Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... 9 10 >
Topic Options
#461708 - 04/03/01 01:25 PM Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
The OC Offline
Member

Registered: 03/27/02
Posts: 1985
...at least for a while. Read the gory details at http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29468-2001Apr2.html

It's worth noting that the Washington Post is, effectively, the Cho-ster's hometown paper.

------------------
"If you pull your head outa your butt, you'll see things a whole bunch clearer."
-- Witty but intolerant Chris Medellin, to popular Otto Chelman

[This message has been edited by Otto Chelman (edited 04-03-2001).]
_________________________
Posted by Otto Chelman

"You have [my] contempt." -- Alan Light to disappointed TBG subscriber.

Top
#461709 - 04/03/01 02:14 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
John Roberson Offline
Member

Registered: 11/25/98
Posts: 492
Loc: Chicago
Given what nasty backstabbing shit Cho was saying about the presence of Schulz being unfair to younger cartoonists, like, ahem, Frank Cho...ha. Karma's a bitch.
_________________________
John Roberson
Bottomless Studio
Creator of Vitriol, and the upcoming October Surprise, and FALLING SKY...

Top
#461710 - 04/03/01 02:56 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
Munch Offline
Member

Registered: 06/23/00
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally posted by John Roberson:
Given what nasty backstabbing shit Cho was saying about the presence of Schulz being unfair to younger cartoonists, like, ahem, Frank Cho...ha. Karma's a bitch.


Personal issues aside, it's a shame that the Post is considering replacing what I think is a funny and beautifully rendered strip with, well, crap. I've already called the Post's comics comment line three times about it...

Munch

Top
#461711 - 04/03/01 03:40 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
John Roberson Offline
Member

Registered: 11/25/98
Posts: 492
Loc: Chicago
It's no personal issue for me. Not too incredibly long back, Cho was actively stumping for Schulz' space, pretending it was for the opportunities of ALL cartoonists, on the basis that Schulz had been around forever and the space could go to much better use. Then Schulz died, solving Cho's problem.

This is one reason people are annoyed at Cho. Personally, far as I'm concerned I'm totally indifferent to his strip. Reading a few weeks of it was enough to realize it's a slicker-drawn dumbed-down BLOOM COUNTY. Yawn.

But regarding his strip--Cho is reaping karma. I have no sympathy.
_________________________
John Roberson
Bottomless Studio
Creator of Vitriol, and the upcoming October Surprise, and FALLING SKY...

Top
#461712 - 04/03/01 08:04 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
toddfrye Offline
Member

Registered: 03/29/99
Posts: 244
Loc: Harrogate TN USA
I admit not to having read any Liberty Meadows (I think that's grammatically correct phrasing), but, given Cho's illustrating skills, I would like to see him take on an adventure strip.
_________________________
----------------------------------
Over 17,800 comic book covers

Top
#461713 - 04/03/01 08:35 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
Philip Looney Offline
Member

Registered: 05/28/00
Posts: 2029
Loc: Columbia, SC, USA
Didn't the Post try this once before, only to have a mass of readers clamor for the return of Liberty Meadows?
And for all that people say about Frank's writting style being a copy of this or that; with out Bloom County & Calvin & Hobbes around, it beats half the stuff out there.
_________________________
Yes, I\'ve started a blog too.

Pop-Town Productions - Comics for all!

Top
#461714 - 04/03/01 10:52 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
Howard Offline
Member

Registered: 06/21/00
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally posted by John Roberson:
It's no personal issue for me. Not too incredibly long back, Cho was actively stumping for Schulz' space, pretending it was for the opportunities of ALL cartoonists, on the basis that Schulz had been around forever and the space could go to much better use. Then Schulz died, solving Cho's problem.


John, where did this happen? I remember there was a rumor that Cho was stumping for the space when Schulz announced his intention to retire. But according to Cho, this was something he was *planning* to say in his newsletter, but never did. According to him, during Mark Wheatley's fact-checking with The Comics Journal, prior to releasing the newsletter, that this 'stumping' was made public.

To quote:
Quote:

HP: Some folks also seem upset about a campaign, orchestrated by you, to have Liberty Meadows replace Peanuts now that Charles Schulz is retiring. They seem to liken you to someone hovering outside a rent controlled apartment whose current occupant is packing to move out.

FC: (laughs) Okay, here's the story. I have a semi-monthly newsletter that I send out to the Internet fans who send me e-mail. On each newsletter I talk about what's going on in my comic. Before I send out each newsletter, I have Mark Wheatley and a couple of other people check the facts, and if the facts are wrong, they just delete it, or don't send it out or correct it.

My syndicate told me they were getting all this news from other sales reps, from other syndicates, that Charles Schulz was retiring and everyone in the industry was scrambling to fill Charles Schulz's slot. Every syndicate was sending out their sales force to promote their syndicate's strip. Everyone knew in the industry that Charles Schulz had repeatedly said that once he retired or died, the strip would stop. Period. The sales force director of my syndicate told me this, and everyone else--other cartoonists--said, "You've got to self promote; it's the only way you can survive in this industry."

So in my last newsletter, I said, basically, "After a fantastic 50 year run, Charles Schulz is retiring. If you like my strip, write or call your Features Editor." And I also put in a note that said "Charles Schulz is retiring and his syndicate, against his will, will reprint Peanuts," because, again, based on what the sales force director told me. So I gave this newsletter to Mark to check the facts, and it turned out it was wrong--it turned out Charles Schulz did give permission to run the reprints in the newspapers. So, Mark Wheatley took that part out.

From what I gather, Mark passed it in email to Steve Conley and Rick Veitch at Comicon.com [http://www.comicon.com] to check the facts and see if this was correct. I think Rick contacted The Comics Journal to get Charles Schulz's phone number, and [they] asked him "What's it for?" The next thing I know, I got a call from The Comics Journal saying, "Who's your source?" I didn't tell them it was my syndicate--my syndicate's sales force director. I didn't want to bring them into it. So, I told them I got it over e-mail from a couple of fans. They in not so many worlds called me a liar. My newsletter with the Charles Schulz reprint decision never went out --but then I get some news from Kim Thompson of The Comics Journal, and...

TheComicStore.com: ...by way of The Comics Journal, it kind of went out anyway.

FC: Right. The Comics Journal is the one who spread the rumor.


The entire article can be read here .
_________________________
Howard Price
Sr. Editor
The Trades : Entertainment industry analysis since 1997

Top
#461715 - 04/04/01 09:07 AM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
gene phillips Offline
Member

Registered: 09/30/99
Posts: 5910
Loc: Houston, TX
Howard,
Thanks very much for supplying this link, as I admire Cho's work and wanted to see him comment on matters like the self-nomination and the "Bloom County" influence as well as the Schultz thing.

And I think he's got a point: if he as a judge should disallow consideration of his own work for an award, then shouldn't any REGULAR employee of Fantagraphics disallow consideration of Fantagraphics work in a "Best 100" list? No matter how you break down the differing duties of a judge and a critic, the aim is the same: to tout loudly the virtues of a given work or works. Kim Thompson's gone on record here as noting that very few of the nominees in the whole 100 were published by Fantagraphics (tho I for one WOULD include reprintings like Prince Valiant), and I basically respect this distinction (tho it would surely be a different matter if more of the "top 10" were from Fanta). But if nothing else I wish the comparison would give the Cho-haters some pause to reflect.

[This message has been edited by gene phillips (edited 04-04-2001).]

Top
#461716 - 04/04/01 11:50 AM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
In other words, Gene, you think the COMICS JOURNAL Top 100 list should have excluded POPEYE, POGO, FEIFFER, LITTLE ORPHAN ANNIE, and PRINCE VALIANT, and if we'd done it a few years later, KRAZY KAT? Huh. That's certainly an interesting approach. (Does this mean if Kitchen Sink's staffers had done a list like that they would have had to exclude THE SPIRIT, THE JUNGLE BOOK, POLLY AND HER PALS, KRAZY KAT, LI'L ABNER, and STEVE CANYON to avoid those "conflicts of interest"?)

There are so many differences between Cho nominating WORK THAT HE HIMSELF WROTE AND DREW for an award that is LATER VOTED UPON BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC (giving his win a sheen of objective, popular legitimacy) as opposed to the JOURNAL critics nominating WORK THAT WAS PUBLISHED BY THE COMPANY THEY'RE WORKING FOR that is LATER CLEARLY LISTED AS A JUDGMENT BY THESE SPECIFIC PEOPLE.

Cho himself basically admitted that nominating himself was a dumb, tacky thing to do and the criticism was deserved, so I don't understand why this has to be dragged back into the spotlight, and I certainly don't understand how anyone can imply that Frank Cho saying Frank Cho is the greatest cartoonist of his generation is comparable to Kim Thompson and Gary Groth saying Walt Kelly is one of the greatest of his.

I don't hate Cho, I think he's just a nice guy who has a tendency to put his foot in his mouth, and as a writer he sure draws good. My very own mom (a Washington D.C. resident and comic strip reader), unprompted, asked me last year what I thought of this LIBERTY MEADOWS thing, opining that the writing was really lame.

Generally, these "replacements" don't stick (all strips have their vocal fans -- I mean, someone's keeping MARK TRAIL alive), and I'd bet LIBERTY MEADOWS will be back in the POST when the trial runs out.

Top
#461717 - 04/04/01 12:00 PM Re: Frank Cho Agonistes: Print Post Drops Liberty Meadows
Jim Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/00
Posts: 1855
Quote:
Originally posted by gene phillips:
But if nothing else I wish the comparison would give the Cho-haters some pause to reflect.


It did, the first few times it was brought up. But then I realized it was a silly comparison, for the reasons just given by Mr. Thompson.

Top
Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... 9 10 >