web stats

CSBG Archive

Great Blog Piece on Morrison

Amypoodle has a great piece up at Mindless Ones about Grant Morrison’s work. Amypoodle is really putting together a great string of posts there. All of them are quite interesting.

32 Comments

*sigh* I’m in a bit of a snit toward Morrison at the moment, having ordered the SeaGuy back issues a couple of weeks ago (luckily, all together they cost less than $5) & found the series an unbearably silly exercise in self-indulgence, to the point of bordering on masturbation.

His worshippers really *will* swallow anything he flings at them, won’t they?

i could not agree more dan, seaguy was plainly awful. but if i have to put up with a stinker once in a while for the rest of his stuff i say bring it on.

i just want final crisis to be over so he can revert back to his own creations and blow my mind ever once in a while.

Wow, Dan, way to be an absolutist. I’m a huge fan of much of Morrison’s work, and I don’t think that everything has to be perfect to be a fan. Sure Seaguy is silly, and all over the place, and inconsistent, and all that. However, I also think there are really interesting experiments in there discussing totalitarianism, the tyranny of commercialization, and an interesting attempt at meta commentary on the superhero concept, and some of the traditional tropes of the genre. That being said, I see your points: I don’t think it holds together as a story like I’d like it to,and I’d never recommend it to all readers…but then I like Beckett too, and he lived off of experimental clunkers. Some of us aren’t blind followers, but in the search for something better and different, Morrison’s always at least trying.

*sigh* I’m in a bit of a snit toward Morrison at the moment, having ordered the SeaGuy back issues a couple of weeks ago (luckily, all together they cost less than $5) & found the series an unbearably silly exercise in self-indulgence, to the point of bordering on masturbation.

His worshippers really *will* swallow anything he flings at them, won’t they?

If you’re in a snit toward Morrison, Dan, then why are you even replying?

Particularly in a piece that has nothing to do with Seaguy.

I could do without the “I don’t like hard SF and so it is USELESS” babble, but not too bad a look at Morrison’s oeuvre.

Also, her very definitions of “hard” and “soft” SF are way outside the mean, as evidenced by her classification of X-Men as “hard” SF.

Yeah, I found the article’s tremendous and unsupported assumptions about the value and nature of soft vs. hard SF to make it a less valuable read than it might have been otherwise. There was also precious little unpacking of ideas, but given the author’s comments about Morrison’s JLA… well, of course there wasn’t!

While I’m not the world’s biggest Morrison fan, I thought SEAGUY was great. I love anything Morrison does that comments on the folly that was the original CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS, and this was probably a more fun take on the subject than even ANIMAL MAN #21-26 or THE FILTH.

” If you’re in a snit toward Morrison, Dan, then why are you even replying?”

Wait, so now we’re only supposed to discuss creators about whom we feel unreserved adulation for? We can’t discuss a commentary on an artist about whom we don’t feel 100% positively? Dan Bailey’s remark about Morrison worshippers was an undeserved cheap shot, but to say that we can’t get annoyed with somebody’s work is silly. If I love Doom Patrol, Animal Man, and the first half of the Invisibles, but also feel that We3 was the last really good thing that Morrison did, am I still allowed to comment here?

No, gopher, we’re just not supposed to troll. Which is what Dan was obviously doing.

>> you’re in a snit toward Morrison, Dan, then why are you even replying?

Ummmm … because the topic happens to concern Morrison, who’s done lots & lots of good stuff but whose SeaGuy (a) I found *strikingly* poor, & (b) is the most recent thing of his I’ve read?

That would be the same Morrison, by the say, whose fans’ undiscriminating adulation has led to one regular blogger’s routine reference to him as “the God of All Comics,” by the way. Now, certainly that’s not true by any means of *all* his fans — not nadir, not DWright, etc — but the tendency *does* exist. Sorry to have the effrontery to mention it, though.

Or maybe I’m severely dyslexic; it’s *really* about Millar or Bendis or Busiek or Ellis or someone other than Morrison … or maybe the “Morrison” in question is actually Van or Sterling or Jim, in which case I’m totally off-base.

Jesus christ.

Again, Dan, the topic was amypoodle’s essay, which had nothing to do with Seaguy.

Feel free to disagree with her essay, but just randomly complaining about some Morrison comic you didn’t like is oddly off-topic.

Certainly no big deal, just struck me as odd.

Fair enough, Brian. I guess my original post just goes to show how VISCERALLY I disliked SeaGuy.

(I certainly don’t have a problem with Morrison per se — heck, about 15 minutes ago I won an eBay auction for the 12-issue 3rd series of the Invisibles — but I DO a problem with unquestioning adoration, & that applies to unquestioning adoration toward ANY creator*.)

If the essay had been about Millar, I probably woul’ve piped up & said pretty much the same in light of not only my strong dislike for Kick-Ass but what I see as also Millar’s over-the-top pimping of same (not that I’ve really noticed any pronounced cult of Millar kool-aid drinkers or anuthing … but maybe I just haven’t looked in the right places).

**Except HP Lovecraft. About whom nothing negative is ever to be said.***

***Except for the fact that some 35 years after I first gave it a whirl, I *still* haven’t managed to get more than a few pages into “At the Mountains of Madness.” And “Shadow Out of Time” wasn’t really all that, either. Oh, well.

Seaguy is amazing and I hate you.

Dan, as the “blogger” who coined that phrase, don’t you think maybe it’s done tongue-in-cheek a little bit?

No, gopher, we’re just not supposed to troll. Which is what Dan was obviously doing.

Oh brother, that is just ridiculous. The guy was not trolling in the least with that post.

Greg —

Well, of course, but my interpretation — abject apologies if I’m dead wrong! — has been that with it you’re also engaging in a bit of gentle mocking of some of the over-the-top adulation some of his fans exhibit. Obviously, though, that’s your call, not mine.

T. —

Thanks. I sure didn’t (& don’t) FEEL like a troll. Though maybe sometimes one’s own self is the last to know …

Amypoodle might not be a ‘her’ you know people. Just saying.

Excellent point, Ditranko. I tried to avoid saying “her” for that reason until just then in the comments.

Red- agreed, Seaguy is brilliant. The other six issues can’t come fast enough. I’m looking forward to Final Crisis anyway, but that agreeing to do that resulted in DC finally greenlighting “The Slaves of Mickey Eye” automaically makes it worthwhile, even if it’s one of Morrison’s rare misfires.

“*sigh* I’m in a bit of a snit toward Morrison at the moment, having ordered the SeaGuy back issues a couple of weeks ago (luckily, all together they cost less than $5) & found the series an unbearably silly exercise in self-indulgence, to the point of bordering on masturbation.

His worshippers really *will* swallow anything he flings at them, won’t they?”

And this post wasn’t a “unbearably silly exercise in self-indulgence” itself?

And this post wasn’t a “unbearably silly exercise in self-indulgence” itself?

Not from where I’m sitting. Let’s get real here, if he said the exact same type of thing but directed toward a safe target like Liefeld or Chuck Austen rather than a sacred cow no one would bat an eye.

Uh, no, I’d be pretty upset, because the comment was absolutely and totally off-topic. Nobody would care about the Seaguy bash here if the linked essay had at any point mentioned Seaguy or praised Seaguy, but it didn’t, so there was no reason to post his Morrison comments here (instead of, say, at another forum) other than tone-deaf selfishness.

Just to contribute to the off-topicing, I thought Sea Guy was very reminiscent of the Invisibles in a lot of ways, in that about half of it felt like insightful and penetrating commentary on everything from comic books to philosophy to modern sociology and half of it felt like the quasi-intellectual ravings of an ultra-well-read madman that everyone pretended to get for fear of looking stupid.

That said, I legitimately think Morrison’s a genius. At least he’s doing something different, and in the context of the modern superhero market, that means he should get some sort of medal.

Also, the death of Chubby da Choona was the most legitimately heart-wrenching demise in the history of modern comics. *sniff*

Thanks for letting me know what happens to Chubby, Andy. I haven’t read it yet.

Dan definitely wasn’t trolling, but the comment was a bit out of place. I guess he just wanted to share his feelings about Seaguy with the CSBG massive and engage in a bit of off-topic discussion/debate. I ain’t mad atcha.

BDaly —

You’re right on target, BDaly. Right after reading it I’d said much the same thing over on the Classic Comics board (which is where I hang out about, oh, 95 percent of the time), but that’s not a venue in which Morrison is particularly relevant.

Anyway, my apologies for having come off so bloody vituperative. I guess I just don’t “get” SeaGuy, & as someone who usually likes the more surreal/humorously intendd/whatever stuff, I can only assume that it’s MORRISON’s fault, & that his throng of fans must have (to quote Andy above) “pretended to get [it] for fear of looking stupid.”

I mean … it can’t be ME.

(Can it?)

(*siiiiigh*)

Actually, I liked SeaGuy because it was a fairly straightforward hero’s journey story. I’m not really sure what else there was to get.

“Not from where I’m sitting. Let’s get real here, if he said the exact same type of thing but directed toward a safe target like Liefeld or Chuck Austen rather than a sacred cow no one would bat an eye.”

so? this isnt about rob or chuck. specious argument.

[quote]Thanks for letting me know what happens to Chubby, Andy. I haven’t read it yet.[/quote]

Whoops. I guess I thought four-year-old comics were reasonable fodder here. I’ll be more careful in the future revealing things like *SPOILER* Identity Crisis goes badly for Sue Dibny. I’ve also heard there’s some event thing with Superboy coming up, so watch for that.

Still, sarcasm aside, if this ruins your day, I legitimately apologize.

But read it anyway, especially if you like Morrison. It’s like finding out that *SPOILER* Rosebud is the sled. The story is really more about how the thing is handled what’s going on around it than the event itself.

Not to beat a dead horse, but Seaguy and identity Crisis are hardly the same thing, spoiler-wise. Pretty much anyone who’s read a DC comic in the last four years probably knows that Sue is dead. It’s referenced all over. Seaguy is a stand-alone work.

Actually, I liked SeaGuy because it was a fairly straightforward hero’s journey story. I’m not really sure what else there was to get.

Yeah, completely agreed. I thought it was a straightforward little adventure story – Well, at least compared to the Filth.

Was it marked “First mini-series out of three” anywhere? That might alleviate some of the confusion.

“Self-indulgent?” I don’t get it.

[…] while back, Comics Should Be Good linked to a pair of articles written by ‘amypoodle’ at Mindless Ones about superhero comics as “soft” […]

Leave a Comment

 

Categories

Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives