What's the difference between the journalistas elitism and yours? I mean, why continue to attack them for their attitudes towards the mainstream when you have the same attitude towards the alternatives?

Because alternative comics are objectively bad, as irrefutably evidenced by their low sales, whereas mainstream comics are objectively good, as irrefutably evidenced by their (relatively) high sales. To embrace work that is only enjoyed by a tiny minority is arrogant and misguided; to embrace work that is enjoyed by work that is enjoyed by a majority is humble and sensible.

Well, that sounds reasonab...


Hey, wait a minute! You're not Pat!

Nice TRY, Thompson!

Gail

Isn't it a little much, starting a FOURTH bash-Pat thread, all running concurrently? Do you expect the poor guy to respond to dumb questions on all four threads at once? For that matter, since Kim understands Pat's position so well, why bother?

Another question, Brent and Kim-- do you think it might have just a little bit of a CHILLING EFFECT on free discussion to set a small army of vitriolic fact-twisters after a guy, just because he dares to criticize the Comics Journal? I don't agree with Pat's opinions, but I am damned sick of this.

I agree that devoting 4 threads to Pat's illogic is excessive, but I fail to see any "vitriolic fact-twisters after" him. I think he just pushes people to the brink with his obdurance and militant ignorance in the face of so much counter-evidence to his opinions. Is there anyone more close-minded on the comic book boards? Have you ever met anyone more close-minded? I really don't think I have. (I, of course, exclude here the inexcusably stupid sort, like Holocaust deniers, KKK members, etc.. I mean 'of the seemingly reasonable and nice sort of human beings' when asking these questions.)

Or dealing with the bitterness of Reece, right?

Brent,

Just think of Pat and his critics and yin and yang.

"Do you expect the poor guy to respond to dumb questions on all four threads at once?"

You think he won't?

Still and all, the first post poses an interesting question. I suppose Kim's answer saves the Pat the trouble, though.

--Ricko

"...a small army of vitriolic fact-twisters..."

Cute. Everybody knows it's gone way beyond that. I read over in the
"Rumours and Gossip" forum at tcj.com that they're going to burn a copy of Jimmy Corrigan (the new, improved third printing) on his front lawn tommorow night.

[This message has been edited by Jamie Salomon (edited 05-07-2001).]

Joe wrote:
>>>>>Another question, Brent and Kim-- do you think it might have just a little bit of a CHILLING EFFECT on free discussion to set a small army of vitriolic fact-twisters after a guy, just because he dares to criticize
the Comics Journal? I don't agree with Pat's opinions, but I am damned sick of this.

Joe, you shouldn't post after watching the X-Files... I came up with the brilliant idea for the "Life Imitates Art?" thread all by my hilarious self, if you can believe it!

Eric,

Just how do you know that Joe was watching the X-Files prior to his posting? Playing God again?

You are dismissed because of your tactics that prompted the discipline you allegedly received from veitch. Then you go and repeat it on several occasions as if it were some badge of honor. Get back to the Gutters where you belong.

I still have yet to see Pats' response. I doubt he is even interested in making one. That could be an error on my part, but that is my take on it. It sure does seem that many of his adversaries continue to take cheap shots at him, though. No surprise.