Geez, is this Pat O'Neill telling people that they are self-deluded? PAT O'NEILL, who holds forth on a wide range of topics, inventing facts, denying reality, and lying through his teeth? Last time I recall you whipping out the "delusion" claim, it was telling Kurt Busiek that he was deluded finding value in a certain comic book. Now because people's experiences don't match the "facts" THAT YOU INVENT, that you show no interesting in backing up or citing sources for, you claim they are self-delusional?

You are not only dishonest, Pat, you show every sign of being not sane.

Mainstream does not mean "just what appeals to a fifty year old insane person". Facts are not just whatever you feel like claiming. You claim that South Park ratings would not be considered good on even other cable networks -- tell us South Park's ratings, Pat, and tell us what other cable networks expect. (Here's a bit of info for you: the first time an original scripted adult-oriented cable series was the highest-rated cable program for multiple consecutive weeks, it was South Park. Individual airings of individual episodes have had as many as 6 million+ viewers.)

I think South Park is/was mainstream. Too successful to call it anything else. I think Hate would/could be mainstream in the same sense, because it shares much with South Park (and is way better, in my opinion).

But I in no way represent the mainstream of American culture, and I don't have any like-minded friends, so they don't either.

Subject matter, 'regular joe' outlook, half-cool/half-gross details used throughout. That connects it to mainstream.

My point exactly. Now repeat this but replace the specifics relating to Britney and the area of culture that she inhabits with other specifics and real headway will be made, eg. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Batman, The Doors, Mario Lanza, Hate comics, etc. etc.

Exactly what tradition--in the manner of the one Lesley Gore and Britney Spears are part of--does Hate belong to?

I'm unaware of any 40- to 50-year long string of satirical comics with ugly art.

Oh please, that's just ignorant.


ever heard of MAD MAGAZINE, Pat?


Another case of a dude so INTENT on winning the argument that he ignores not only opinion, but FACT. Its a FACT that these things are prevailant in America.

And the "ugly" thing is bullshit and you know it. I think the art is fantastic--but what the hell do I know, I only study ART in school...

I mean...I've got so many ways to cut you to pieces, I don't know where to start?!?

MAD MAGAZINE, for one...

EDITORIAL CARTOONS, for another...

This thread is officially fucking retarded.

I should leave this topic alone....my point is made, but I'm just awestruck by your last comments...I mean, what were you thinking?

No history of crude satire in comics? COMICS?

oh my goodness...

Awestruck...

The tradition of sitcoms about young people living on their own in the big city. If comics wasn't so tragically limited in the range of subject matter, realistic sitcom-type comics would have been invented decades ago. It's more of a sitcom comic than a satire comic, but since you haven't read it and refuse to read anything from Fantagraphics you wouldn't know.

Furthermore, the exact nature of how different traditions operate varies from tradition to tradition and individual traditions evolve over time. The vapid girl singers of your childhood evinced none of the blatant sexuality that singers like Britney do. I'd be very surprised, to say the least, if Leslie Gore considers herself an antecedent to Britney Spears (if she's still alive that is). From what I've noticed, these sexpots who flaunt their wares so openly are part of a newer, different tradition than the saccharine-sweet old-timers.

Is anything that predates your childhood capable of being mainstream, by the way?


---------

About the ugly art thing: I've encountered the opinion that Bagge's drawing style in Neat Stuff and Hate is ugly before, and I never understood this. It's a hyper-exaggerated cartoony style, but is based in the tradition of cartooniness. Artists like Gary Panter, Lloyd Dangle, Tom Hart, with their thin, unconnected lines I could see how they could be processed as ugly (Panter referred his style as "ratty drawing"), though they look fine to my eyes. But Bagge? If you guys see ugly there, I'm not going to argue, but I really can't understand how his drawing could be processed as ugly. It just doesn't compute. It's like someone saying chocolate tastes gross.

You guys really find Bagge's art ugly? Huh.

Will people be listening to rap in their 40's and 50's? Like the beatles? WTF? Rap is here to stay and I'm damn sure it's going to be around when i'm your age, hell I'm willing to wager that i'll still be listening to it than too. I'm not trying to jump on the bandwagon here by dissing Pat, but he's pulling shit out of his ass.
As much as I like superhero comix, I'd love to see indy/alt comics get as much exposure. I'm not interested in trying to keep them underground and a big secret, only known to a select few. That sucks.

The nature of the culture industry has sped up in recent decades. Product life cycles have been getting shorter and shorter. I doubt we'll ever see cultural producers with as much longevity as the Beatles again. The Rolling Stones still draw huge audiences when they go on tour, but I wonder how many of those audience members bought their recent albums and how many songs from those records the band actually performs.

The "flash-in-the-plan" syndrome is an entirely mainstream phenomenon. Non-mainstream culture sometimes tends to generate smaller cult followings that remain loyal years after the flashes in the pans have burned out the the ashes have been blown away by the next big thing.

Whether or not something sticks around for paying customers for lifetimes is a separate issue than if they were on everybody's lips when their tawdry star was at its momentary apex.

Hasn't rap music been around since the early seventies? When did The Sugarhill Gang record "Rapper's Delight"? I remember hearing it as a child who was too young to go downtown to specialty record shops or to even understand such a concept. Which means they had plenty of fans in their twenties who would be around Pat's age today.

(note to freshman psychoPatologists: This is what I was referring to earlier: argued into a corner, Pat now redefines "mainstream" as something else that is completely different than he did previously, namely something that is popular longer than most posters here have been alive. Welcome to the new digs, everyone. Make yourselves comfortable, but don't get too comfortable because we won't be here for more than a few posts from our choreographer. And: step, toe, step step, heel, twirl...)

Mainstream means exactly, literally that: the the main direction that the stream of consumers' dollars are moving in at the moment.