Saturday, August 09, 2003

Cardcaptor Sakura: Master of the Clow Vol 6: My experience with Japanese "saga" comics, which is admittedly very small, has led me to believe that ambiguous endings are the norm. Thankfully, this final installment of the original Cardcaptor series isn't that way. There's a great ending, and all the loose ends I can think of are tied up nicely. This was a good series.

Justice League Adventures #22: Strange cover for a story that was apparently about Green Lantern. If the little role that Hawkgirl had in the story was the emphasis, then it was a very poor story. If the Green Lantern part was the emphasis, it wasn't horrible, just not up to the usual standards. And the Garbage Pail Kids inserts were... icky.

Supreme Power #1: Marvel's riff on the Justice League goes hard core with JMS writing. Not a bad coverage of the early days of Hyperion (this universe's Superman) as he lands in a field as an alien orphan with phenomenal powers. There's also more hints of where the story is going with a nice teaser at the end, and a cliffhanger of the main plot. All-in-all, a solid first issue.

That's it for this week. Next week's comics are Powers, Ruse, Generations 3, Aquaman, Fallen Angel, Green Arrow, H-E-R-O, JLA, JSA, and Amazing Spider-Man, if everything arrives. Could be a fun week for the Aqua-fan... And I've been told by a person I trust that I will like Fox Trot tomorrow. I can hardly wait to see tomorrow's funnies. Maybe they'll distract me from the constant pain of sunburn.

posted by Tegan | 8:19 PM

The sunburn is killing me. I'm in so much pain I can barely sleep. And now it's raining, which seems to be some sort of unfair cosmic irony in my limited, sunburned perceptions. Anyway, here's a round-up:

Aquaman's new artist, Patrick Gleason, has already drawn Aquaman in JLA: Welcome to the Working Week. I liked the artwork in that book quite a bit.

Sequential Tart has a Tart's favorite fourteen Elseworlds, a list which I naturally quite appreciate. In fact, Rebecca Salek's articles at ST tend to be well worth reading in general. And I may have to do a follow-up to this article, as I have a complete collection of DC's Elseworlds.

The Tarts also tackle the Harry Potter Phenomenon.

WizardWorld Chicago has started, and there's a bit of coverage here and there. As usual, Comic Book Resources has a photo parade for those brave enough to check it out. CrossGen has announced a universe-changing mini-series entitled The War.

So, Smallville's Allison Mack has a little blog going. Interesting.

There's a thread at Comicon about how to get sketches. I passed on some advice I gave to one blog reader through e-mail, and have also discussed some other aspects of sketches.

Atrios claimed that Dean's campaign is already being affected by another scandal, this one of foreign contributions. Ug.

Ishtar Talking has updated her blog with two new entries, translations are provided by Salam Pax. Her most recent entry talks about the ongoing destruction of Basra by looters.

Hossein Derakhshan of Hoder.com has an idea on how to get around the censorship of the Iranian government. Looks like it'll work, too.

I'm finally listed on Blogshares. How amusing. I own a handful of shares in my own blog, but somebody else beat me to the buying and I think I don't have official control over my blog on the game itself.

And, lastly, I already posted about this once, but it's worth a second look.

These political cartoons by Dr Seuss reveal a lot about how people were thinking in the early days of WWII. He skewers isolationists, urges people to work harder, and rips apart racism. And that's just his attacks on Americans. Go, look. I suggest reading them in chronological order, keeping in mind the events that happened around the dates. Some of them are truly disturbing, including one that seems to support the Japanese internment, but they are worth looking at for their historical perspective.

posted by Tegan | 7:59 AM

Color is something you don't see much in sketches. Mostly the artists are working with minimal materials, and many of them just want to churn out something quickly that looks neat. I'm happy with that, as I'm a big fan of simple line drawing. But a couple of my sketches incorporate color into them, and that makes them even more interesting in other ways.

AQUAMAN
by Leah Adezio
22 Jul 2000
(permission to post given 26 Jul 2003 via e-mail)

This sketch was a no-brainer to get, as it was drawn by my roommate at San Diego 2000, the irrepressible Leah Adezio. I did not expect to room with someone who had so much energy! I got tired just looking at her sometimes. This was my last sketch of the third night, Saturday night, and I think it's the only sketch that wasn't done at the con itself. At that con Leah also showed me some more of her artwork, and I was blown away. I hope that someday her stuff will see print so you can judge for yourself how great an artist she is. It's a crying shame that Ari of Lemuria isn't on issue #15 with two collections selling in bookstores.

To see all the sketches I have permission to post so far, check out my Sketchbook Page. If you have any contact information for any of the other artists I'm trying to contact, please e-mail me.

posted by Tegan | 12:25 AM

Friday, August 08, 2003

Back in college, there was an exhibit put up in one of the school's gallery areas. There were posters all over campus, asking people to come and "draw the line". The exhibit was of erotic artwork and photos, and the idea was that you would go into the exhibit with a marker and draw a line at where you thought the images went from artwork into pornography.

It was a heavily discussed exhibit. Several of my friends went down to check it out and draw their lines. There was a bible group that staged a protest of some sort: I heard they all went to the front door of the exhibit and drew their lines there, without entering. Some people complained that pornography, even in this context, shouldn't be allowed on campus. A particular English professor (who had been arrested for tearing up copies of Playboy) let everyone know her opinion of the thing loudly in the hallways of the English department.

I chose not to go. I had no interest in the stuff that was being exhibited, and I didn't see the point of drawing more attention to it if I didn't like it. Why be counted as an attendee if I objected to the stuff inside? I figured then, as I do now, that as long as the stuff wasn't directly hurting me, and was not likely to develop into something that would hurt me, then I would leave it to others.

To my dismay, lots of people feel that it's ok to limit what other people see and read, even when those items do not directly impact anyone but the consumer in any way, shape or form. While it's difficult to argue that true pornography has any merit whatsoever, I don't feel that it's in society's best interest to start prohibiting it just because one group of people doesn't like it. And, unfortunately, what one group of people might consider obscene (like the Hentai in the Castillo case) is considered culturally significant art by another group of people (the people in Japan who produced it and made it a bestseller). Suddenly we get into a situation where people are not allowed to explore other cultures because those cultures go against their social mores... sounds downright Victorian to me.

And we also get the claim that such works cause improper behavior. But the arguments for this are the same as Frederic Wertham's: juvenile delinquents read comic books, therefore comic books cause delinquency. Any comic book fan knows what utter nonsense that is.

Then there is another problem with such censorship. Who decides what is proper or not? Do you let these folks decide, or do you let someone like me choose? How do you know for sure what the community standards are without asking every soul in the community what their opinion is? And, even if you do find a consensus, are you willing to block any outside viewpoints, culturally closing yourself off? Do you really want to trust your ability to buy books to a jury of twelve people who may not represent their community at all? After all, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain has consistently been banned despite its strong moral message... apparently by people too stupid to understand what the author was writing about. Do you really want those people deciding for you what you are allowed to read and see?

And yet it goes on. People are willing to give up their basic rights for a monster that disguises itself as "security", they are willing to stop thinking for themselves if the government is willing to do it for them. While I'm not inclined to defend "obscene" works on their merits, I am inclined to defend the basic right to free speech and expression which is constantly being eroded by people who seem to think that they know what is best for everyone. I got news for you, once people are adults, they are capable of deciding such things for themselves. You trust them with cars, driving on the roads with you, but you do not trust them with the contents of their own minds. Seems backwards to me.

I guess that's what bothers me most about the Castillo case. A piece of work that has cultural value in another country was sold by an adult to another adult, with no children involved at all. No one was hurt. It was a victimless crime. And yet Castillo was punished dearly and will have that conviction on his record for the rest of his life. And worse, Castillo didn't know at the time he sold it that his community would deem the work "obscene". In fact, based on the history of the work and the fact that it was offered for sale via a major distributor, he could be fairly confident that it wouldn't be declared obscene. I don't know, but I keep thinking he was punished ex post facto, which is illegal in the United States. I not sure any law professor will agree with me, but when something is declared illegal after the fact, it sure sounds that way to me.

I am rambling a bit now, so I'll finish this up. Censorship is morally draining. Censorship destroys your culture, and lessens all affected by it. Being against censorship does not require a person to like, or support, works that they find disgusting. It simply requires them to not ban those works for everyone because of their own views. I'm surprised when otherwise intelligent folks can't handle that. Maybe they are too busy drawing lines to realize that they are limiting themselves.

posted by Tegan | 7:29 PM

Batman: Nevermore #5: This is the ultimate, "Why didn't I think of that?" team-up, and this story was everything I would have hoped for, but not entirely what I expected. While the ending was telegraphed, it was telegraphed properly, and the whole thing worked as a story. I really liked this series.

Detective Comics #785: I've said that I prefer Detective Comics to have some detecting in it... and while the first issue of this story-arc delivered, the second issue let's down just a little. It's not bad. In fact, it's still pretty good. I was just hoping for more detecting than Bats beating up thugs. The back-up story is quite promising.

Faction Paradox #1: I stopped reading the original Doctor Who novels some years back, mostly because I was having trouble keeping up, but also because I was losing interest in them. They were increasingly self-referential and complicated, and I got a little bored with them being so unlike the TV show (which was goofy and willing to laugh at itself even when it tackled serious ideas). I continued to read books by the particular authors that I liked, but at this point I haven't read a Doctor Who novel in years. And so, even though it was published six years ago, I haven't read Alien Bodies which contained the first appearance of the Faction Paradox, nor have I read any of the Faction's other Doctor Who related appearances. In fact, this is the first I've read of the Faction Paradox, though I know that their roots are in the Doctor Who multiverse. And so my first reaction upon reading this first issue was "Huh?" Despite Lawrence Miles efforts to make the book new-reader friendly, it really was a tough read. That's not to say that I disliked it... I'm a fan of Jim Calafiore's artwork and I'm intrigued enough with the concept to keep reading the comic. But maybe it could have been a little more friendly to the new readers. Especially the ones that aren't going to buy it because of its relationship to an old British cult science fantasy show.

Still to review: Justice League Adventures, Supreme Power, and Cardcaptor Sakura.

posted by Tegan | 12:57 PM

Fun Library Reference Calls from Pete.

Lawrence Lessig on The Spirit of Democracy.

Do people actually respond to spam? Well, according to this article, yes, they do. Pathetic.

Lack of new textbooks in Iraq means that students will be using old textbooks with blank pages where the pro-Saddam propaganda used to be.

Peter David gives a potted history of why saying "yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater isn't protected speech" actually may be undermining the point you are trying to make.

Just tracking... The death toll for coalition forces in Iraq has now topped 300 (it's at 302 as of this writing). Information on the wounded is hard to get, but there have been allegations of underreporting. Quite a few of the wounded have had their lives changed forever.

posted by Tegan | 11:59 AM

Thursday, August 07, 2003

Superman: Birthright #2: The art still bothers me, but not as much. The story isn't bad, but it's a little... normal. I do like the touch with Clark's ability to see other colors.

Formerly Known as the Justice League #2: This is the Giffen League revisited, pure and simple. Yes, some of the characters are twisted a little to fit Giffen's humor (Mary Marvel in particular), but it's fun. The street gang is great.

JSA: All Stars #4: I like the Royal Flush gang. And Courtney makes an OK Star Spangled Kid. Not too bad.

Still to review: Justice League Adventures, Supreme Power, Batman: Nevermore, Detective Comics, Faction Paradox, and Cardcaptor Sakura.

posted by Tegan | 10:35 PM

I am currently lathered in aloe vera gel in the hopes that the pain from my Laura-you-idiot sunburn will get to a manageable level. Here's some thoughts from around the net.

Good news on the Aquaman front, as Aquaman is finally getting his second collection. AQUAMAN: THE WATER BEARER will collect Aquaman 1-4 from the current series, and stories from the Aquaman Secret Files and the JLA/JSA Secret Files. It'll also have a sketchbook for extras, and a new cover by J.G.Jones.

The good Harry Potter artist I blogged about recently has a couple of new images up: At The Department of Mysteries and the Flight Towards London. If you want to keep up with the coming images, just check Marta's Livejournal every few days. She eventually adds them to her artdungeon page, but you'll see them first on the livejournal.

Going to name a kid soon? Check out how common the name you've picked is at Name Statistics. I noted that my last name is "vary rare". My first name is the 22nd most common first name. Eek. And my nickname, Tegan, is at 4103rd on the list. My husband's name is 33rd most common among males. Link via Mark Evanier.

I'm being haunted by Raymond Carver. I would tell more, but I want to find out if I'm remembering everything correctly.

Will Pfeifer has his own take on Bob Hope Movies to watch. In another article, he tells us about classic educational films like "Soapy the Germ Fighter" from 1951. And if you can't get enough of Will, read his article on films about the cold war.

Salam Pax has a bit about the slow learning curve of General Sanchez and a bit more about finding Raed at Turning Tables.

posted by Tegan | 4:20 PM

Here's another thought on the Castillo case: "It's the ubiquitous slippery slope from here. First comic books that have sex. Then they'll come for the ones with violence. Then they'll come for the Richie Rich comics for showing our children class warfare. Then they'll come for the skimpy bathing suits Betty and Veronica wear. They'll come for the X-Men and the Ninja Turtles and then they will start on you local Borders or Barnes and Noble, tearing apart the children's area, burning Harry Potter and Goosebumps books."

Also, Peter David is still thinking about the problem, as is Franklin Harris. Neil Gaiman recounts almost getting a Swedish publisher sent to prison because he portrayed a rape recounted in the bible as a rape. There's also more about the international aspects of the case from Neil. And he also responds to a Texas resident who is surprised that Dallas was the locale for the sham. Mark Evanier weighs in, as do Bill Sherman and Sean Collins.

Update: Over at the Pulse, comic pros chime in, not very eloquently in all cases I'm afraid, on the Castillo decision.

posted by Tegan | 11:59 AM

Wednesday, August 06, 2003

Sunburned and sun-addled. I should be more careful next time I get taken to a water park to spend the morning.

posted by Tegan | 5:18 PM

Tuesday, August 05, 2003

Interesting thread on CalPundit on what to send to soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm telling ya, comic books and the sunday funnies. Keep their minds alive without straining them.

What's a flash mob?

Tiny chance I won't post tomorrow. If there's nothing up there all day... well, I'm having fun, that's all.

posted by Tegan | 3:55 PM

The Supreme Court has declined to hear the case and correct the major miscarriage of justice carried out by the state of Texas. It's a crime to sell adult comic books, that were carefully presented in an adults only section, to an adult in Texas. Comic fans beware! In Texas, comic books are ONLY for kids.

Update: More on the massive anti-First Amendment Texan Crap at CBLDF, Newsarama, ICv2, Peter David's Blog, More ICv2, Neil Gaiman's Journal, and Comicon Pulse. I'm sure there's more, but those are the bits I got to quickly.

Another Update: Journalista weighs in, as does Hit and Run to which even Instapundit linked.

Yet another Update: For anyone still ignorant of why the Jesus Castillo case is such an incredible sham, check out this article from the Dallas Observer, a local newspaper, written at the time of the first joke of trial.

A store manager was arrested for selling adult materials to an adult. He broke no laws. The evidence that the material did NOT meet the standards for obscenity was ignored by the jury, who were told: "Comic books, and I don't care what type of evidence or what type of testimony is out there, use your rationality, use your common sense. Comic books, traditionally what we think of, are for kids." (emphasis mine) In other words, you CANNOT have adult material in comic book form, even if all the evidence and testimony (and there was a LOT of evidence presented) in the world says it is legal. If you are an adult and claim to be a comic book fan and are not outraged by this, you are a hypocrite.

There's also a very long thread about the case at comicon from last year when before the appeal to the Supreme Court was announced.

One more time for the slow folks: Jesus Castillo was convicted on the charge of "Display of Obscenity." The book he sold to the undercover police officer was NEVER DECLARED OBSCENE, and did NOT met the Supreme Court's test case (the Miller Test) for being obscene. This was a brutal travesty of justice that succeeded only because the prosecutor convinced the jury to ignore all the evidence and say that comic books are ONLY for kids, and therefore do not deserve any first admendment protection.

posted by Tegan | 8:02 AM

Comments (16)

So there's a law somewhere in Texas against selling porn across the street from an elementary school, and someone had the guts to enforce it. About time. Screw CBLDF.

Posted Tue 5 Aug 08:40 AM by farsider

Wrong

Maybe you'd like to read up on the facts of the case *BEFORE* you start making false statements.

Posted Tue 5 Aug 01:40 PM by Laura

I read the facts. I didn't make any false statement.

Posted Tue 5 Aug 02:19 PM by

Now you are even afraid to sign your name???

No, you haven't read the facts if you think that Jesus was convicted on "a law somewhere in Texas against selling porn across the street from an elementary school". The proximity of the school had nothing to do with the law he was convicted under. You have made a false statement.

Posted Tue 5 Aug 02:47 PM by Laura

"Now you are even afraid to sign your name???"

Laura, you know who I am. I don't think I ever signed my name in these posts until you started calling me Rich. And I don't post my email address because I don't want to get a bunch of crap mail. You know what that's about. If you want to call that being "afraid," fine.

Much of the information presented on the links you have provided is wrong. Those websites present one side of a two-sided issue. I went to the actual court documents which are on the internet.

Here are just a few of the inaccuracies that you are repeating.

*"He was arrested for selling adult materials to an adult. He broke no laws." All three judges on the Appellate Court agreed that he was selling obscene material. That violates Texas Penal Code 43.23. He broke the law.
*"The evidence that the material did NOT meet the standards for obscenity was ignored by the jury, who were told: "Comic books, and I don't care what type of evidence or what type of testimony is out there, use your rationality, use your common sense. Comic books, traditionally what we think of, are for kids.""
The defense testimony did not outway the evidence presented by the State. Plus, the jury had the actual comic book. The jury decided the comic book was obscene in accordance with the law. After reading the description of it, I whole-heartedly agree.
*"If you are an adult and claim to be a comic book fan and are not outraged by this, you are a hypocrite." Laura, my reservoir of affection for you is sizable. You seem to be a nice person. How could any Aquaman fan not love you? But the personal insinuations you direct at me for having a different opinion of the world than you are getting tiresome.
*"The book he sold to the undercover police officer was NEVER DECLARED OBSCENE, and did NOT met the Supreme Court's test case (the Miller Test) for being obscene." (1) The jury DID declare the book obscene, (2) the Appeals Court agreed it was obscene according to the Miller Test, (3) and the book should be featured in the dictionary next to the definition of "obscene." You're the one who has not read up on the facts.
*"This was a brutal travesty of justice that succeeded only because the prosecutor convinced the jury to ignore all the evidence and say that comic books are ONLY for kids, and therefore do not deserve any first amendment protection." According to the Supreme Court obscene material does not deserve 1st Amendment protection. The Texas Court's decision was NOT based on the fact that "comic books are ONLY for kids." The prosecutor did his job and I think if I was on the jury I would have agreed.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 07:06 AM by

Whoops. The previous comment was by me, Rich.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 07:08 AM by farsider

Well, we've all heard stories about Texas justice, and I see nothing here that disproves them.

Obscene or no, the book was sold to an adult, and the location of the book was clearly marked "adult section". And I understand that you consider the book pornography...however, I've seen and heard of books that I consider far more pornographic than that one. Now, whose definition of "pornography" do we go by? And what kind of precedent is set, by the nebulous standards of individual states? What will be next? Love & Rockets? There was some pretty hard core BDSM in the latest issue.

This is scary and wrong for the precedent it sets, if nothing else. It sounds like Castillo had all his bases covered for selling this sort of thing, and he still got busted. It almost sounds like the BOOK was on trial, rather than the defendant!

Posted Wed 6 Aug 09:08 AM by Johnny Bacardi ( - http://johnnybacardi.blogspot.com)

"And I understand that you consider the book pornography... however, I've seen and heard of books that I consider far more pornographic than that one. Now, whose definition of "pornography" do we go by? And what kind of precedent is set, by the nebulous standards of individual states?"

Pornography CAN be protected speech under the first ammendment. Obscenity is not protected speech. Neither pornography nor erotica are not "necessarily" considered obscene under Supreme Court rulings. Whether or not a work is considered obscene is determined by LOCAL standards (not state standards). To use an extreme example, just because an adult bookstore may be legal in Philadelphia doesn't mean you can open one in Amish country. The Supreme Court's ruling (in the Miller case, I think) allows for community standards to prevail. Why people have a problem with this concept, I do not understand.

This case really does not establish a new precedent, it just continues existing precedents. That's why the Appeals Court did not overturn the trial court.

And of course the book was on trial. The issue was whether or not the store manager selling obscene material. The jury found the book to be obscene. If it is unreasonable for the jury to have found that book (as described in the Judges' Opinion) to be obscene, then the term obscene has no meaning.

You or I or Laura or the CBLDF may not like it but here are the facts:
1. Obscenity is not protected under the 1st Amendment.
2. Obscenity is determined by State and Local legislatures as interpretted by local community standards.
3. Juries are the accepted means of determining what local standards are.
4. Vendors can be prosecuted for selling obscene materials, whether they are comic books, videos, magazines, etc.
4. These standards were established by the Supreme Court in the 1970s and 1980s, as a result of a string of pornography cases, and have not been changed since.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 09:51 AM by farsider

Darn! That should be:

5. These standards were established by the Supreme Court in the 1970s and 1980s, as a result of a string of pornography cases, and have not been changed since.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 09:54 AM by farsider

Well, aren't you the sharp legal mind!

I never got around to taking my bar exam, so I'll bow to your obviously superior knowledge of the facts as they've been presented.

But I do know this: Castillo got hosed. And maybe the letter of the law was upheld, but justice was not served. Even in today's America, that's troubling.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 10:54 AM by Johnny B ( - http://johnnybacardi.blogspot.com)

I'm not a lawyer. I just play one on the internet.

However, I used to be a City Official in Ohio and I worked with our Police Chief and City Manager to keep an adult bookstore out of our city due to the negative effects that they generally have on communities. I have read the Meese Commission report on Pornography and I have read books on the negative effects of pornography. In general, I support local law enforcement, public officials, and community groups when they try to limit the influence of pornography in their own community.

I'm sorry Castillo got hosed. Maybe his legal counsel should have advised him differently. I can't believe they were surprised that a jury would find "Demon Beast Invasion: The Fallen" to be obscene. Apparently everyone else on the internet knows how "backward" Texas is. CBLDF should have known what their client was in for.

Posted Wed 6 Aug 11:16 AM by farsider

No Rich, I DO seriously believe you are a hypocrite if you support this case.

"But the personal insinuations you direct at me for having a different opinion of the world than you are getting tiresome."

It's very simple. The jury decided the book was obscene, DESPITE IT NOT MEETING THE DEFINITION OF OBSCENE, because the prosecutor said: "Comic books, traditionally what we think of, are for kids."

You are an adult, yet you read comic books. Therefore you should be fighting this nonsense with every breath you have. Since you aren't, but you apparently still read comic books, I believe you are a hypocrite.

If the prosecutor had said, "Despite the evidence presented, I think this book is graphic enough to be declared obscene, and therefore should be declared obscene," I would not have a problem with it.

I would still think that the store was being unfairly prosecuted for allowing a book that somebody ordered from a popular Japanese series to be put out on a shelf in an adult only section to be sold, but I would not think that the whole prosecution was a joke.

The prosecution, instead of defying the evidence that it wasn't obscene using the content as evidence, declared the thing obscene because of the MEDIUM. And that, in my opinion, is truly obscene.

Do you get it yet, or are you truly a hypocrite?

Posted Wed 6 Aug 05:13 PM by Laura

Have you read the Appeals Court ruling? If not, I recommend it. It shows that many of your "facts" are wrong.

Majority opinion:http://www.5thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/as_web.exe?c05_02.ask+D+11251151

Dissenting opinion:http://www.5thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/as_web.exe?c05_02.ask+D+11240861

"You are an adult, yet you read comic books. Therefore you should be fighting this nonsense with every breath you have. Since you aren't, but you apparently still read comic books, I believe you are a hypocrite."

Sorry. I won't waste one breath defending the vile, perverted, misogynist filth described in the ruling. I support the public's right to limit obscene pornography within their community. If I made an exception just because "it's a comic book" then I would be a hypocrite.

Posted Thu 7 Aug 06:38 AM by farsider

I read both opinions, and they don't address the fact that the prosecution did not even bother to deal with the Miller test.

I think you need to go to your local shop, and if they sell any adult comics, you need to boycott them. And any other shop that sells comics and also carries anything adult. After all, Rich, you truly believe that comics are for kids.

By the way, you shouldn't be reading Rick Veitch's Aquaman, since it contains perverted magic scenes which shouldn't be allowed to get into the hands of children.

And don't say, "But that's different!" It's only a matter of degree, and you have put yourself firmly on the side of those who would have the government do their parenting for them.

Posted Thu 7 Aug 09:43 AM by Laura

"I read both opinions, and they don't address the fact that the prosecution did not even bother to deal with the Miller test."

The Majority Opinion, in addressing the "fifth point of error," specifically states that Demon Beast Invasion failed the three-part Miller test and "therefore is obscene."
1. Obscenity is not protected under the 1st Amendment.
2. Obscenity is determined by local community standards.
3. Juries are the means of determining local standards.
4. Vendors can be prosecuted for selling obscene materials, even comic books. Can you follow the logic?

Posted Thu 7 Aug 12:11 PM by farsider

You just don't get it...

So I won't bother. Go burn a book.

Posted Thu 7 Aug 02:23 PM by Laura

Monday, August 04, 2003

So I saw my first episode of the new Teen Titans Cartoon the other day. Um. I'm thinking of "If you can't say something nice..." and trying to come up with something nice. Uh, I suppose it will be a decent show for its target audience, of which I am definitely NOT part. It's a good thing that Aqualad isn't a regular, because then I'd feel obliged to watch it regularly. As it is, I only have to catch one more episode... the one with Aqualad.

'Nuff said.

posted by Tegan | 4:32 PM

I'm usually not a big fan of Rich Johnston's Lying in the Gutters, mostly because he reports everything, including stuff that just hasn't been confirmed yet. On the other hand, if you want to know what is happening in the industry, he's the guy to go to, as he generally scoops everyone. And, to be fair, his traffic light graphics to indicate which rumors are actually rumors do give fair warning.

Anyway, Rich's latest is about last week's yellow lighted rumor regarding attempts by DC to sign JMS to an exclusive contract, which JMS went ballistic over (including the threat of legal action against the person at DC who started the rumor). This week Rich is claiming that those rumors didn't originate at DC... but were a clumsy attempt by someone at Marvel to make DC look bad when they didn't sign all the people the rumors claimed they signed. There's more on the conspiracy theory at Waiting For Tommy.

Ug.

I like comic books because I like reading comics. The personalities behind the books don't interest me all that much. That's why Lying in the Gutters doesn't interest me when it gets into the nitty-gritty nonsense. But a story like this, in which the one writer at Marvel I actually like is threatening legal action against DC, and it turns out the rumors he objected to may have been started by his own bosses at Marvel... this kind of story really bites. I like Amazing Spider-Man. I intend to try out JMS' Doctor Strange. The last thing I want is for JMS to leave Marvel because of some poorly thought out rumor-mongering makes him mad at his bosses. In the end, I just find myself hoping this is all so much smoke and mirrors, and some stupid fan made up the rumor.

posted by Tegan | 3:23 PM

Sunday, August 03, 2003

Until this sketch, everyone tried to give me a face-on view of Aquaman when they sketched, or at the least a profile. Lieber decided to take the icon in a different direction, and produced a view of Aquaman that normal humans wouldn't be likely to get in the DCU. This sketch, along with the later one by Jeff Parker, shows Aquaman from below. It's nice to see a different perspective.

AQUAMAN
by Steve Lieber
22 Jul 2000
(permission to post given 14 July 2003 via e-mail)
http://www.unrewarding.com/steve/

This sketch came exactly halfway through my first San Diego comic-con. It was the first sketch I got on the third day of the con, as I started to work my way systematically through artists' alley. I chatted with Lieber a bit before working up the nerve to ask for a sketch, he had won an Eisner the night before, and I was sure he wouldn't want to draw anything for me. Like 99% of the artists I've met, though, he was delighted to add to my sketchbook. We also chatted a bit about a story he had just illustrated for Eric Shanower's OZ Story anthology. I came to the conclusion that Steve Lieber is a pretty cool guy.

To see all the sketches I have permission to post so far, check out my Sketchbook Page. If you have any contact information for any of the other artists I'm trying to contact, please e-mail me.

posted by Tegan | 4:28 PM

The Baghdad Bulletin is putting up their fifth issue. It's worth a read to see how Iraqis are thinking. Salam Pax has also updated with news from his correspondent in Mosul. And, just to make it a hat trick, G in Baghdad has also updated his blog with some thoughts on how things have changed yet remained the same. As usual, though his English is far from perfect, G has the money quotes:

"Again provide jobs, electricity, security and Iraqis will vote to elect you president for life
That’s not true you know
Now there is something else. Of coarse not as important as electricity but as good as most of the Iraqis will tell you, It’s the 'mukhabarat free society', no more security thugs with ugly faces demanding to see your ID, your history and your mothers love letters"

And lastly:

"Unlike what al-Jazeera says I think Iraqis gained something form the Americans. We got some amebic concept, some call it freedom others call it chaos, I call it a fuzzy dream of democracy."

posted by Tegan | 12:19 PM