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 misrepresen-

tation 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, con-

trary 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.  Anyway, I'm off for a cuppa and a biccie - see

you in part two if you're interested in truth, justice  and fair play.

We'll probably have a Babe of the Day or two in between

parts 'though, 'cos there's a helluva lot to cover.

Posted in: Cartoons