Hi, Everybody!
First, a matter of POLICY: If you sent me something, and you DON'T want me to use your full name, please let me know. Or else I'm just gonna run it with your full name and apologize later.
Anyways, cleaning up the ol' AMOC mailbag at momentofcerebus@gmail.com :
AMOC's newest friend Steven Swenson, sent in a number of things:
Original art by Gerhard, although not Cerebus related otherwise.It's the original art to Ger's Harry Potter print.
And:
FYI the original cover art for Low Society is up for auction on ComicLink It sold. My bad.And and:
Now here's something you don't see every day:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Mid-Ohio-Con-Jacket- Cerberus-the-Advark-Graphic- Mens-Medium/113234059421?hash= item1a5d46a09d:g: 2iQAAOSwuvVbj6HN
if it were a large or XL, I'd buy it
well, maybeDamn it sucks being fat. It'd probably fit Dave though...
Got a request:
Hi there, I was wondering if you might see your way clear to putting something in the sidebar that has a list of the one-shots that are already out, and the ones that are coming up for order—I'm finding I have a hard time remembering to order them and which ones to order! And of course I'm not interested in missing one! A one-stop resource might be just the thing. Thanks for reading!
Regards,
CoryWe did this a few days ago, hope people already noticed.
Okay, what else?
I recieved NO e-mails to amoccomments@gmail.com titled: "ComicsGate: Yay!" or "ComicsGate: Nay!"
But the post got a lot of comments! So, I'm just gonna reply here to people's comments from there.
Dominick Grace: Yep.
Memetaphysician: See, this was my problem then, and is my problem now. Ethan Van Sciver is called "every name in the book -- except wattavacall 'whiteman'." and when I ask for concrete evidence showing him deserving the abuse, I just get more name calling. Not blaming you. Just complaining. A link supporting your stance would have been nice.
Erick: Yup, ya got me. NOTHING I do or say will convince you otherwise. I mean, I ASKED for concrete evidence. If you think you got some, help a brudda out. I suspect EVS is not gonna be good for Dave. I faxed that to Dave. I knew when I faxed, that without a smoking gun, Dave would blow it off. I can't say anything to convince him without some sort of proof. Help?
Carson Grubaugh: See, this is almost what I need. If you got actual tweets (ugh.) or videos (double ugh.) proving your claims about EVS, that'd be great. The problem is that ComicsGate is a giant circus tent. While EVS is one of the main tentpoles, he's not the only one. He can always claim, that it's one of the other guys behind whatever nastiness ComicsGate spews forth. I kinda wonder about that. Why doesn't he rebrand his efforts as something else? If he wants to have a conservative comics label, call it something OTHER than ComicsGate and leave the trolls behind...
As to you going all "Daniel in the lion's den", and going on EVS's show, that's your call. But remember: on the map of the comics medium, the part where CoimcsGate resides is labeled "Here there be Dragons."
Erick again: I direct you to look up old clips of Harvey Pekar on Letterman. Carson going in "eyes wide open" to try to promote his work is probably a bad idea. But without PROOF, Dave's gonna throw his support behind his new bestie, and damn the consequences.
Bill Ritter: "EVS is welcome to believe anything he wants to, no matter how distasteful his belief(s) are to me" ya got anything in, I dunno, writing that shows EVS's beliefs? Guys, HELP!
Michael Hunt: I'm still working on what I'm sending up. I got a message from somebody, which I forwarded to Dave at their request. I got a response from Dave. BUT, as the first someone wants to remain anonymous for fear of ComicsGate troll reprisals, and Dave wants to keep everything EVS/ComicsGate related out in the open, I can't and WON'T divulge either. I only mention it now, to let people know that the channels of communication ARE open. And ANYTHING anybody wants me to tell/send Dave, I will gladly do so. But you have to get it to me!
Steve: I just don't want my wife, family, or friends to be harassed by random internet assholes. I don't want random internet assholes coming here and shouting down people in the comments of posts when said people are critical of Dave or his decisions. So, it's a molehill, but it's MY molehill.
Erick again, again: Thanks for the support. Truly. This is why when I first heard of Dave and EVS working together, I decided to post Judenhass. I like Cerebus and Dave enough to keep the lights on for Tim, but if this place gets invaded by toxic a-holes, I'll have to seriously rethink that.
(My first reaction was that if a-holes show up, Aliens: "Take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.")
Tony Dunlop: Okay, but I'm kinda sorta under the social obligation to promote the works of Dave Sim and Gerhard. If they have new works, don't I have to promote them?
Bob O.: "what are you doing on his fan site?" Um, running the joint?
Damian: I'd like to take this moment (heh.) to clarify a mistake I made in my post. When I said, "I mean they have a F@$#ing BLACKLIST!" I meant to say, "I mean they have a F@$#ing BLACKLIST! (I mean, I enjoy a good Blacklist as much as the next guy...)" This has lead to confusion later in the comments as to if it's a blacklist or a boycott. It's probably both (depending on who you ask.) I apologize. It was getting late, and I was tired. Mea cupla, mea maximum culpa.
Carson Grubaugh again: I hear ya buddy, oh man do I hear ya...
Bob O. again: I did, and I just did again. (Click the word "Blacklist" (especially the third one.))
Michael Hunt again: Man, answering EVERY post is starting to seem like a dumber idea than I already thought it was.
Damian again: Are you trying for "AMOC Special Friend of the Day"?
Tony again, again: I already explained this in my response to Damian. Again, sorry.
Damian again, again: Ok, Damian deleted his post, but I still have it, but I'm sure he deleted it because it contained an inaccurate assumption.
Michael Grabowski: Yup. Which is why I chose Judenhass.
Bob O. again, again: I posted the ComicsGate blacklist (or one version of it). What's the problem? Shit-tons of new Cerebus "fans" coming here and saying "Bra!" in every comment?
Me: Hi me. Oh look, the ComicsGate blacklist again...
Damian again again, again: You must REALLY want "AMOC Special Friend of the Day"!
Michael Grabowski again: I'm sorry, again. The lined image says Blacklist, and I had a bit. nd then I forgot to post the bit. But yeah, it's more boycott (But I bet they would love it to be a blacklist.)
Bob O. again again, again: G'Day!
Technically, it's Tim's blog, I'm just ruining it.
Nope, "poo-poo head" just about sums it up.
The tall pointy hat means status son, you can argue with me, but you can't argue with status...
Jeff: I don't get paid.
Jerk.
I'd also like to take your post to address something that bugs the fuck out of me. What the hell is wrong with "Social Justice Warriors"? People fighting for justice? Isn't that like Superman's job description? If THEY'RE Social Justice Warriors, what's the other side? Social Injustice Warriors? Anti-social Justice Warriors? Social Justice Pacifists? Anti-social Injustice Pacifists? I'm a firm believer in the Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King's quote: "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." So TO ME, Social Justice Warrior is a stupid thing to call your opposition as it paints you in a very bad light.
Manqueman: I'm not sure. I'll put it in the pile.
Billiam: Okay, proof for A? And B?
Okay, it's late and I just spent like six hours writing this thing. I'm going to bed. I'll tackle the other ComicsGate comments on Monday.
34 comments:
"Jerk"?
Of course I know you don't get paid for running AMOC. Why "jerk"?
I can't tell if you were trying to be funny or if you meant it. I LITERALLY (well, to be honest, figuratively) meant that you are doing a yeoman's job in an unforeseen time when you have to figure out which side is which, and who has the right (or, "right", or Right, or "Right" answer.
I'm sorry that you misunderstood what I was saying, or that you were offended. I was trying to be both sympathetic and funny. Apparently, I screwed the (three-headed) pooch on both accounts. But, I was trying. I hope that you know me well enough to believe me about that.
Sometimes, I forget your sense of humor; other times, I envy it. But I am not meaning to, nor trying to be a jerk. Quite the opposite, if you look closely at my attempt to be equanimous about all this kerfuffle/horseshit.
I look forward to your response, as well as your comments on the other six-hours worth of responding to the Kerfuffle.
I know who bought the jacket but promise not to tell.
There's also 4 issues of CANAR currently being auctioned if anyone's interested.
Steve
ps -- and I'll look up what the Low Society cover sold for eventually.
Also, while I will admit that I don't know a lot about what the so-called SJWs are drawing and writing in (mostly) "mainstream" comics (the big two, I guess), I was under the impression that they call *themselves* Social Justice Warriors. If I am wrong, please inform me of how I am wrong.
My problem with the so-called SJWs remains the same, as is the problem that I have with the so-called comicgate(rs): Vitriol.
I really wish that some entity could devise a way to put all of the leading spokespersons/"front persons" in a large, empty, locked-behind-them warehouse, with two chairs and lots of bottled water, and let them somehow come to a meeting point.
Yeah, like *that's* gonna happen.
Matt, I truly feel for ya, buddy (or, former buddy). This whole thing reminds me, lately, of when I ran for (and lost) the election for Student Body President in my junior year of college, only to see the ultimate winner (a really great guy) go through a living hell in our senior year of college.
You are doing well, very well, so far. Please don't let your sense of humor, which I have always admired immensely, fail you. Or, us.
Jeff,
Social Justice Warrior is not something any person or group named themselves. It is something Trump supporters and eventually comicgate supporters began calling liberals. It's in the same vein as "snowflake" or the old-time "bleeding heart", but used more specifically by the comicsgate crowd as a pajorative to describe creators and publishers who make an effort to include women, people of color, and LGBTQ folks in their comics.
It is this sort of representation to which the comicsgate folk object so vehemently. Comics just ain't what they used to be, straight white male fantasies, and that is what bugs them. These folks are also mostly aware of only the history of the big two superhero publishers, and do not understand that, while every profession has more diverse practioners than it once did, comics were not always created by syraight white males for straight white males, and as a medium has always been more progressive politically than most.
I suspect the moniker was shortened to SJW due to the very confusion the label caused. "Social Justice Warrior" just doesn't sound like a bad person, especially within the context of superhero comics, does it? The mind boggles.
Matt,
Good heavens, man! You've got your hands full. I'll lay low for as long as I can stand and hope that provides you some relief. But it ain't easy.
If it means anything to you, I think you've comported yourself admirably in a trying situation. You've been as fair-minded and informative as possible, and done so entertainingly and with good humor.
Good job.
Michael Hunt
Jeff 1: It...it...it was a joke. You said I was earning every penny, I don't get paid. So ya know, "Jerk." for reminding me I'm not getting paid for this. If it ever seems that I'm not chuckling when I post something, remember that there is a high probability that I have a twinkle in my eye.
Steve: oh you'll tell, we have ways of making you talk...
Jeff 2: oh, I'm keeping my sense of humor. As evidenced by a couple of things this ComicsGate "brou-haha" has taught me about Cerebus. (I got at least 2 future Cerebus related posts out of it so far. Like, do you know what song Cerebus is whistling in issues 275 and 276? I know. Dave told me.)
Michael: No, don't go! I'm just kidding, get the fuck out of here, and take Seiler with ya (he's not much to look at, but he also doesn't eat that much...)!
I kid, I kid. (Ya know, I got to stop trying to deal with this teapot in a tempest on three hours of sleep.)
Thanks for the support, I really appreciate it (ALMOST as much as I'd appreciate large envelopes of cash mailed to me *hint* *hint*)
Ya know, a large pointy hat comes with great responsibility...
Matt
Wow.
So, just looked up what the Low Society cover sold for.
A measly, paltry, $626.
I'm honestly quite shocked.
Steve
Hi Matt,
Not sure what you're responding to - if it's this:
"Sometimes I just have to shake my head at the kinds of things people think are worth considerable time and attention. "
I was referring to (what little I know about) Comicsgate. All I meant was, if they think the comics they've been buying are getting too "politically correct," the only sensible, adult response is to stop buying them and start buying ones that aren't. Don't throw a tantrum because you're not getting your way, is all I'm saying *to Comicsgate.* Not to anyone else. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
And yes, I know it's virtually certain that nobody from that crowd will ever see this, so I'm very much pissing in the wind here when I should be getting ready for church.
Matt,
I assume you are asking for evidence that he called for SJW creators to be fired?
http://boundingintocomics.com/2018/07/02/ethan-van-sciver-wants-to-kick-sjws-out-of-entertainment/
Coupled with the blacklist you posted (do we know who generated that?).
van Sciver did create a shield of qualification to hide behind by saying IF a company is out to make money, THEN they should realize these creators are detrimental to that and let go. From a business standpoint. Nothing personal. Just dollars and cents.
Fair enough. "We hired you to make us money. This book is losing money. It is cancelled. We have no more work for you." is a perfectly acceptable thing for an employer to do.
But, it is highly debatable if SJW creators guarantee a decrease in sales.
I think some of these creators, the talented ones, lead to higher sales and better books. Matt Fraction's run on Hawkeye being a prime example of a creator on the blacklist that had a run on a book worthy of the acclaim, and I assume increase in sales.
Others, Gabby Rivera, also on the list, 180'd the basic science of light to make a terrible political point in a truly terrible line of dialogue. An awful comic that did damage to an otherwise good character and sold accordingly.
This point about decreasing sales is going to be an impossible to win debate anyway, with the various sides choosing which factors count in their analysis. Straight up sales numbers? Aging fan base losing interest in superheroes? Market saturation points? Internet piracy? General economic upswings and downswings? Event fatigue? What counts as evidence? Whatever best makes one's point. Thus, pointless.
Van Sciver's qualification itself is more interesting. He allows that it is up to the company to decide whether they choose to lose money in favor of a cause. That is where he buys himself the moral wiggles room.
This is a debate about how one is to view comics, ontologically. What level of analysis do you care about the most when talking about comics? This debatable on principle, no facts needed.
Van Sciver seems to view comics as a business first and foremost and an art form second. Or, if an art form first, is disingenuously speaking as if he views it as business first to convince the business side to delivers political results he desires. (It is also wrong to assume a business is categorically obligated to make money. Non-profit businesses being a resounding blow to that definition of business.)
I love comics as an artform above all else and because of this think we should praise any business that is willing to take losses in an effort to grow the artform, make space for new voices. I think Fantagraphics is a prime example of a publisher that values art above money.
Matt Fraction has greatly added to the medium as an art form. Even if Hawkeye was taking losses it was a worthy loss on Marvel's part. They should be applauded if that was the case.
Good for them they gave Gabby Rivera a chance to bring a new point of view to the table. Unless that book got significantly better after issue 1, she proved to not have much artistic merit.
Obviously having only one level analysis is overly simplistic, but in this case VanSciver does show his hand as monetary concerns overriding artistic concerns, or, his willingness to pretend his values lie on the business side, when really his overriding level of analysis is political.
These are all things I would love to talk to him about.
For everyone worried about where Dave stands, I think this bit to me in our ongoing talks about being involved with Comicsgate might offer insight to the fact that Dave is taking this very seriously.
"I have no idea, and haven't for some time had any idea, how much of anything that seems to be happening in my life is just pixie dust and moonbeams, how much of it is a reward for faith and endurance, how much of it is an extremely subtle scam to get me mixed up in something I don't want to be mixed up in, how much of it is an even more subtle scam to see if I'll abandon Ethan the way the comic-book field abandoned me, what it will take to bring any of those about, what I'm prepared to do about them or what kind of mixture of all of those (and other metaphysical elements I can't perceive and am not anticipating) Comicsgate is."
Matt, I concur with Michael Hunt.
You're doing an admirable job (and even that fails to qualify how exceptional you have been on this site and recent days).
This article gives a fairly balanced history around comisgate:
https://www.inverse.com/article/41132-comicsgate-explained-bigots-milkshake-marvel-dc-gamergate
I say "fairly" because it makes some allusions on participants to others that may not be accurate (so, some opinions (or as CNN puts it, analysis)). Generally, tho, rather objective (imo).
This one not so balanced, but some additional history of points
http://nerdbastards.com/2018/09/01/figuring-out-comicsgate-the-whos-the-whens-and-the-wtfs/
Carson,
Wow. That was...well, beautiful. Personally, I think you give Van Sciver far too much credit, but then I'm less convinced that this is an ontological debate than are you.
That comicsgate is political (and only a comics-focused subset of a larger mindest) is self-evident to me, and its rallying against the creation of comics by, or for, or containing characters of color, women, and LGBTQ folks is nothing more than a fearfully ignorant reaction to a changing and more generally enlightened world.
That people with this mindset have been encouraged and used by politicians (who may or may not share this mindset) for the sake of aquiring political power is also self-evident. That people with this mindset have been ecouraged and used by opportunists (who may or may not share this mindset) for the sake of aquiring wealth is also self-evident. That these politicians and opportunists sometimes work together to their mutual benefit is also self-evident.
I don't care if Van Sciver or the comicsgate noteables are politicians or opportunists. I do care that their rhetoric is ignorant, hateful, and inflammatory. Certainly, I care about comics as an artform and as an industry, but also as a community, and the words and actions of comicsgate are a threat to all three.
By the way - and this gets back to "that was...well, beautiful," before I climbed up on a stump and started speechifyin' (remember to vote early and often, folks!) - you've changed my mind about one thing. I'd love to see you have a conversation with Van Sciver on any platform. I think that his attempts to answer your unbiased, innocent, and truth-seeking questions, to which I imagine he has no answers, would likely reveal him as the disingenuous oppotunist I suspect him to be.
Michael Hunt
Matt,
Kudos to you on how you are handling this.
I know that you are having to dodge some slings and arrows - some thrown by me, but when ya wears the tall pointy hat, sometimes ya gets the pointy end of the stick!
As far as my prediction in my first post on this subject that lots of folks would rationalize Dave's involvement with EVS and his ilk. Well, sad to say I have not been proven wrong.
Prejudiced folks rarely if ever recognize let alone acknowledge their prejudices. And, when confronted about such they always feel that they are the ones being persecuted by people with an agenda.
Michael,
Comics-as-community is something I totally overlooked. Thanks for pointing that out. It is a wildly important level of analysis.
It was hard for me to see that one given that:
A) My personality is just not super socially oriented; spending most of my day focused on how teeny-tiny I can get a weave of crosshatching to be and all.
B) I am not really part of Comics-as-a-community, having never had any major worked published. No one in the industry has any reason to know who the hell I am, yet. I don't know any of them outside of what I can glean from their work. So it isn't really foregrounded in my mind.
Having such a community, truly open-minded on all sides of the spectrum, is exactly how we shore up gaps in our own perceptions. What you just illuminated for me, and hopefully I for you, is a prefect example of that and why we would indeed probably be great neighbors.
A strong, TRULY diverse, community would be a benefit for the artform and the business. In the more academic terms I seem to prefer, that is a harmoniously synchronized Gradient of Analysis, in which all possible Levels of Analysis are optimized within themselves and in relation to one another.
Carson,
I don't think you have to be a published creator to be part of a (the?) "comics community".
My own experience with comics was simply buying and reading them in a vacuum for decades. About ten years ago, at the age of forty-three, I met a fellow, a comic shop owner, who I enjoyed talking with because he was not an asshole or an idiot. He invited me numerous times to events at his shop and after several months I finally accepted.
What I have found in the community built around that shop we're artsts, writers, and readers of comics from across an astonishing spectrum of age, sex, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, etc.... What was more amazing to me was the rediculously high percentage of them that I could stand to be around for any length of time, not to mention how many genuine friendships I formed, and those that I grew to love.
This was huge for me. People had hitherto mostly disappointed me, many of them severely. But these people I found to be almost universally intelligent, caring, kind, funny, and good-hearted. And when I began to enlarge my circle to include people I met online or at cons or other comics events, I was rarely given any reason to regret doing so. Sure, some had their quirks or problems, but the community was understanding and, when necessary, helped, reabilitated, and policed itself.
The vast majority of the comics community are truly very fine people. Counting myself among them has literally changed my life. It made me a better person because it gave me something in which to aspire.
I know that all sounds grandiose. It is grandiose. And I mean every word. Undoubtedly that is why I feel (yes, "feel") and think the way I do about comicsgate. They have targeted the very people (a great number of whom have already been literally targeted by actions of the Trump administration) with whom I share the most rewarding fellowship of my life and to whom I owe debt of allegiance.
None of this is academic to me. It's political and it's personal.
Michael Hunt
Very well said Michael.
Very well said indeed.
I'm relatively quiet on AMOC, but I had to speak on this.
I'm a lefty-leaning guy, and I don't share Dave's opinion on women. I probably fall into the marxofeminist cabal that Dave talks about.
Yet, after I finished reading Cerebus, I signed the petition. While I think it's fair to say that Dave is anti-feminist, I was fine with agreeing to never using the m word to describe him, because of how he interacted with comic book creators such as Colleen Doran and Teri S Wood. Hell, I probably wouldn't have heard of them if it weren't for the back pages of Cerebus in the 90s.
Dave may have documented his dislike of feminism, but he never treated women comic creators rudely in public or private. If someone was dedicating their life to creating comics, Dave did what he could to back them.
The Comicsgate guys, though, are different. I've seen some of them spend all day harassing women and trans comic book creators on social media. I mean, all day.
These people don't have Dave's values. They may be conservative, they may be religious, but they honestly don't care about comics. They just want to use social media to harass women and trans people. These people argued with Neil Gaiman on when he started to work at DC, even though Neil (politely, because it's Neil) told them their "facts" were wrong.
Dave, I know it's tempting, but this is a bunch of phonies and frauds pretending to be comics fans. You've always been better than that. Please keep that in mind.
As always, thanks for the great comics.
Hey, even Erick and I can agree! First Damian, now Erick. Way cool.
Well said and extremely moving, Michael.
Academic is obviously my default. Strength and weakness. It is comfortable in a way people are not. I wish that were not the case but people wear me out very fast, even groups of people I like being with. I prefer lengthy, deep exchanges with a single person. Two or more people becomes too hard to track in a live situation. So, yeah, I need people out there reminding me of the communal aspects of this. Thanks.
Hopefully the communally minded can see the value in the people that see their gaps.
Carson,
I understand where you're coming from, man. I'm pretty comfortable on my own for long periods or in a group of two to four. Larger crowds make me nervous. Too many audio tracks confuse me. But I've grown to trust these people and I can say, "Hey, I'm stepping outside for a moment to get my groove back."
Okay, I've never said THAT, but you take my meaning. If I didn't come back in for a while then someone would come check with me to see if I'm cool. No pressure, just help if I needed it. And I DO want to be there, but my stupid brain is making that difficult, so I take a break, recharge and go back in. I've found, after several years, that most anxieties that arise these says (and they do arise) are dealt with swiftly and successfully, with the firm knowledge that these people have my back at every turn.
My community is chock full of people with quirks of all sorts, and some of them are quite debilitating. But we talk about them. Not in a formal group session format, but just in conversation. We're aware of each other and we check in with each other. "How you doin'?" isn't idle chit-chat. "Haven't seen so-and-so in a while," results in a sharing of information, a phone call, or text, maybe even a drop-in. "How you doin'?"
The support that I've received from these people...emotional, morale, financial (seriously)...is like nothing I've ever experienced before, I know I've tried to be, and I think I've been there for them as well.
I still want my time alone, but even that is sweeter, knowing that, when I pop up out of my hole, when I give the world a chance, I shan't be disappointed. It's fucking brilliant!
Michael Hunt
Talking to whatever people/platforms represent the ComicsGate community in spite of their views is fine. Trying to target them as a sales market BECAUSE of their views is... not great. The optics are bad, the views are retrogressive. If the goal is to grow the market for Cerebus, dipping into a group who represent a minority of a minority of the future is only going to backfire on Dave and be a really poor starting point for Carson's comics career.
Carson: Think about people who started out relatively mainstream but then chased the right-wing niche because the surface audience seems reasonable and then just kept on going and going until that's all that defines them as a brand. It seems that it's less probable to return to mainstream acceptability once you've gone down that road than it is to build a mainstream acting career if you got your start in porn. You may find some common points of agreement with some ComicsGaters. But do you want to find yourself tarred with the worst views of the even fringier groups associated with them?
From what I've seen of Comicsgate it's about free speech, reviews of comics/movies and storytelling through direct funding from fans. I never heard about a boyclott nor blacklist.
As for harassment, haven't seen that either though some of the "SJW brigade" threatened some of the Comicsgate crew (I think the incriminating tweets were removed but are also archived out there).
What counts in the end is the story. Is it good? Everyone has their own metric. A lot of the comics I've seen them review are indeed terrible. Had to look for myself, Gabby Rivera is not a good comics writer in my opinion.
Per Diversity & Comics twitter/youtube a lot of conservative creators keep their views to themselves for fear of being blacklisted.
I'm a little surprised some here are saying they may stop supporting Dave Sim over Comicsgate.
Still, I can respect Dave's caution regarding Ethan VanSciver and Comicsgate and what it may mean for him in the larger perspective.
Find a live stream, most of it is attempts at fund raising, some discussion of whatever the hot topic is in comics/pop culture and humor that one may or may not funny. It all seems rather tame to me.
A relatively recent tweet for those interested:
Diversity & Comics
@DiversityAndCmx
14h14 hours ago
More
2 Days
5 Videos
9 Comic Books Reviewed
8 Positive Reviews
4 Recommends have black leads
3 Recommends have black women as lead/leads
3 Recommends have black writers (2 male/1 female)
1 Recommended Book has a writer who openly hates me
cheers,
A Fake Name
Hey! I’m more than willing to submit to interview, Carson! A lot of strange information here, the INVERSE article being especially egregious. You could reach out to me at ethan12032@gmail.com and I’d be happy to chat!
Best,
Ethan Van Sciver
Huh...
The Man hisself.
I find myself in a Star Wars frame of mind.
Been Kenobi: "....from a certain point of view..."
And a paraphrase of Grand Moff Tarkin: "if you would prefer an alternate" article, "simply name the" website.
I feel like Jim Shooter just showed up to a Gene Day memorial...
Matt Dow
Interim Editor, Moment of Cerebus
Mr Van Sciver,
My first, (and probably only,) question is: As "ComicsGate" gained more and more notoriety, why note abandon the term, and use something else for your efforts?
Matt Dow
Interim Editor, Moment of Cerebus
Matt,
See? That's what I mean. Humor and grace, dude. Nicely done. And notice I haven't lost my shit, or anything. Trying to follow your excellent example.
Carson,
I'd advise you to do this live, if at all, and/or with the ability to have your own original or copy of any recording made. My only other comment would be that I really can't think of a more open-minded, moral, and pointedly curious person for the job.
Michael Hunt
Michael Hunt
Matt:
Because it’s only a word. “ComicsGate” is what we make it. If we were to call ourselves THE SUNSHINE BUNCH, our detractors would simply say “nonsense, you guys are ComicsGate.”
There’s a reason far leftists hate the term “SJW” even though they created and applied it to themselves four years ago: because it’s become ironic, in that their observable behavior is antisocial, unjust and cowardly. Any label is detrimental to them because it identifies them.
On the other hand, over time ComicsGate will mean what we make it mean by our deeds and efforts. It’s only the word that we’ll be referred to by. For good or ill, it’s outside of our control. Might as well embrace it.
EVS.
1. "Social Justice Warrior" is not a phrase made up four years ago by people describing themselves as "Social Justice Warriors". The term has been around a few decades and only began to be used as a pejorative by the right during "Gamergate". I suggest checking out the etymology of the phrase here (and not just the first few paragraphs).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior
2. I suspect "SJW" became the preferred pejorative because gamer/comicsgate realized how weak an insult it is to call anyone "Social Justice Warrior". It seems rather like yelling, "Hey, you! What're you, some kinda person willing to expend time, money, and effort to make the world a better, place?"
It sounds, in fact, like what might be inscribed on a plaque in a museum exhibit of some national hero. The mind boggles.
3. Given that EVS answered "the letter" of the question, and not what I suspect was "the spirit" of Matt's question, I wonder if Matt might want to rephrase his question.You know, after his 12-hour shift.
Michael Hunt
Alright guys (and Margaret.),
Not specifically addressed to anybody, but just a general statement:
EVS IS here, so if you have any questions or concerns, you can address them to the horse's mouth. So to speak...
Just don't be horses' asses...
Mr. Van Sciver,
I must confess to being a lying liar, who lies through my lying liar teeth.
I have a more questions, to wit:
What the F*ck is a "Cyber Frog"? And why the H*ll do I give a sh*t?
But seriously, please feel free to take a moment (heh.), and describe the character/series of Cyber Frog overall, and what Dave's gonna be working on specifically.
(Also, I hope to have gotten through the links I was sent both pro and con re: Comicsgate/um...you by Saturday, so you might want to check out that post.)
Matt Dow
Interim Editor, Moment of Cerebus,
Hilarious Hypocrite
Hi Matt!
I don't presume that you DO give a sh*t, but I'm hoping I can sell you a comic book.
I had a series in the 1990s called CYBERFROG. It was about an alien sent from a world that wished to represent us in an impending alien invasion. The alien was meant to look human, but accidentally interacted with, and thus adopted, the appearance of a frog.
He was a typical violent 90's slacker superhero, definitely of his time, but the series ended in 1998 when I went to work for DC.
This relaunch imagines that the invasion he was meant to prevent did indeed happen on August 17, 1998, and he failed to stop it. He was nearly killed, but his cybernetic frog body saved him and preserved him at the bottom of the Delaware River in Camden NJ, in a twenty year restorative hibernation.
He reemerges today, in 2018, to a world that's been dominated by the Vzzpyzz, alien hornets that use humans for food and building material.
Very few humans are left. But he's determined to protect the ones who survived, and destroy the alien colonization as he was intended to do.
It's four parts, 48 pages each. Dave Sim has agreed to co-write and script doctor my stories, starting with books 2-4. He's being paid very well, volunteered to do it, and I value this as a learning opportunity like no other.
We had a long conversation on the phone about the industry's perception of ComicsGate, and I tried to impart to him what a struggle this might be, but he's Dave Sim. He's always done what he wanted to do.
I'm not sure what working with him will be like, but i'm sure it'll be worth every penny to me in education, and the books can only be improved dramatically by his participation.
-Ethan V.
Washington Post article
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/13/comicsgate-movement-isnt-defending-free-speech-its-suppressing-it/?utm_term=.958bc8da44a6
Washington Post, huh? I guess it's really a "thing" now. But this is just bizarre;
Earlier this year, I first heard of a Canadian academic named Jordan Peterson - the first time I read that name was right here on AMOC, and now he seems to be everywhere.
Last week was the first time I ever heard the names Ethan Van Sciver or Comicsgate - again, right here on AMOC. Now at least the latter is in "the paper read by those who think they run the world."* Either I'm insular and spend waaaay too much time here, or AMOC is ahead of the curve on cultural "things."
*The people who run the world read The Wall Street Journal. The people who think they run the world read The Washington Post. The people who think they should be running the world read The New York Times.
And here's another interesting fellow for you:
A Fake Name
NERKISH
@nerkish
9h9 hours ago
More
SoOoOo, guys, what did I miss?
Was there any more manufactured drama?
Did @DiversityAndCmx do another interview that blew up in his face?
How many times did @EthanVanSciver relaunch CyberFrog with terrible variant covers for "charity?"
I want all the deets!
Well, I am glad I checked back in on this thread! I figured it was tapering out and then EVS himself shows up!
Awesome. Email is on the way. Thanks for taking the time to drop in on our little corner of the net, Ethan!
Post a Comment