A mixed bag this time around and some comments at the end.
Spoilers ho!
Superman/Batman 33 - Just as all good things must come to an end, so must all bad things. This arc, about aliens going berserk on Earth, is a perfect example of the new decompressed storytelling without any benefits. I've already forgotten how many issues this ran on, but it was only at the cover of this issue that we finally got to find out who was behind all the shenanigans, Despero.
This issue typifies the problems with the entire arc. We begin with Batman having undergone the possession by the blackrock and strong enough to challenge Superman. But Superman knows that Batman would prefer to die than to be possessed, so he threatens Batman with exactly that; the blackrock, being somehow sentient and psychic and having a highly developed fight or flight mechanism, leaves Batman under his own control. These scenes are supposed to provide a neat mirror to when Superman was possessed and Batman had to fight him. And on the surface, it is a neat little solution to the conundrum Superman is faced with...but there is no way that Superman would ever follow through with the threat. We've had story after story where Superman has declined to kill even his most virulent enemy, so there is no way in DC's green earth that Supes would kill Bats. I guess the blackrock isn't too very psychic.
But then we find out that all of this mess has been brought on by Despero employing an alien race that delivers judgments on entire species. Despero convinces the race to judge humanity and humanity is found lacking the finer qualities of the better alien races. So they psychically persuade the aliens to destroy humanity in order to purge the universe of an inferior race. Only when they are convinced to examine the memories of the people that Superman has known do they begin to believe they have made a mistake, and then Batman convinces them. They defeat Despero and the aliens release the humans from their possession.
But the overarching wisdom of these aliens is somewhat lacking. Do they consider their own roots--do they believe that they themselves have always been so perfect? If they are as wise as they are portrayed, they would know that if they went about destroying creatures they found to be inferior to them, they would be no better than the things they purport to be fighting. Plus, if they are such powerful psychics, why would they trust Despero at all?
And at the end, Superman and Batman agree to be friends while the narrative Alfred says that they never really lost their friendship, as Batman vows to let his humanity back into his personality. This doesn't jibe with the jetsetter Bruce Wayne we have been seeing over in Batman but I understand the point. It just seems futile after all this. If anything, after all his battles, Batman should know that the first and last person he should ever trust is Superman (which argues again against his threatening to kills Bats, but I did that jig already).
I'm sure that the creative team was trying to make some kind of points in the issues that led to this conclusion, but I'll be darned if I know what it is. I don't know why we had the appearance of Plastic Man in the niddle of it. Luthor is disposed of in a single panel...the whole tapestry just doesn't hold together, especially since this issue was upposed to tie it all up. And we are blessed with the apeparance of really wise psychic aliens who don't really seem to be much of either.
Justice League of America 7 - So the team has come together, and after all the planning, the deciding factor regarding who gets to join is whoever was around when Grundy and Amazo were defeated. The problem is that Rucka punches all the fanboy buttons without really delivering content. Look! The Justice League has two headquarters--one is the Hall of Justice from the Super Friends TV show and the other is the satellite from the Justice League Unlimited series. Never mind that both of them pose tremendous danger to the people that the Justice League purposts to protect, especially since there will apparently be tours through the Hall of Justice. And there is some nonsense about putting the Hall on the same location as where the All-Star Squadron met...but the hall is in Washington DC while the All-Star Squadron was headquartered in the remains of the 1939 Worlds Fair in New York.
With a wink, Greg Rucka has Black Lightning invite Batman to the League, harkening back to when Black Lightning turned down Batman's invite, back in the 70s. And Roy takes on yet another identity, this time as the Red Arrow, in order that he may use the "family name." And he lives up to it by immediately hitting on Hawkgirl, which would appear to throw a whole lot of continuity that was recently put back into whack totally back out of whack.
Then there's the gimmicks--if I wanted the full cover, I would have had to buy two issues of the comic, since each cover is exactly half the picture (just like the first issue, remember?). And there is a nifty fold-out spread of the new team in the center, but the layout is totally messed up so that the story pages are out of synch.
This is all just symbolic of my problem with the issue altogether, and as I think back, the part that has been lacking from the earlier issues. Appealing to the fanboy is easy--make an esoteric reference to another company's teams, pull out the fan favorites using some sort of surprise, or just display that you know something about the history. But beneath that very thin veneer of coolness, there's...nothing. It doesn't hang together and sometimes doesn't even make sense. And I don't think asking the story to make sense at more than a surface level is too much.
Runaways 25 - I had heard good things about this series and read the trade containing the first 12 issues. I enjoyed those stories and rather liked the concept in general. Then I found out Joss Whedon was taking over the series, so I knew I had to try it out.
I'm not a big fan of the Marvel Universe, but this just sings. The Runaways have always been a little distanced from the mainstream Marvel Universe ("you know, for the kids!"), so Whedon can spend a good bit of time developing the characters and their interaction. As I think about it, it seems to me that Whedon has more experience doing this than trying to fit his vision of characters into an existing universe. Anyway, he has a team book again, with which to work on the interactions and dialogue between the characters while developing the personalities of the individuals that make up the team. You kow, that stuff that Whedon just excels at.
And boom, he nails it. Even with the appearance of the Marvel heavies, these are still confused kids trying to find their way in a world they didn't want to be a part of. Their powers are barely useful, so it is the family they created which sustains them. Each voice is different and consistent. And like all the best teen teams, they may squabble but when they are in danger, they come together.
Fortunately, this issue makes a fine jumping on point for the series. I recommend jumping as quickly as you can.
Notes
It took a bit of digging to find out who did the cover for Superman 661, Jesus Merino. And while Wonder Woman and Superman are okay, I swear to you that his portrayal of the villain channels Neal Adams, and with the word-balloons, it's a throwback to that earlier day. The story itself is a little thin, but that villain just sings.
Also, some bad news. It would appear that Gail Simone is leaving Birds of Prey, which is just unhappy. I know you can't expect a writer to spend a career on a single title, and Simone has a huge run on BoP, but that's one combination that has been quite strong for some time now. While she reports that her new title is big and a dream of hers (rumor has it that she will be taking over Wonder Woman after Jodi Picoult's run), the Birds are going to miss her.
Monday, April 9, 2007
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
The Moon and the Sun
If you read my earlier blog from today, you'll see that I mentioned this book a little bit. Well, I was actually home not feeling so great, so I sat right down and finished the book. My opinion of it has changed a little, but allow me to recap.
Vonda McIntyre's The Moon and the Sun is ostensibly an alternative history novel, set in the court of Louis XIV right about the turn of the 17th century into the 18th. The main character is Marie-Josephe de la Croix, a recent escapee from a convent on Martinique into the court of Louis himself. We find out that she is actually the daughter of nobility who were sent to Martinique by Louis and who died, leaving her in the care of the convent. Her natural intelligence and curiosity (we find out in degrees that she is a mathematician, composer, and accomplished artist) were stifled by the convent, and she looks forward to beginning her career as a minor noble, the lady-in-waiting for Louis's niece.
Court intrigue follows and she, being quite beautiful (of course) becomes the target of lecherous men all around her, except for Lucien de Chretien, the king's most trusted advisor. As if learning how to deal with Versailles in the Sun King's reign is not difficult enough, her father ( edit: "brother," see Yonmei's comment and my response below. Stupid fingers) is a renowned Jesuit natural philosopher who has just accomplished a mission of the utmost importance to the king--capturing a live mer-creature and returning it to Versailles for study. Louis and her brother, Yves, believe that mermen have an organ that gives immortality, and they are seeking it in the best scientific method of their time--which involves dissection and detailed comparative study.
And here is where my problem begins. It is perfectly clear that the merpeople are in fact sentient, even if no one in the book gets it. So, the surviving mer-creature (affectionately called "sea monster" by name) witnesses the dissection of her dead lover and wails in the mer-language, a sort of song that everyone around her takes to be the cry of an animal. But for nearly half the book, we get to follow Marie-Josephe around while she wins over the court with her innocence and intelligence, despite the way the church and the court itself continually remind her of the inherent weakness of women. But she is not so smart that she can't figure out that the mer-woman reacts exactly like a human woman would under the same impulse. Part of that is because we rarely see the mer-woman in the first half of the book.
Now understand, if I wanted to read a period piece with a little fantasy thrown in on the side, this would be a marvelous book. It is light and fluffy, full of simple feminism (although never openly expressed by any of the characters). But the shadow of the impending torture of an alien sentient hangs over the novel, causing the courtly interplay to be asinine. In fact, a hard science fiction novel would be all over the implications of the merpeople, while for most of the book, it is only an interesting background detail. Of some interest is the opinion of the visiting Pope Innocent, who is torn between deciding if the mer-creatures are beasts or demons.
Finally though, Marie-Josephe gets it (due in no part to the near-psychic communication the mer-creature possesses) and she finds herself trying to change the minds of the notoriously stubborn Louis and her brother...and the pope. If she fails, the mer-creature is to be butchered and served as the main course at one of Louis's feasts. Marie-Josephe must work within the constraints of her role in the severely repressed system to convince them not only to spare the life of a human creature but also to not commit the mortal sin of murder in the process of preparing her for a meal. Her solution is ingenious, even though it ultimately fails, setting the reader up for the obligatory but silly action scenes.
As I put the book down, I wondered why this story had to be set in the time it is. How much more philosophical conversation could take place if it was set in modern times? How much deeper could the book have drawn its characters and their opinions if they lived in a contemporary setting? What McIntyre does is an interesting thought experiment, but it has little depth to it. So I'm left with the feeling that a lot of potential has been left unfulfilled and wondering why.
To be honest, there are a few scenes, especially with de Chretien, that take up an alternative viewpoint that I don't entirely believe would have been present in the setting she chose. de Chretien is an avowed atheist who is tolerated at court because of his service to Louis. Because he is not so wed to the Christian morality as the people around him, he is among the first to believe that the mer-creature is sentient. I find his arguments about atheism to be compelling, especially in light of current conversations about biblical literalism "versus" science. A good friend has been pointing me to the lectures of David Hawkins, recent author of The God Delusion, where he posits rational arguments about the faultiness of the Bible as a historical record and moral guidebook. Ironically, Marie-Josephe, a devout Catholic raised in a convent, is the first to set aside her bias, but it is de Chretien who makes the most astute arguments, in part because he *can*--he is a man in the court and is not automatically ignored when he speaks.
The Moon and the Sun is an entertaining book, but I run again into my problem with recent award-winning books. The question I ask myself, which is not at all fair to the book, is what else was up for the Nebula that year that this won? It really doesn't break new ground nor is it particularly stylish. And what I think would be more fascinating, now that the table is set, is to write a sequel in which we see some of the war that has been declared by the novel's end. By doing that, there is no way McIntyre could avoid the moral implications of the thrust of her novel.
Vonda McIntyre's The Moon and the Sun is ostensibly an alternative history novel, set in the court of Louis XIV right about the turn of the 17th century into the 18th. The main character is Marie-Josephe de la Croix, a recent escapee from a convent on Martinique into the court of Louis himself. We find out that she is actually the daughter of nobility who were sent to Martinique by Louis and who died, leaving her in the care of the convent. Her natural intelligence and curiosity (we find out in degrees that she is a mathematician, composer, and accomplished artist) were stifled by the convent, and she looks forward to beginning her career as a minor noble, the lady-in-waiting for Louis's niece.
Court intrigue follows and she, being quite beautiful (of course) becomes the target of lecherous men all around her, except for Lucien de Chretien, the king's most trusted advisor. As if learning how to deal with Versailles in the Sun King's reign is not difficult enough, her father ( edit: "brother," see Yonmei's comment and my response below. Stupid fingers) is a renowned Jesuit natural philosopher who has just accomplished a mission of the utmost importance to the king--capturing a live mer-creature and returning it to Versailles for study. Louis and her brother, Yves, believe that mermen have an organ that gives immortality, and they are seeking it in the best scientific method of their time--which involves dissection and detailed comparative study.
And here is where my problem begins. It is perfectly clear that the merpeople are in fact sentient, even if no one in the book gets it. So, the surviving mer-creature (affectionately called "sea monster" by name) witnesses the dissection of her dead lover and wails in the mer-language, a sort of song that everyone around her takes to be the cry of an animal. But for nearly half the book, we get to follow Marie-Josephe around while she wins over the court with her innocence and intelligence, despite the way the church and the court itself continually remind her of the inherent weakness of women. But she is not so smart that she can't figure out that the mer-woman reacts exactly like a human woman would under the same impulse. Part of that is because we rarely see the mer-woman in the first half of the book.
Now understand, if I wanted to read a period piece with a little fantasy thrown in on the side, this would be a marvelous book. It is light and fluffy, full of simple feminism (although never openly expressed by any of the characters). But the shadow of the impending torture of an alien sentient hangs over the novel, causing the courtly interplay to be asinine. In fact, a hard science fiction novel would be all over the implications of the merpeople, while for most of the book, it is only an interesting background detail. Of some interest is the opinion of the visiting Pope Innocent, who is torn between deciding if the mer-creatures are beasts or demons.
Finally though, Marie-Josephe gets it (due in no part to the near-psychic communication the mer-creature possesses) and she finds herself trying to change the minds of the notoriously stubborn Louis and her brother...and the pope. If she fails, the mer-creature is to be butchered and served as the main course at one of Louis's feasts. Marie-Josephe must work within the constraints of her role in the severely repressed system to convince them not only to spare the life of a human creature but also to not commit the mortal sin of murder in the process of preparing her for a meal. Her solution is ingenious, even though it ultimately fails, setting the reader up for the obligatory but silly action scenes.
As I put the book down, I wondered why this story had to be set in the time it is. How much more philosophical conversation could take place if it was set in modern times? How much deeper could the book have drawn its characters and their opinions if they lived in a contemporary setting? What McIntyre does is an interesting thought experiment, but it has little depth to it. So I'm left with the feeling that a lot of potential has been left unfulfilled and wondering why.
To be honest, there are a few scenes, especially with de Chretien, that take up an alternative viewpoint that I don't entirely believe would have been present in the setting she chose. de Chretien is an avowed atheist who is tolerated at court because of his service to Louis. Because he is not so wed to the Christian morality as the people around him, he is among the first to believe that the mer-creature is sentient. I find his arguments about atheism to be compelling, especially in light of current conversations about biblical literalism "versus" science. A good friend has been pointing me to the lectures of David Hawkins, recent author of The God Delusion, where he posits rational arguments about the faultiness of the Bible as a historical record and moral guidebook. Ironically, Marie-Josephe, a devout Catholic raised in a convent, is the first to set aside her bias, but it is de Chretien who makes the most astute arguments, in part because he *can*--he is a man in the court and is not automatically ignored when he speaks.
The Moon and the Sun is an entertaining book, but I run again into my problem with recent award-winning books. The question I ask myself, which is not at all fair to the book, is what else was up for the Nebula that year that this won? It really doesn't break new ground nor is it particularly stylish. And what I think would be more fascinating, now that the table is set, is to write a sequel in which we see some of the war that has been declared by the novel's end. By doing that, there is no way McIntyre could avoid the moral implications of the thrust of her novel.
Where's yer head at, man?
My writing production has gone way down since I started this out, and it is not so much the result of bad writing, as it is poor subject matter.
When it comes to comics, I almost exclusively read DC. I suppose there might be a long posting embedded here about the difference between DC and Marvel when it comes to story-telling, but let's just start with my tastes right now. And about a year ago, DC was going great guns--Infinite Crisis was coming to a fairly satisfying conclusion and 52 was making big promises. And in the regular titles, "One Year Later" was going to do some rebooting. But what have we ended up with a year later? Superman has been uneven, first telling how Superman got his powers back, then the global invasion by a giant snake oil salesman, and finally Arion's predictions of the dire consequences of there being a Superman at all. Only the last arc has any long-lasting repercussions with the possibility of an ongoing conflict with the only character that regularly gives Superman troubles, Superman himself. Action has been a throwback to the 80s and 90s, with its event-based storytelling (look at us have a co-writer who has never written a comic in his life! but you will recognize the name!). I've already remarked on my feelings about the whole 3-D glasses schtick, but even that has been delayed as the creative teams have fallen behind schedule. In fact, the title is being forced to go to unprecedented places by breaking up a five- or six-part story with filler issues while things get caught up. And those schedule problems don't come close to what has plagued Wonder Woman, that got so far behind that the first arc will have to be finished in a special issue while a whole new creative team takes over and plots a company-wide event.
Of the "big three," only Batman has really succeeded creatively. Morrison's inspired storytelling in Batman carries that title to some places we've not seen in a long while. Having Bruce Wayne as a character is a joy, and Morrison is nailing the jet-setter characterization that has been missing for decades. Whatever Bruce did to get rid of his demons in 52 seems to have worked, and other than the regrettable all-prose Joker story, Batman is a joy. Even so, it does not hold a candle to Paul Dini's work on Detective, making Batman a real detective again. Dini is delivering single-issue stories that develop both Batman and his supporting cast, making it quite possibly the best title DC has going right now.
Outside the big three, Green Lantern, Green Lantern Corps, and Teen Titans have really come through. Gl and Teen Titans have the advantage of Geoff Johns' guiding hand, and his record as the deliverer of big stories is substantial. However, Johns is not so good at the small stories, which has long been a part of the Titans' history. Perhaps the new writer there can continue to deliver the big thrills while developing the characters. More stories like the solo Kid/Red Devil, please! And while Green Lantern has been fun, it has been fairly predictable. Green Lantern Corps has indeed been a surprise with its strong story-telling, even though the art has been horribly uneven. I would add Uncle Sam, Justice Society, and the Dr. Thirteen back-up story in Tales of the Unexpected as highlights of the past year. But Justice League? What could have been a great story was drawn out by more scheduling issues, and the energy built-up with the promise a new Justice League has petered out in the weeks between the issues.
I could go on, appearig to bash what is going on at DC, but let me just say that I'm buying more comics now than ever before. I look forward to Wednesdays a great deal. My point is this--I've set myself some standards for writing reviews and one of those is that I don't want to review the same titles every month. But spread these titles over the weeks in a month and I'm left with perhaps one good title and a bunch of mediocre ones to talk about here. And I'm just not up for talking about mediocrity yet. So no blogging in those weeks.
So, I'm going to make a deal with you--if I don't blog reviews for a week's comics, I will still write a blog entry on the state of things.
As for books, well, I'm having a real struggle at the moment. When I was in college and grad school, I made a real effort to buy all the Hugo- and Nebula-winning novels. I felt it was a great way to get a sense of the history of the genres I love as well as visiting the canon of great books. And, if you are a book-lover, you know the joy of going to used bookstores and finding that one book you've been looking for. And I've read some wonderful stuff on that quest--Babel-17, for example. Mars Plus still excites me and I read it more often than I read some Heinlein. But grad school got tough and I had to bear down on getting my degree while working five jobs, and whn the pressure got too much, I had to start a career as a tech writer. So I was poor and couldn't do the book-hunt thing so much.
But recently I was inspired to go back and close the gap, catching up on the award-winning novels. And while I recognize that tastes change, especially mine, I'm discovering the best books of the past few decade and a half are generally nowhere near as good as the classics of the 50s and 60s. The book I've been working on for the past month is a fine example. While it purports to be speculative fiction, I'm finding that there is next to no fantastic in it to sustain my interest, acting more as a romantic peroid piece as we follow a young woman in 18th century France. I've finally reached the halfway point of this 450-page novel, and we have been introduced to exactly one fantastic element--a mermaid. And so far, where the novel is going is ruthlessly predictable and I find myself wondering what else was out the year this won a Nebula that had to suck so poorly. But then, I am only halfway through the book, so maybe it'll pick up so that amazing things happen and I'll find myself healthily eating crow, but right now, calling it a struggle is an understatement, as I put in about five to ten pages in bed before going to sleep. And it is no help that the book is helping to put me to sleep. Even less help is the electronic promise from the British arm of Amazon that a book I've been looking forward to for a year is on a tramp steamer crossing the Atlantic on its way to my doorstep.
I feel a big entry coming up about the weakness of recent books, but I don't want to start it based on my opinion of my current reading material, when I've not finished that book. But I wanted to let my readers know I'm still here, struggling with my sources. I'll write more about those struggles if they continue.
Hey, new comics tomorrow! May my pull-list be filled with instant classics!
When it comes to comics, I almost exclusively read DC. I suppose there might be a long posting embedded here about the difference between DC and Marvel when it comes to story-telling, but let's just start with my tastes right now. And about a year ago, DC was going great guns--Infinite Crisis was coming to a fairly satisfying conclusion and 52 was making big promises. And in the regular titles, "One Year Later" was going to do some rebooting. But what have we ended up with a year later? Superman has been uneven, first telling how Superman got his powers back, then the global invasion by a giant snake oil salesman, and finally Arion's predictions of the dire consequences of there being a Superman at all. Only the last arc has any long-lasting repercussions with the possibility of an ongoing conflict with the only character that regularly gives Superman troubles, Superman himself. Action has been a throwback to the 80s and 90s, with its event-based storytelling (look at us have a co-writer who has never written a comic in his life! but you will recognize the name!). I've already remarked on my feelings about the whole 3-D glasses schtick, but even that has been delayed as the creative teams have fallen behind schedule. In fact, the title is being forced to go to unprecedented places by breaking up a five- or six-part story with filler issues while things get caught up. And those schedule problems don't come close to what has plagued Wonder Woman, that got so far behind that the first arc will have to be finished in a special issue while a whole new creative team takes over and plots a company-wide event.
Of the "big three," only Batman has really succeeded creatively. Morrison's inspired storytelling in Batman carries that title to some places we've not seen in a long while. Having Bruce Wayne as a character is a joy, and Morrison is nailing the jet-setter characterization that has been missing for decades. Whatever Bruce did to get rid of his demons in 52 seems to have worked, and other than the regrettable all-prose Joker story, Batman is a joy. Even so, it does not hold a candle to Paul Dini's work on Detective, making Batman a real detective again. Dini is delivering single-issue stories that develop both Batman and his supporting cast, making it quite possibly the best title DC has going right now.
Outside the big three, Green Lantern, Green Lantern Corps, and Teen Titans have really come through. Gl and Teen Titans have the advantage of Geoff Johns' guiding hand, and his record as the deliverer of big stories is substantial. However, Johns is not so good at the small stories, which has long been a part of the Titans' history. Perhaps the new writer there can continue to deliver the big thrills while developing the characters. More stories like the solo Kid/Red Devil, please! And while Green Lantern has been fun, it has been fairly predictable. Green Lantern Corps has indeed been a surprise with its strong story-telling, even though the art has been horribly uneven. I would add Uncle Sam, Justice Society, and the Dr. Thirteen back-up story in Tales of the Unexpected as highlights of the past year. But Justice League? What could have been a great story was drawn out by more scheduling issues, and the energy built-up with the promise a new Justice League has petered out in the weeks between the issues.
I could go on, appearig to bash what is going on at DC, but let me just say that I'm buying more comics now than ever before. I look forward to Wednesdays a great deal. My point is this--I've set myself some standards for writing reviews and one of those is that I don't want to review the same titles every month. But spread these titles over the weeks in a month and I'm left with perhaps one good title and a bunch of mediocre ones to talk about here. And I'm just not up for talking about mediocrity yet. So no blogging in those weeks.
So, I'm going to make a deal with you--if I don't blog reviews for a week's comics, I will still write a blog entry on the state of things.
As for books, well, I'm having a real struggle at the moment. When I was in college and grad school, I made a real effort to buy all the Hugo- and Nebula-winning novels. I felt it was a great way to get a sense of the history of the genres I love as well as visiting the canon of great books. And, if you are a book-lover, you know the joy of going to used bookstores and finding that one book you've been looking for. And I've read some wonderful stuff on that quest--Babel-17, for example. Mars Plus still excites me and I read it more often than I read some Heinlein. But grad school got tough and I had to bear down on getting my degree while working five jobs, and whn the pressure got too much, I had to start a career as a tech writer. So I was poor and couldn't do the book-hunt thing so much.
But recently I was inspired to go back and close the gap, catching up on the award-winning novels. And while I recognize that tastes change, especially mine, I'm discovering the best books of the past few decade and a half are generally nowhere near as good as the classics of the 50s and 60s. The book I've been working on for the past month is a fine example. While it purports to be speculative fiction, I'm finding that there is next to no fantastic in it to sustain my interest, acting more as a romantic peroid piece as we follow a young woman in 18th century France. I've finally reached the halfway point of this 450-page novel, and we have been introduced to exactly one fantastic element--a mermaid. And so far, where the novel is going is ruthlessly predictable and I find myself wondering what else was out the year this won a Nebula that had to suck so poorly. But then, I am only halfway through the book, so maybe it'll pick up so that amazing things happen and I'll find myself healthily eating crow, but right now, calling it a struggle is an understatement, as I put in about five to ten pages in bed before going to sleep. And it is no help that the book is helping to put me to sleep. Even less help is the electronic promise from the British arm of Amazon that a book I've been looking forward to for a year is on a tramp steamer crossing the Atlantic on its way to my doorstep.
I feel a big entry coming up about the weakness of recent books, but I don't want to start it based on my opinion of my current reading material, when I've not finished that book. But I wanted to let my readers know I'm still here, struggling with my sources. I'll write more about those struggles if they continue.
Hey, new comics tomorrow! May my pull-list be filled with instant classics!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)