Noah B. can be a smart and interesting writer, but he lets his need to be an "angry young man" in the Groth mold get in the way of detailed and specific arguments - so it's just too easy to find numerous exceptions to everything he says.

Groth is a much more effective writer because he lays out his arguments in greater depth and seems less blinded by some strange animus that is always on display in excess.

He's a good example of a type that the comics journal attracts, a kind of intellectual who needs to be seen as an anti-intellectual: "smart and precious people like 'literary fiction' so I must attack it." I don't doubt that he dislikes this kind of stuff, but his need to rant in such a way makes me wonder what's going on. Perhpas he could be the best writer for TCJ if he was at least a little interested in persuading his readers . . . He is TCJ's least rhetorically effective writer, and that's too bad becauses he's a bright guy.

PS: having looked at the Holder responses, I think he's on target with his comments - he brings in examples that fully undermine Noah's argument.