On HU
Erica Friedman started off the week by interviewing Comic Fusion’s Stacey Korn about Wonder Woman Day.
We then had a series of posts on comics and architecture, of all things.
Alex Buchet began with the first of a multi-part look running through the month on a comics and architecture exhibit at the French national museum of architecture.
Ng Suat Tong followed up with a look at the role of architecture in Josh Simmons’ House.
Caroline Small wrote about Morris Lapidus, postmodern curves, and the boxy modernism of comics.
I wrote about Alan Davis’ The Nail and why superheroes hate the Amish.
And I disputed R. C. Harvey’s assertion that criticism and art are about making you happy.
Twilight, Shojo, Genre and Gender
Melinda Beasi’s post from last month on Twilight and the contempt for female fans has sparked a bunch of discussion this week.
David Welsh explains why he agrees with Melinda and Melinda adds some thoughts about why it’s wrong to group all shojo titles together. Brigid Alverson argues that the issue is that genre isn’t that good, not that women are held in contempt. And finally Erin Ptah says she dislikes Twilight for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with female fans.
Murder, Misogyny, Multimedia
I’ve got an article about murder ballads up on Madeloud.
And to celebrate, I’ve uploaded a murder ballad playlist including all the songs I mention in the article. Revel in bloodshed!
Utilitarians Everywhere
At Splice Today I review the boring George Clooney vehicle The American.
Shortly thereafter, though, I began to have suspicions. So, as I do when such suspicions occur, I leaned over to my wife and whispered low, “He’s going to be redeemed, isn’t he?”
She looked at me over her glasses with mingled disgust and horror. “If he gets redeemed,” she said sternly, “I’m going to be upset.”
At Madeloud I review Wovenhand’s latest record.
Other Links
I enjoyed this essay by Rachel Manija about why it’s okay to write negative criticism.
And R.C. Harvey has a fun article about Wonder Woman’s costume changes over the years. I love the eagle cartoon.
I don’t know anything about Ke$ha, but this is really funny.
Oh, and Caroline Small is going to be on the critic’s panel at SPX today at 3:00 PM eastern time. If you’re attending the convention, go say hi to her!
In the spirit of negative criticism, I have to say that the Rachel Manija essay is pretty useless, a catalog of uninteresting “insights”. I had to force myself to get through it.
Sigh. Way to cast a gloom over everyone, Suat….
And as long as I’ve started….Manija’s essay wasn’t theoretically complicated or anything, but I thought her comments were well-reasoned and clearly stated. I think she correctly identified many of the arguments made against negative criticism, and provided convincing refutations.
It wasn’t things I hadn’t thought of, for the most part, but I think it’s an argument worth making, and thought she made it well.
Noah: “Way to cast a gloom over everyone, Suat….”
An inevitable result of negative criticism I’m afraid. Someone out there is going to feel gloomy.To which I’ll add Manija’s own points against the idea that “criticism is mean and pointless” and that “life is too short to discuss negative things.”:
I read parts of that article a few times over because you recommended it twice and I still haven’t found anything in it which is going to add to my understanding or practice of criticism. And there are homilies like this:
So I need to be told that “all publicity is good publicity” for the nth time? Big Yawn. Maybe in the FAQs of a review site and I suppose that is exactly what that journal entry is. Nothing wrong with writing a clunker now and again. The thing I contributed to HU this week would be an example of just that. That’s the way it is with blogs. Have you read her books?
It’s definitely aimed at people who don’t necessarily see themselves as professional critics. I’m okay with that, though. And the first paragraph you quote is, as you demonstrate, a fine short response to the forces of anti-gloom, who are legion.
I haven’t read her books, actually. I only recently even found out who she was!
I don’t think your contribution this week was a clunker, damn it! Proud to publish it, and all that. I’m sure you’ve been told this before, but you’re way too tough a room!
And suddenly I was seized by a doubt; I hope it’s clear that last bit is said jokingly. I appreciate the toughness of your room.
It’s funny how this sort of mirrors the Crumb foofarah, except I’ve switched sides. You’re saying, “this isn’t up to snuff,” and I”m saying, “well, I don’t think it’s necessarily trying for that snuff, but I think it does well with what it’s trying to do” (though there was some suggestion with the Crumb from folks that the Crumb undermined or questioned the snuff itself, which this obviously isn’t trying for.)
The bit you quote about any publicity is good publicity is something I actually don’t think I agree with her on necessarily. Bad reviews can actually hurt a book, I think, especially if the bad reviews are the only ones out there. I think you’re on more solid ground saying that a bad review may help a consumer (or just that there’s worth in saying the truth) than that it’s actually going to aid the author.
On the topic of “any publicity is good publicity,” I think *publishers* must believe this, at least on some level. I’m always shocked when pubs deliberately send me later volumes to review of series I’ve already panned. But they often do.
That may just be a mistake though, mightn’t it? You’re assuming they’re keeping tabs on who said what, which really may not be the case…. It may not be that the believe it so much that they aren’t organized enough to have any opinion about it in the first place?
It could be, though I tend to ascribe that level of detachment more to the pubs who send everyone everything. But someone like Viz, for instance, who only sends me selected volumes… I know they keep tabs on reviews, because I can see them in my site stats. And I know my contact there specifically sends me volumes of series he knows I like (as well as new ones he thinks I might like). But I was pretty surprised when he sent me volume two of Stepping on Roses after I wrote a decidedly negative review of volume one.