Jump to content

A Picture is Worth 1,000 Words


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

37 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

To let the initiated know it is a heaping pile of goat dung?

To enable the people that use it to wield power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Grog said:

It was the result of courage, commitment and determination, backed by science, maths and that "Sir, this is impossible! - I know, let's do it." attitude.

Grog has this right.  The USA used to lead the world in just about everything.  

We worried about media manipulation, covert wars and how society was being misled.  Remember "Manufacturing Consent"?   

Now you have The Muppets storming your capitol.  It is a fall from grace.   The USA still leads the world in many, many things but not like before.   Certainly not as a shining example of democracy or a demonstration of the benefits of a well educated populace.   

C'mon USA.  Pull it together.  You can do it.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bugsy said:

Grog has this right.  The USA used to lead the world in just about everything.  

We worried about media manipulation, covert wars and how society was being misled.  Remember "Manufacturing Consent"?   

Now you have The Muppets storming your capitol.  It is a fall from grace.   The USA still leads the world in many, many things but not like before.   Certainly not as a shining example of democracy or a demonstration of the benefits of a well educated populace.   

C'mon USA.  Pull it together.  You can do it.  

The Best Americans are doing just fine, as long as the masses storm the gates of the Capitol and not their ivory towers. Expect them to continue dividing the masses by using their media to keep half of the unwashed hating the other. Even if they stopped now, 30 years of bullshitter media and an alternate reality is not going to go away anytime soon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bugsy said:

Grog has this right.  The USA used to lead the world in just about everything.  

We worried about media manipulation, covert wars and how society was being misled.  Remember "Manufacturing Consent"?   

Now you have The Muppets storming your capitol.  It is a fall from grace.   The USA still leads the world in many, many things but not like before.   Certainly not as a shining example of democracy or a demonstration of the benefits of a well educated populace.   

C'mon USA.  Pull it together.  You can do it.  

^ This.

Except the Capitol was stormed by Duck Dynasty, not the Muppets.

Kermit, Miss Piggy and Bert & Ernie are all a fuck of a lot smarter than those Trumpers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

On a similar note, it's amazing how many important battles seem to take place in national parks.

- DSK

"Often there is no more than a little plaque to reveal that, against all gynecological probability, someone very famous was born halfway up a wall.”
Terry Pratchett, Equal Rites

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2021 at 9:34 AM, Steam Flyer said:

On a similar note, it's amazing how many important battles seem to take place in national parks.

- DSK

Generally there are not a lot of buildings in national parks so it gives rooms for big battles to be fought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Remodel said:

In the world of you can't make this shit up:

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1356660605172789248/photo/1

 

13 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Do courts accept that sort of illiterate shit or is it rejected until they get it right?

Lawyers: You get what you pay for and Donnie is a cheap suit going through the motions because he just knows he has the R’s by the nuts and he ain’t gonna get impeached.

Be nice if the R’s suddenly realised Donnie has fucked things up royally for them , kicked him out and got on with rebuilding their brand without the big T hanging out front.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, P_Wop said:

Image may contain: one or more people, text that says '"Since you didn't succeed in blowing up Parliament, we're going to let you off with a stern warning."'

:lol:      I'd be surprised if more than three or four USAnians got this.

But it would be cool to have a holiday where you set off fireworks and get money from passersby. Maybe substitute an effigy of Buffalo Bikini Guy, with replica tatts, for poor Guy?

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Naw . . . many here have seen V for Vendetta.

After all, isn't that movie one of the motivations for Q?

OK... I never heard of it  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_(film)

And now that I have, I think I'd probably like the book (graphic novel ie comic book) better, but knowledge is a good thing anyway

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

OK... I never heard of it  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_(film)

And now that I have, I think I'd probably like the book (graphic novel ie comic book) better, but knowledge is a good thing anyway

- DSK

The movie is superb.  Natalie Portman, Hugh Weaving, John Hurt, and an excellent production.  Well worth it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

OK... I never heard of it  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_(film)

And now that I have, I think I'd probably like the book (graphic novel ie comic book) better, but knowledge is a good thing anyway

- DSK

 

10 minutes ago, P_Wop said:

The movie is superb.  Natalie Portman, Hugh Weaving, John Hurt, and an excellent production.  Well worth it.

The graphic novel is quite a bit different than the movie. They each stand on their own and are excellent in their own ways.

My $.02.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

The graphic novel is quite a bit different than the movie. They each stand on their own and are excellent in their own ways.

My $.02.

Add my 2 cents to that.

But Alan Moore's work is notoriously difficult to adapt to the big screen. I found that even more true for Watchmen.

Rumour has it that he never liked any of the adaptions, but then, he's a very acquired taste and very English, too.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Grog said:

But Alan Moore's work is notoriously difficult to adapt to the big screen.

Difficult to adapt a comic book (sorry, "graphic novel") to the big screen?

Are you serious?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

What is that?

Are his ashes lying in state?

A perfectly folded American Flag presented to the family and the officer's ashes in an urn.  

And yes, his ashes have been given the rare honor to lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Difficult to adapt a comic book (sorry, "graphic novel") to the big screen?

Are you serious?

Well, not as hard as "Remembrances of Things Past" or "Finnegan's Wake", but hard!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Difficult to adapt a comic book (sorry, "graphic novel") to the big screen?

Are you serious?

 

37 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Well, not as hard as "Remembrances of Things Past" or "Finnegan's Wake", but hard!

Sloop, you might give the 'comic book' version a read before you scoff. It's not Richie Rich. (Or even the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers. And how cool is that? I got the FFFBs in twice in less than a month!)

Just sayin'

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2021 at 1:21 PM, Steam Flyer said:

:lol:      I'd be surprised if more than three or four USAnians got this.

But it would be cool to have a holiday where you set off fireworks and get money from passersby. Maybe substitute an effigy of Buffalo Bikini Guy, with replica tatts, for poor Guy?

- DSK

Not all of us are total goobers...

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Not all of us are total goobers...

OK, sorry.

Partial goobers!

Actually I'm the numpty who had no idea there was a popular movie in which the Gunpowder Plot was important feature

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Left Shift said:

A perfectly folded American Flag presented to the family and the officer's ashes in an urn.  

And yes, his ashes have been given the rare honor to lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda.

I've never heard of that.

Has it happened before?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Sloop, you might give the 'comic book' version a read before you scoff. It's not Richie Rich. (Or even the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers. And how cool is that? I got the FFFBs in twice in less than a month!)

Just sayin'

I've seen those things.

They are nothing but Richie Rich or Batman with more complex art work.

Trying to credit them as being just another kind of legitimate literature for adults goes some way towards explaining the current level of literacy that we see here and elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

I've seen those things.

They are nothing but Richie Rich or Batman with more complex art work.

Trying to credit them as being just another kind of legitimate literature for adults goes some way towards explaining the current level of literacy that we see here and elsewhere.

Ah, folks would tend to suggest that series like Neil Gaiman's Sandman probably should count as literature. Whatever that is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Se7en said:

Ah, folks would tend to suggest that series like Neil Gaiman's Sandman probably should count as literature. Whatever that is.

Yeah - many people are saying it.

For the literacy challenged;

lit·er·a·ture
/ˈlidərəCHər,ˈlidərəˌCHo͝or/
 
noun
noun: literature; plural noun: literatures
  1. written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit.
    "a great work of literature"
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Left Shift said:

Has a cop-killing mob invading the Capitol Building happened before?

I meant cremated remains, not a murdered cop

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Yeah - many people are saying it.

FWIW, a work friend based her English degree honours thesis on the Sandman. Was at some little place north of Reading, named after a dictionary. She tells me it counts as literature.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

145349787_10225309423463591_728418400207

 

I would take issue with it being the conservative ethos, but it definitely is the Republican ethos!

Around here we simply call it "Fuck you, I got mine".

The foundation of Conservative attitudes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

I've seen those things.

They are nothing but Richie Rich or Batman with more complex art work.

Trying to credit them as being just another kind of legitimate literature for adults goes some way towards explaining the current level of literacy that we see here and elsewhere.

I'm not sure that the art work is much more complex, if at all. IIRC, it's B&W in V. But as with any form of art, there's a wide variety in the quality of the art and of the writing and plot. I'm a little disappointed in your off-hand dismissal of (presumably) all "graphic novels", "I've seen those things." That seems a tad closed-minded.

At the same time, I'm not sure I'd go as far as to call it 'literature', in the academic sense. I certainly don't think it will survive as long as Melville (of course, V doesn't have the 'bible leaves' scene as Moby Dick does), let alone Shakespeare. But I would have the same reservation for many (if not most) of the books currently on the market. So there's that.

Pulp is pulp. If you don't like to read what you refer to as comic books (and who am I to argue that semantic distinction), there's always the movie (which, returning to my original point, is a somewhat different story).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2021 at 8:20 AM, SloopJonB said:

Difficult to adapt a comic book (sorry, "graphic novel") to the big screen?

Are you serious?

 

Granted, there a not many of those, but they do exist.

Like Alan Moore's Watchmen or Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA, there are a number of "Author Comics" or graphic novels with an intense and complex plot where the illustrations not only serve to build scenarios worth dozens of written sentences or pages but also help to build the story and dynamic in ways usually known from cinema, i.e. perspective, zoom, cuts, colorisation and so forth.

Add to that plots where half a dozen of main characters are developed and interact (or not!) at some time or location, or have been in the past or will be in a possible future or will never meet at all, but still have an impact to the story. Plus any number of secondary characters and sidekicks that will give you a pretty dense and rich envoirenment, much closer to John le Carré or Frederick Forsyth (earlier books) than anything Disney or Garfield.

Watchmen was published over here in five volumes, AKIRA had twenty. Both were adapted to that big screen and both movies fell way behind the comic books in developing the characters and the story. They were noisier though.

Another, different example would be Frank Miller's Return of the Dark Knight. Single volume and so far Hollywood has made five(ish) movies out of that book, usually by building on only one or one and a half of the many plot lines Miller wrote. And they still haven't covered it, much less did they come close to the density or suspense.

So, yeah, in some (rare) cases of comic books, I am serious.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

 I'm a little disappointed in your off-hand dismissal of (presumably) all "graphic novels", "I've seen those things." That seems a tad closed-minded.

When you become an adult, reading, novels and so forth is about books filled with words, not looking at pictures with captions.

If someone wants to look at that crap, that's just fine - intellectually limited adults have been reading Superman comics as long as they have been around.

It's the attempted legitimizing of them by calling them "novels" that I have a problem with - like they're some sort of illuminated manuscript.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

When you become an adult, reading, novels and so forth is about books filled with words, not looking at pictures with captions.

If someone wants to look at that crap, that's just fine - intellectually limited adults have been reading Superman comics as long as they have been around.

It's the attempted legitimizing of them by calling them "novels" that I have a problem with - like they're some sort of illuminated manuscript.

Again, calling an entire genre 'crap' without actually examining each piece in its own right just seems a bit closed minded.

Of course, all Disco is crap. Same for both Country and Western. And anything by that Prince thing. So there is that. (Embracing my hypocrisy.)

Also, there are a lot of "novels' out there that are crap. So it's not actually a dilution of the meaning of the word. (Just about all Stephen King's horror stuff is 'crap'. Even according to him--I recall once in a Time Mag interview that he called his horror pulp, "the literary equivalent of a Big Mac".) Still wouldn't go so far as to call any of this 'literature'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

When you become an adult, reading, novels and so forth is about books filled with words, not looking at pictures with captions.

If someone wants to look at that crap, that's just fine - intellectually limited adults have been reading Superman comics as long as they have been around.

It's the attempted legitimizing of them by calling them "novels" that I have a problem with - like they're some sort of illuminated manuscript.

I'll put the somewhat bitter stance of your leading sentence aside for now and ask two questions:

Where is the threshold, for you? Which writer or work does qualify as the lowest acceptable form of literature (or music, for that matter) in your opinion?

 

I'd want to add that the term "graphic novel" does not aim to fast forward any of those to the Nobel Price Jury. It is merely a means to try to seperate them from the indeed mostly dreadful Superman comics.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Again, calling an entire genre 'crap' without actually examining each piece in its own right just seems a bit closed minded.

Of course, all Disco is crap. Same for both Country and Western. And anything by that Prince thing. So there is that. (Embracing my hypocrisy.)

Also, there are a lot of "novels' out there that are crap. So it's not actually a dilution of the meaning of the word. (Just about all Stephen King's horror stuff is 'crap'. Even according to him--I recall once in a Time Mag interview that he called his horror pulp, "the literary equivalent of a Big Mac".) Still wouldn't go so far as to call any of this 'literature'.

I very much agree. And I have never met an admirer of any of the arts who was close minded.

Art, music, literature and culture only lives when it evolves. Each of them must and does find novel forms of expression, yet some will only be recognised in hindsight, years or decades later.

Transposing the "graphic novels" to music, how is Hendrix's standing compared to Dvořák?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grog said:

I very much agree. And I have never met an admirer of any of the arts who was close minded.

Art, music, literature and culture only lives when it evolves. Each of them must and does find novel forms of expression, yet some will only be recognised in hindsight, years or decades later.

Transposing the "graphic novels" to music, how is Hendrix's standing compared to Dvořák?

 

Currently, they are both dead. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

When you become an adult, reading, novels and so forth is about books filled with words, not looking at pictures with captions.

If someone wants to look at that crap, that's just fine - intellectually limited adults have been reading Superman comics as long as they have been around.

It's the attempted legitimizing of them by calling them "novels" that I have a problem with - like they're some sort of illuminated manuscript.

I suspect at this point you are just trolling. If so - huzzah! You can quote from literature and say "Mr Se7en is not a sensible man".

Otherwise, given that you have already ignored that the learned professors of English at Oxford seem to consider at least one example worthy of study as literature, can we approach it from the other end?

What if we were to take something you consider literature, and set it to pictures?

Poetry would be too easy - it's all to easy to imagine drawings of the vaulted and gilded caverns, the peaceful stream of Xanadu with the text appended. Or the gritty, salt encrusted shipboard life of Ryme of the Ancient Mariner.

So, instead, can we look at one of my favourites - The Old Man and the Sea.

Again in my minds eye I can picture that story woven through a string of illistrations - the wrinked visage of the man, the sunbleached boat, the wearyness on his face as he rowed back. A series of frames depicting the battle with the fish. The island disappearing over the horizon. And the novel is short enough that a graphic novel of the story would not be unfeasible.

So - if you set it to pictures, does The Old Man and the Sea get rejected from the halls of literature?

If not, is it possible that a few examples (and I'd probably only suggest Sandman and Watchmen, although there may be more) may classify as literature?

(FWIW, I don't actually particularly enjoy them either - I would have preferred Sandman as a novel, and I can't bring myself to read any of the others. But I can still respect them for their artistic merit.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grog said:

I'll put the somewhat bitter stance of your leading sentence aside for now and ask two questions:

Where is the threshold, for you? Which writer or work does qualify as the lowest acceptable form of literature (or music, for that matter) in your opinion?

 

I'd want to add that the term "graphic novel" does not aim to fast forward any of those to the Nobel Price Jury. It is merely a means to try to seperate them from the indeed mostly dreadful Superman comics.

 

Nothing bitter about it - contemptuous disdain would be a better description.

I'll go with Potter Stewarts' definition of porno - "I know it when I see it." If they called them "Adult Comic Books" I'd be fine with it.

If you like them, look at them in good health. Raymond Chandler once got trashed as merely a pulp author.

Somehow I doubt any "Graphic Novels" will ever achieve his lasting fame.

And I would never classify Superman as dreadful - it has no pretensions to being anything other than children's entertainment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grog said:

I very much agree. And I have never met an admirer of any of the arts who was close minded.

Art, music, literature and culture only lives when it evolves. Each of them must and does find novel forms of expression, yet some will only be recognised in hindsight, years or decades later.

Transposing the "graphic novels" to music, how is Hendrix's standing compared to Dvořák?

 

Similar to Attwood's standing compared to Dickens.

And as regards the evolution of art, Paint By Numbers was a novel form of expression - should it be taken seriously as an evolution of art?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Se7en said:

So, instead, can we look at one of my favourites - The Old Man and the Sea.

Again in my minds eye I can picture that story woven through a string of illistrations - the wrinked visage of the man, the sunbleached boat, the wearyness on his face as he rowed back. A series of frames depicting the battle with the fish. The island disappearing over the horizon. And the novel is short enough that a graphic novel of the story would not be unfeasible.

So - if you set it to pictures, does The Old Man and the Sea get rejected from the halls of literature?

I would make a good edition of Classics Illustrated - comic books.

I read lots of them as a child.

Then I discovered books - and put away childish things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

I would make a good edition of Classics Illustrated - comic books.

Do the words still count as literature? Yes / No?

Curious - Do you watch TV or Movies? Or does the cheapest bit of schoolkid doggeral have more literary merit to your mind than Apocalypse Now? Because it's words in a book vs moving pictures?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2021 at 4:25 PM, Bristol-Cruiser said:

image.thumb.png.5c468f4263722ad881e8b6e0786b15d4.png 

One wanted to encourage a bit more personal charity of the wealthy and powerful towards the sick and poor. The other wanted to change the whole nature of society so there wouldn't be so many sick and poor. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Se7en said:

Do the words still count as literature? Yes / No?

Curious - Do you watch TV or Movies? Or does the cheapest bit of schoolkid doggeral have more literary merit to your mind than Apocalypse Now? Because it's words in a book vs moving pictures?

You're right, I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sean said:

B04E41DA-D349-4981-94CD-48CCF1E48765.jpeg

 

the bookcase looks like its missing a bigger fatter one

but looking at her eyes i think i know where it is

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

With estimates ranging from 400,000 to 1.1 million, it was bigger than the Insurrection.

mmm.jpg

Buht all lives matter. Except Brian Sicknick’s or other Capitol cops’ lives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Nothing bitter about it - contemptuous disdain would be a better description.

I'll go with Potter Stewarts' definition of porno - "I know it when I see it." If they called them "Adult Comic Books" I'd be fine with it.

If you like them, look at them in good health. Raymond Chandler once got trashed as merely a pulp author.

Somehow I doubt any "Graphic Novels" will ever achieve his lasting fame.

And I would never classify Superman as dreadful - it has no pretensions to being anything other than children's entertainment.

I used to be a collector, but sold off most of the "books" years ago. The few I have kept I still like and respect as works of art, both the plots and the graphic work.

The industrialised Superman et al were never my thing. I dispise the completely redundant cliff hanger format, no matter how skilled the illustrator is. Which brings me to two points:

One: A graphic novel is a novel in the sense that there is a beginning, a middle and an end.

Two: It is a marketing term. Semantics, if you will. They are, after all, comic books. Just better thought out and illustrated than the majority.

And if Chandler is now considered literature (Is he? Really?), maybe Art Spiegelman's Maus will be recognised by future readers as a worthy work. It won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992, after all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, frenchie said:
Sound on.
Hope this embeds properly, right now it's loading forever... 

 

 

 

Somebody edited out the part where she said "Hurry up, I'm late for my fuckin' dentist appointment"

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites