 |
| Image copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd |
Every parent thinks their offspring are cherubic little darlings; gifted, talented, infant prodigies from whose @rse cheeks emanate the golden, illuminating, life-enhancing rays of the sun. All mothers and fathers look upon each and every uttered syllable of incoherent babbling as some soul-enriching words of wisdom and enlightenment from the mouths of babes. "Aren't they cute?", "Aren't they adorable?", "Aren't they funny?", "Aren't they marvellous?", scream mater and pater in ecstacies of delight - quite oblivious to the fact that everyone else recognizes these howling, screeching, wailing banshees of devastation and destruction for the fractious, obnoxious little brats that they are.
Which brings me neatly to The DANDY. Let's face the truth that is obvious to most people not actively involved in siring the 2010 stillborn incarnation of the once-gloriously entertaining weekly comic from the stable of D.C. THOMSON - which is simply this: with a few honourable exceptions, most of the content was utter crap. Inadequately written, inadequately drawn, inadequately lettered crap, created by those whose talent was far outstripped by their enthusiasm, and who still desperately required a few more years honing and polishing their craft on some self-published fanzines for the less-discriminating tastes of their friends and families.
I am amazed by the self-congratulatory nonsense currently being bandied about on the blogs of some of those who were responsible for the murder (for such it is - the fact that it was already in poor health should not blind us to the truth) of a once-great national institution. The Dandy was poisoned from within, by a small group of well-meaning but clumsy, inexperienced novices with no grasp of the treatment required by the ailing patient, but who nevertheless persevered with any and all last-gasp, desperate, untried and untested theories whose only effect was to hasten the dying 'septuagenarian' to its doom.
"It wasn't our fault," they claim. "We tried." "We did our best." "We should all be hailed as heroes for our attempt, which was brave, bold and glorious." The fact that placing your hands around the throat of a gasping patient and squeezing even harder is hardly likely to produce positive results, never mind being anything to be congratulated for, seems to elude their comprehension. But they're 'parents', you see. They regard each and every 'infant' which sprang from the depths of their would-be 'creative' loins in not quite the same way as those of us anchored in a more objective and impartial reality.
'Tis they who killed the patient. And while they may have to go without the financial benefits that the deceased's survival would've ensured, 'tis the rest of us who must mourn the loss of a childhood friend.
It was Clint Eastwood who said "A man's gotta know his limitations." That was the problem here. Not only did those involved not know their limitations, but in their vanity and their ignorance, it never even occurred to them that they might have any. It still hasn't - despite the evidence (the corpse) clearly, blindly, staring them in the face.
God save us all from well-meaning quacks when qualified specialists are obviously and urgently required.
18 comments:
I have to say I'm a bit surprised at the amount of guilt for the Dandy's demise being heaped on distribution and marketing and in some cases the kids for not being hip enough to pick it up (OK possibly a few issues re distribution here but then again I saw the Dandy in shops all the time) .I don't question the creators motives or their attempts and although I wouldn't say the content was "crap" I am amazed no one has actually said that maybe it was partly to blame for the Dandy's demise . Anyway good luck fending off the nutters on this one Kid I envisage a few colourful replies - McScotty.
Actually, McScotty, despite the stats counter showing that people are reading this post, I'm not expecting too many replies on this one. Some people who don't like what I'm saying are hoping that if they ignore me I'll disappear.
Hey, that wasn't an inquest at all.
It was a bit of an inquest. I 'investigated' the cause of death and made a pronouncement on it.
Thank you CSI: Never-Never Land.
Never-Never Land? Ah, that'll be where all the 'anonymous' people come from, eh?
Well said sir!
On the subject of kids,i`m reminded of that old saying..."Kids are like Farts..One does`.nt mind ones own,..but find other peoples repugnant!"
So very true. Jason Fender, I believe?
Your onto something here Kid.
Those scrawlers killed our comic.
Spread the word. Black list them from other comics before its too late.
Too extreme? no. Who'd have thought Dandy would ever go? Nothing is safe unless we take action. I want to see Beano celebrate 75, 80, 100 years.
Act now. Stop the rot.
Reading that back it sounds slightly crazy but I just want comics to stay with us. Gutted the Dandy is going. Not happy at all. They should never have changed it. Remember how it was 10 years ago?
They won,t admit it. They want to look after thie jobs.
Thats why articles like this need to be seen as a wake up call.
Good job.
It's a sad day for British comics so, understandably, passions are running a little high - on both sides of the argument. Nobody disputes that those behind the relaunch meant well, but, sadly, some of them just weren't up to the task. I just wish they had the spuds to admit it, instead of bleating on about what a great job they did and that the reason for the comic's failure was entirely down to other factors.
Ultimately 'though, the editor and DCT bigwigs should never have sanctioned the new direction, although something definitely needed to be done. (Just not that.)
Oops! I was revising my answer when your comment came in, so they're out of sequence.
I heard this news on Friday and was stunned. What's next? The Beano? 2000AD? Looks like Viz might be the last comic standing.
You're right on the money though, the new look wasn't that good. I can remember seeing it on the news-stands here (hey - I read Dandy back in the '70s and laughed my head off at the Viz parodies, especially Desperately Unfunny Dan) recently and thinking, "Oh, that don't look good." I wasn't aware how bad it was though...
What amazes me, Dan, is that those involved couldn't see just how awful it was - and they still can't. Going by the comments on their own blogs and elsewhere, they seem to think they were creating a masterpiece that deserved to succeed. It was obvious to most of us brought up on well-drawn comics that the new-look was under par. But did they listen? The arrogance of youth, I suppose. Thanks for commenting.
I think your point on new artists being a major reason for the Dandy's demise is simply untrue.
Most of the artists on the Dandy had been drawing for the comic for quite some time before the 2010 revamp among them Duncan Scott, Jamie Smart and Nigel Parkinson. I think the over reliance on Jamie Smart who drew a large number of strips for the comic, I dont have many issues of the dandy after the 2010 revamp but one of the ones I do have has more than 5 pages of his work. His style is quite divisive and could have put off a lot of potential readers.
These new untried and untested artists were very much in the minority in the comic. Hopefully the end of the Dandy wont see them being moved to the Beano and speeding up that comic's inevitable demise.
Your point about poor lettering in the comic is valid as well as your point about poor writing some of the writing was quite poor especially in the mini-strips and in the use of celebrities unknown to the majority of readers.
You seem to be agreeing and disagreeing with me at the same time, which is rather confusing.
Whether or not the new artists were a minority in the comic or not, it is entirely possible for that minority aspect to be the major reason for the readership's rejection of the relaunch. And I have always made clear that artists of Nigel Parkinson's calibre (as well as a few others) were not included in my criticisms.
Jamie Smart was apparently responsible for the overall look and design of the 2010 incarnation, having lettered the lacklustre logos for most, if not all of, the strips, but his style was not the only one which was seriously under par. We at least agree on his culpability, but others were also responsible.
However, if you're saying that he deserves the chief share of the blame then I wouldn't necessarily disagree with your assessment - just that he wasn't the only guilty party.
Thanks for commenting anyway.
http://leejamesturnock.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/kid-robson-is-bloody-annoying.html
Hope you take this in the spirit in which it's intended! :)
Post a Comment