I'm sorry you feel that way. I thought I was being polite and respectful.
Why "murder aside"? If we're using Rwanda as a reference point to what we'd expect from Americans in the immediate aftermath of a catastrophe then murder must be on the table. I don't happen to believe it would be that way so quickly, and if you imagine yourself refraining in any way from any behavior it seems like you don't really either. That is, if you wouldn't murder then maybe others out there wouldn't either. If I wouldn't engage in slavery then maybe others out there wouldn't either. And once we go down that path suddenly we're holding onto civilization just a bit longer, which is part of my premise.
I'm not sure how to answer, it's both I think. It seems a bit pedantic to dissect it in that way. A month is about thirty days, or about four weeks. Any way you slice it, a very short period of time; just days, only a few weeks. These are not people born in the aftermath of civilization, accustomed from birth to a law of the jungle existence. These are people who probably still had plans penciled into their calendar books for the near-future-they-are-now-living-in that has turned upside down. In other words, if you are so chronologically close to a major disaster that you still have a note on the fridge that says "Dentist 11:30 Wednesday the 15th" you're probably not yet a slave trader.
I think you're exactly right, I just found it ham-handed and formulaic.
Agreed, there was no image of her doing so, but we are shown a garbage truck loaded with corpses that, since it's not that kind of book, we must accept didn't get there by magic. She had no helper.
I disagree that "anyone" could load a garbage truck with corpses by themselves, and specifically not a female who by conformation and profession was thin to begin with and who has not been eating properly. The expression "dead weight" isn't exaggeration.
I don't doubt it. We both could, but I'm not optimistic on agreement. I shall follow your example.
Last edited by Comedian; 10-01-2012 at 06:53 PM. Reason: syntax
Guilty. I did say anorexic and I do not know if she actually had a clinical disorder pre-event. What I meant was model-skinny before and not eating right after. Mea culpa.
Trained professionally over two decades. It doesn't matter how "in shape" or out she looks. She was both a model, which has a definition that is generally understood to include thinness, and we see her conformation relative to others, therefore I approximated her at around a hundred pounds. I'm sorry if that is a sticking point. It was intended merely as a marker that might be easily understood indicating low body mass. If I said simply, "A thin girl..." would it alleviate the controversy on this?
Now who's exhibiting prejudice?
I think I understand the scale of the event fine. And we agree, many will react badly. Perhaps our model character was a sociopath even before the event, who knows? I simply maintain that her behavior was unrealistic for its time and place.
Doesn’t this give the lie to the notion that, just because I could live without clumsily done left-wing themes I can’t enjoy a story some would label as left-wing. It goes to your next point and well-crafted.
This is a reasonable point. My opinion, a minority one I know, is that 'Y' is not finely crafted. In fact, the ending has been widely criticized.
-Based on the titles list, it seems like our tastes may be more similar than our discussion might suggest.![]()
I've discovered Locke & Key through this thread, and I am thankful.
Much love to L&K. Didn't think I'd get so involved with a title I knew nothing about, but the few mentions here and brief descriptions had me wanting to know more. I'm on Vol 5 now.
I just picked up the first trade of Plastic Farm because it looked interesting. Anyone familiar with it?
I thought of another one, that book said men can't understand pig Latin. What the hell kind of BS is that?
Animal Man, Superman, Supergirl, Batman and Robin, Batgirl, Wonder Woman, Earth 2, Worlds Finest, The Movement
I was curious as to whether we're some opposing opinions about Y in this thread, took longer than I thought. Each to their own though, it's one of my favourite stories. Just goes to show how people's opinion on such things can vary so much. I didn't think it was too heavy handed for the most part, and most importantly for Y it explored an interesting world and situation and painted some very detailed characters throughout. I loved it, shame not everyone did but that's the way with these things.
Oh and to the poster further up, glad you like Locke and Key - I love it, will be gutted when it ends.
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.
Douglas Adams
Hilarious that your LCS guy threw a tirade because you didn't like the book. Unless you went on a rant, he reacted inappropriately. Then again, some LCS employees are lacking in social skills....Even if you did go on a rant, I can see the guy being annoyed, but there's no need to spaz out because someone doesn't like the same book.
I didn't like Y: The Last Man, either. I couldn't care less about the book being right-wing or left-wing, it just didn't appeal to me. I bought the first 4 TPBs, on a strong recommendation from a friend, and gave them away almost immediately after reading them. The book has a cheap, TV series-of-the-week feel to it.
Aside from Y having more varied elements, due to the length of the storyline, I far prefer the film Children Of Men over Y: The Last Man, when it comes to a storyline about the disintegration of society due to an extreme event. They're both somewhat similar in the basic plotline, but are executed differently.
Y the last man was good but it wasn't groundbreaking.I wouldn't even put it on par with Maus,Watchmen, or Persepolis.
I see the similarity between Y and Children of Men, but Children of Men had a pretty uninspiring last act. I like both but Y is my favourite of the two, not least for the reason just given.
I don't think anyone has suggested it was groundbreaking, just it's a well written story with compelling characters. It does the basics right and builds on it throughout the run ensuring for most (though not all) an ejoyable read. When I started this thread my search was for something that was on the same level as that: focused on the quality of the writing (rather than the idea behind the writing) and something that was an addictive read. Too many books are built around a 'great idea' and live off that throughout the series rather than developing any sense of a world or characters outside of that initial concept. For me, Y did. Vaughan in general excels at that.
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.
Douglas Adams
Bookmarks