Writer, Artist or Character? Most Important? [Archive]

Matt

03-25-2005, 08:45 PM

Yep.
The writer is by far the most important factor in a comic.

If the art is bad, then good storytelling can overcome it. I still bought Flash when the art on it hurt my eyes because the plots were good.

If the character is, to put it bluntly, pretty crap then a writer can still make him or her interesting. An artist can't do that as much as he may try (then again, it's not his job). Catwoman is a good example of this in a way - that character has been written both very poorly (see the end of her last series) and also extremely well (current series).

Of course, if you want a series to fail dismally then all you have to have is a bad writer. It doesn't matter if the art is being done by Alex Ross every single page and it's your favourite character; if the story is garbage then the comic will be garbage. Any example of this, sadly, was the last Spectre series.
I like the Hal Jordan character and the art, after the first few issues, was gorgeous but since the story and plot was horrible ... the series was horrible.

steeler80

03-25-2005, 09:01 PM

I'd have to go with writer first. If a book has artwork that I really don't like, I'll still pick it up if the writing interests me. If a story doesn't work, then I'll just flip through it in the shop to admire the artwork and then set it back down.

Characters come third but it's hard to stay away from Batman even if I don't like the writing (which luckily I'm enjoying Batman and Detective right now).

Paradox

03-25-2005, 09:59 PM

chiefdog tries to force a choice.:

Writer, Artist or Character? Most Important?

Yes .

kossori

03-25-2005, 10:11 PM

I actually prefer writer/artists. Also known as cartoonists. Of course, they don't really do cartoons...
I'm talking Mike Allred, Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez, Jeff Smith, Frank Miller... you get the idea.

I'm enjoying DC's new Solo book just for this reason.

I think it would be this for me:
1. "cartoonist"
2. writer
3. artist
4. character

However, I've been known to drop a book even if I love the writing if the art doesn't fit the style of the writing. Like when Gulacy took over Catwoman. So it goes to show that I won't blindly buy a book based on a writer's name. Although it will get my attention.

titanfan

03-25-2005, 11:26 PM

Writer, imho. A good writer can make any character interesting. I'd rather read a comic book script than look at art without text.

(Although I do think that some characters are so good that almost anyone can write them)

HartyPotter

03-25-2005, 11:44 PM

1. character
2. artist
3. writer

There are only a few titles like Amazing Spider-Man that I would read regardless of the artist. So character and artist are MAJOR. Writer... eh, not so much. As long as the writer's competent, I want to read my characters' monthly adventure, whether or not it's the best of all time.

Beta Ray Bill

03-26-2005, 01:13 AM

1. Writer/Character
2.
3. Artist

I can deal with bad art as long as the story is still there. Some characters I just don't like so I won't read them regardless of who the writer is. Case in point, the new Green Lantern series. Geoff Johns is an awesome writer but I've never been much of a GL fan so I won't pick it up. I don't care if Alan Moore was going to write Spider-Man, I wouldn't buy it because I just don't dig on ol' Petey. That's just me though. I'll still read my favorite character(s) even if the the writer/artist both are a big dud together. I'm a sucker.

Joey

03-26-2005, 03:43 AM

if I don't like the art then it's hard for me to enjoy a series... no matter how good a story is I find it distacting when the art is horrible (see current Wonder Woman issues)

Mon-el

03-27-2005, 10:33 AM

Personally, I follow this order.

1. Character
2. Writer
3. Artist

Jake V

03-27-2005, 11:40 PM

Writer
Character
Artist

There are writers that I'll follow anywhere, and there are characters that I'll at least be curious as to what's going on with them (but not curious enough to buy a book because they're in it).

Artists, not so much. Really bad art can kill my interest in a certain issue, but not a series. On the whole, I don't really care about art, as long as it brings the writers story to life.

comic_lover

03-27-2005, 11:40 PM

Would you collect a comic by a writer you like but with a character you're not that fond of? or a comic with a character you like but with a writer/artist you don't? Of the three categories what order do people put them in with regards to collecting a comic book. For example i'll buy the three core superman and two core batmna books whoever writes them because i love the characters. Alternatively i'll buy anything joe kelly, joe casey or ed brubaker writes and anything jim lee, phil hester or ed mcguiness draws. i guess i'll go
1.writer
2.character
3.artist Actually,to me, I expect good writing and good artwork,and that includes inking,letterers, and colorists too.If one little thing is wrong with a book it will irk me to no end.I don't follow artists,writers,etc I just look for well produced books.It's like a good movie,it's rare to see that one-two combination of good writing and artywork,but hey,once in a while you get it. see the Avengers relaunch with Busiek,Perez,Vey,Smith,and Comicraft.

Bakema NL

03-28-2005, 02:02 AM

Character
Artist
Writer

Yep, I disagree with almost all of you. Because we are talking comic books, I think the artist is the most important, after the character, because there are certain characters I want to read almost regardless who's doing the title. If I want a good story, I will read a book........the ones without the pictures, you might have heard of them. Am I saying comics don't offer good stories? Of course not, they do offer good stories, but because they have pictures to tell/accompany the stories I am of the opinion that art is more important than story, but like a 51% art to 49% story. Because however much you like certain art, you can only put up with mediocre or bad storytelling for a period of time. It will get irritating and may make you drop a title you really don't want to. But the same goes vice versa, a good story with bad art will make me drop a title too eventually (take the last few Robin books for example, stories were ok, but the art was horrible in my opinion, shouldn't have gone on for any more months otherwise I would have dropped the title, because of the art, not the story).
I haven't addressed "Character" and that one is on top of my list. I certainly go for some characters first, like Batman, Spiderman, Superman and lots of others. I can take mediocre stories/art (or even bad, but not that long) for a while, usually things pick up along the line. And I think there are not that many bad artists, usually it's more the case of a certain style you don't like and I can put up with that if it's for a short term period, only because I like the character. Best of all is a good story with good art. Put that on top of your favorite character and you are a happy comic book reader.....I know I am. :)

dancj

03-28-2005, 02:36 AM

I actually prefer writer/artists. Also known as cartoonists. Of course, they don't really do cartoons...
I'm talking Mike Allred, Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez, Jeff Smith, Frank Miller... you get the idea.

I'm enjoying DC's new Solo book just for this reason.

I've only got the Tim Sale issue of Solo, but most of the stories are written by other people. It didn't seem very 'solo' to me...

For me it's
1 - Writer
2 - Artist
3 - Character

Same as most people. I bet this would have been different during the spectator boom of the 90's

Reptisaurus!

03-28-2005, 06:43 AM

1. Artist/Writer: Note that these aren't strictly defined terms. There's a huge difference between a Marvel Style book where the artist is as much a writer as the writer, sorta, and has complete control over the pacing and plot and a 76 page Alan Moore opus where every. single. detail. is spelled out for the artist. I might give a slight edge to the artist because we can see the artist's craft right there on the page, while the writer's work is interpreted by the artist. We get a "purer" sense of the artist than the writer, if that makes any sense....

3. Character: Unless it's an obscure character that I haven't seen in a while. I'm slightly more likely to buy, say, a Daredevil (who I love) book than a Batman (who I like less) comic, but it completely depends on the creative team.

On the other hand, I'll snap up *anything* with Enemy Ace or Stegron the Dinosaur Man in it, 'cause I hardly ever get a chance to see them.

Forsaken_One

03-28-2005, 09:11 AM

I've only got the Tim Sale issue of Solo, but most of the stories are written by other people. It didn't seem very 'solo' to me...

Solo is simply a focus on a specific person. It isn't just that person, but that person is the focus and links together the whole issue.

I mean, would you really want someone who just draws and admits they can't write to do both on their Solo? Or a writer who's best drawing consists of stick figures?

Sage Shinigami

03-28-2005, 10:11 AM

1. Writer
2.
3. Character/Artist

The writer is everything to me. If Grant Morrison starts writing about Ephraim the Retarded Rabbit, and manages to do a good story, I WILL buy it. Even if his favorite artist, the (highly overrated) superstar Frank Quietly draws it--I'll still buy it.

The only case I place the character above the writer is when the writer is screwing the character up. Like for instance, Geoff Johns is likely my second favorite writer, but I likely won't wanna pick up his JLA, 'cause he'll have Bats getting punked by the ENTIRE team. It should be the reverse because, if Bats isn't that uber-human that even the superheroes fear, he's totally useless in the JLA...

Artist is at the bottom always though. If the character's done right, and the writer's great, I can deal with bad art. Though usually, you aren't gonna see this.

dancj

03-29-2005, 03:19 AM

Solo is simply a focus on a specific person. It isn't just that person, but that person is the focus and links together the whole issue.

I mean, would you really want someone who just draws and admits they can't write to do both on their Solo? Or a writer who's best drawing consists of stick figures?

I'm sure the current approach makes for the better comics - it's just that the title is a bit of a lie. Are they doing ones focused on writers?

Forefinger

03-29-2005, 03:24 AM

I'm going with writer as well. Take James Robinson's Starman series for example. Brand new character, Jack Knight, that was the son of one of the JSA, Ted Knight. Ted wasn't even one of the more popular members of the JSA. And at the beginning, Tony Harris' art wasn't all that great. Just based on his writing, the series became one of the best of all time.

Forsaken_One

03-29-2005, 09:07 AM

I'm sure the current approach makes for the better comics - it's just that the title is a bit of a lie. Are they doing ones focused on writers?
Yes, I believe the second issue focused on a writer.

Bat-Mite

03-29-2005, 12:35 PM

Err... no. Solo is focused on artists. The second issue was all about Richard Corben, who is more famous for his art than his writing.

Bat-Mite

03-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Yep, I disagree with almost all of you. Because we are talking comic books, I think the artist is the most important, after the character, because there are certain characters I want to read almost regardless who's doing the title. If I want a good story, I will read a book

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v431/Bat-Mite/suicide_01_350x298.gif

One of these days, I should learn to stop reading stuff in the internet.

Forsaken_One

03-29-2005, 12:49 PM

Err... no. Solo is focused on artists. The second issue was all about Richard Corben, who is more famous for his art than his writing.
You're right, I was thinking of writer/artist Paul Pope in the third issue. I associate him as a writer myself, but he is both.

Bakema NL

03-29-2005, 01:16 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v431/Bat-Mite/suicide_01_350x298.gif

One of these days, I should learn to stop reading stuff in the internet.

Yeah, it is difficult to look at things from another person's point of view, isn't it? What the hell do I know with only 31 000+ comics, I'm just a guy who has only recently started reading comics. :rolleyes:
And you forgot the next part of the post where I explain myself......doesn't surprise me.

But maybe you're right about stop reading stuff on the internet.....we might agree on something there. :)

muimi

03-29-2005, 01:24 PM

Bakema NL

03-29-2005, 01:40 PM

Writer. Writer. Writer. Followed closely by character.

My main motivation for reading comic books is the story. Therefore a good writer is key as is my interest in the character itself.

I love the character of Robin/Tim Drake but Willingham's writing coupled with Scott's pencils? There's no power on earth that can make me buy the issues by that team.

The artist before that almost made me drop the title, it was horrendous. But I read a new team was coming in so I stuck with it, shouldn't have lasted any longer though. A character I like, story was ok, but the art was so bad I was on the verge of dropping the title, it irritated me that much. Different persons, different viewpoints.

Reptisaurus!

03-29-2005, 01:47 PM

The artist before that almost made me drop the title, it was horrendous. But I read a new team was coming in so I stuck with it, shouldn't have lasted any longer though. A character I like, story was ok, but the art was so bad I was on the verge of dropping the title, it irritated me that much. Different persons, different viewpoints.

I'll drop a book in a second if the artist gets on my nerves.

I really like Greg Rucka's Wonder Woman, ferinstance, but the artist just kept. gettin'. on. my. nerves.

Dropped. Ditto for Birds of Prey and Ultimate Fantastic Four.

Bakema NL

03-29-2005, 02:21 PM

I'll drop a book in a second if the artist gets on my nerves.

I really like Greg Rucka's Wonder Woman, ferinstance, but the artist just kept. gettin'. on. my. nerves.

Dropped. Ditto for Birds of Prey and Ultimate Fantastic Four.

Exactly. Comics tell a story through pictures and words. When I ask myself why I read comics, it's mainly for the art, in combination with the story, sure. But art is more important otherwise I could just as well pick up a good novel, they are better anyway in delivering you a real solid story if written well. Not that comics are a lesser form of entertainment or something, of course not, but they have another way of telling you a story and a very important factor are the drawn pictures. Characters and art are the things that get me into comics first, that's what you see right away, what draws you in most of the time (only new characters are a shot in the dark sometimes)..........the story always comes afterwards anyway because you still have to read the comic first before you can have a solid opinion about it. You may know a writer from previous work, but in my opinion that's no guarantee I might like a book, maybe I don't give a hoot about the character(s). A solid written book with an artist I like doesn't necessarily make for a fun book to read in my opinion.

It's funny to see the trend has shifted from "hot" artist to "hot" writer over the years, to the point a lot of people almost seem to forget comics have to do with drawn pictures too. Like they want to make up for comics regarded as kiddy stuff.........hey, the stories are just great, it's all about the stories, you only have to look a little at the pics, but they are not really important, it's the story that counts......why don't you read comics, I don't understand.......
Boatloads of people followed the Image founders like crazy when they started out, art was certainly the hot issue back then, because they were all artists founding their own company, I didn't see writers doing it. But we're at the point this could very well be the case. Funny to see it happen, what will the next hype be? A lot of the Image stuff fell through, because the stories were too thin, I agree on that, so writing is important, of course it is. For me, like I said, 51% art, 49% story and only when I like the character(s).

Bat-Mite

03-29-2005, 02:26 PM

Yeah, it is difficult to look at things from another person's point of view, isn't it?

If that point of view happens to be "Sure, I'll buy any piece of crap as long as it has Spider-Man in it, cause hey! It's comics and they are not supposed to be good anyway" then... yeah, It's hard for me to loot at things from that point of view.

What the hell do I know with only 31 000+ comics,

My dog has hundreds of fleas, and that doesn't make him a flea expert. Makes me a crappy dog owner, though.

And you forgot the next part of the post where I explain myself......doesn't surprise me.

I don't care about the "why" cause the "what" is all kinds of wrong by itself.

But maybe you're right about stop reading stuff on the internet.....we might agree on something there.

Alas, the damage is done, and I have lost all hope in humanity already.

Bakema NL

03-29-2005, 03:00 PM

If that point of view happens to be "Sure, I'll buy any piece of crap as long as it has Spider-Man in it, cause hey! It's comics and they are not supposed to be good anyway" then... yeah, It's hard for me to loot at things from that point of view.

Aaaah, you are assuming here. Got it all wrong there. And what's crap to you doesn't have to be crap to someone else, it's all very subjective material we're talking about.

My dog has hundreds of fleas, and that doesn't make him a flea expert. Makes me a crappy dog owner, though.

The dog doesn't have the brain to be an expert in the field of fleas. Like I said, comics are subjective material. The thing I dislike most about comics, music, movies, books, games and all are the people who are telling other people what to read, watch or play, because they, in all their wisdom, know what is good and what's not.......doesn't work that way, same as telling somebody is reading crap.

I don't care about the "why" cause the "what" is all kinds of wrong by itself.

Good attitude to have a nice and open discussion.

Alas, the damage is done, and I have lost all hope in humanity already.

You come across as a Mr. know-it-all with this attitude, making assumptions based on nothing, not going into the "why" and "what" a person has to say, the die-hard comic fan who isn't pleased with a lot of things because he has seen it all and knows it better..............but you said it, you lost all hope in humanity.

Forsaken_One

03-29-2005, 03:05 PM

Guys, will you take it to private messager if you want to continue this conversation please? For me? :)

Bakema NL

03-29-2005, 03:15 PM

Guys, will you take it to private messager if you want to continue this conversation please? For me? :)

Maybe it would be better......but no thanks, I checked some of his posts to see what I'm dealing with here...........not worth my time, the typical embittered comic book collector who should move on to something else maybe. And I'll leave it at that.

Bat-Mite

03-29-2005, 04:20 PM

Guys, will you take it to private messager if you want to continue this conversation please? For me?

Just for you, I will only make one more post and this will probably be the end of the whole thing, since I am apparently not worth the time of the extremely busy Bakema, who right now is trying to save a pack of kittens from Cancer, and has no time to discuss about his 30 million comic book collection... which sadly all happen to be issues of Young Blood #1.

I shall ignore all his attempts to insult me, and go right to the meat of the business. I shall explain why he said something that is horribly wrong.

If I want a good story, I will read a book

Now this... now this just irks me.

What does Bakema wants to tell us with this? That comic stories are not supposed to be good? If they are good, fine, but that's not important? That comics are incapable of telling a good story, or as good as other media? Whatever it is, it's not a praise for comics.

This is the kind of ignorance about comics that irks me from people who don't read comics. The fact that it is coming from someone who has enough comics to build his own little fort out of paper mache just makes it repugnant.

Bakema is also making a huge disservice to the men and women who write comics by completely undermining their contribution. Did he ever stop to think that, perhaps, the reason he likes Spider-Man is because a writer made him likable in the first place? Apparently not.

Ontir

03-29-2005, 05:02 PM

1: Artist: It's a visual medium, and the art has to have something going for it, or I won't buy it.

2: Writer: I'll pick it up if it's pretty, but I won't continue, if it's a horrible read.

3: Character: The character(s) are less of a consideration, in general, because a good writer can make pretty much any character fascinating. Miller's Daredevil, Morrison's Animal Man, and Len Wein's X-Men being prime examples of "dead" properties being launched through the roof.

Captain Jim

03-29-2005, 09:00 PM

Guys, disagree all you want, but lay off the insults, please.

Suzanne

03-29-2005, 09:19 PM

For me, characters come first in terms of importance. Artist and writer are neck-in-neck.

CLavery

03-30-2005, 03:07 AM

1. Writer- For me I think a good writer can make a good comic book with a crap character and crap art. But amazing art and an amazing character writen by a crap writer cannot make a good comic book.

2. Art- With the lack of a good artist stories can be hard to read due to sheer bad art and bad layouts.

3. Character- It is my strong belief that with the right creative team any character in the world can be interesting in a comic.

Bakema NL

03-30-2005, 01:52 PM

Just for you, I will only make one more post and this will probably be the end of the whole thing, since I am apparently not worth the time of the extremely busy Bakema, who right now is trying to save a pack of kittens from Cancer, and has no time to discuss about his 30 million comic book collection... which sadly all happen to be issues of Young Blood #1.

I shall ignore all his attempts to insult me, and go right to the meat of the business. I shall explain why he said something that is horribly wrong.

Now this... now this just irks me.

What does Bakema wants to tell us with this? That comic stories are not supposed to be good? If they are good, fine, but that's not important? That comics are incapable of telling a good story, or as good as other media? Whatever it is, it's not a praise for comics.

This is the kind of ignorance about comics that irks me from people who don't read comics. The fact that it is coming from someone who has enough comics to build his own little fort out of paper mache just makes it repugnant.

Bakema is also making a huge disservice to the men and women who write comics by completely undermining their contribution. Did he ever stop to think that, perhaps, the reason he likes Spider-Man is because a writer made him likable in the first place? Apparently not.

Since I am enjoying your presence here so much I'll continue.
You have said yourself you don't want to know the why's and what's......and that's obvious, because you totally ignore the sentence after the mentioning of books as a good read. I'll quote it for you, so you can see for yourself, guess you missed it, lol.
Comics tell a story through pictures and words. When I ask myself why I read comics, it's mainly for the art, in combination with the story, sure. But art is more important otherwise I could just as well pick up a good novel, they are better anyway in delivering you a real solid story if written well. Not that comics are a lesser form of entertainment or something, of course not, but they have another way of telling you a story and a very important factor are the drawn pictures.
A book has many more words between the covers as opposed to comics, so there's a lot more to do storywise, lots more indepth storytelling possible, nobody can deny that. Are comics worse in telling stories? No, they're different, another approach, of course, there are pictures to go with it. A lot of people don't see the quality in comics. I do, otherwise I wouldn't be reading them, so I really don't know why you mentioned this, because you are obviously wrong.
There you have it Mr. Mite. All explained for you, no disservice done to any comic book writer, I like the stories very much, otherwise I wouldn't buy all the comics I do. Like I said, just one more time, just for you, it seems you read too hastily all the time........51% art, 49% story......that's what I buy comics for...and characters come first.
All Youngblood #1........assuming again my Mite, second time and alas, wrong the second time around too, better luck next time....and after it saying you ignore my insulting....tsk tsk.
And what's "cancer" to you, you use it a lot. Saw you mentioning all people disagreeing with you could die from throat cancer in another thread............guess the moderators didn't see that one.

Ilash

03-30-2005, 02:07 PM

Bakema NL

03-30-2005, 02:19 PM

1. Writing - If the story, characterization and general writing style isn't good I won't bother. That is why I read comics after all.

2. Art - Bad art can spoil a story so it is very important (comics are a visual medium after all) but I won't buy a book based solely on the art.

3. Character - I don't usually pick up a book based simply on a character. Brilliant characterization - yes but based purely on some familiar character - not normally. After all, a good writer could make me want to read a book with characters that I had no previous interest in (Astonishing X-Men) while bad writing could scare me away from a character that I do like (the regular Superman books most of the time).

Ok, this is what's important to you, no problem. But you won't buy a book based solely on the art. While that's all fine of course, but you still have to read a book before you know it's to your liking or not.............when you're dealing with a writer you don't or barely know. If you know a writer from previous work the choice can be an easy one, although the new work could disappoint you too of course.
The same goes for character. If you know a character from previous stuff which you liked because of the writing and art, you are most likely attracted to it, I know I am. It could very well be I'm disappointed with the new stuff by another team.......art is easy recognizable, but again, you first have to read some of it to really know it's for you or not.

Bat-Mite

03-30-2005, 02:25 PM

Since I am enjoying your presence here so much I'll continue.

Dude, when you say "not worth my time" it is usually a good idea to show it, otherwise it makes it look like you really have nothing better to do with your time.

Look, I'll do you and the rest of of the people reading this thread a favor and take this to Private Messaging.

Ilash

03-30-2005, 02:32 PM

Ok, this is what's important to you, no problem. But you won't buy a book based solely on the art. While that's all fine of course, but you still have to read a book before you know it's to your liking or not.............when you're dealing with a writer you don't or barely know. If you know a writer from previous work the choice can be an easy one, although the new work could disappoint you too of course.
The same goes for character. If you know a character from previous stuff which you liked because of the writing and art, you are most likely attracted to it, I know I am. It could very well be I'm disappointed with the new stuff by another team.......art is easy recognizable, but again, you first have to read some of it to really know it's for you or not.

Um, no offense but I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Could you clarify a bit?

Bakema NL

03-30-2005, 02:32 PM

Dude, when you say "not worth my time" it is usually a good idea to show it, otherwise it makes it look like you really have nothing better to do with your time.

Look, I'll do you and the rest of of the people reading this thread a favor and take this to Private Messaging.

You are consistent, I'll give you that, you indeed never read on........"Since I am enjoying your presence here so much I'll continue.".........explained again for your information. And what I do with my time is my own business............wow, how I like to be on a forum, it's the same everywhere, gotta love it. :D
And don't bother with the private messaging, we're done I think. :)

Bat-Mite

03-30-2005, 02:46 PM

Well, if you don't want to defend your crazy ideas in private, that's that for the discussion.

Captain Jim

03-30-2005, 08:05 PM

Guys! Enough!

CLavery

03-31-2005, 12:01 AM

Ok, this is what's important to you, no problem. But you won't buy a book based solely on the art. While that's all fine of course, but you still have to read a book before you know it's to your liking or not.............when you're dealing with a writer you don't or barely know. If you know a writer from previous work the choice can be an easy one, although the new work could disappoint you too of course.
The same goes for character. If you know a character from previous stuff which you liked because of the writing and art, you are most likely attracted to it, I know I am. It could very well be I'm disappointed with the new stuff by another team.......art is easy recognizable, but again, you first have to read some of it to really know it's for you or not.

I totaly agree with you. Art and Character are also a big factors when I buy comics. Just because they are in 2nd and 3rd doesn't make them meaningless. I just mean that I am more likely to jump at a comic because of the writer than the art or the character. But may still buy a comic because of its art or because of a character.

dancj

04-01-2005, 03:29 AM

A book has many more words between the covers as opposed to comics, so there's a lot more to do storywise, lots more indepth storytelling possible, nobody can deny that.

I can. In a well written and drawn comic, pictures offer possibilities that aren't there for prose novels, but there's nothing you can do in a prose novel that you can't do in a comic

Reptisaurus!

04-01-2005, 03:34 AM

I can. In a well written and drawn comic, pictures offer possibilities that aren't there for prose novels, but there's nothing you can do in a prose novel that you can't do in a comic

Right. Read Understanding Comics. Then go read Promethea.

I honestly and genuinely prefer comics to books, just 'cause I think there's more stuff you can do with them. They have more narrative impact than plain 'ol text.

glennsim

04-01-2005, 09:06 AM

I'd say they are all equally important, although "character" is a loose and vague term. Within the realm of "character" you have "how long have I been reading the character", "is the character a part of the larger shared universe", "does the character have a background I can relate to", "does the character have new and interesting powers and origins", etc.

Just a few highlights of my purchasing decision-making over the years:

I love Wonder Woman when Perez relaunched it. When Chris Marrinan took over the art, I was heavily disappointed, but I stuck with it because the stories were OK. Then the stories became focused on things like when Vanessa gets her period and I dropped it altogether. Returned when Byrne took over the book. Wasn't happy with some of his writing choices either, but didn't find them poor enough to drop the book again - they might have been poorly-though-out adventures, but at least they were adventurous adventures.

Stopped reading Fantastic Four near the end of the first series, because Reed was dead and it had really stopped being the Fantastic Four for me.

Wasn't interested in Chase, because I couldn't find myself interested in a normal person going up against supernatural forces. Sorta like why I never could get into X-Files.

No interest in the Ultimate books, since they aren't a part of the normal canon. I should mention, though, that if Marvel were to drop all of the regular books and only publish Ultimate books, I'd start buying them and try to get the back-issues of the rest.

Not interested in New Frontier, because it's not in continuity.
Breach didn't really capture my interest as a character, so I haven't bought it.

Gave the latest Daredevil a try for a while, but found the stories boring and the art hard on the eyes. Why is everything so dark?

And so on...

Bakema NL

04-01-2005, 11:28 AM

I can. In a well written and drawn comic, pictures offer possibilities that aren't there for prose novels, but there's nothing you can do in a prose novel that you can't do in a comic

Sure, comics lend themselves for stuff books cannot do, it works vice versa.
And you are correct, there's nothing you can do in a prose novel that you can't do in a comic..........but it's rare that comics achieve their full potential in this.
And Understanding comics is required reading, I have it. Prometheus I don't know, point me to it, I'm curious.
And of course you can do more with comics, if only for the combination of pictures and words. The main difference is with books there's a lot left to the imagination, more than with comics, you have to make the pictures in your head. Both of them, books and comics, are great, wouldn't do without either.