|
I don't think it's fair to judge the guy for not knowing a friend was a rapist. He does suck though
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:35 |
|
|
It's more that he doesn't seem to have changed in any way- there's no evidence he's rethinking the automatic 'I'm sure he wasn't doing anything wrong' he put forward when his friend stumbled out of an anti-rape PSA. He was actually a great illustration of rape culture, a decent enough guy who fails to notice his buddy's obvious predations. That was never dealt with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Alright, I'm willing to try an experiment. It's been suggested that I ask the pack of uncontrollable shitposters in here how you think Alison and Clevin's relationship will turn out. So what do you think, mm? It's bizarre seeing three threads simultaneously focused on this very very mediocre comic. The Clevin meme has really taken off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:It's more that he doesn't seem to have changed in any way- there's no evidence he's rethinking the automatic 'I'm sure he wasn't doing anything wrong' he put forward when his friend stumbled out of an anti-rape PSA. He was actually a great illustration of rape culture, a decent enough guy who fails to notice his buddy's obvious predations. That was never dealt with. I think you're trying to out-Clevin the Clevin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
Piell posted:Clevin is an android that Paladin built to be Allison's perfect boyfriend so that she would go away and Paladin could spend more time with Feral. Patrick will discover this when Clevin returns and he can't read his mind. Nah, Patrick will read Clevin's mind and melt like that Nazi at the end of Raiders because he can't take such a pure and wholesome soft boy. Divine radiance will surround Clevin as he plays his ukulele and cures all the world's ills.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:I think you're trying to out-Clevin the Clevin.  I knew a guy in college who was, in fact, definitely a creep and a predator and arguably a rapist. I didn't like him, but that didn't change the fact that I tried to make social space for him because he was in the same club, and I didn't look closely; I missed his really awful behavior. In the club, I was told 'actually he's fine, just awkward' and the social group we were in tried really hard to paper it over. It only ended when someone came out with accusations and there was an outpouring of 'oh yeah I saw that poo poo too.' So, yeah. That poo poo happens, and I've tried to take it as a learning experience. I'm not judging Clevin for missing that his roommate was the workd's most obvious date rapist, but to have him go on to be this anodyne Perfect Boyfriend is a weird move. I thought that his failure to see was the point of that little vignette, and it was before the chapter went off the rails. But it didn't stick at all, it informed none of his characterization, so it disappointed me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Of course, he isn't actually an "anodyne Perfect Boyfriend." He's a self-centered Nice Guy who needs everything to be about him, and who wants constant praise for basically doing nothing of note. The problem is that I don't know if the creators realize that's how they've depicted him...
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
It's sort of the platonic ideal of the nice-guy mindset: by being supportive and understanding and non-confrontational (above all else, non-confrontational) and being friendly (but never flirtatious) and always persistent, eventually the out-of-your-league object of your desires will bestow their grace on you. Look at his reaction when they kiss in the movie theater, it's borderline worshipful This is why I disagree with some other posters: Clevin is the authors insert, the Pygmalion to claim his Galatea, and he is not going anywhere. All aggression will be passive, and all toast will be milque, the ending of the words is CLEVIN
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:The comic is not good, OP. Sorry you've wasted money on it. Counterpoint: the comic is good, and I'm glad I supported it. I especially liked how the kickstarter grossed around 20% more than the last one; I hope the third volume does the same when they get around to printing it, although that kind of thing is seldom linear. It's great seeing creators get rewarded for their hard work. Unfortunately, neither the writer nor the artist is likely to show up at a local con, so I won't be able to get this one signed. If that ever does happen, though, I'll make sure to pick up an extra copy or two in the name of this thread, and give them to friends or a local library or something. Nuns with Guns posted:I guess I conflate "shitposting" with general jokes thanks to some deep-rooted trauma. I'm cool with people joking/shitposting about the comic being bad, of course, because it is Oh, no, you were right the first time. Keep in mind that "shitposting" and "joking" aren't mutually exclusive; in fact, the first defense of the shitposter is always "but I was joking". Witness... basically all of GBS, for instance. Joe Slowboat posted:This reminded me of something the comic is, I guess, supposed to be about : Being the one with all this power and privilege and not knowing how to change the world. Now, see, this is a really great post. It's cogent, thoughtful, supports its points with examples from the comic, and has a solid explanation of why the poster feels the way he does about it. I mean, I disagree with it on almost every level, but that does not change the fact that it's really well done. Thank you for quoting it, since I'd never have seen it otherwise. The most interesting thing about all this, and the reason that I focused on the future in my criticism of the criticism, if you like, is that the same pattern seems to exist in the thread now as did when I stopped reading it like a year ago. People confidently make predictions that something stupid is about to happen, and then it doesn't, but they continue to confidently make predictions that further stupid things will happen, partially based on the predictions that were wrong the last time. (Good lord, I remember a ton of stupid Gurwara theories, and I bet some people think some of them happened even now.) It's basically the same as political cartoonists talking about Iran and their "ANY DAY NOW" nuclear weapons program; sure, it was wrong the last seven times, but definitely this time Clevin will prove to be the special author avatar boy everyone knows him to be. Let's be clear: if Clevin is an author avatar, the author is really not too happy with himself. The primary word that should come to mind when you think of Clevin is "awkward". His first scene involves him trying to get a date with Alison and failing because she's much more interested in superhero biz re: date rapists. His introduction is HILARIOUSLY goofy; come on, look at this:  Are you seriously telling me you think the creative team meant us to take this dude in the polka-dot shirt and the lamest possible superhero costume seriously? It's a domino mask and nothing else and he isn't even wearing it! You can't even call him a Nice Guy here, because the distinguishing characteristic of the Nice Guy is that they hang around feeding niceness into a lady hoping that sex will randomly pop out like some terrible coin-op porn machine. Clevin is literally hitting on her in this scene. He does it again, later on, although thankfully not at their second meeting, because it would be a bit weird what with all the "let's talk to your rapist friend" and "horrible murder" stuff in there. He has never once done anything other than admit to Alison that he's interested in her and try to ask her out on dates; he's not just hanging around in the wings waiting for ~true love~ to shine through. It's odd that people have retroactively made that the narrative, but, well, people are people, that's sort of how it works. He does continue to be awkward, even now that they are actually dating, and the most recent thing with his little comment after Alison's speech is another great example of that. Alison rolls with it, but it's not real clear the comic is on his side here, especially since it immediately follows several panels of him standing around looking uncomfortable while Alison talks to all her superhero buddies and a lengthy speech where he admits he's being an idiot. What he is, so far, is just some normal college schlub who's in a band that isn't going anywhere and isn't super clear on how to deal with being in a relationship with someone he clearly idolizes. Alison is mainly with him because she wants to be with someone who's just kind of nice and actually likes her, and her experience with normal relationships is approximately zero. So yeah, I expect some kind of payoff for all that, whether it involves exploring him more as a character to see if there's more to him than that, or them continuing to have troubles of this kind, or what. If it hasn't happened in a year, I'll be happy to call that a failure on the comic's part, but so far we've only witnessed the setup.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
It doesn't matter how 'goofy' he looked in his first appearance when literally every appearance since then Clevin has been Good and Right and the comic bends over backwards to invent a long relationship that we never see to justify where Allison agrees with his really whiny weak fuccboi poo poo. Clevin has not been in the wrong so far, and if they're setting up for a big payoff it'll be actually years in the making because this comic still hasn't gotten around to plot points it set up in its initial arc, let alone any possible arcs you're making up in your head while the comic has spun it's wheels for the last 60+ pages doing nothing but self congratulating Allison and friends one being woke af but not really doing anything to help anyone at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Counterpoint: the comic is good, and I'm glad I supported it. I especially liked how the kickstarter grossed around 20% more than the last one; I hope the third volume does the same when they get around to printing it, although that kind of thing is seldom linear. It's great seeing creators get rewarded for their hard work. Unfortunately, neither the writer nor the artist is likely to show up at a local con, so I won't be able to get this one signed. If that ever does happen, though, I'll make sure to pick up an extra copy or two in the name of this thread, and give them to friends or a local library or something. Note that you don't actually state what makes the comic good, just insisting how much you support the comic. The rest of your is just long-winded whining without any point to it. Really, you're just trying to defend the comic in the negative: the critics are wrong, so the comic must be good, without any references to the supposed good art, writing, plotting, themes, etc. At the end of the day the jokes and funny edits have completely and justifiably eclipsed the juvenile political effortposting (worse than any shitpost in the thread). The world has simply moved past you. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
I'm not predicting that Clevin turns out to be a mind-controlling villain. I'm hoping for that to be case, because it would be interesting in a stupid way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:It doesn't matter how 'goofy' he looked in his first appearance when literally every appearance since then Clevin has been Good and Right and the comic bends over backwards to invent a long relationship that we never see to justify where Allison agrees with his really whiny weak fuccboi poo poo. Clevin has not been in the wrong so far, and if they're setting up for a big payoff it'll be actually years in the making because this comic still hasn't gotten around to plot points it set up in its initial arc, let alone any possible arcs you're making up in your head while the comic has spun it's wheels for the last 60+ pages doing nothing but self congratulating Allison and friends one being woke af but not really doing anything to help anyone at all. You mean, the appearance where he was wrong about his friend being a rapist and actually being a nice guy once you got to know him? Or the one where he got shot down asking Alison out again? Or the one where he whined about not getting thanked in a speech for no reason? Help me out here, I haven't seen this always-right Clevin you're talking about anywhere in the actual comic. The comic has been regularly hitting its various points; we've got the organization Alison was trying to set up actually being set up here, which is a direct result of her realizing her previous poo poo was stupid and not helping anyone. We've got Gurwara showing up as, most likely, an agent of the conspiracy that forms the overall backbone plot for the comic. We've got Patrick reappearing here and (potentially, isn't clear yet) paying off some of the stuff about peoples' powers getting "worse" as well as advancing that story. I mean, are you complaining because that poo poo hasn't been solved yet? The comic is basically over once they unmask the conspiracy, that's a long-haul kind of thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:You mean, the appearance where he was wrong about his friend being a rapist and actually being a nice guy once you got to know him? What actually happens is that he states how wrong he was about his dead rapist friend and essentially disowns him posthumously. This reflects the underlying ideals of the comic's liberal politics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:You mean, the appearance where he was wrong about his friend being a rapist and actually being a nice guy once you got to know him? Or the one where he got shot down asking Alison out again? Or the one where he whined about not getting thanked in a speech for no reason? Help me out here, I haven't seen this always-right Clevin you're talking about anywhere in the actual comic. So that first one is that initial appearance I was talking about how everything after that. Him getting ignored for Libertarian millionaire is something Allison goes out of her way to apologize for after having a Big Personal Revelation and visiting him at work to hit on him. And that speech we both agree reads as whiny nonsense is explicitly treated in text as not whiny, but actually correct and good and Allison (rightfully in the eyes of the narrative and writer) apologizes to him. While we agree that he's not, the writer is purposefully trying to show Clevin as correct and a victim. That's that bad writing people are talking about. The comic is saying "no no no, this is actually good" while we all think 'No this is poo poo'. The difference between you and literally everyone else in these threads is when that happens we just think "Oh this must be poo poo writing" where as you are twisting your brain trying to invent possible set ups and future arcs that will somehow justify the lovely writing. ZenMasterBullshit fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
I PREDICT that the story will deal with Clevin's mediocrity, and Allison reveals that she just wanted an inoffensive milquetoast boyfriend she pretends to love, in contrast to Patrick and Max. This is why she stumbles over her words when saying she loves her. It would be interesting, and a great cap on the story of CLEVIN.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I PREDICT that the story will deal with Clevin's mediocrity, and Allison reveals that she just wanted an inoffensive milquetoast boyfriend she pretends to love, in contrast to Patrick and Max. This is why she stumbles over her words when saying she loves her. It'll probably be this but also go out of it's way to make sure everyone knows that Clevin isn't really a bad, spineless guy and Allison will spend at least half an issue agonizing about how mean she was to Clevin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:You're mostly . Note that you don't actually state what makes the comic good, just insisting how much you support the comic. The rest of your is just long-winded whining without any point to it. Really, you're just trying to defend the comic in the negative: the critics are wrong, so the comic must be good, without any references to the supposed good art, writing, plotting, themes, etc. That part of my post involved the same amount of effort as the post I was replying to. If all you have to say is that the comic is bad, why should you expect me to say any more than that it's good? if this is some bizarre way of asking me why I like the comic, it's for the same reasons I always liked it; it's funny, it has an angle on superheroes that isn't done much anymore, specifically one in which actual superpowers are irrelevant to the actual problems the world faces and someone with near-ultimate physical power continually struggles with that idea. The moral problem at the heart of the last issue was a different angle even from that, though, since Alison actually did have the power to address the situation through means of her physical strength, and used them. I was very impressed that they actually went through with that; most stories would have found some bullshit third way of solving the problem that didn't involve her beating up someone to force him to do her bidding, or would have had her be too "noble" to take this solution, or would have somehow justified it after the fact. This comic did none of those things, and that was pretty ballsy. It exhibited exactly the kind of deft handling that was missing in the rape issue, and I'm looking forward to more stuff like that in the future. BravestOfTheLamps posted:What actually happens is that he states how wrong he was about his dead rapist friend and essentially disowns him posthumously. This reflects the underlying ideals of the comic's liberal politics. That does indeed happen in a later scene than the one I was referencing. It's a somewhat poignant moment for something that only takes a sentence. The comic is much better when it does things in that way than when it filibusters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
no idonotlikepeas posted:ballsy nah idonotlikepeas posted:poignant neop
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
I am extremely awkward, goofy, quirky, kooky, and maybe a bit too nice for my own good. That's what makes me so likeable, in fact.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:So that first one is that initial appearance I was talking about how everything after that. Him getting ignored for Libertarian millionaire is something Allison goes out of her way to apologize for after having a Big Personal Revelation and visiting him at work to hit on him. And that speech we both agree reads as whiny nonsense is explicitly treated in text as not whiny, but actually correct and good and Allison (rightfully in the eyes of the narrative and writer) apologizes to him. While we agree that he's not, the writer is purposefully trying to show Clevin as correct and a victim. She does apologize for blowing him off, yes, but he's not in any way represented as a victim there. Again, he's set up like a doofus, just one that doesn't get shat on in that particular scene. ZenMasterBullshit posted:That's that bad writing people are talking about. The comic is saying "no no no, this is actually good" while we all think 'No this is poo poo'. The difference between you and literally everyone else in these threads is when that happens we just think "Oh this must be poo poo writing" where as you are twisting your brain trying to invent possible set ups and future arcs that will somehow justify the lovely writing. Nah, it's simply a difference of perspective. You're approaching it from a perspective of already thinking the comic is bad, so you take the worst possible interpretation of that scene. Some people in the comments section on the site are approaching it from an explicitly pro-Clevin position, and agree with your interpretation of the events but not the ultimate feeling about them (Clevin is right and Alison should have thanked him). I'm coming at it from an angle of trusting the writer a bit more, so it reads as someone mildly gaslighting his girlfriend and having it work. It didn't require any particular contortions; I didn't even imagine another interpretation of that scene until I came in here and saw people getting salty about it. Open your mind to the possibility of a Bad Clevin and a new universe will unfold before you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:no My, how insightful. Thank you, you have surely changed my mind with this post; I will never again point out that having your protagonist do something morally reprehensible and not justifying it is after the fact is ballsy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:If all you have to say is that the comic is bad, why should you expect me to say any more than that it's good? You are unable to actually talk about art in a critical nonsense, even if it's extremely amateurish pop art like a superhero webcomic. It's not about liking something, it's about talking what makes art worthwhile or not, in the case of SFP a fascinating trainwreck. I could for example, post to the terrible art that loses it's scribbly indie appeal after it gets colours. The literally edgy angles of the characters and the world shifts into soft, round, and bland forms with mediocre colouring that never accentuates the tone or visual storytelling of the comic. You insist that it's funny, and claim that it has "an angle on superheroes that isn't done much anymore," which is completely immaterial since 1) superheroes are a stupid loving genre that shouldn't get anymore "deconstruction" nonsense, and 2) it's patently false because Zack Snyder made two movies in the last five years iwith that angle, which are Good and worth defending. idonotlikepeas posted:That does indeed happen in a later scene than the one I was referencing. It's a somewhat poignant moment for something that only takes a sentence. The comic is much better when it does things in that way than when it filibusters. Actually it's rather appalling kind of nonsense where the dead friend is denounced as the "toxic" Other of liberalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
'Batman, if you don't kill this person, millions will die!' 'Agh, I don't like killing people.' 'Batman, please, this is the only way.' 'Okay.' *kills in a way evocative of rape* 'I didn't like it one bit. Agh. I still think killing is not entirely right.' 'Batman, I will explain to you in great detail that you were right to kill. Allow me to start with a story from my childhood [...] And thus you should start killing more.' 'Yes, now I understand it, ghost of Laozi who looks exactly like David Carradine. I am not a crazy person after all.'
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
I think this comic could really turn itself around if it became more like a good work of art, like Lawrence of Arabia. On an unrelated note, I recently re-watched Lawrence of Arabia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:My, how insightful. Thank you, you have surely changed my mind with this post; I will never again point out that having your protagonist do something morally reprehensible and not justifying it is after the fact is ballsy. thank oyu
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:I will never again point out that having your protagonist do something morally reprehensible and not justifying it is after the fact is ballsy. I dunno, I got the opposite impression given that whole detour with the impostor professor
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
That's not a difference in perspective that's just you being really uncritical. The same writer that wrote the hilariously tone deaf 'Sweetheart' metaphorical rape scene and then didn't understand what was poorly handled about it is the person writing the Clevin relationship. The same person that set up plot point and interesting arc early on then did nothing with them is still the person writing the Clevin relationship. The person that wrote a pretty okay comic about a superhero becoming disenchanted with her position as a symbol of nominal peace and wanting to affect long lasting positive change on the world then transitioned that ideal into 'Starting a non-profit tech company where all the explanation of what it does and how it'll actually help anyone' happened off camera is still the person writing the Clevin relationship. There's nothing the author has done, especially recently, in this comic that shows they can craft a simple arc like that without loving it up and there's more evidence that it's going to continue to drift into this nice woke-middle-class inertia of being nominally radical but actually about nothing. Your faith in the writer comes from being uncritical, unthinking about it and putting blind faith into the author that they do not deserve. idonotlikepeas posted:My, how insightful. Thank you, you have surely changed my mind with this post; I will never again point out that having your protagonist do something morally reprehensible and not justifying it is after the fact is ballsy. Like this. It isn't ballsy, it's lazy. People do bad poo poo in fiction all the time and don't justify it (Also gently caress you she totally does try to justify it during and immediately after because she was doing it to save people.) It was just poorly written and made so Allison could look like the strong moral superior to a Libertarian Millionaire to help justify the comic's alleged themes of 'Real justice for the downtrodden'. It was also done in the emotionally cheapest way to try and seem transgressive while doing something that in-narrative was not transgressive at all which is kind of why people felt really strongly about how lovely it was. It was images and words to be evocative of sexual assault for a scene that could have been equally accomplished by her just lifting him off the ground and threatening him with non-sexually-coded violence. ZenMasterBullshit fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Never forget Rat, the prole who was shoved by Allison into a trashcan from which he never escaped.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Ballsy is like the last word I would use to describe anything about the comic that shat out that rape chapter. Also RIP Rat.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
In her ballsy book Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand portrays many unlikable characters who could only be considered good people in the narrow setting of the story. But I posit that what many consider an extensive treatise on Objectivism, is in fact the exact opposite of that. Because I believe that Ayn Rand was too clever to believe in something so batshit insane. I base my belief entirely on my reading The Fountainhead, another book, where Rand did the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
ZenMasterBullshit posted:Like this. It isn't ballsy, it's lazy. People do bad poo poo in fiction all the time and don't justify it (Also gently caress you she totally does try to justify it during and immediately after because she was doing it to save people.) It was just poorly written and made so Allison could look like the strong moral superior to a Libertarian Millionaire to help justify the comic's alleged themes of 'Real justice for the downtrodden'. It was also done in the emotionally cheapest way to try and seem transgressive while doing something that in-narrative was not transgressive at all which is kind of why people felt really strongly about how lovely it was. It was images and words to be evocative of sexual assault for a scene that could have been equally accomplished by her just lifting him off the ground and threatening him with non-sexually-coded violence. Like I wanna stress this really hard, between this scene, his response to the reaction to it, and the general 'progressive/feminist in name only' politics of the comic at large makes the writer seem like the biggest, gross softboy rear end in a top hat that was to call himself progressive but doesn't understand any of it and just comes across as worse than your regular dude bro. Between that and the Clevin-being-relationship-jesus just makes my skin crawl because it's just kind of creepy 'white knight progressive' dude 101. ALSO again gently caress you that she doesn't try and justify it! The next chapter features a 40 page conversation that is explicitly about her coming to terms with it and how 'Actually, I guess it was a good thing ultimately.'
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:You are unable to actually talk about art in a critical nonsense, even if it's extremely amateurish pop art like a superhero webcomic. It's not about liking something, it's about talking what makes art worthwhile or not, in the case of SFP a fascinating trainwreck. Good lord; those movies are appallingly bad. You liking them does help me see where you're coming from, though. I don't recall using the term "deconstruction". Deconstruction of superheroes is as old as Alan Moore's work, at minumum; it's nothing new. But even in something like Watchmen, which thankfully Zach Snyder was unable to totally ruin despite his best efforts, or the absolutely atrocious Man of Steel, the primary problems presented by the narrative are ones that can be solved by superheroes. Zod is not going to stop assaulting the earth if Superman is extra-nice to him; the situation ultimately requires that he be punched. The only "conflict" apart from the most obvious physical one is in whether he should continue to pretend not to have power that he actually does, which is something the actual Superman comics did to death decades ago. Lex Luthor requires Superman's punching and also Batman's detective skill to triumph over him. What Strong Female Protagonist does that is novel is that the problems presented by the narrative are not things that can be made to go away by punching. What is Superman to do when presented with world hunger, assuming he is not being written by someone who permits him to invent Super-Harvesting to solve that problem instantly? What will he do about racism? You can't punch your way out of that, and eyebeams are not particularly useful. SFP is specifically and intentionally set directly after the era in which something like Man of Steel would exist, when the Zods of the world are largely taken care of. So what are these superheroes to do now, with no overt villains to fight? That's a story I want to see; there's value in the novel, especially in a genre in which so much has already been done. The fact that all of them are millennials is nice to see as well, of course, since Superman and Batman are as old as my grandparents, but that's more of a side note and a source of one-off jokes such as the one in the thread title. If you want to talk about the quality of the art itself, it's nothing special. It definitely took most of an issue for them to adjust to coloration, but today's art is perfectly serviceable, if nothing special. The last few pages have done some meddling with panel borders to indicate the state of mind of the participants. The contrast between Alison and Clevin's pastel-colored evening and the brown tones that begin to intrude as Patrick does reinforce his status as a disruption. Nothing too fancy, or innovative, but good enough to do the job. I would also venture to suggest that if you don't like superheroes, reading a superhero comic is not going to end up being your favorite activity regardless of its quality? "Superheroes are a stupid loving genre" is a foolish statement on the face of it considering their enduring popularity; if you want to say something so powerfully contrary to what most of humanity seems to believe, I'd be very interested in hearing an explanation of it. BravestOfTheLamps posted:Actually it's rather appalling kind of nonsense where the dead friend is denounced as the "toxic" Other of liberalism. What he says is this: "He died, and then my idea of him died right afterward." Toxicity and politics don't enter into it. It's about the fact that you are friends with a construct you've created in your head of another person, but it is possible for that construct to be tragically, horrifically different than the actuality of the person; Miles as a rapist is someone he doesn't know at all, and the fact that he had that capacity invalidates the Miles he'd constructed in his own head. That moment is him sorrowfully realizing that he never really understood his dead friend. Of course, the fact that you're repeatedly whining about liberalism gives me a bit of information here, too. ZenMasterBullshit posted:Like this. It isn't ballsy, it's lazy. People do bad poo poo in fiction all the time and don't justify it (Also gently caress you she totally does try to justify it during and immediately after because she was doing it to save people.) It was just poorly written and made so Allison could look like the strong moral superior to a Libertarian Millionaire to help justify the comic's alleged themes of 'Real justice for the downtrodden'. It was also done in the emotionally cheapest way to try and seem transgressive while doing something that in-narrative was not transgressive at all which is kind of why people felt really strongly about how lovely it was. It was images and words to be evocative of sexual assault for a scene that could have been equally accomplished by her just lifting him off the ground and threatening him with non-sexually-coded violence. Yeah, you're just wrong about all this. She's angry because Libertarian Monkey doesn't want to act when he has the power to do so, but she is fully aware that forcing him to do something "good" is not a morally defensible action. The whole rest of the chapter is about her trying to figure out if she did the right thing, and failing to come to any conclusion. The comic does not provide a convenient character who drops from the sky to justify Alison's actions; in fact, it brings in one that tells her there aren't easy answers to that kind of thing. There is absolutely nothing in there to support the idea that the comic is on Alison's side; it goes out of its way to avoid being on her side.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Alright, I'm willing to try an experiment. It's been suggested that I ask the pack of uncontrollable shitposters in here how you think Alison and Clevin's relationship will turn out. So what do you think, mm? hahhaa you joyless sad gently caress
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Now, see, this is a really great post. It's cogent, thoughtful, supports its points with examples from the comic, and has a solid explanation of why the poster feels the way he does about it. I mean, I disagree with it on almost every level, but that does not change the fact that it's really well done. Thank you for quoting it, since I'd never have seen it otherwise. You're very welcome, I'm actually quite proud of it. I think it's worth noting here, most negative takes on Clevin-as-character (as opposed to our shared negative take on Clevin as a person) I think assume that his introduction and his later presentation are at odds because he was picked up by the story and used for something he didn't originally fit into. At least, that's my perception of events. I don't think it's arguable that there's a shift in the tone and direction of the comic between Clevin's introduction and later events, Allison dating Max, etc. You even point out that the core theme of the Max chapter is 'Allison finds something she can solve by physically coercing somebody, and decides to do it.' I would contend that this shift included a recasting of Clevin, since the comic's framing of his behavior doesn't really line up between these events. In the party scene, him hitting on Allison is one of a number of distractions - I actually want to state how much I like that particular page for its framing, as a digression. There's Clevin, Hector is IMing her, there's a number of background details, then there's one panel in which the background betrays a guy taking advantage of a drunk woman. The underlying concept (Allison sees the thing that matters to her, the protection of the innocent, through a lot of apparently important events going on around her) underlines both her characterization (someone who is never 'off' for even a second, as a former superhero and somewhat moral obsessive, which isn't a bad thing) and the way most people overlook things. It's not a subtle move, but it's one that's decently pulled off here, since I know when I first read it I didn't catch where the comic was going on this page, being too distracted by Awkward Clevin and Hector's drama and so on. I don't think the comic has had anything like this kind of focus in a long while, whether because of an art style change or, my personal theory, because shifting to an open-ended chapter structure rather than shorter 'issues' left the creators with too much open space to write in, decompressing the comic and letting the air out of dense storytelling like this. It was never going to be Mignola-level beautiful page design, but it had its moments. Now, the pacing has decayed and the softer, less zine-feeling style of art has left me wanting, because the backgrounds are there to be pretty (and sometimes, are kind of pretty) rather than to communicate details in a harsh but effective manner. In any case, Clevin's a distraction and an obstacle here, an incredibly standard if well-intentioned guy. He later realizes how wrong he was, etc etc. But it's his later reintroduction, in contrast to Max, that really stood out to me at the time. Because Clevin basically is doing the same exact thing: "Hey I have free movie tickets, want a ticket" but it's framed much more Nice Guy-ishly by the authors. Here, he's selflessly giving Allison movies, complete with 'you can go watch them whenever, even without me' IIRC, and is being blown off because she's caught up in the web of Max, Libertarian Sleazeman. Later, she apologizes and his tickets offer is taken up, and then later, they date. It's from around that point in time that I would say my argument about Clevin As Bourgeois Ideology becomes valid, not his first appearance. To be clear, I also think that the 'torture a libertarian' turn in the plot destroyed my faith that the comic would build on subtext or context clues like it once did; that whole scene was just unbearable and the author seems consistently unable to face what was written as what it is. As such, I can only assume that the Whiny Clevin Speech is, in fact, intended to be a real emotional coming-together of the couple, rather than him being a whiny jerk to her. This position was further compounded by the author saying that 'Strong Female Protagonist' is meant to refer also to her being strong in a moral sense, i.e. she is in fact meant to be a dedicated seeker after morality. Either the comic has taken a turn for a cynical claim that Allison has never realized her own slide into moral equivocation, complacency, and blindness to her own and others' faults... or she's still supposed to be more or less a seeker after truth and justice. I just have a hard time keeping the faith about these things, though I'd like to be surprised.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Without love, Bad Clevin cannot be seen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Yeah, you're just wrong about all this. She's angry because Libertarian Monkey doesn't want to act when he has the power to do so, but she is fully aware that forcing him to do something "good" is not a morally defensible action. The whole rest of the chapter is about her trying to figure out if she did the right thing, and failing to come to any conclusion. The comic does not provide a convenient character who drops from the sky to justify Alison's actions; in fact, it brings in one that tells her there aren't easy answers to that kind of thing. There is absolutely nothing in there to support the idea that the comic is on Alison's side; it goes out of its way to avoid being on her side. Uhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Are you sure you haven't missed some pages? Or maybe everyone else just falsely remembers a character that doesn't exist. As if someone has implanted that memory into everyone's mind. Wow, that's meta. Very ballsy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Good lord; those movies are appallingly bad. You liking them does help me see where you're coming from, though. Both the author and artist were completely unaware they were creating a 1:1 rape metaphor with that scene of the SFP forcing John Galt to help her
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Yeah, you're just wrong about all this. She's angry because Libertarian Monkey doesn't want to act when he has the power to do so, but she is fully aware that forcing him to do something "good" is not a morally defensible action. The whole rest of the chapter is about her trying to figure out if she did the right thing, and failing to come to any conclusion. The comic does not provide a convenient character who drops from the sky to justify Alison's actions; in fact, it brings in one that tells her there aren't easy answers to that kind of thing. There is absolutely nothing in there to support the idea that the comic is on Alison's side; it goes out of its way to avoid being on her side. Except the end piece of her long back and forth is her just realizing this guy is ultimately loving with her, not doing what's in his power to actually help or discuss things, doing things this way because it suits him and is ultimately for his own amusement and she happily calls him out on it and walks away. It's kind of this...fun thing called drawing a parallel. She ultimately does what she can to force him to do some good (unfail that one guy) and learns that his personal goal means nothing to it. All his talk about how power is some times good to use it on others or maybe it's not is bullshit and she only gets what she wants (ie. Do good) by ignoring it all and doing what she can. Even with your reading it's still not ballsy for a comic to have the protag do a bad thing then go and be rewarded by hooking up with her new perfect boyfriend and then have a long conversation that boils down to "Hey maybe it's good you did that, maybe it isn't. I mean you saved some people, but maybe you did it in a bad way." for 40 pages. It's a wishy-washy stance taken by a comic that, in every other facet of it's writing, definitely has an expressed goal and opinion and politics. It makes that grey area of 'was that okay' feel really hollow when the comics morals up until that point kind of largely to "Yes because that guy was an rear end in a top hat and didn't want to help people for bullshit reasons." ZenMasterBullshit fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:35 |
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Deconstruction of superheroes is as old as Alan Moore's work, at minumum; it's nothing new. But even in something like Watchmen, Isn't the entire thrust of Watchmen that superheroes cannot solve the Cold War, and the megalomaniacal desire to be the one man who saves the world is what motivates the presumptive villain in the creation of monstrosity? Allison is Ozymandias is Patrick is Rorschach. In that particular respect, SFP is a modern retelling of Watchmen where the overarching threat isn't nuclear war, but the continued existence of inequality in society. I am afraid I just don't think it's living up to its ancestor in that regard. Edit: I just think that saying Watchmen presented problems superheroes could solve with punching is a pretty painful misreading of the situation, since it's less that superheroes solved anything and more that a superhero desperately trying to solve things with comic book logic lead to mass slaughter which is only ambiguously effective at creating the desired result. Also, squidding New York is a more interesting bit of hard-nosed utilitarianism than torturing a libertarian, for a comic book. Wolverine becoming an organ donor remains pretty solid in that regard. Joe Slowboat fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:54
|
|