home authors guest shorts graphical shorts
Date Written: September 16, 2004Comments:
Average Vote: 3.75
09/23/2004 Will Disney (4): i can tell this is going to be a *great week* !
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone (2): Scott McCloud is crying right now. But +1 for Toast's pained expression in the last panel.
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: Why is Scott McCloud crying, Joe Frankenstone? While the record has shown that I'm not the biggest fan of Litcube's "It's a pants" series, I do think it displays more than just a rudimentary grasp of the ideas outlined in McCloud's long-ass meditation "Understanding Comics" (as well as the book's primary source material, Eisner's more instructional "Comics & Sequential Art"). Litcube's comics often play upon themes of focus, and the "Simplified Reality of the Cartoon"; and in this case, the passage of time (the last panel is noticeably "longer" than the first three). I'm not saying that the "It's a pants" series is at all great, but I do think it does serve as a good (and in fact, unusually clear) illustration of the basic principles of sequential art.
09/23/2004 Will Disney: 'an GIANT SHOE' got a laugh out of me. this is a very persistent line of artwork.
09/23/2004 TheBuyer (4): yup.
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone: Pointing out "Comics & Sequential Art" is better than "Understanding Comics" is like pointing out "Hamlet" is better than "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" -- well sure, but the latter explicitly acknowledges the debt to the former and in fact leads an interested reader there for more information.
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone: Explain what you mean by themes of focus?
09/23/2004 Ferucio P. Chhretan: Wow, what a timely conversation. Too bad I have to go teach a comic class and miss all of it.
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: I wasn't saying that one book was better than the other, although I can see how a quick read of my post could generate that mistake. "Understanding Comics" is, in fact, long-ass. It is more of a wandering meditation on the theory medium whereas "Comics & Sequential Art" is more of a technical examination of the form. Both are good, and worth reading, and I'd be happy to loan them to anyone within earshot.
By focus, I mean that the very fact that we are being shown this scene of all scenes is a joke in and of itself.
I ask again: Why would Scott McCloud find this work so objectionable?
09/23/2004 qualcomm: yes, frankenstone, how dare you imply that pony said one thing was better than another thing? (not that you're not an asshole, too. a big one.)
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone: Scott McCloud is crying not because these shorts aren't good examples of several of his theories -- the role of simplified cartoonishness as the way to universality, good timing in the sequential juxtaposition, etc. -- but rather because they do, in fact, suck, and thus hurt the whole noble enterprise of online comics as anything other than giggles for the stoned. Interesting point about the role of focus on these banal scenes.
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: While I appreciate the point that Frankenstone and Summer are trying to make, I don't really care to dispute their blanket statement that the entire series sucks. Some of them do, some of them don't. I don't think it matters to this discussion. What I object to is Frankenstone and Summer's need to make obscure references for whatever reason. Once in while is fine, but when nearly everything the two of you say has to be Googled to be understood by the lay-person, it starts to get a little irritating. Add to the fact that the McCloud reference made by Frankenstone and Summer was much shallower than it initially appeared ('Scott McCloud likes comics and these are junk comics'), and it's as if my underpants were filled with sand and bees.
09/23/2004 Will Disney: I don't know - these are growing on me. Isn't it sort of ridiculous to say they're bad? Aren't they obviously bad? They seem to me to be funny in their persistence.
09/23/2004 Dick Vomit: Hey let me roll this argument back for a sec and ask the pertinent question: what IS Toast doing to an giant shoe in this short?
09/23/2004 TheBuyer: Hard to say, but it sure shrunk the hell out of that pupil when he stopped.
09/23/2004 scoop: I'm going to have to take issue with you Sausage. I don't think Frankenstone is an asshole, and a big one at that. On what grounds are you making that judgement, that Frankenstone is an asshole, and a big one at that? Does it have something to do with his behavior, that you would say he is an asshole and a big one at that? Just curious, scoop.
09/23/2004 anonymous: Joe, calling online anythings 'noble' suggests you have your head up your ass and are arguing points using neat sounding words without looking them up first. That and your sentence structure reads like a Jon Matza style idiot-trap. Anyway, enough about you, my anonymous 4 stars don't count but I'm with Disney, Pants is growing on me.
Dick, I think whatever toast is doing to an giant shoe, he wasn't done when Tim showed up.
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone: But - but - but - Scott McCloud does like comics! And these are junk comics! Just because my point is obvious doesn't mean it's any less true. Should I have pointed out that the Tim/Toast relationship blatantly rips off the Zot/Jenny relationship?
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: Does it? Does the Tim/Toast relationship really blatantly rip off the Zot/Jenny relationship? Does it? Because I can hear the bees.
09/23/2004 qualcomm: frankentsone, what the hell. pony accuses you of indulging too often in obscure references, and you reply with some shit about Zot & Jenny, whoever the fuck they are. whoever the fuck they are?!
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: The Beeees, Frankenstone, the BEEEEEES
09/23/2004 Joe Frankenstone: What about the sand?
09/23/2004 scoop: What kind of sand are we talking about here Joe? Is it the metaphorical kind like the that found in Dan Cavicchio's "Gardens from the Sand: A Story About Looking for Answers & Finding Miracles." Or are we talking about the brass-tacks kind of sand like the type talked about in encycolediac depth in C.W. Ammen's oft-overlooked classic
"The Complete Handbook of Sand Casting." Which is it, huh bub?
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: Scoop, you could give Patricia Ann Jones a run for her money!
09/23/2004 TheBuyer: Marie Catherine Sophie de Flavigny even, except without the divorce.
09/23/2004 scoop (5): This is fucking awesome!
09/23/2004 Jon Matza: Whoa, how does this qualify as a controversy? This is more like a wussy-versy.
09/23/2004 scoop: It certainly doesn't meet the strict criteria necessary to achieve the coveted "Khan-treversy."
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: I agree. Is anything being said here actually in contention?
09/23/2004 scoop: Yeah, that I am awesome and and cool and that you are a supreme dork.
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: It's good that you're not sure about that. It would be bad for you to die wrong.
09/23/2004 Mr. Pony: Because you are wrong about that. About you being awesome. I am the awesome one, actually. You are the supreme dork, supreme dork.
09/23/2004 TheBuyer: Ya, hey! Except for anon_a trying to pick a fight with the weird kid this isn't controversial at all and that is sooo March. The only real controversy is which of these here dorks is Alpha Dork.
09/24/2004 Ferucio P. Chhretan: I like that the weird kid is Frankenstone for once. If I know who Zot and Jenny are, does that make me a beta-dork? I didn't ref them, I just understand the ref without Google-ation.
09/24/2004 Le Pinson: 'Allo, ma frahnz. Eef you wuud allow me tou mak ah cohmant, ah wuud manshon sat Sot et Zhyenni arr charaktars from se comeek bah Scott Mahkluu, ahlso entietelled "Sot".
09/26/2004 Joe Frankenstone: Finally! It took incomprehensible foreigners to understand me!
09/26/2004 Le Pinson: Whatevair. Yahr refrance; sheh'mad no sans, an' Ah seenk mehbay eet waas faar eet's ahwn sehhk. Congrazhulayshon, raytarrd!
11/9/2004 TREE: I am concerned that this is the most controversal thing since September
12/2/2004 CrazyGuy: I'm not sure I get it.
12/2/2004 scoop: Yeah Litcube, who cares if people, say an ass hole like me for instance, like it or not. Just do some more.