Wolfe and Gaiman

António Pedro Marques · 04 Jan 2011, 16:22 · from 2011-January.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gUGVkcm8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 16:22:15 +0000
Subject: (urth) Wolfe and Gaiman
In-Reply-To: <SNT123-W1977B15D738866B4594310CF080 at phx.gbl>
References: <SNT123-W1977B15D738866B4594310CF080 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4D234937.9040608 at gmail.com>

Lee Berman wrote (04-01-2011 16:18):
>
>
>> Gaiman is, IMO, a superior comics author. Those are not so easy to come by.
>> Of course comics are seen as a lesser art compared to proper Literature.
>> Gaiman of course doesn't claim to be on the same league, even in his
>> non-comics stuff.
>
> I'd like to suggest the adjective "comics" be changed to "visual arts" or
> something like that. Neil has had more than one of his works transferred
> (through an obviously very expensive process) to the big screen. After 40
> years we may need to accept that Wolfe's work just isn't seen as amenable
> to this process.
>
> I think it would be quite a mistake to think that Wolfe looks down his nose
> at authorial work which translates well to visual. 		 	   		

'Irregardless', that's how it's seen, a minor form of art.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net