UK 'TROLLS': ALIVE AND KICKING (THE BUTTS OF BUTT-'EADS) - PART ONE...

Well, I said I'd deal with it and I'm a man of my word.  No issue with his comments about comics helping kids with reading skills, because I had a wider vocabulary than my peers due to my consumption of them.  However, when I look at 'comics' in my local supermarket, what I mostly see are periodicals that are only called 'comics' out of convenience, rather than because they actually are.  Is a comic a comic just because it's categorized as one in a shop, or does it have to meet a more specific standard?  We'll get into this more detail later, as he develops his theme.

Think about that for a moment.  The 'main goal' of those who 'attack' the 'industry' is to 'bring it to its knees and put everyone in it out of work for their own selfish reasons'.  Have you ever read a more ludicrous statement?  And by what supernatural means does he divine the inner motivations of other people's minds? Perhaps it's simply nothing more than some comic readers who love them as a medium complaining about the downward spiral they appear to be in, and speaking out because they want things to improve?  Nah, couldn't be that, could it?  They must be evil.

'Trying to put adults off buying comics' and trying to 'take this brilliant way of developing reading skills away from children' is another hysterical (and I don't mean funny) assertion based on nothing more than an insane fantasy of his own invention.  Did even Dr. Fredrick Wertham at his most extreme ever declare a more ridiculous notion (as his critics would claim) based, not on fact, but on nothing more than a determined desire to diminish the views of those with whom he disagrees.

This is clearly a man on a mission, who doesn't seem to care by what means he accomplishes it.  No exaggeration is too huge for him, no distortion or invention too great.  Watch and see.

     

Well, I can certainly see a gaping hole, though not in the so-called 'theory' he ascribes to others, but in his gross misrepresentation of it.  I have, on the odd occasion, concluded that one or two comic contributors, in putting a positive spin on the state of either a specific comic or the condition of the 'industry' in general, have done so with an eye on how such loyalty to 'the cause' might benefit their long-term career prospects, than from a desire to present an accurate assessment of how things actually are.

Think about it.  Do you really believe some individuals are completely unaware of how being perceived as 'biting the hand that feeds them' might not exactly impress those who employ them?  Freelancers are at the mercy of commissioning editors, and so must often tread a delicate path.  Such is reality, my friend.  However, contrary to what is claimed, neither I (nor anyone that I know of) has ever claimed that absolutely every comics contributor who may have a more positive attitude on the current state of play than I (and others) do, holds that view because of a vested-interest.

So, again, a vast difference between the facts and the assertion.  And this is a theme that runs through the person's entire blog post.  And as for 'trolls' having 'the vested interest', in what way exactly?  Do they get financial remuneration for destroying the comics 'industry', or are they in line for an O.B.E. as a reward for all their hard work?  The guy talks more pish than Mr. Pishy of Pish Street, Pishtown, in the County of Pishshire.  Gimme strength someone.

Anyway, I'm off for a cuppa and a biccie - see you all in part two if you're interested in truth, justice and fair play.  We'll likely have a Babe of the Day or two in between parts though, 'cos there's a helluva lot to cover.

The PLAIN And SIMPLE TRUTH...

Well, at least the bottom blurb is right

According to the Free Dictionary, the definition of 'thriving' is "To grow vigorously; flourish" and "To be successful or make steady progress; prosper". Most of the meager group of detractors who take issue with my views on British comics have conceded that sales of comics have been declining for years and continue to do so.  They may disagree that the alleged 'industry' is dead, but they usually admit the long, slow, steady decline.  Except when they're trying to 'talk it up' of course.  Then they use words like 'thriving', 'healthy', etc., in their rabid desire to put a rosy glow on things.

Incontrovertible point of logic: If sales and circulation are in decline, then they can't be thriving or prospering - that's just a plain and simple fact.  On that basis alone, I win the argument.  It's over - case proved, case closed, and no amount of intellectual (I use the word in an ironic sense) gymnastics on their part, no amount of distortion, obfuscation, or wishful thinking can alter the facts.  There's really no need for me to go on, I'm right, they're wrong, and that's just how it is. That's simply the way the cookie crumbles.

That won't stop me beating the subject to death though, as is my wont.  When people ascribe motivations of their own invention to my comments on comics as if they have some kind of exclusive insight into the workings of my mind, when they casually accuse me of bitterness, envy, and frustration at 'not being allowed' to work in U.K. comics today, then they're playing with fire. Let's now get one thing straight: The reason I no longer work in comics (specifically) is down, mainly, to two things.

Firstly, the world of British comics today is a vastly different entity to what it was in 'my day', not only in its set up, but also in its size.  Secondly, I no longer get any enjoyment or satisfaction from working in the field (so work indoors then - chortle) and would find it a chore.  I've been offered a few opportunities to return to the biz over the years and not pursued (or declined) them.  That's not something my tiny band of determined detractors can accept though, preferring instead to smear me with their false accusations as to my inactivity in the medium in which I had a 15 year career.  

Having dealt with that, I'll soon be addressing each and every point of the provocative post I mentioned last time.  I'll have to do it in instalments, because the effrontery of its dubious claims is simply too enormous to confront in one go.  I'll demolish each and every false assumption and accusation one by one, and demonstrate beyond any doubt why that particular individual is not only wrong, but disingenuous in the way he presents his case.

 See you then - it's a date. 

HOW TO DEAL WITH FUTILE AND FRANTIC FLAPPING FROM A PIG DESPERATELY TRYING TO FLY...

I've been informed that some prat with a face you'd never get tired of punching is taking a little pop at me over on his blog devoted to a comic that was never very good at its best.  His post completely distorts my point of view (and motives), railing against his own straw man interpretations of my opinion in an attempt to heap scorn on it, and in doing so, merely reveals the feeble nature of his position.

Only his small circle of industry pals with whom he seeks to curry favour and win approval will see any merit in his ingratiating brown-nosing, as the facts are simply against him.  Can he name any company producing comics today who turns them out in the numbers that IPC and DCT once did?  Can he name any British comic that has a circulation even approaching that of any comic of the '60s and '70s?  No, of course he can't, because they don't exist.

Fewer children buy comics today than they once did, but he conveniently overlooks this salient fact in his sad endeavour to discredit me for merely expressing the plain and simple truth.  To accuse me (or anybody) of trying to tear down what passes for (or 'poses as' would perhaps be a more accurate description) the current comics 'industry' and destroy the jobs of those trying to earn a tenuous living from it is a ludicrous assertion.

My criticism of The DANDY, for instance, was intended to identify what was wrong with the ailing periodical in the hope that corrective action could be taken to save it.  My assessment of the current state of what is laughably called the comics 'industry' is voiced for the same reason.  Comic strips of course, survive on the internet and in book form, but the format of a comic has its own individual 'character' and 'charm' that cannot be replicated on a computer screen, mobile, or iPad.

He can squeal as much as he likes of course, but pigs will fly before his outrageous assertions and provocative distortions will prove to have anything more than the most superficial resemblance to reality.  It's a shame he didn't address the actual issues, instead of trying to settle scores on behalf of his few disgruntled chums.  You never know though - maybe there's an oinkment they could rub on their affected parts.  (Mutually in all probability, given their obvious 'admiration' for each other.)

Now that's what you call bringing home the bacon.  Next!

******

Oh, and don't worry, I ain't going soft.  I'll be going through his post piece by piece and exposing it for the lies, distortions, misrepresentations and fantasies that it is.  Coming soon, so don't dare miss Kid kick @ss!