(no subject)
Heh-heh, this is probably going to stun the few people who have me on their Friends list, but I'm actually going to post something of substance.
I grabbed a copy of the Bay Guardian today because the cover had "Independent comic book stores fight back" on it. This piqued my interest, as I am an avid follower of several comic book titles, and regularly visit my local comic book stores. As a matter of fact, I was visiting my most local comic book store when I spotted the Guardian. I even attended the San Diego Comic Convention this year.
I was especially curious about the "independent" part; did it signify that San Francisco (where I once lived for many years) had been invaded by NON-independent comic book store? I don't know if there is such a thing as a non-independent comic book store in this country. The UK has Forbidden Planet, but there's not an equivalent that I'm aware of in this country.
So I flipped to the article, and was presented with a fine example of why I avoid reading the Guardian. The Guardian, for those not aware, is the newspaper of the Liberal Establishment in San Francisco. As such, with every issue it commits many of the same journalistic sins, more than one of which is contained in this article, as we will see.
Note for those not familiar with my political viewpoint: I consider myself to be a liberal, but I often find myself embarrassed at the words and actions of those who claim to represent my political demographic. The Bay Area is one of the few places in America where liberals have managed to stay in power, pretty securely so, for decades. As such, they are the establishment around here, and they act like it, protecting their own interests at the expense of their supposed political ideals, etc.
My liberalism has (I believe) come from hard experience and analysis, not from growing up with liberalism as the accepted "truth." I was raised a Nixon Republican, and my mother is quite active in that party in San Diego. As I got older, I developed my own sense of right and wrong, and became what I now call a "redneck liberal." As opposed to the whiny type, y'see....
If anything, I give the liberal establishment a harder time, because they are supposed to represent MY ideals. The conservatives are a lost cause. I expect them to behave badly. Liberals are supposed to be the good guys.
Anyway, enough background. Let's examine the article.
Sin #1: Sensationalistic cover blurb.
The article is merely a guide to the author's favorite comic stores in San Francisco and Berkeley. Actual title "A guide to Bay Area comic retailers." The lead paragraphs are the only place where he lamely attempts to pit these "cool" independents against a straw man, the Borders chain. I guess because they've started carrying graphic novels, and a very small selection of Marvel and DC comics, they're eeeevil. If the Guardian were interviewing small comic book publishers, Borders would be eeeevil for NOT carrying their titles.
Sin #2 Preaching (pandering) to the choir
"Hollywood has seized on comics for new material, from the mainstream Spider-Man to the indie Hellboy. But sales have stayed flat. The major publishers have made things worse by encouraging people to buy trade paperbacks at Borders instead of visiting small, neighborhood comic book stores."
Of course she doesn't need to explain exactly HOW the major publishers are encouraging people to buy trade paperbacks at Borders instead of visiting small, neighborhood comic book stores. Since we are a Liberal Bay Area audience, we already know that The Man is evil.
I am a big consumer of graphical fiction. If I were being encouraged to visit Borders instead of Alameda Comics and Cards (not mentioned in the article), I would probably notice.
Sin #3 Geographical ignorance/elitism
All of the "Bay Area" comic stores she mentions are in the only cities that actually matter, Berkeley and San Francisco.
Alameda Sports Cards and Comics? Probably not hip enough, what with those (shudder) sports cards, and wasn't Alameda that town where they ran that lesbian schoolteacher out on a rail a few years back (actually, she won her case and kept her job)?
Lee's Comics in San Mateo? Is San Mateo reaaaally considered part of the Bay Area? Dr. Comics and Mr. Games in Oakland? Games are better than (shudder) sports cards, I suppose, but I don't think they'll be having whisky tastings any time soon.
Sin #4 Ineptly executed snobbery
"In San Francisco, Comix Experience (305 Divisadero, S.F. 415-863-9258, www.comixexperience.com) is more likely to feature a tableau from an Alan Moore comic than Superman in its display window."
Y'see, Alan Moore is one o'them interlectual comic writers, and Superman is the corniest old-time superhero of them all.
What would she think if Comix Experience put up a scene from one of the Superman books that Alan Moore has written?
Once again, what could have been an interesting article gets sunk by idiotic manufactured controversy and cultural elitism.
Hmm, I just went to the author's website, which claims to be "a magazine for people who defy categories." She is the genius (I mean that sincerely) who came up with God Hates Figs.
Perhaps it should be "a magazine for people who defy categories in the most predictable way possible."
I grabbed a copy of the Bay Guardian today because the cover had "Independent comic book stores fight back" on it. This piqued my interest, as I am an avid follower of several comic book titles, and regularly visit my local comic book stores. As a matter of fact, I was visiting my most local comic book store when I spotted the Guardian. I even attended the San Diego Comic Convention this year.
I was especially curious about the "independent" part; did it signify that San Francisco (where I once lived for many years) had been invaded by NON-independent comic book store? I don't know if there is such a thing as a non-independent comic book store in this country. The UK has Forbidden Planet, but there's not an equivalent that I'm aware of in this country.
So I flipped to the article, and was presented with a fine example of why I avoid reading the Guardian. The Guardian, for those not aware, is the newspaper of the Liberal Establishment in San Francisco. As such, with every issue it commits many of the same journalistic sins, more than one of which is contained in this article, as we will see.
Note for those not familiar with my political viewpoint: I consider myself to be a liberal, but I often find myself embarrassed at the words and actions of those who claim to represent my political demographic. The Bay Area is one of the few places in America where liberals have managed to stay in power, pretty securely so, for decades. As such, they are the establishment around here, and they act like it, protecting their own interests at the expense of their supposed political ideals, etc.
My liberalism has (I believe) come from hard experience and analysis, not from growing up with liberalism as the accepted "truth." I was raised a Nixon Republican, and my mother is quite active in that party in San Diego. As I got older, I developed my own sense of right and wrong, and became what I now call a "redneck liberal." As opposed to the whiny type, y'see....
If anything, I give the liberal establishment a harder time, because they are supposed to represent MY ideals. The conservatives are a lost cause. I expect them to behave badly. Liberals are supposed to be the good guys.
Anyway, enough background. Let's examine the article.
Sin #1: Sensationalistic cover blurb.
The article is merely a guide to the author's favorite comic stores in San Francisco and Berkeley. Actual title "A guide to Bay Area comic retailers." The lead paragraphs are the only place where he lamely attempts to pit these "cool" independents against a straw man, the Borders chain. I guess because they've started carrying graphic novels, and a very small selection of Marvel and DC comics, they're eeeevil. If the Guardian were interviewing small comic book publishers, Borders would be eeeevil for NOT carrying their titles.
Sin #2 Preaching (pandering) to the choir
"Hollywood has seized on comics for new material, from the mainstream Spider-Man to the indie Hellboy. But sales have stayed flat. The major publishers have made things worse by encouraging people to buy trade paperbacks at Borders instead of visiting small, neighborhood comic book stores."
Of course she doesn't need to explain exactly HOW the major publishers are encouraging people to buy trade paperbacks at Borders instead of visiting small, neighborhood comic book stores. Since we are a Liberal Bay Area audience, we already know that The Man is evil.
I am a big consumer of graphical fiction. If I were being encouraged to visit Borders instead of Alameda Comics and Cards (not mentioned in the article), I would probably notice.
Sin #3 Geographical ignorance/elitism
All of the "Bay Area" comic stores she mentions are in the only cities that actually matter, Berkeley and San Francisco.
Alameda Sports Cards and Comics? Probably not hip enough, what with those (shudder) sports cards, and wasn't Alameda that town where they ran that lesbian schoolteacher out on a rail a few years back (actually, she won her case and kept her job)?
Lee's Comics in San Mateo? Is San Mateo reaaaally considered part of the Bay Area? Dr. Comics and Mr. Games in Oakland? Games are better than (shudder) sports cards, I suppose, but I don't think they'll be having whisky tastings any time soon.
Sin #4 Ineptly executed snobbery
"In San Francisco, Comix Experience (305 Divisadero, S.F. 415-863-9258, www.comixexperience.com) is more likely to feature a tableau from an Alan Moore comic than Superman in its display window."
Y'see, Alan Moore is one o'them interlectual comic writers, and Superman is the corniest old-time superhero of them all.
What would she think if Comix Experience put up a scene from one of the Superman books that Alan Moore has written?
Once again, what could have been an interesting article gets sunk by idiotic manufactured controversy and cultural elitism.
Hmm, I just went to the author's website, which claims to be "a magazine for people who defy categories." She is the genius (I mean that sincerely) who came up with God Hates Figs.
Perhaps it should be "a magazine for people who defy categories in the most predictable way possible."