand. This is not a straightforward book and I could see it being really offputting for a lot of people.  As you know, I'm a Morrison fan, but Sea Guy mystified me and I didn't enjoy it at all. Yet, this worked for me, as does Deadpool which I know a lot of people hate because of the zaniness. To each his own. As much as I enjoyed this issue, it's not one of those comics that I would be shocked if someone didn't care for. 

[elemental]

Enjoyed the episode although the talk with Gabe lost my interest after a while as the debate became a bit circular at one point. I like to subscribe to the 'porn theory' - you know it when you see it. Then again this interview is unlike any you will see on other podcast and i guess thats why we download EOC.... intresting and thought provoking is nothing else.

I don't know if it was having Gabe on or the contents of the drink roll call but the rest of the show was like a normal EOC episode but turned up to 11 

[JimN]

Absolutely understand. This is not a straightforward book and I could see it being really offputting for a lot of people.  As you know, I'm a Morrison fan, but Sea Guy mystified me and I didn't enjoy it at all. Yet, this worked for me, as does Deadpool which I know a lot of people hate because of the zaniness. To each his own. As much as I enjoyed this issue, it's not one of those comics that I would be shocked if someone didn't care for. 

Sea Guy wasn't for me either...

I actually tend to like quite a few comics that aren't straightforward and I thought Xombi #1 contained some very cool concepts. Unfortunately, it just didn't work for me. My tastes seem to be increasingly idiosyncratic though so I encourage anyone who's interested to give it a try!

Jim

[BC1]

So then can we disregard an artist's intention that his work is art?  Or, would you agree with the jurors who wanted to keep Marcel Duchamp from entering a signed urinal in an exibition because, despite his "intent", their "perception" was that it was not art and therefore did not qualify?  If intent really is irrelevant, then they were totally within their rights to decide it wasn't art.

Also, even if we take a narrow view of Vince's definition of comics, then every history of comics needs revision.  The real history starts with the cave paintings at Lescoux, proceeds through Sumerian pictograms and Egyptian hieroglyphics, continues with Greek pottery art, moves onto Oriental silk screening and medieval triptychs, includes the Sistine Chapel paintings, and eventually adds text to create "modern" comics.  Does that seem reasonable?

[RobAnderson]

I'm late to the thread but just wanted to say I enjoyed hearing Vince's discussion of Neonomicon. I thought Moore told a disturbing, great story, and it seemed like after some attention when it first came out (due to the content), I didn't hear much about it.

I was hooked from that first scene in the first issue with Carcosa and the mural. That was some eerie shit.

Amazing read, if you have the stomach for parts of it...

[leafinsectman (Dan)]

I listened to this episode last week and for some reason I didn't remember the Incognito discussion (must've been too distracted by the awesomeness of Gabe Hardman) so I thought I'd go back and listen. I just read both volumes this weekend and I wish they'd clone Sean Phillips so both Criminal and Incognito could be ongoings. I want more!

Like King DAP, I also realised where they were going with it before the end but I was actually fine with it. Kind of a downer but happy endings feel a little weird (to me, at least) for a book like Incognito. I guess I'm fine with the ending as long as they continue the series. I don't think this'll be the final Incognito (I really hope not) unless the creative team just doesn't feel like doing it anymore. It felt like they were setting some stuff up although it could just seem that way because of how Brubaker chose to write his story (not knowing the ending before getting started).

By the way, when Slaughter was talking about seeing through layers of reality and how someone is watching them and how some force sent the artifact down to earth and started it all, it felt a little like he was becoming self aware. Like he was starting to realise that Brubaker was writing him. That panel where he looks up to the left corner and says "but whatever it is... it's watching us..." I thought he was gonna look at me and say "hey, I can see you!"

Also, am I the only one who got the vibe that Zoe and Slaughter had a thing?

[EmperorZurg]

Only just listened to this podcast while driving through tornadoes in Tennessee last week...  Loved the debate, very meta.  Of course, Vince is absolutely right.  He says all these things that have the same basic structure (e.g. sequential images) are all the same as a result--  all "comics."  But that's like saying that since the basic structures of a pile of poop and, I dunno, say, a rose are the same (i.e. they are both made of an arrangement of atoms), then the poop and the rose are "the same."  While the statement is true in an extremely fundamental sense, it's so fundamental as to be entirely unhelpful in thinking about these objects.  You can acknowledge their ultra-hyper-ground-floor-level sameness but then you have to utterly disregard that if you want to have a meaningful conversation about the rose.  Because it's the rose you want to talk about.  The rose is the "better" thing.  That seemed like what Hardman was trying to get across...  kind of grudgingly saying, yeah, well, OK the storyboard is "comics" but who cares?  You won't have a worthwhile conversation about comics if you're going to bring storyboards into it.   As to what is "comics," I'm reminded of that famous-ish quote from Damon Knight, when asked what is science fiction--  "it's what I'm pointing at when I point at something and say 'That's science fiction.'"  I would choose to adopt this view in considering comics.  I know what things I want to talk about when I'm talking comics, and I know what things I'll yawn and turn away from if you're talking about them as comics and I don't "feel it."  And as to the tangent about what is and isn't art, it reminds me of a time back in college when I went to a dinner party at a professor of art and archeology's house.  He served us wine in Greek kylixes from 500 B.C. or so.  "These were made to be wine cups," he proclaimed.  "These were not made to sit on display in glass cases!"  As I gripped the kylix in both hands, terrified that I might let it slip and shatter on the hard tiled floor, I did wonder, "So is this thing art, then?  Is any juice glass I buy as part of a set at K-Mart art?  Does the art naturally flow from the form, divorced from the function?  Or is it art only if some authority proclaims it to be so?"  Think of art vs. artifact.  To be an artifact, something need only be human-made.  So definitely all art is artifact.  But are all artifacts art?  I WANT to say, "no."  So I WILL say "no."  Still, I would acknowledge finding it utterly impossible to identify some bright line boundary that puts some artifacts on the "art" side but leaves others on the "non-art" side.  I would suspect that Mr. B sees all artifacts as "art" exactly because of this impossibility...

[VinceB]

Is any juice glass I buy as part of a set at K-Mart art?  But are all artifacts art?  I would suspect that Mr. B sees all artifacts as "art" exactly because of this impossibility...

Yes, yes, and YES! YEEEEE!