How are you doing, comic-wise?

[djracodex]

The pages where "How are you doing, comic-wise?" turned into "Theological debate 101" lol!

[robotthepirate]

Ok, it's an ignorant joke. I'll email him and tell him to remove it.

I didn't give it too much thought at first glance but I can see your points. A four panel critism of such a complicated theory is clearly not going to do a good job of it.

No, I mean that it's not good enough to say that both sides consider the other's position to be preposterous, so they must be even. The evidence has to be examined, and the evidence supports the Big Bang. Not everything about it is understood, but that should not be taken as a blank canvas for supporting any story that one wishes to be true.

But the beliefs and values of persons, however bias and ignorant, are equal. Ignoring how the comic delivers the author's view (badly) it still understandable that he and others feel this way because their argument is not based entirely on science but the belief in a being who is beyond and can defy the laws of science as we know them. Even if this faith is misplaced the fact that they believe it gives their motivations equal social worth to those who believe everything must be proveable by science.

The pages where "How are you doing, comic-wise?" turned into "Theological debate 101" lol!

Lol, the more I watch that there's more and more cats.

My comic is suffering from this debate, that's how I'm doing comic-wise. So much time trying not saying things that could be misinterpreted.

[IVstudios]

Ok, it's an ignorant joke. I'll email him and tell him to remove it.

I didn't give it too much thought at first glance but I can see your points. A four panel critism of such a complicated theory is clearly not going to do a good job of it.

I can't speak for the others, but I didn't mean to say it's a bad or inappropriate joke, per say (I love a good pithy joke when it's of an option I happen to agree with). You just seemed surprised that it would offend someone enough to not want to read the rest of the comic, so I thought some context might explain it.

[Terotrous]

On a completely unrelated note, how's everyone doing comic-wise?

My secret project will probably be done by next week!

But then there's a really long editing process so nothing will actually be put up for a few months or so.

[Cope]

No, I mean that it's not good enough to say that both sides consider the other's position to be preposterous, so they must be even. The evidence has to be examined, and the evidence supports the Big Bang. Not everything about it is understood, but that should not be taken as a blank canvas for supporting any story that one wishes to be true.

But the beliefs and values of persons, however bias and ignorant, are equal.

Again, no they are not. People's values and beliefs don't exist in a vacuum. They can and should be assessed.

Ignoring how the comic delivers the author's view (badly)

It's more that the author's view itself is wrong. It's not a matter of miscommunication.

Even if this faith is misplaced the fact that they believe it gives their motivations equal social worth to those who believe everything must be proveable by science.

I'm not sure what you mean by "social worth", but if your point is that the guy is as entitled to his beliefs as anyone else, then I agree. That doesn't make his beliefs less ignorant.

[Cope]

ALSO I HAVE A COMIC THAT I DRAW AND MY BUFFER WILL PROBABLY BE GONE SOON.

[McDuffies]

If we're already making a big discussion about five strips long comic, I think I should clarify a few things instead of expecting them to go without saying:
I don't hate this guy. I don't have anything against him. It's hard to tell which type he belongs to, but even if he was a fundamental, it wouldn't mean he was a bad person. Some fundamental christians are known to be good people. In fact this guy is probably a good guy, most people are.
If his comic expresses things that I think are wrong, what does that mean? Sometimes, comics just don't come across the way authors intend. And even if things I complained about are intentional, they still don't give full disclosure of one's personality. People have more than one side of personality.
I also don't deny this guy a right to make this comic, specially if it's a personal affair. Does a comic make this world a worse place? Not likely, competition in this area is just overwhelming. If making it is making him happy, it likely makes the world a better place.
The only thing I'm really arguing is whether the comic is good or bad. That we're mostly discussing belief system behind the comic is unfortunate neccessity, because it is something that affects the quality of the comic. But I'm not interested in this belief system as anything other than a quality of the comic (nor do I think that it accurately represents anything else).
Remember how I talked at length about art and narrative style of the comic and character designs? The only reason I'm giving more space to belief system than to those is that people had less objections to what I said about those.
If I think that it's a bad comic, do I think that the comic should not exist. Certainly not. If I don't like a comic I just don't read it and, unless it's a comic that somehow forces itself into my world repeatedly, I'm not bothered by it.

The first I read as a jokey criticism of the author himself and as something a lot of Christians can relate to (I know I can). Man has something to pray about and keeps forgetting, we've all been there. It may as well have been about remembering to book a dentist appointment as far as how judgemental it goes.

Or if he was making comics about football? It's a different baggage, different weight, different context, different outcome.

Ok, possibly yours is another reading of this comic.
My reading is based on experiences that I had with christian comics. If there is one defense of the comic I could think of (and addmitedly it's a big one) it's that the comic has only a few strips, which isn't a whole lot to base a context on it. It may be that I unfairly judged this comic because I expect a christian comic to be judgmental. But that's the baggage I mentioned earlier, what comes in the package with making christian comics.

But on the other hand, some other comics in the bunch (the big bang one, for instance) gently shove this one on the judgemental side; he doesn't display humility you're ascribing to this one in the rest of the pack.

Here's how the whole reading experience of this particular strip is to me. I'm arriving to this deeply personal comic where a guy is ostensibly expressing what bothers him, and one of the first statements I run into is "people forget to pray". Really? All the ills and hypocrisies of modern christianity, and one of the first things you want to talk about, one of, in your opinion, most pressing issues, is that people don't pray enough?
It may be that the author didn't intend it this way. It may be that he has a whole lot of other things to talk about. This is how it appears to me as a reader, I'm judging a comic and not it's author, and comics do have a way of sneaking unfortunate implications and unwanted effects under author's nose.

The second wouldn't be at all out of place in a secular comic (which is fine, because it's agenda it set entirely by the author), it's just a joke about how time absorbing social media is with a hefty nod to Braveheart. Though if we're talking systems of beliefs I can't stand to watch either that or The Patriot without feeling a tad racially abused by Mel Gibson.

There are a few problems about this comic, the worse one being that it's an old joke and an old observation, one much older than internet itself. With such old observations, you're expecting every next iteration to at least look at the issue with more depth, which isn't happening. Internet and social networks are making attention span shorter? What else is new?

But the complain pertaining to this discussion is that this comic sets the tone for the later comics with the tone of "me, the righteous one - modern world, the evil", and that colours the way reader looks at comics coming after it.

As for the Big Bang strip. It offends you so much that it makes you hate the rest of the comic?

It affects the way I see other comics in that I have an additional information about the mindset of this comic, and that information isn't favourable. More concise people than me have said smart things. I'll add once more: the strip inevitably colours the way we read other strips in the bunch. I can't look at this comic and the prayer comic and pretend that they're separate, independent of each other. Nor am I supposed to.

Now an aside so people don't think I've got something against McD personally or that I've returned to the forum just to wade through heavy debate (neither of which are true).

The thought has never crossed my mind.

So I'll agree with your stance against "rituals and church's addendums", there's nothing wrong with rituals as such, but they should be personal things that aids faith in practise rather than a replacement of it. With regards to the comic though I don't see where he's supporting these things. Though I'm happy to change my opinion if he does a "said my 20 rosaries, sins are forgiven" comic.

Rituals have one thing wrong with them, though, and that is giving people an opportunity to practice christianity through them instead of through through more substantial actions, like adhering to commandments. I see a lot of people sticking to rituals as if they are the most important thing about faith, while clearly neglecting more substantial things, and I conclude that people are using them as a psychological crutch, to convince themselves that they are good people and christians without having to change something about themselves.
I think that you can figure out how I can see prayer, another way of practicing christianity through speaking, as opposed to practicing it through action, as yet another of rituals with similar effects.

Saying that this man shouldn't share his own personal faith or that it has to be a controversial subject because of the church's dark past would be like stopping a child from saying he enjoys football because of the sport's record of fan violence and racism, or like suggesting people cannot talk about life in Germany because of the Nazis, or that the UK should never again be allowed to make children's television after almost every man I grew watching has been accused of child abuse and/or rape in the last few months. I consider the crusades no more an act of Christianity than I consider the Nazi party an effort to perfect the human race, bad things get done for bad reasons and are disguised as good things with good reasons to trick people into going along.

Here's a thing though, Christianity has brought many good things in these 2000 years, but those atrocious things that it brought are usually a result of using christianity as a front to judge people who think different and live differently, to despise what they don't understand, to resist any kind of change and advancement, to suffocate knowledge in favour of dogma. So by starting a comic in a distinctly judgmental tone, then showing scorn for scientific breakthroughs while embracing dogma, one inevitably brings on himself comparison with these unfortunate events in history of christianity rather than the other ones.
If the comic had started on a different note, if it had focused on the positive or if it had chosen a larger, less "pressing issue" oriented picture, I would have minded it just as much as I would have minded a child saying that it likes footbal. But since it didn't, I mind it just as much as I would have minded a comic about football that casually mentions five minutes into it's runtime that violent mobs and racists kinda actually have a point.

Ok, it's an ignorant joke. I'll email him and tell him to remove it.

I wouldn't advise it. Let the guy run the comic the way he wants to. If the comic is bad, it'll be solely his doing.

But the beliefs and values of persons, however bias and ignorant, are equal.

Actually they are not equal, as they are weighted by arguements that stand behind them as well as (somewhat less justifiably) universal acceptance of those ideas. Don't make me give examples.

Even if this faith is misplaced the fact that they believe it gives their motivations equal social worth to those who believe everything must be proveable by science.

Thanks to Heisenberg, noone thinks that everything is proveable by science. We just think that if something is proven, it is true, and since we're not sure where the limits of what is proveable are, it is our duty to keep pushing current limits of what is proven.

[McDuffies]

Yes, I agree lightbringer is still too heavy on the prose. Personally I don't like inner monologue and thought bubbles so i told my writer to absolutely avoid those in the comic. Characters are much more fun when they are playing off other characters and you can get so much more of their personality from simple banter than you would with exposition.

Funny thing is, I like inner monologues and thought bubbles. It's just that I never found a way to integrate them in any of my comics well, and I also don't think that professional authors are doing too hot a job of it. I like the idea that I have additional means of telling readers something I can't tell them through actions, but I can never draw a line between what I'm showing and what I'm putting in thought bubbles without making it look awkward, so I usually end up with no thought bubbles at all.
And yes, the comic is much better and more interesting if we get to know a character through his actions and banter with other characters, rather than if we have direct access to his thoughts, which is another reason why I can't find a way to make thought bubbles and inner monologues work.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

On a completely unrelated note, how's everyone doing comic-wise?

An innovative question!

I had a tragic realization that one of my characters has not only been appearing off model, but in the course of the comic I cannot really find an example where he really truly looked the correct way I picture him in my head I sat down and worked on his design for a while, just focusing on the side profile, until I got it to as close an approximation of how he appears in my mind as my skill level is currently capable of. I'll have to do the front and 3/4 views as well, but the side profile is a good anchor to have, and I'm glad I caught it "early" (160 pages -_-) enough in the comic that there's hope for the future.

[Humbug]

Funny thing is, I like inner monologues and thought bubbles. It's just that I never found a way to integrate them in any of my comics well, and I also don't think that professional authors are doing too hot a job of it. I like the idea that I have additional means of telling readers something I can't tell them through actions, but I can never draw a line between what I'm showing and what I'm putting in thought bubbles without making it look awkward, so I usually end up with no thought bubbles at all.
And yes, the comic is much better and more interesting if we get to know a character through his actions and banter with other characters, rather than if we have direct access to his thoughts, which is another reason why I can't find a way to make thought bubbles and inner monologues work.

I'm sure it can be done well, it's just not easy to, the only time I really liked inner monologue was from Legacy of Kain, although that is a game and not a comic, but it could count on a certain level. I think I liked it because it was written in such a theatrical way, I was marvelling at the prose.

On a completely unrelated note, how's everyone doing comic-wise?

Well, since you asked, I'm at the start of the big tavern fight scene. Here's a teaser panel.

[Aster Azul]

Hey there! Looks the forum still lives!

[McDuffies]

I'm doing ok but I'm thinking perhaps I tend to overdo with doublechecking facts.

[Yeahduff]

Read something by Bryan Lee O'Malley today that was interesting:

If you’re trying to write a comic, you should have images in your mind. Strong images. Not just words and ideas and abstract concepts.

True? False?

[JSConner800]

Read something by Bryan Lee O'Malley today that was interesting:

If you’re trying to write a comic, you should have images in your mind. Strong images. Not just words and ideas and abstract concepts.

True? False?

I'd say true. Unless you're both writer and artist, you have to be able to communicate your vision to the artist, and for that, you should have a strong picture in your head that you can describe to him/her. You could also give your artist free rein to do as they please, which I've heard some comic writers do, but if you're the one with the story in your head, leaving the visuals up to your artist can sometimes lead to clashes of continuity or a general disconnect between the plot and the images representing it. My first few pages of script were pretty vague, and our artist ended up having to redraw several panels to keep continuity as a result. I tend to write from strong mental images even when I'm doing prose, so I was able to correct this rather quickly, and it's already starting to show in the more recent pages our artist has drawn. It makes sense. If you're interested at all in contributing to a visual medium, you have to have a powerful vision.

Or, y'know, you can just scribble out some stick figures in MS paint, whichever gets you off.

[Terotrous]

Read something by Bryan Lee O'Malley today that was interesting:

If you’re trying to write a comic, you should have images in your mind. Strong images. Not just words and ideas and abstract concepts.

True? False?

I think it's true, comics are a visual medium, you can't divorce the visual aspect from the text or it ceases to be a comic. When writing a comic, you also have to be thinking about how it will look when it's put together.

[IVstudios]

I'll say mostly true. You don't need every single panel laid out in your head, but you should have a few high points visualized.

And just because you have an image in your head of how you want a scene to go doesn't mean it can't change as you're putting it onto paper. You might have a specific vision of how you want a scene to play out but as you're drawing it realize that it needs to be changed to work visually or fit with continuity or just make sense. I think you get a lot of dumb writing from people who have too strong a vision of how they want a scene to play out and they end up ignoring basic logic if it doesn't match up with their vision. You get things like characters that kill a hundred henchmen but then won't kill the villain because they're "not that kind of person."

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

I agree. Of course ideas and concepts are important in any medium, but if the strength of your work lies in clever* wordplay, it's quite possible that you might find a novel more suitable for the purposes of your work. That's not to say said smart** wordplay has no place in comics- good writing makes anything better! But you do need to have strong visual roots for what you wish to create, especially if you're doing something that isn't two gamers on a couch or Dinosaur Comics, bless Ryan North's brilliance. (Which one could make the argument that his vision was exceptionally strong that he can use the same series of images thousands of times and still find innovative ways to spin it)

It's surely possible to not figure out an exact visual of a scene until you sit down to draw it- I can't tell you how many times I've had a scene in my head look one particular way because I picture it like a movie, and i have to change things or put people on different sides when it gets time to draw because that's how it would work in a comic. But it'd be tough to sit down to draw a scene someone else wrote if they never mentioned things like- This takes place in a haunted castle! None of the lights work, so you have to carry a torch around, which is important in chapter 3! Penelope is twice the size of Warnold! Also, the villain has a bunch of teeth missing! But they're not missing in an evil-guy way, it's more of a hillbilly way!

Also, certain concepts are much easier to convey through imagery, others through words. If your story is primarily best conveyed through words, and you have a hard time visualizing a way to draw those concepts, that's a sign that a comic might not be the best vehicle for your story.

* & ** I used "smart" instead of "clever" the second sentence because often there isn't room for clever wordplay *in comics*, and people try to shoehorn it in, insisting they've made a pun and we should all laud them. Smart wordplay means knowing when you have a little room to be silly about words, and knowing the importance of conservation when it comes to text in general.

[robotthepirate]

I'm pretty much accepting that I have a different viewpoint regarding people's opinions, in that I consider them equal and others don't, but given that I consider your opinions equal to my own I'm fine with that. I'm happier to see this thread talk about comics again.

That said, this concered me (and this is aimed entirely at McD to the extent I almost PMed him (but it'd be more open to do it this way) and is a issue of faith and nothing comic related so feel free to skip over it):

I think that you can figure out how I can see prayer, another way of practicing christianity through speaking, as opposed to practicing it through action, as yet another of rituals with similar effects.

Prayer is a direct communication with God; at best an exposition of your heart that lets Him into your deepest emotions and opens you up to hearing his voice, at worst merely a list of things you want, but a communication nonetheless. While there are plenty of Chistians who use litergy to help them to pray the moment that becomes empty words it is no longer prayer. I'm don't know who's given you the impression prayer is nothing but words or why.

Read something by Bryan Lee O'Malley today that was interesting:

If you’re trying to write a comic, you should have images in your mind. Strong images. Not just words and ideas and abstract concepts.

True? False?

I'll agree with that. The way I picture RTP in my head is epic and while I fail to portray the comics with such skill I wouldn't be able to make them at all if I couldn't picture them in my head. Plus the amazingness of the imagined version will keep pushing me to improve.

but if the strength of your work lies in clever* wordplay,

Aw, man! Mine usually isn't even that clever.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Also, certain concepts are much easier to convey through imagery, others through words. If your story is primarily best conveyed through words, and you have a hard time visualizing a way to draw those concepts, that's a sign that a comic might not be the best vehicle for your story.

Yep totally.

[LibertyCabbage]

The early chapters of Lightbringer are actually being remade right now with better art and writing. As it turns out, when you cut down on the verbiage and excise the adolescent moralising against pacifism, all you're left with is a bunch of superhero cliches.

Well, that's... fucky.

Well, um, Linkara had a lot (and I mean really lot) of learning to do before he'd gain ability to write well, and by that point he'd probably either finish the comic or lose interest in it (I'm talking in past tense because I haven't checked his comic recently and don't know what it's like now.For all I know, it may have become good). But if I'm considering whether the premise could have turned out into a different comic, well I do think that most of premises can, and in this case probably have, since the basic arc of Lightbringer is something I've seen superhero comics doing often in last few decades.

O.K. Yeah, I wouldn't recommend that an inexperienced writer tries doing a superhero comic. Everything's just been so done to death that there's about a 0 percent chance of a creator like that doing anything worthwhile. So, hypothetically, I would've perhaps advised Linkara to file away his ideas for Lightbringer to use at a later time when he's more prepared for it.

Solomon is to me a good example of a guy who beefed on conventional rules and sticks to them like a foo'.

I guess it's essentially an issue of the reviewer establishing credibility with the audience. Solomon never really tried to do that, largely for the reasons you pointed out.

What I am worried about is that authors are often discouraged from invention, like Cuddly was in this case, I think.

Right, in which I guess I'd say, just go with whatever feels right. You don't wanna get overanalytical worrying too much about what people will think.

I don't care. I think that when a generation that read "Ghost world" when the were kids replaces current generation in power, things will be better for reputation of comics, though kids'll still be proving that video games are not just for kids. Until they replace their previous generation, of course.

I agree that comics will inevitably be regarded more highly. The medium's too appealing not to continue to evolve.

Incidentally I am doing better than usual comic-wise, I'm writing something, second draft currently in progress (first one being laughably bad), and if this comic works out for me, I might consider making it a series. It's kinda coincidental and funny that it's a comic about witchcraft.

I'm excited to hear that you're working on something again.

As for the religious stuff, I think it's been covered pretty thoroughly, and I don't really have anything to add to it. Reading McDuffies' and robotthepirate's posts, I felt my negativity towards the comic fluctuating in response to the arguments, and I think it's still somewhere between the sentiments of those two. Ultimately, my current standing relates to something I wrote in this thread recently:

Yeah, and sometimes, inexperienced creators get into real trouble trying to do stuff that's beyond their abilities. That's where you get a lot of the infamous scenes in webcomics, where creators who can't write that well to begin with try to tackle sensitive issues like rape and religion, and it takes their comic from "boring" to "awful.

So, the lesson to be learned is, a creator should stay away from ultra-sensitive topics like this unless they're confident that they have a really good grasp of what they're doing. This guy's obviously very clumsy at getting his point across, and, like I said above regarding Linkara's comic, it'd be wise to file the religious ideas away for later while he develops his abilities in a less abrasive manner.

Personally I don't like inner monologue and thought bubbles so i told my writer to absolutely avoid those in the comic.

Writers who use those a lot tend to be trying too hard to be edgy and grimdark.

The pages where "How are you doing, comic-wise?" turned into "Theological debate 101" lol!

It's fun, though, as long as everyone's being civil about it. I mean, the forums are here so we can discuss stuff.

Ok, it's an ignorant joke. I'll email him and tell him to remove it.

I expect him to find this thread anyways in his referrals. (Now, that's gonna be awkward.) I'd hope that he learns something from this thread.

Hey there! Looks the forum still lives!

Hey!

True? False?

True, because art is 90-plus percent execution. Concept is way overrated.

As for how I'm doing, comic-wise, I started working on a scene that's dialogue-heavy and pretty intense. I don't think I've drawn a scene like this before.