Look at the mega-grossing feature films drawn from comics: Batman, Superman, The Hulk and more.

I think this seminar was moronic.

Ahhhh, pulphope…So, like a famous Mythbuster, you essentially ‘Reject [their] reality and substitute your own”.

:)

He sounds like a Hollywood sycophant. Everything Joss Whedon writes is great. Comic book artists produce “crappy” pictures. Makes me wonder if he ever watched an episode of BUFFY … which would torpedo the assumption that every Hollywood actor is “great.”

Honestly, why would they schedule a panel for the sole purpose of riling up the fans?

Not everyone who talks about comics on the internet is a creator, or wants to be a creator. Talking as if “we” are all artists or writers is silly and condescending. Some of “us” just love comics and like to take them apart to see how they work — not because we think it’s going to save the medium or make comics better; because it’s fun.

I, for one, like semantic discussions about the Inner Zen of Comics. Like Christopher Moonlight says, if you don’t like it, don’t take part. Shouting down those who do, or making assumptions about them, is rude and unhelpful.

:)

Secondly, even bad art is art, so why are comics not art? Let’s call it art! It’s not against the law to name anything art, and some schmoe on the street can call his statue made of junk art, then why can’t we call the covers of JSA art? I thought that art is an

Thirdly, there are some stinker books sitting on a library shelf right now that few people have read and that deserves to be called literature over, say, Watchmen? Please! Yeah, a random issue of X-men may not be spectacular, but not every “legitimate” writer is a John Grisham. They should stop seeing comics as simply kids fare.

I’d like to ask Wolk if there’s any definition to this question that would make it intelligible.

Exactly what I was thinking. Reminds me of the “what is manga” argument, where you can pull out all sorts of different theories about art form, pacing, style, etc . . . and then turn around and talk about the literal definitions which make the entire debate moot. It’s a matter of personal perception and how each individual perceives what “literature” means to them. :)

Still, in interesting discussion to read. Arguments and discussions on topics that may seem pointless often bring up very valid and interesting ideas, as well. :)

I suspect that if comics (or whatever we’re calling them by then) ever do rise to the level of respectability of film or literature (in the sense of text-only books), then perpetrators in the medium will do anything they can to distance themselves from comparisons to literature or film. Because comics aren’t there yet though, people seem to think that acceptance and respectability hinges on showing how similar to respectable media comics are. Politics and noise, but what are you gonna do?

But that’s me. If you want to keep talking, keep on a-talking.

I find it interesting that some people feel threatened by this conversation. The title of that panel was only meant as a vehicle for the participants to start on. There’s is nothing wrong with people wanting to discuss the inner workings of a subject that they love. If you’re not into it, just don’t take part in it. There’s no need to shout down those who are.