Lest I be called (oh most egregious of internet rhetorical insults) a hypocrite, I thought I should point out that some of the lads and I have been having a larf at Pat's expense over on the Journal boards. Nothing cruel, just sharing stories from the trench, the incredibly pointless trench.

There, I've said it, and now I'm gone (since I know I'm not welcome here).

You have only yourself to blame for that Timmy, and this thread belongs in the Gutters.

Hypocrite.

edited to include "with all due respect, that is."

[This message has been edited by jack to remove the word "fucking" (edited 02-01-2001).]

[This message has been edited by jack (edited 02-05-2001).]

Thanks for the heads-up, but I'm not going to bother checking this out.

If I cared what the Journalistas thought about me, I'd never get any sleep at night.

All I can say is this: For the past 15 years, Groth and company have been arguing that their little pet concepts are the future of comics and the only chance of cultural significance for the form. And in 15 years, it still hasn't happened--nobody's rushing to make movies or license or even write scholarly articles (which the Journalistas would probably find more significant) about Love and Rockets or Hate or any of their other prime choices.

I've steadfastly said this stuff is too "down" for the general public...and I'm consistently proven right.

Pat:
"...nobody's rushing to make movies or license or even write scholarly articles (which the Journalistas would probably find more significant) about Love and Rockets or Hate or any of their other prime choices."

Really? I guessed you missed that thing about MTV doing a "Hate" cartoon (although that never happened), the Ghostworld movie coming out, or the several articles about Jimmy Corrigan which are more scholarly than your average Superman article.

Pat, you consistently prove that except for the mainstream, you have an utter lack of knowledge and near disdain for the rest of the comics world.

[img]/resources/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Have a nice day.

I have no idea why Tim Miller is over here baiting you, and I resent being de facto characterized as one of the "lads" -- which is the kind of Team Comics clubby crap that makes these message boards a pain on which to participate.

Pat, someone asked on the Journal message board why the Journal "hated" you so much. I pointed out that to the best of my knowledge no one HATED you, even in the realm of hating semi-public comics figures, and described the long history of our argumentation including my analysis of why you've been such a choice opponent. That description may not be flattering, but it's not having fun at your expense -- some reader asked an honest question, and frankly, that reader seems to remain skeptical.

By the way, I think your description of Gary and Kim's essential failure is extremely wrongheaded. First, you're ignoring the half of their magazine's mission that isn't about art but about ethical business practices across the board. Second, they're not in the licensed property business, they're in the comics business, and they're in their 25th year of publishing. Third, Fantagraphics artists do receive their fair share of high-profile outside work and recognition, including academic attention through being taught and written about.

I mean jeez, Pat, they're not perfect, and they're not cultural-changing juggernauts on a par with Disney (thank God), but they're not completely irrelevant, hapless failures, either.

[edited for naughty words]

[This message has been edited by Tom Spurgeon (edited 02-01-2001).]

Not to mention that someone's making a "Ghost World" movie, not to mention the reams of praise Joe Sacco and Chris Ware have been getting in the mainstream press... yadda, yadda...

I love Pat O'Neill.

Ummm... Pat? Movies aren't comics. Licensing isn't comics. Comics are comics. I doubt that Groth and co have been proclaiming that in the future, the kids would all be wearing Hopey Underoos.

Which isn't to say that there hasn't been licensing, adaptation, film deals and commentary on the Fantagraphics-style of books (if one can somehow lump Love&Rockets, Critters, and Voice Of Submission into one catch-all category...)

Let me guess: I'm one of those hard-core Journal supporters, right?

[edited to add that last comment.]

[This message has been edited by NatGertler (edited 02-01-2001).]

And lets not forget OKAY Cola!

------------------
Rick Veitch
Invites You To Read THE DAILY RARE BIT FIENDS
updated every day along with news of the world's most popular artform!
THE COMICON.COM DAILY SPLASHis always refreshing!
www.comicon.com/splash

The Ghost World movie doesn't count without the attendant merchandising that Pat mentioned--fast-food tie-ins, video games, posable action figures, etc. Otherwise, how can Fantagraphics make any claim to cultural significance?

You mongoloids need to read more closely: Pat said "rushing" to make movie tie-ins, etcetera. Obviously, he's aware that a few, intellectually inept and laborious attempts have been made over a span of time that, frankly, is unacceptable to adapt the wretchedly lugubrious works of the FBI creators for the aesthetically starved masses.

Thankfully, they have 7th Heaven while waiting for the disappointment that inevitably will be "Ghostworld: the Movie."