Take that pretentious documentary about webcomics

[Yeahduff]

What is this debate over, exactly?

This is the exact question I'm left wondering. What about this is controversial?

Oh well. Maybe I don't care.

[McDuffies]

Well, I can't say what this discussion is about for other people but I can say what I saw in it.
I saw that PA guys can get away with anything. They can insult anyone they want, and still majority of people will grin and say "Hey, it's their type of humor." Do they get away because they're popular? Or because they used people to taking them as jerks? "Hey, they are jerks, they're allowed to say that kind of stuff. You're not jerk, so you aren't". Neither of those seem right.

Dunno, it all seems very ugly to me. It seems like a big ugly spot on face of webcomics. I mean, I could go on and pretend that all of that didn't happen or that it's not my concern, but it still makes me very sad.

...Now tell me, how would you feel if someone drew circles and arrows with red (unerasable) marker on the original of your finished page...

I think they mark up photocopies, and not the original art. At least, here in America. Otherwise, they'd have to wait forever for the art to get to their office, and then to return that art to the penciller, and wait for them to get that done. Nowadays, it's done with faxes, emails, and copies, so that they can mark 'em up, and then the artist can go back to the original and fix it without having to start all over again.

Perhaps nowadays. I remember that story about Wallace Wood ripping his bages and quitting, because editor scribbled on them with red marker. It's a kind of urban legend today.
Besides, what happens when I don't agree with editor's changes? huh?
There's one much more recent story about artist from around here whose pages got redrawn by another artist because, as editor said, "his females aren't pretty enough".

[Subhuman]

Okay, I have yet to see where Penny Arcade "insulted" anyone. They took a deserved stab at a bunch of pretentious wankers (the ones who yammer on about "reinventing" the form and the "Man" holding them back, etc.), and suddenly everyone and their mother gets offended? Even Eric at Websnark clutches his pearls in shock and scolds Penny Arcade for being "mean" because they apparently called Cat Garza fat and ugly and a kitten-killer. I mean, Jesus, they joked that the guy looked like a stoner. Which...he does. Is that what passes for a malicious attack these days?

The whole thing is just a huge orgy of overreaction, from all sides.

[McDuffies]

Okay, I have yet to see where Penny Arcade "insulted" anyone. They took a deserved stab at a bunch of pretentious wankers (the ones who yammer on about "reinventing" the form and the "Man" holding them back, etc.), and suddenly everyone and their mother gets offended? Even Eric at Websnark clutches his pearls in shock and scolds Penny Arcade for being "mean" because they apparently called Cat Garza fat and ugly and a kitten-killer. I mean, Jesus, they joked that the guy looked like a stoner. Which...he does. Is that what passes for a malicious attack these days?

The whole thing is just a huge orgy of overreaction, from all sides.

So he looks like a stoner, meanwhile Tycho is an ugly bold man and Gabe looks so thin that even I could beat him up - and yet they draw Tycho as a pretty, handsome (and hairy) guy, and Gabe as a mean machine. If they were a bit more realistic about themselves, then perhaps I could accept that they have right to joke about other people's look.

You should've read mcCloud's rant before the "righteous" removed it from site. Anyway, how do you judge whether someone is pretentious based on 5min trailer? How can you call it righteous stab if it's based on lacking informations? How do they know that the given quotes aren't totally taken out of context? For all they know, two guys from the trailer might be of apsolutely different opinion, and that, while aiming to a class of people that annoys them, they actually hit two innocent bystanders?
And yes, it is a joke, noone says it isn't. But it's a rude, insulting, mean-spirited joke. If you think that there's no mean spirit in it, go back to your own post and see which words you used to describe those guys. You'll see that they are mostly words of hatred.
PA play it rough, you accept it because you're used to it and perhaps because they pack it in funnier pack than someone else would. Had anyone else make the same joke, would you still think it was a "jesus, they joked"? Would you think it's even if guys in question returned the kick to PA by mocking them in their own comics?

The whole thing might as well be called blown out of proportions: by those who asked PA for apology as well as by those who defended them. It is those second who turned the entire discussion to the old "artsy vs. commercial" arguement.
In any way, I support nothing that serves further dividing webcomic scene. PA comics do, they know that the comic will start endless discussions, fights and flames, they're not that naive that they wouldn't know. Yet they make comic because they don't care. And now you have endless discussions and you act as if you think that PA guys didn't know that was gonna happen? Heck, it's not their first time either.
And one last point: this incourages every overambicious little prick to advertise his comic by trolling and douchebagging - hey, if it works for big guys, why wouldn't it work for us?

[Col]

Perhaps nowadays. I remember that story about Wallace Wood ripping his bages and quitting, because editor scribbled on them with red marker. It's a kind of urban legend today.
Besides, what happens when I don't agree with editor's changes? huh?
There's one much more recent story about artist from around here whose pages got redrawn by another artist because, as editor said, "his females aren't pretty enough".

Yeah, I'd buy it that they used to mark up original stuff. And having someone redrawn another person's work because they didn't like it is a complete stab in the back. But editors can be necessary sometimes in order to help convey a point in the story better, or to point out an accidental flub in the work. Some are better than others. It's all a matter of taste, but nevertheless, having someone other than just the artist take a good look at the work is only going to help, because you need that fresh pair of eyes. Now if only all editors were experienced comic makers themselves. Then we'd really be in business.

[Mimo]

If they were a bit more realistic about themselves, then perhaps I could accept that they have right to joke about other people's look.

I agree- I think it's pretty silly to attack someone's personal apperance when you are hiding behind an avatar.

[Subhuman]

Anyway, how do you judge whether someone is pretentious based on 5min trailer? How can you call it righteous stab if it's based on lacking informations?

Because those people aren't just in the 5-minute trailer - they're everywhere. I've personally come across a number of artists who are so self-righteous it makes me want to puke. PA weren't just making digs at those specific artists in the trailer - they were speaking to the victimist drama queens in the arts community as a whole, and there are lots of them.

And yes, it is a joke, noone says it isn't. But it's a rude, insulting, mean-spirited joke.

If PA had said, "Look at this doofus! He's all geeky looking! I bet he's never had sex in his life! Hah!", then yes, that would be mean-spirited and insulting. Saying that the guy looks like a stoner? Please. For one thing, "stoner" isn't even an insult anymore. What they said wasn't completely harmless, obviously, but let's not go overboard. There's a difference between a witty remark and a hateful attack.

[Jen_Babcock]

Okay, I have yet to see where Penny Arcade "insulted" anyone. They took a deserved stab at a bunch of pretentious wankers (the ones who yammer on about "reinventing" the form and the "Man" holding them back, etc.), and suddenly everyone and their mother gets offended? Even Eric at Websnark clutches his pearls in shock and scolds Penny Arcade for being "mean" because they apparently called Cat Garza fat and ugly and a kitten-killer. I mean, Jesus, they joked that the guy looked like a stoner. Which...he does. Is that what passes for a malicious attack these days?

The whole thing is just a huge orgy of overreaction, from all sides.

So he looks like a stoner, meanwhile Tycho is an ugly bold man and Gabe looks so thin that even I could beat him up - and yet they draw Tycho as a pretty, handsome (and hairy) guy, and Gabe as a mean machine. If they were a bit more realistic about themselves, then perhaps I could accept that they have right to joke about other people's look.

From my understanding (and I get this partly from PA's one and only book collection), they didn't start their comic with Gabe and Tycho as masks to their identity. They adopted those fictional personas as their own after a while. Why? Who knows. Maybe they thought it was "cute." Maybe they just wanted to keep their identities private (too bad success "ruined" that for them).

Anyway, I"m not saying that this makes it ok for them to make fun of other people's looks (yet at the same time I'm not saying I'm against it either).

I'm really tired, so sorry if this isn't making much sense.

[Reinder]

I think the real issue here is that they put their own opinions into the mouths of cool, sarcastic guys, and the opinions they were opposed to in the mouth of one stoner who also looked more than a bit po-faced, and one vampiric-looking freak. John Barber, from his photograph, does not look a bit like a vampiric freak, but more like a regular, all-American guy who needs a haircut.

And that's rigging the debate, even if the PA characters aren't supposed to be likenesses of themselves.

John, by the way, is not nearly as elitist as he was made out to be. He works for Marvel in his day job!

I wish Scott McCloud had had the cojones to keep his article online, if only with a retraction saying "On second thought, I don't think I was right about this." That's what I would have done. I think he was broadly right, by the way, and that Tycho's response was feeble.

[Jen_Babcock]

I think the real issue here is that they put their own opinions into the mouths of cool, sarcastic guys, and the opinions they were opposed to in the mouth of one stoner who also looked more than a bit po-faced, and one vampiric-looking freak. John Barber, from his photograph, does not look a bit like a vampiric freak, but more like a regular, all-American guy who needs a haircut.

I suppose, but who else would've been in the strip? Not Tycho and Gabe? Then it wouldn't have been a Penny Arcade strip. The only time when T and G aren't in the strip is when they're doing a comic about a specific game.

Gabe and Tycho have been doing this kind of "mean spirited" and "juvenile" humor for years. Why no one has blasted them about it until now is beyond me.

And no, this isn't b/c they're attacking "specific people" this time. If you go back in their archives, they do this sort of thing to individuals [in the public eye] quite often.

[McDuffies]

Because those people aren't just in the 5-minute trailer - they're everywhere. I've personally come across a number of artists who are so self-righteous it makes me want to puke. PA weren't just making digs at those specific artists in the trailer - they were speaking to the victimist drama queens in the arts community as a whole, and there are lots of them.

But it's not caricatures of some guy in the comic - it's caricatures of two specific guys. Plus, there's a rant about Garza's look, which turns the attention from possible representation of him as an average art-webcomicker to him personally. If they wanted to leave it to discussion about the subject of webcomics, they should've spare the rant. This way, it is a personal attack at at least one specific person.

I can't justify any hatred based on different views. If someone told you that you don't have a place in webcomics because you don't make high art, I would be on your side. However, you (along with PA guys) show a lot of hatred toward them (I mean, if "makes me want to puke" doesn't spell hatred, what does?). Do you hate them because they have different opinion of comics? Or because they use big words ot say a little? Or because they look like hippy? None of those are reasons for hating someone. Did they ever did anyhing to you personally, kill your dopg or something?

If PA had said, "Look at this doofus! He's all geeky looking! I bet he's never had sex in his life! Hah!", then yes, that would be mean-spirited and insulting. Saying that the guy looks like a stoner? Please. For one thing, "stoner" isn't even an insult anymore. What they said wasn't completely harmless, obviously, but let's not go overboard. There's a difference between a witty remark and a hateful attack.

Whether "stoner" is an insult or not, depends on the subtext. If I said to SWF that he is a stoner, he wouldn't take it as an insult because he knows me and he would know that it's just a joke among friends. In content that PA provided, "stoner" is ment as demeaning, it is an insult.
As for "Look at this doofus! He's all geeky looking! I bet he's never had sex in his life! Hah!", that's pretty much what PA's depiction of those guys is saying.
I could take the text of the comic itself a witty remark, but only under a very stretched definition of witty, but accompanied by caricatures and rant, it's not witty and it's too large to be considered a remark.

From my understanding (and I get this partly from PA's one and only book collection), they didn't start their comic with Gabe and Tycho as masks to their identity. They adopted those fictional personas as their own after a while. Why? Who knows. Maybe they thought it was "cute." Maybe they just wanted to keep their identities private (too bad success "ruined" that for them).
Anyway, I"m not saying that this makes it ok for them to make fun of other people's looks (yet at the same time I'm not saying I'm against it either).
I'm really tired, so sorry if this isn't making much sense.

I for one agree with you. PA should've chosen not to mock people's looks, because that's as low as a comedy can get.
The fact that they are quite different from what their alteregos are (now) is just underscoring the irony.

I wish Scott McCloud had had the cojones to keep his article online, if only with a retraction saying "On second thought, I don't think I was right about this." That's what I would have done. I think he was broadly right, by the way, and that Tycho's response was feeble.

Yeah, I hated that too. McCloud's article was based more on facts and less on opinions much more than any rant about this I've read so far. I'm all for "no drawbacks" and against that "ok, let's all pretend I never said that" game.

Gabe and Tycho have been doing this kind of "mean spirited" and "juvenile" humor for years. Why no one has blasted them about it until now is beyond me.

*nods head* It's what sells their strip anyway. Who still goes there for games review?

I think they mark up photocopies, and not the original art. At least, here in America. Otherwise, they'd have to wait forever for the art to get to their office, and then to return that art to the penciller, and wait for them to get that done. Nowadays, it's done with faxes, emails, and copies, so that they can mark 'em up, and then the artist can go back to the original and fix it without having to start all over again.

That's absolutely true. Though, with artists-editors, problem is, artists often have their vision and they'll try to fit other artists in their vision too. I once received very bad comments on LWK from one versed artist, later his friends told me that he simply doesn't appreciate comics that aren't drawn in realistic maneer. Though that's an extreme case. All in all, editor has to know his job, the problem is when editor starts thinking that he is a part of creative process, which he's not - he's supposed to be an objective watcher in the whole thing.

[Jen_Babcock]

Well my main point is is that I don't think people should be getting their panties in a twist about Gabe and Tycho's comic about the documentary if they've never been bothered by their offensive humor or their satircal take on individuals before.

[Subhuman]

Do you hate them because they have different opinion of comics? Or because they use big words ot say a little? Or because they look like hippy? None of those are reasons for hating someone. Did they ever did anyhing to you personally, kill your dopg or something?

Of course not, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to roll my eyes at their pretentious attitude. And I never said anything about hating them. Why would I hate someone who did nothing to me? You're leaping to conclusions about my personality. There's a difference between hate and mild irritation.

[Crazy Chris]

Am I the only one disturbed by the fact that everyone here is argueing about this more then the people who are actually involved in the controversy? Or by the fact that I can't spell argueing?

[McDuffies]

Do you hate them because they have different opinion of comics? Or because they use big words ot say a little? Or because they look like hippy? None of those are reasons for hating someone. Did they ever did anyhing to you personally, kill your dopg or something?

Of course not, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to roll my eyes at their pretentious attitude. And I never said anything about hating them. Why would I hate someone who did nothing to me? You're leaping to conclusions about my personality. There's a difference between hate and mild irritation.

Ok, I apologuise for that, I didn't mean to attack you personally.

Well my main point is is that I don't think people should be getting their panties in a twist about Gabe and Tycho's comic about the documentary if they've never been bothered by their offensive humor or their satircal take on individuals before.

I know, I just used the comment to support my claim that it was insulting joke after all. Plus, my concern over the fact that they will do something like this and get away with it every time because people are used to it from them.

[Subhuman]

Also, I think making fun of an artist carries more venom than making fun of a CEO at a game company.

[TheGoobla]

But editors can be necessary sometimes in order to help convey a point in the story better, or to point out an accidental flub in the work.

On the topic of editorial control, I don't think its about getting criticism and input from editors, its about the fact that its usually a fairly autocratic relationship. You've got a bunch of investors and advertisors on one hand, who are the main financing force of the comics, and pressure is being applied in a top-down manner to ensure they get a return on their investment.

I do think that editors are fine - so long as its in the shape of a collaborative effort, rather then just some yuppie boss telling you what will and won't sell. Although there are of course comics artists who can deal with that sort of thing, and naturally, they're usually the ones that market selection invariably winds up with. I for one, prefer a more liberal and cooperative environment however.

That's a general principle I hold. If a group of people are going to associate in order to produce something; comics, cars, foods, dildos... I think they should associate on free and equal terms.

[Col]

I completely agree.

[Jen_Babcock]

Also, I think making fun of an artist carries more venom than making fun of a CEO at a game company.

Possibly. Though at the core of it they're still making fun of individuals.

But maybe some people are more fair game than others.

Personally I couldn't care less.

EDIT: You know if you saw PA's comic about Rob Liefeld, you'd see they've been MUCH more harsh to individual ARTISTS in the past.

[Jen_Babcock]

Sorry to double post, but I just read that supposedly Penny Arcade's booth is right accross from McCloud's booth at the San Diego con. Hopefully for them the drama will die down (I'm sure I will).

Though the sadistic side of me is hoping for an old fashioned "let's take it outside" fist fight.