Oh the Drama!

[Jen_Babcock]

Scott Kurtz is being ridiculous- how do you even qualify "hardness?"

Hah! I stand corrected!

[Jackhass]

I don't think one or the other is harder...it's a personal thing. Some are better than one, some the other.

Personally I'm better at comedy. Between my comic and the numerous humorous articles around the web I've written it comes easy...I've never even seriously tried pure drama except in a few creative writing classes and those attempts were pretty mediocre.

[Dr Legostar]

Scott Kurtz is being ridiculous- how do you even qualify "hardness?"

1. Talc
2. Gypsum
3. Calcite
4. Fluorite
5. Apatite
6. Orthoclase
7. Quartz
8. Topaz
9. Corundum
10. Diamond

Duh.


on another note, it's much easier for me to write comedy for Legostar because Drama just doesn't work with lego bricks.

[Jim North]

You'd have slightly melt them, bend them into sweeping dramatic poses, and then wait for them to re-solidify.

[Dr Legostar]

You'd have slightly melt them, bend them into sweeping dramatic poses, and then wait for them to re-solidify.

i'm not sure even that would help.

[McDuffies]

Not picking on you specifically, just the last post with this opinion, so......etc

It's like how people always say that it's easier to write than to draw. But while making letters on a paper with a pencil is a common skill for a person, writing something that can actually constitute as a good script is much more difficult. But it's easier to differ amateurish drawing from good, than amateurish writing from good, even to the point where many inferior writers get along very well, which is not the case with inferior artists (unless it's manga, I guess )

Likewise, with humor you'll instantly declare it good or bad by a simple criterium of whether it made you laugh or not. Criteriums for writing drama are much more difficult. On one hand, this makes writing drama much more difficult because paths that you follow when writing are much more complicated and tangled, on the other hand it's much easier to get by with bad writing, because there isn't an immediate criterium that would declare your writing as bad. Therefore many people will think that writing drama is easier - similarly to how many people think that anyone can write, while not everyone can draw.

But reading this thread I noticed that many people seem to define drama as simply a fiction that is not comedic. It's not so simple, drama isn't just a simple complement of comedy.
For one, drama often overlaps with comedy - for instance someone's been talking about how comedy needs as much structure and planning as drama, for most of examples that I can think of are comedies with element of drama, and it's drama that gives it the structure. Like, Sluggy Freelance might be a comedy comic with very complicated plots and emotional network, but it's not it's comedic nature that lends it plots - it's the adventure elements; It's not the comedic nature that gives it emotional network, it's the dramatic elements. On the other hand, SF stories that are strictly comedic, are very simple in structure.
And then, what about those failed comedies than don't get any laughs? Don't they fall in the same category as failed dramas that don't get any emotional involvement to characters and interest in plots?
Genre is defined by it's characteristics, not by the lack of characteristics. Just writing the story that isn't funny doesn't mean that you're instantly writing drama. If you are writing drama, that means that you're dabbling with elements that define drama. Sure you don't have to bother with being funny, but you have to deal with those other, drama elements, which are very elusive, much more difficult than humor.

Ah. So it's a tall poppy thing. Okay.

Still reckon it's a little lame, but that's okay. Most people seem to still get a sense of satisfaction out of it.

Is it much different from you getting a sence of satisfaction out of contradicting everyone, always, even when you're addmitedly uninformed of the subject like here?
There hasn't been a discussion about Kurtz for months and maybe years around here. And this thread is rather poor with comments related to him, until you brought it up there were (I counted) four posts related to him, out of which two were strictly about his statement that started this thread and his comic, and not him personally. Other two could be taken as light-hearted jabs if you're in a bad mood. Where's all this "slagging" you've been mentioning? Are you sure you're not mistaking Kurtz with Rob Liefeld or Mookie?

[Fabio Ciccone]

To me comedy vs. drama is not the main point, but reality vs. fantasy... I just can't write reality, no matter what I try.

[Yeahduff]

McDuffies wins.

[Jim North]

McDuffies wins.

Intolerable!

I may have to disagree with him after all. It's a matter of principle now.

[McDuffies]

Well I did win till darned Fabio posted after me. For two days there I was a winner/thread killer!

[KWill]

Well I did win till darned Fabio posted after me. For two days there I was a winner/thread killer!

[Cope]

Now there's a beast you don't wanna tangle with.

[Fabio Ciccone]

Well I did win till darned Fabio posted after me. For two days there I was a winner/thread killer!

Nothing lasts forever... even Fidel retired!