ima give it a whirl.... Mr slott did a wonderful job of pulling on my heart strings for peter parker. i respect the hell out of the story for that
fret not, there are plenty other wacker brand books i read if im not feeling superior
ima give it a whirl.... Mr slott did a wonderful job of pulling on my heart strings for peter parker. i respect the hell out of the story for that
fret not, there are plenty other wacker brand books i read if im not feeling superior
True enough, and for a couple of reasons. It's worth remembering that behind Lee's "Excelsiors!" and talk of the "true believers" being merry Marvels real editors was a skillful hucksterism. Whatever else may have lay behind Lee's glad-handing style, there was absolutely the sales pitch, the bid to get you to buy into Marvel and, ultimately, to buy something. We also need to remember that fans have more access now, they can communicate with more frequency, more familiarity, and with the anonymity the internet affords. We don't know how Lee would've dealt with BongHits420 telling him that he only reads FF on the newsstand because Marvel is out of ideas because Lee never had to deal with that.
Sure, Wacker could just not post here. But then, he looses out and so do the rest of us who see people getting, at worst, as good as they're willing to give as a small price to pay for a forum where fans and pros can interact.
Stan Lee got a restraining order against poor Sheldon Cooper, who only wanted his autograph because he'd missed the signing at the comic store on account of being in jail for contempt of court. By Judge J. Kirby, no less!
"I came to the conclusion that the optimist thought everything good except the pessimist, and the pessimist thought everything bad, except himself." -- G.K. Chesterton
I wrote a blog on science and superheroes! Check it out, if you'd like! http://thoughtfulconduit.com/whatdoesthismean/?p=186
Also on Facebook: http://facebook.com/thoughtfulconduit
Really surprised that Judge Kirby would've sided with Lee. I blame Wheaton for this.
Its been about 20 pages since my original post, but I still want to clarify.
I think if Dan Slott wasn't as close to the situation there wouldn't be any problem with his behavior. The issue is that he in an artist. A writer. A profession that will always draw confliction opinions on your work. Because of the nature of the comic book game there is also a very strong following and community attached. He's going to have opinions flying at him at all time. Why should he be defending his work online against the readers? His fans. People that are entitled to their opinion and come to message threads such as these to express them.
ALSO, he shouldn't have to defend it. If his work gave him the reputation as as good of a storyteller as many of his contemporaries, then he should feel as if his work speaks for itself.
You would never go to a museum to have the artist himself pipe in about how hard he worked on it or how you may not understand the work. No. You are allowed to see the piece undisturbed by the views of the creator because ultimately, those opinions are biased.
We are allowed to go to these forums and speak freely about his or others work. There is no need for him to defend himself or Ramos' work online. He is an adult, and a professional. If he is proud with his work, he should just be happy that people are talking about it.
If posters acted the way they would in a museum, I'd love to see the artist in there defending his stuff.
I know Kevin Nichols through a guy that knows a gal. Small world!
If nihilism didn't take some delight in destruction one might suspect nihilists were an unnaturally morbid sort.
-Theophilus
"Picasso is just shoving this Cubist style down our throats now!"
I know Kevin Nichols through a guy that knows a gal. Small world!
If nihilism didn't take some delight in destruction one might suspect nihilists were an unnaturally morbid sort.
-Theophilus
To a point, freely within the rules of the site owner.
As to the rest of your point, its hard to sit back and watch negative miss information be spread about you and your work. Is he not allowed to attempt to correct the mistakes?
We all know that something said enough times will eventually be viewed as fact on the message boards. Look no further than the "Its Magic, we dont have to explain it" quote. That was never said by anyone other than JMS when he said he was going to paraphrase a conversation he had with "Marvel". It often gets attributed to actual words spoken by Joe Quesada because at the time he was the head of Marvel and the editor in charge of OMD. Quesada never said the quote, as JMS admits its a paraphrasing of what got said and JMS never identified who said it or what was really said.... yet many still believe it to be a direct quote.
Perhaps. But telling a judge that he's at the kiddie table of his profession is...not logical.
WHEAAAAAAAATOOOOOOOOON!!!!
Speaking of which, I thought it was odd how quickly they dropped the arch-enemy angle. Dude intentionally broke Leonard and Penny up to win a bowling tournament and he never got his comeuppance.
Mine, too.
"I came to the conclusion that the optimist thought everything good except the pessimist, and the pessimist thought everything bad, except himself." -- G.K. Chesterton
Oh, and artists do show up to their gallery showings to speak with visitors about their work. In a perfect world, message boards would be the same way.
Unfortunately, we -- well, mostly the rest of you -- are uncultured heathens.
I know Kevin Nichols through a guy that knows a gal. Small world!
If nihilism didn't take some delight in destruction one might suspect nihilists were an unnaturally morbid sort.
-Theophilus
"I came to the conclusion that the optimist thought everything good except the pessimist, and the pessimist thought everything bad, except himself." -- G.K. Chesterton
Bookmarks