WCCA Winners Announced

The Neko · Post by **The Neko** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:59 am

<a href="http://www.ccawards.com/2005_ceremony.htm">The WCCA online presentation is up.</a>

I think they did a good job this year, even though I think fanfiction comics like that PPG Doujinshi shouldn't be elligible... but hey, that's just me and my irrational distaste for those things.

Prettysenshi · Post by **Prettysenshi** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:25 pm

I kinda can agree with you. Fanfiction comics shouldn't be allowed for certain catagories, like original story or character, b/c in some ways, their works aren't original. But whatever. I think that they did do a good job.

Alschroeder · Post by **Alschroeder** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:41 pm

Yeah, I'm not faulting the COMIC, which is more entertaining than the original cartoon, but I think there should be a separate category for fanfic. Fanfic, by its very nature, has a pre-generated fan base of fans of the original. It's disheartening to see, say, Magellan or Killroy and Tina, that worked hard to build their fanbase from nothing, having their original characters eclipsed by those that are technically copyrighted by Cartoon Network, and already have their legions of fans.
Again, not the comic's fault, but I think a change should be made in next year's WCCA rules, to have awards for fanfic separate from awards for original series.---Al

Spriteville, USA · Post by **Spriteville, USA** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:56 pm

My goal in the future is to win an award on here for a sprite comic.

Now all I need to do is update and get good at this comicking thing.

Kris X · Post by **Kris X** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 1:22 pm

Hm. Forgot to vote for that.

RPin · Post by **RPin** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 1:28 pm

Genndy Tartakovsky and Craig McCracken could be proud of winning the WCCA, who knows?

Nicotine · Post by **Nicotine** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 1:52 pm

There are webcomic awards...?

I never knew that, heh. Great job to the winners, I guess.

Warren · Post by **Warren** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 3:21 pm

I'd forgotten all about the awards.

Levi-chan · Post by **Levi-chan** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 3:29 pm

Woo! Copper, Copper, ra-ra-ra.

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:57 pm

Uh, this thing with PPGD winning for character design is boarding with scandalous... I am also rather sure that Dinosaur comic doesn't belong in antrophomorfic category, it is just cynical to nominate it for that. A reason more why WCA jury should finally start to check nominations for comics that just don't belong in certain categories.

But one of my favourite comics in outstanding comic of the year, so

Sortelli · Post by **Sortelli** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:28 pm

I think Dinosaur Comics fits the category. It is certainly awesome.

Jim North · Post by **Jim North** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:36 pm

By the broadest sense of the word, EOI is an anthropomorphic comic. So why didn't you win, dammit?!

Sortelli · Post by **Sortelli** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:47 pm

I was holding out for the Haven't Updated In A Year category.

Besides, Dinosaur Comics is consistently dinosaurs that talk like people, EOI is not built around anthro characters, unless you count the imaginary personifications of people in a chatroom to be anthromo. . . fuck it, I don't even want to try to spell that damn word ever again. Anthropomorpicfuckzorz.

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:39 am

While we're at it, Dinosaur comics is even less built arouns anthro charcters than EOI. Talking dinosaurs are just about the least important thing in it.
Actually, it's not built around any characters, the least antropomorphic. It doesn't really matter whether it's dinosaurs who are connected with speech baloons or anything else. The visual side of the comic is based on rehashing the series of images, and it really doesn't matter whether it's talking animals or something else on them (that is, if some different panels were picked at the start, comic wouldn't change much). They're avatars, symbols, not characters.
Thing is, by applying cold, aimed logic, you can stretch antropomorphic category to fit them in (aimed - in sence that if your aim was to put them in, you could do that), but it's really too big a stretch. That's why I think it's cynical. Like, fooling a WCA system by Dinosaur comic fans.

Sortelli · Post by **Sortelli** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:02 pm

No, it actually IS a comic about talking dinosaurs. The continuity, such as it is, wouldn't fit with different characters doing the dialogue.

Remember though, the awards come from votes that come from people like us, webcomic artists. I'm glad the judges don't over-turn results based on their own whims when there's a plurality of cartoonists picking the winner.

I didn't vote at all this year, incidentally, so I wasn't one of the people who picked Dinosaur Comics. If I was going to nominate it for something, it would be for the writing.

Wp · Post by Wp » Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:35 pm

You're right, in a way, McDuffies. When I see the word "anthropomorphic," the first thing I think of is "animals given human characteristics." But if you take the dictionary definition:

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

One entry found for anthropomorphism.
Main Entry: an

Jim North · Post by **Jim North** » Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:26 am

Well, not all of them. There are a good number of people who make a distinction between "talking animals" (wherein they have regular bodies, but can speak to humans) and other anthropomorphs (wherein they have more humanoid bodies).

Wp · Post by Wp » Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:54 am

Yeah, you're right. Actually, the absolute first thing that pops into my mind is your latter definition (which typically includes talking as well).

Kalle B · Post by **Kalle B** » Wed Jul 13, 2005 11:53 am

mcDuffies wrote:Actually, it's not built around any characters, the least antropomorphic.

No offense, but this makes me wonder how much of Dinosaur Comics you've actually read. In my opinion, to say that the dinosaurs that put the "dinosaur" in "Dinosaur Comics" aren't characters is very strange. They have personalities, histories, interpersonal relationships... yeah, all of that. How do you define "character"?

And aren't all characters "symbols" in some sense?

/Kalle B

Jackhass · Post by **Jackhass** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:21 am

Hmmm...

...I haven't read the majority of the winners. I guess I'm not hip to the latest in the webcomics scene.