New Simon Spurrier Interview at 2000AD Review

[gavinhanly]

Ok - just put up a new interview with Simon Spurrier.  It's really quite long - and well worth a read.

Should have another interview up very soon too.

Enjoy!

Oh, and the recent site probs appear to be over.  Hooray!

Link: http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/" target="_blank">2000AD Review

[paulvonscott]

"My one gripe is with individuals who believe that just because they dislike something it must automatically be defined as "crap" or "worthless", and – even worse – that anyone who disagrees is clearly insane. I have no enormous problem with the fact that some people don't like Bec and Kawl, because I know for fact that there are those who love it. Whose opinion is more valid? Is there a "right" and a "wrong"?"

I know my views, and I know other peoples views are the complete opposite and I don't think they're are insane, and I'm not sure that even if anyone had said fans of Bek and Kawl were insane (which I doubt) people would have seriously believed that.  

I could have replaced Sin Dex for bek and kawl or ANY other strip there.  I think it's great when sin dex fans stand up for the strip (despite the fact I don't like it) and abysmal when they just have a bit of a snipe at people.  

We can all have fun arguing over the merits and non-merits of strips.  If we instead start commenting on the people with the views and theorising on their motives then we are in for a whole world of woe.

Speech over, enjoyed the rest of the interview.

[paulvonscott]

Last point, someone saying they 'loved it' is just the same as someone saying 'it's crap' it's just a lazy summary of what they thought of it.  there is no critical worth to either comment.  Also not worth hassling people over.

[paulvonscott]

Sorry, this is the argument me and Si had six months ago.  Can't believe I fell for it again.  Equally happy to debate or forget it all :)

[gavinhanly]

I think it's fair to say I've been pretty harsh to Bec & Kawl in some of my reviews, so some of the comments in the interview may be directed at those.  Considering how much of a bastard I have been in them, I think he was fairly restrained...

Link: http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/index.shtml" target="_blank">2000AD Review

[paulvonscott]

Well, I'm in the target group too, I think it's just a general comment and not meant to be a personal dig at anyone.  Unless you did say Bek and Kawl fans were insane ;)

'both views are equally valid, but the ones with this view have a problem, so I'll take them to task' Just engaged my foolish auto-response.  I'd rather just read a defence of the strip, than an offence.

It was just a story which provoked strong reactions from people.  There's always been such love or loathe strips in 2000AD really and none of Si's other series fall into that catagory.

Nothing like picking at scabs is there?  They'll never heal...

[CowboyJinglyBits]

Oh, for goodness' sake...   I'm not entirely sure what you've taken offence to this time, Paul.  The point of what I said in the interview was that there's no such thing as a 'most valid' opinion (unless, I suppose, it's shared by 100% of the population), that it's stupid and pointless to try pigeonholing readers, and that those who love or hate something are just as entitled to think or say what they want...  Which is pretty much the most open-ended and non-antagonistic version of what you're always spouting yourself.  I really couldn't have put it any more openly, or any less confrontationally, and here you are reacting as though I was having a personal stab at you, which of course I wasn't.  As far as I can recall you never suggested that B&K's fans are insane (which is the only sort of dogmatic bullshit that, in the interview, I single out for condemnation), so this sort of outraged response is perhaps a little superfluous?  I did the interview because Gavin asked me to, not as a sneaky way of reopening a really really really *boring* argument which has knackered me in the past and which I had considered put to rest.

I've no intention of playing along and contributing to the whole Sordid Affair Mk2.  Like I said in the interview: like it or loathe it, there will be more just as long as there *are* those who like it, and just as long as Tharg wants it.  I can't be any more open that that.

As for the now infamous 'PVS principal' - that "I can't *not* respond to someone else's post when it's full of digs!", or however you word it usually - perhaps you'd care to reflect upon the fact that, again, *you* reopened this particular tin of maggots, that I haven't made any deliberate digs beyond the usual responding-to-a-detractor confrontational machismo bollocks that we're all guilty of, and that I really can't be arsed with all this yet again.  

Please, make like DxB and let dead puppies lie.

[CowboyJinglyBits]

Shit.  There goes the secret identity.

Siiiigh.   ;)

[Slippery PD]

Good interview Si......

And the above is one of the funniest things Ive read in a long time.  

Yer Slippo
 
 

[Tex Hex]

Happy Degree Si! Hopefully youll use yours more than I have mine.

Hex.

[paulvonscott]

Well, Si has said this before, that I've got a nasty little vendetta against him.  The only problem I have is this argument.

Basically if all opinions are valid, stop taking issue with the people who dislike your story and accept they don't like it, are perfectly justified in saying they didn't like it and just get on with it.  

I don't feel it's a direct dig at me or anyone else.  I do feel as though I'm part of the group that are the crazy people.  Of course I don't think that you did this interview just to start it off again.  That's mad talk.

Basically, we agree on everything but this, Si doesn't understand why this argument bothers me and thinks it personal, it's not.  

Just killfile me, it's probably easier and I'd perfectly understand.  

[Oddboy]

stop taking issue with the people who dislike your story

He has, hasn't he?
Or did I read the interview wrong?

[paulvonscott]

I'm making minor points of issue, I can see the argument, but I obviously am not equipped to make my point well or do it without upsetting people.  My apologies, I'll just do my best to avoid these sorts of arguments in future and stick to simple comments that won't make my blood boil.

[gavinhanly]

I think I should say that the B&K question was designed to get Si's side of the argument (not that I was aware that one was particularly raging), since my comments in the episode reviews were pretty one sided (although I do stand by them).

Also, not everyone reads the message boards regularly, so while it may appear to some that these debates are "dredged up", many others will be keen to see what a writer has to say about his work.

There's lots more good material in that interview apart from that one question!!

Link: http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/" target="_blank">2000AD Review

[Trout]

I can see Si's point, to some extent.
We've already discussed this in a different context on the board.

The principle is that if you slag something off, say why. I know Paul always gives his reasons, so he's not guilty of that.

However, I agree that a story should not be dismissed as simply "crap" as we engage in our over-detailed dissections of the weekly prog.
I suspect I have done that myself (SinDex, probably) but now I try not to, when I'm making a negative comment.

I take Paul's point that saying, "It's crap" is effectively a different way of saying, "I don't like this," but we should consider that not everyone will understand that.

The issue here is exactly the same as the issue of arguing on the board.
We must ensure we do not make criticism a personal issue.

Say, "I'm not enjoying Interceptor because it's become predictable."

Not, "Interceptor is shite." And definitely not, as some people have done regarding other writers, "Ian Edgington is crap because I don't like this story."

To underline my point, I'm not enjoying Interceptor, but I still like Edgy as a writer.

NB In case he's offended, I want Paul to know I'm not accusing him of any such practice. I'm appealing for restraint and informed and explained opinion on the board.

Anyway, that was my reading of the interview. I don't think it read like back-biting against anyone.

I'll shut up now, much faster than Si did. :-)

- Trout