Frank Miller and everything 80s

I have been reading a lot of 80s Frank Miller lately: Ronin, TDKR, Daredevil: Born Again, Batman: Year One, and DK2.  When he was on his game he was the best writer in comics.  Better than Gaiman and Alan Moore at their respective bests.  My preference is for the Miller storytelling through brooding narration and the redefining of the superhero.
One I read for the first time recently was Ronin (1983) which was an amazing book that reminded me of Aeon Flux, and has inspired me to rewatch Samurai Jack, which is a basic reworking of Miller's text.  (I'm on episode 3 of season 1 right now!)
I have seminar papers to write, but all I want to do is read another Miller story, or re-read which seems to be the case now.  I wish he had written more.  I also wish he hadn't lost his touch, looking your way All Star Batman and the Boy Wonder, and Holy Terror.  When he goes wrong, he goes wrong like no one else.  But nothing he does can take away from his brilliant decade of the 80s.

Pounding it.

I didn't think I would like reading criticism from Ezra Pound, but this books was pretty funny.  This was a required class text, otherwise I may never have read this book.  Pound is so sure of himself, that when he makes bold assertions it comes off as hilarious.  I really liked how he dissed Shakespeare in favor of Chaucer, as having lived more was was less provencal.  Way to go Chaucer, still impressing after all these years.

Not much more I can say about this text than the funny assertions and the suggestions on how to read literature like a boss.

McLuhan Massage

This must be one of the more interesting books on media that I have read.  Everything varied, nothing was constant, which I expect is meant to imitate the expanding role of media in society.  I don't want to say this is a book of platitudes, but more about short comments on how media is changing YOU.  Most of the book was images expanding or portraying the message that was written.  The relation between image and text was interesting, and sometimes the meaning was obscure.  I must say it was gripping and amazingly prescient considering it was written in 1967 and seemed to be talking about the internet. I kept thinking about my tendency to browse Reddit, and McLuhan seems to have anticipated the internet.  Quite amazing.

Batman wrote a book on Multimodality?

Oh…its Bateman, guess I should read a little closer.  The first of several disappointments.

This is the first entry for foundational reading concerning my dissertation.  Wanting to do graphic narratives I should probably learn the theories of layout and semiotics.  So I started with this book of multimodality which was nearly 300 pages of very dry text.  I didn't choose it because Bateman is an accepted scholar in his field, but because this happened to be cheaper than the books of the leading scholar, Kress.  What I found almost immediately is that the first 100 pages Bateman is arguing with Kress, and is trying to establish an empirical approach to multimodality, while dismissing logic that would seem to say that an empirical approach to semiotics probably won't ever ever ever work.  What I have also come to notice about Bateman is that he is never cited in other essays on multimedia.  I'm starting to wonder about this lack of presence in the field of multimodality.  Looks like I will have to fork out the cash for the books written by Gunther Kress.

Ah Bateman, if only your name was Batman and you kicked ass.

Learning how to Write

It would seem that today I am using to finally clear out all of those books I started in a moment of excitement, but never finished.  The fourth book finished on the day is The DC Comics Guide to Writing Comics by none other than Green Lantern and Green Arrow scribe, Denny O'neil.  I mainly purchased this book because of O'neil's attachment.

O'neil writes as a writer and an editor at DC, which puts him in a place to give advice.  Unfortunately the advice seemed regressive and harmful for any person wanting to write creatively.  He offers pragmatic advice by avoiding taking risks with stories and by following the comics formula.  This was written 12 years ago, but I imagine the safe story telling is still in vogue today, and may help explain the declining comic book market.  This period in mainstream media should be called the Age of Pragmatism because I am tired of art that plays it safe.  I don't want the sequel or the typical comic anymore.  O'neil seems content to preach the status quo.  I can't fault him too much because he is working within an industry where the status is maintained, and as an editor that doesn't want to lose his job he has to play it safe and only occasionally take a calculated risk.  I imagine the hardcore fans, much like the extreme teapartiers, will make themselves heard at an imagined misstep.

Reading this guide to writing has brought my frustrations to the surface with what I perceive as problems endemic in mainstream anything.  Guess if I want original and experimental I will have to keep reading independent publishers.

Holy Superheroes!

I started this book awhile and then stalled on it.  I couldn't really find much to value from it since it wasn't what I was looking for.  The book is about superheroes.  Or really I should say the book uses superheroes as a way to illuminate some of the more important lessons to be gained from Christianity.  This is a spiritual book disguised as a theory book.  Garrett would bring up a lesson from history like 9/11 and show how some (not all) superheroes reacted to that tragedy.  he would then show how those superheroes were behaving as though they asked WWJD.  This is the basic formula for each chapter.  Bring up pedestrian philosophical point and then show how superheroes follow said philosophic point.  I need to make a point to read Amazon reviews.  sigh.

Voyeurs - Gabrielle Bell Part II

I realize that the year is still young, and yet here is the second book I've read by Gabrielle Bell.  Titled The Voyeurs, the book is an autobiographical account of a thirty-something woman trying to make sense of the world and herself in it.  She is an artist that isn't sure what her purpose is and what she wants.  The character on the page is exceedingly complex and hard to define.  Maybe the complexity is what draws me to Bell's narratives.  The premise is not something that I am attracted to, but the execution makes all the difference.  I already have another of her books in the mail, and wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't appear in this blog in February.

In the meantime I need to focus my energies on theory.  I need to show restraint and save the next Bell book until I finish Metafiction.  Lets see how well I restrain myself.  Taking bets.