Another stunning cover from JDH.
Only read Dredd for now. A full on post DoC stroy arc from Rob Williams. A very dark start to a promising multi parter enhanced by Laurence Campbell's art which adds to the mood of the city at the moment. Nice view of the Statue of Justice ruins.
Scanned through Lenny Zero. Just doesn't interest me anymore.
V
Hmmmm short review, but at least you were first eh. Well Dredd was fantastic in my opinion, I had accidentally seen the last panel before I read it and expected one type of ending, I am safe to say it was a totally different, unexpected one for me...nice and beautiful artwork too.
3rillers- midsection episode -AKA the fighty one
Aquila- nice artwork etc but I just keep expecting Dafoe to pop up....its all just a bit, "thought you'd solved the riddle well there are three more layers" maybe I'm jaded but just seems setting it up for a sequel already...
Ichabod and the dead dudes- nice, real nice...love the artwork, premise and a great little episode, I don't know where this is going, but (unlike Aqulia) I care
Lenny zero - what a great episode, a real standout to me, always been a fan of the character but sometimes the stories can get you lost, this one is well panned, well written, ''makes sense' and reads well... Love it..dirty dirty judges!
Can we sell lenny's cam footage as a tie in product for the movie? Thoughts?
Liking the Dredd and a full letters page with plenty of well known faces, although not too many boarders. A Thargian response to each adds to the wonder.
As we were, which is far from a bad thing.
Dredd was fantastic, had the fear that it was going to be a typical, new thing, Dredd disapproves and is proved right, type tale BUT the last page but pay to that and the story took a very interesting turn. Lovely art by Laurence Campbell as well.
Aquilla was fun, 3riller was thrilling and Lenny Zero was... well it was well executed but cliched.
Ichabod, nnnnnoooooooooo. How is this going to wrap up? Loved it.
Nice progage.
Prog firing on all cylinders this week. Every story a pleasure, nothing a chore, but it's Dredd that deserves the special mention. Finally, finally, finally we have the sort of post-DoC story I was waiting for - the city actually feels (and looks!) like it's been brought to it's knees; it feels like a place where 350 million people died and the survivors are living in the dust and ashes of their bones. Dredd looks like he's been pulling 36-hour shifts, we get Hershey, McTighe and some cracking character dialogue all round wrapped up in a nifty little noir thriller. Extra oil rations for Messrs Williams and Campbell.
Rage Hard seemed familiar - have we seen him before?
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 25 August, 2012, 04:22:21 PM
Rage Hard seemed familiar - have we seen him before?
I think he was from the parallel dimension nice Dredd story circa 1644 - 8
http://www.2000ad.org/?zone=prog&page=profiles&choice=1647 (http://www.2000ad.org/?zone=prog&page=profiles&choice=1647)
But I could well be wrong...
pretty sure that is where hes from
Great Dredd this week, more of a sense of fallout about the whole thing and superb art. Loved the bit of the Statue of Judgement. Does this mean that Dredd's now a post-apocalyptic post-apocalypse? :D
Haven't read this weeks ep yet, but looking forward to it - Rob Williams has written some top-notch Dredd. I really loved 'Out Law' from the Meg a few years back.
Hmmm... as much as I loved the 'sex' panel in last week's Lenny Zero, this week I think that the one panel in particular goes a bit too far.
Quote from: Banners on 26 August, 2012, 07:49:29 PM
Hmmm... as much as I loved the 'sex' panel in last week's Lenny Zero, this week I think that the one panel in particular goes a bit too far.
Worse than last weeks??!
Maybe I am the forum prude but last week was more than enough for me. If its worse than oral sex being portrayed then the mind boggles.
Last week's seemed quite funny. This week's, perhaps, was gratuitous.
Quote from: Banners on 26 August, 2012, 09:25:19 PM
Last week's seemed quite funny. This week's, perhaps, was gratuitous.
That's when i start getting uneasy. Sex is a fundamental and is going to feature in stories. At certain points however it can start feeling gratuitous and dare I say it kinda juvenile and self indulgent.
A nicely grubby Dredd, as Dark Jimbo says: it feels like the city is on its knees, did I miss the email about Hershey becoming CJ? :o That last panel certianly added a twist too.
Aquila, 3tiller and iccybod all cooking, Lenny Zero works that wee bit better thro, and that roasting panel was okay by me, the rest of Lenny spot on for a MC1 tale
And a healthy letters page yaa!
Quote from: Proudhuff on 27 August, 2012, 03:33:47 PM
...did I miss the email about Hershey becoming CJ?
Prog 1789 - (http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a113/Darkjimbo2/Francisco.jpg)
Cheers Dark J,
I took that to mean a caretaker sort of thing, didn't realise she was getting the full chest eagle.
In a similar mode anyone know who's in the Gang of Five now?
Quote from: Proudhuff on 27 August, 2012, 03:33:47 PM
A nicely grubby Dredd, as Dark Jimbo says: it feels like the city is on its knees,
As was Lenny Zero...
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 25 August, 2012, 04:22:21 PM
Prog firing on all cylinders this week. Every story a pleasure, nothing a chore, but it's Dredd that deserves the special mention. Finally, finally, finally we have the sort of post-DoC story I was waiting for - the city actually feels (and looks!) like it's been brought to it's knees; it feels like a place where 350 million people died and the survivors are living in the dust and ashes of their bones. Dredd looks like he's been pulling 36-hour shifts, we get Hershey, McTighe and some cracking character dialogue all round wrapped up in a nifty little noir thriller. Extra oil rations for Messrs Williams and Campbell.
Yu huh. That's some brilliant art on Dredd right there - but don't forget the Blythe droid!
As the Dark One says, everything on top form. Next amongst equals are Ichabod and 3rillers this week, but still loving Aquila and Lenny Zero.
M
Well we know where the next batch of cadets will be coming from now. Workforce cut to the bone now loads out on maternity.
Nice exciting cover!
Dredd was really good this week - I quite like these 'Who shot JR?' type stories. I do get a little frustrated with the other senior Judges though. When will will they learn that the easiest thing to do is just to listen to Dredd?
3rillers - Really enjoyed this again. It's fast paced and the artwork is really lovely. It's very clearly told too.
Aquila - Is still great but this fight with the other gladiator bloke feels like it's gone on a bit now so I'm glad Aquila has gone off to chop someone else up next week. I'm really looking forward to the collected edition of this.
Ichabod is no longer being read - I've said why I don't like it in previous threads.
Lenny Zero is no longer being read either. I think this story would fit better in the Megazine.
Quote from: Banners on 26 August, 2012, 07:49:29 PM
Hmmm... as much as I loved the 'sex' panel in last week's Lenny Zero, this week I think that the one panel in particular goes a bit too far.
Have just read it and can't regard that particular scene as anything other than gratuitous and self indulgent.
That kind of sexual encounter being depicted makes me feel like I'm reading a lads magazine with scenes being played for pure sex factor and lad giggles.
Rest of the prog looks great.
Quote from: JamesC on 29 August, 2012, 10:08:47 AMDredd was really good this week - I quite like these 'Who shot JR?' type stories. I do get a little frustrated with the other senior Judges though. When will will they learn that the easiest thing to do is just to listen to Dredd?
I just like to imagine that for every time we see Dredd being proved incontrovertibly right, there are half a dozen other occasions when he's in there ranting to the senior Judges about how allowing ten minute lunch breaks will be the downfall of the Justice System. So they're always all, "Oh, Grud, here comes Dredd with the dire warnings again..."
Quote from: JamesC on 29 August, 2012, 10:08:47 AM
I do get a little frustrated with the other senior Judges though. When will will they learn that the easiest thing to do is just to listen to Dredd?
Well if Chaos Day didn't teach 'em, nothing ever will.
Quote from: The Prodigal on 29 August, 2012, 10:30:21 AM
Have just read it and can't regard that particular scene as anything other than gratuitous and self indulgent.
That kind of sexual encounter being depicted makes me feel like I'm reading a lads magazine with scenes being played for pure sex factor and lad giggles.
I know what you mean - the panel could have just been Lenny's reaction to what he saw. It did make me raise an eyebrow (and that's all, I swear), though the Judges were gettin jiggy last week all over the place so it's not out of context if you ask me.
M.
Quote from: Mikey on 29 August, 2012, 01:24:43 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 29 August, 2012, 10:30:21 AM
Have just read it and can't regard that particular scene as anything other than gratuitous and self indulgent.
That kind of sexual encounter being depicted makes me feel like I'm reading a lads magazine with scenes being played for pure sex factor and lad giggles.
I know what you mean - the panel could have just been Lenny's reaction to what he saw. It did make me raise an eyebrow (and that's all, I swear), though the Judges were gettin jiggy last week all over the place so it's not out of context if you ask me.
M.
I didn't think it too
many out of place, given how hard line Kramer(?) was about with others, she turns out to be more so, as it were
Thing is with Kramer, why did Lenny record her. Blackmail or trashing her career wouldn't wash as all the judges were under the influence of an agent. Also with the Judges at such low numbers I cant see them expelling the lot anyway.
With Hershey, with recent past events she would have sided with Dredd in an instant but then we wouldn't have a story arc.
V
Judge Dredd - Fantastic take on Dredd, both the writing and the gorgeous art. Love that panel of the fallen Statue of Judgement, and the one of the next page of the Judge with his injured partner. Isn't the innocence drug pretty much what Morton Judd wanted to do? History repeating... This is an intriguing start, although I guess it's only a two parter what with 1800 being a jump-on prog. Feels like there's enough material for longer, but short and sweet is good too.
Tharg's Thrillers - Continues to look great, but it zipped by fast and it doesn't seem like too much happened in this part. I'll be interested to see how it wraps up next week.
Aquila - Any panel with fire in this strip is always a very pretty panel indeed. In fact, so are the other panels. Lovely art, beautiful colouring. I'm not greatly invested in Aquila's quest, but I am enjoying the ride.
Ichabod Azrael - Lovely pretty atmospheric sea monster action, and a very unexpected final page. Good stuff!
Lenny Zero - Still looking great; for some inexplicable reason, I particularly like that panel with the crates. And still an entertaining read, though I have to agree that the videotaping panel leaves a bit of a bad taste. Dwelling on it so explicitly only started me considering more in-depth the fact that it's very much non-consensual on all sides, which gets more icky the more I think about it and rather jars with the overall tone of happy fun heist hijinks.
Yeah. What happens in Lenny Zero is basically a drug rape by proxy to get back at his ex-girlfriend (who he will then hilariously slut shame, blackmail, get fired or masturbate to, one imagines). Staggeringly fucked up. I think that's me done with Andy Diggle now, and quite possibly 2000ad as a whole for publishing it. Cheap, nasty and triggering.
Ive not been commenting on the prog lately because ive been enjoying nothing in it whatsoever, and have been waiting patiently for the changes in 1800. But i had to pop back this week and say that 'innocent' is the best dredd we've had in weeks (months?) and i wish it was like this all the time. I was going to say i didnt like the art, after a brief flick this morning, but on actually reading the thing i find it's beautifully moody and more importantly flows perfectly and is entirely legible- which is a bit of a change from things of late in the prog.
Norwichmass was also a good one this week, and i really like jon davis-hunt's work. Am i the only one who thinks he'd be a good fit for 'kingdom' if we've lost richard elson to the americans?
The rest of the prog continues to do nothing for me at all, and in the case of 'that panel' in lenny zero- not why i buy the prog, and one of tharg's periodic missteps. Mind you, i find the art on this patchy and unfinished-looking at best so i dont reait usually.
SBT
Quote from: jamesedwards on 29 August, 2012, 10:49:12 PM
Staggeringly fucked up. I think that's me done with Andy Diggle now, and quite possibly 2000ad as a whole for publishing it. Cheap, nasty and triggering.
I find this a truly baffling overreaction.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a113/Darkjimbo2/zero.jpg)
Cover -
Not really a fan of JDH at all - or massive robots. So this is well and truly a 'meh' cover for me. Detail over dynamics.
Dredd -
Very nice dark tale and I concur with people on it. It's nice to see Laurence's "rough" style (ooh err not even got to Lenny yet) although there's so much photo reference it feels a bit stilted at points (that's the Minty helmet). But then he has been with Marvel for a bit, tracing is a way of life for those cats! Story is very dark and interesting. Blythes colouring is, as always, a different level of amazingly amazing.
3rillers -
Giant robots no. JDH no. "It's times like this I thank every scientist ever - " no.
Aquila -
I do agree with what's being said about this by others on the thread - the endless, bigger fish eats bigger fish eats bigger fish and the always-getting-trumped thing doesn't inspire me. Caldwell's colouring is great though - nice to see him getting to flavour something long outside of Dante (ooh eerrr still not at Zero yet).
Ichabod -
I am actually quite fond of this, given the "hell and bloodfire" type dialogue of Aquila just before they kind of grate against eachother but I'm interested as to where this is going. I was a bit shocked that I didn't actually notice in the last episode that Reardon had been replaced :P Testament to Doherty's fine colours and Fuso's appropriately matched style. He slips a bit here, noticeably in the second page. The pulled-apart Ichabod page is just magnificent though. Brilliant bit o' comics.
Lenny -
Well now I did think the spit-roast scene was a bit excessive but I've found the whole story to be a bit self-indulgent really so if that's the only evidence of it anyone's spotted I'm surprised. It doesn't put me off Diggle or (lol) the whole of 2000ad but it is a bit much. People's reactions to it here is part of the reason I baulk at raunch when editing scripts. Draws attention away from the story more than anything.
I'LL BAULK AT YOUR RAUNCH. FNARR.
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 29 August, 2012, 11:21:21 PM
Quote from: jamesedwards on 29 August, 2012, 10:49:12 PM
Staggeringly fucked up. I think that's me done with Andy Diggle now, and quite possibly 2000ad as a whole for publishing it. Cheap, nasty and triggering.
I find this a truly baffling overreaction.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a113/Darkjimbo2/zero.jpg)
It's not the sexual content, it's the context. And the character history. And the one liner about - giggle! - dicks. Dicks belonging to two men who are defined by their choice to abstain from sex, inside a woman who doesn't want to have sex with men and who broke the heart of the male power fantasy cliche who planned the whole thing. Everyone in that threesome is raping the others, as proxies of Lenny Zero and his gang. I've always found it easy to understand the sci if trappings of 2000ad as a sort of delivery mechanism for a more down to earth statement. Strip back the sci fi from this week's Lenny Zero...
I don't feel good about paying money for this. The least I can do is Not buy the next one. Dredd's a spent force and Dante's over - I won't be missing much, except maybe some of the artists.
I don't agree with that (this is the internet after all).
The judges have insane puritanical no sex regulations, and they used them to condemn Lenny. It kind of makes sense that he would use those hang-ups as a weapon against them.
If you see this as a tit for tat pissing match and not a violation of someone's sexual integrity...
I think rape can be depicted artistically - its used as such in Punisher: Born, for example. But this is a badly written pulp crime pastiche (with a sideline in "look! Concepts from the first two hundred issues that haven't been used since!!!"). It's not the place to be doing this.
Realtalk: I had PTSD-like symptoms for about six months because I failed to prevent someone being drunkenly abused last summer (not that they were my actually responsibility or that I couldn't actually have done much to stop them, but you do tend to feel that way). If something is going to bring that to mind - be a trigger - it shouldn't be played for mild titillation or a shit one-liner. In this it's played for both. It's artistically irresponsible to produce material like this.
And if anyone thinks unpacking an objection is the same as overreacting...
DREDD was excellent this week. Interesting developments from Justice Department, as they try to come up with ideas to try and sort out the mess the city is in.
The artwork is spot on from the Campbell Droid and I think Dredd looks awsome and the style fits the feel of the story perfectly.
By the way, that page with the Statue of Judgement is in the 'cellar', along with a few more from the strip :D
Glad to see that others echo my thoughts on Lenny Zero. It's been a great strip so far but that panel was just a step too far; the speech bubbles gave you all the info you needed to grasp what was happening, the frame was just unnecessary.
Dredd was looking dark and good, Ichabod will read better when collected (and I for one can't wait for the trade!) and the other two just keep tootling on.
Not a bad prog, just that one panel jarred for me
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 29 August, 2012, 11:21:21 PM
Quote from: jamesedwards on 29 August, 2012, 10:49:12 PM
Staggeringly fucked up. I think that's me done with Andy Diggle now, and quite possibly 2000ad as a whole for publishing it. Cheap, nasty and triggering.
I find this a truly baffling overreaction.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a113/Darkjimbo2/zero.jpg)
Mate no offence but its your Daily Mail response that I find as a misplaced over-reaction-to simply insult someone by trying to shoe-horn what they say into a standard issue Daily Heil tick-box status does them a great dis-service imo.
Perhaps Lenny Zero should have stayed in the Meg and kept as a pre DoC story.
V
It's more that it shouldn't play certain things for schoolboy giggles, really. I do want Lenny to die now.
Cover: Kewl.
Dredd: Yeah, this is good stuff from Williams and Cambpell. Surprised to see that was Blythe on colours, would have expected that style of art to come in already coloured. First impression was "ugh, s'all smeary and out of focus", but actually reading the story it worked quite wonderfully, both in terms of storytelling and atmosphere.
3rillers: Pretty, but didn't add much to last week's setup. Mecha not my thing anyhow. Still, enjoying the format, and hoping for a good final installment.
Aquila: Too. Much. Talk. Wait, did I really just write that? Weren't there immortal warriors scrapping on a burning Roman bridge? Nah, this is just the first episode I didn't completely love, mainly because it felt like nothing really happened bar the Highlander revelation and teasey danglers.
Ichabod: Losing patience here again a bit, but saved by a great cliffhanger that ties back into the first series, and that a fabulous final page!
Lenny Zero: Loving this series, but for the first time this episode seemed to unnecessarily repeat elements from the previous one: stub guns and boinking judges was clever and funny last week, this week it's a bit tired: if you're going to build a story around surprise guest-stars and gags you better keep them fresh! Couldn't be bothered less by the spit-roast (repressed judges lose inhibitions and are filmed in act of savagely poetic vengeance, so what?), but I did think the arse-to-camera-teetering-on-stillettoes art on Mink was the slightly skeevy part of this instalment.
Not my favourite Prog of recent months, but a strong Dredd lifts all boats.
Quote from: a chosen rider on 29 August, 2012, 10:28:31 PM
Isn't the innocence drug pretty much what Morton Judd wanted to do? History repeating...
Yeah, I was expecting Dredd to quote Fargo's line: "our duty is to police the citizens we have, not create the citizens we'd like". Loving this story, it'll obvioulsy end in tears, but I can't wait to find out how.
not too keen on the cover - the arms made it look like a man-sized suit, but with an improbably tiny head. One of those oictures where you have to actively work out what's what, whereas a cover should be instantly obvious)
Loving Aquila, 3rillers and Lenny Zero is my favourite thing in the prog at the moment (if drug-induced sex is 'beyond the pale', should we stop writing comics about war or murder as they're pretty nasty too? Didn't bother me in the slightest.)
Ichabod will probably work better in a full read-through, I'm not too engaged with the story, but every episode contains something to enjoy.
I think we're getting very strong proggage at the moment.
If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 August, 2012, 02:01:47 PM
Quote from: a chosen rider on 29 August, 2012, 10:28:31 PM
Isn't the innocence drug pretty much what Morton Judd wanted to do? History repeating...
Yeah, I was expecting Dredd to quote Fargo's line: "our duty is to police the citizens we have, not create the citizens we'd like". Loving this story, it'll obvioulsy end in tears, but I can't wait to find out how.
not too keen on the cover - the arms made it look like a man-sized suit, but with an improbably tiny head. One of those oictures where you have to actively work out what's what, whereas a cover should be instantly obvious)
Loving Aquila, 3rillers and Lenny Zero is my favourite thing in the prog at the moment (if drug-induced sex is 'beyond the pale', should we stop writing comics about war or murder as they're pretty nasty too? Didn't bother me in the slightest.)
Ichabod will probably work better in a full read-through, I'm not too engaged with the story, but every episode contains something to enjoy.
I think we're getting very strong proggage at the moment.
I don't want to go all one dimensional on one story and theme (Having said that I am now going to go all one dimensional) and maybe you are right on one level with regard to the war/murder scenario-fair point However part of the difference for me was that this bit of "action" and the follow up scene (as opposed to most war/murder scenarios) reeked of being played for laddish laughs in a juvenile and self indulgent manner. That's what distinguished it in my book.
When i see stuff like this I suspect somebody going wilfully beyond the pale in an attempt to outrage and goad a reaction. I also suspect that such depictions might be a device for grabbing attention when a good story line/writing might be a better option.
Quote from: jamesedwards on 30 August, 2012, 02:29:50 PM
If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.
Or to articulate it in a far better way-what this guy said.
Christ, I mangled my syntax there. Hope the intent comes across - violence can be justified, rape is always about power and humiliation and can't ever be justified.
Quote from: jamesedwards on 30 August, 2012, 03:48:15 PM
rape is always about power and humiliation and can't ever be justified.
On that point lets hope wwe can all agree.
'Lenny Zero' has been the highlight of the Prog in the past coupla months I'd say.
Would love to see Diggle & Willisher return for another series.
Yeah.
Quote from: jamesedwards on 30 August, 2012, 02:29:50 PM
If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.
James, I'm a bit taken aback here.
If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps
overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics. Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation. I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape
in the real world as expressed here.
However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie. Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal. It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.
Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 August, 2012, 06:16:53 PM
Quote from: jamesedwards on 30 August, 2012, 02:29:50 PM
If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.
James, I'm a bit taken aback here.
If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics. Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation. I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape in the real world as expressed here.
However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie. Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal. It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.
Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.
In all honesty tordel I agreed with James' post as a better expression of my own post (hence the double quick succession post) and my post was in that context. I was genuinely focusing on the second part of his post which I felt articulated far better what I wanted to say. Maybe I should take my time in future because as a rule I don't play internet warrior games or throw cheap shot insults at people. That was genuinely unintended and I apologise for a genuine oversight and any offence caused.
That preceding paragraph was not influenced by your last line btw. That was wasted on me. I am just making a genuine apology for offence caused because believe or not I feel that is important in itself.
Cheers tordel.
Thanks for that Prodigal, I appreciate the clarification.
I now feel that I am beating this thing to death but should have also said that while I appreciate the fantastical aspects of the story context I am not convinced that is sufficient to obviate the issues presently being debated.
For me the poop rises to the surface of the story context however fantastical. One opinion among many.
There you go.
Quote from: The Prodigal on 30 August, 2012, 07:03:54 PM
I now feel that I am beating this thing to death but should have also said that while I appreciate the fantastical aspects of the story context I am not convinced that is sufficient to obviate the issues presently being debated.
For me the poop rises to the surface of the story context however fantastical. One opinion among many.
Yeah, this is about where I'm at with it really. I think with the way the aphrodisiac was presented last week, as a non-lethal way of incapacitating the Judges shown briefly and then done with, the story succeeded in glossing past the issue without inviting too much dwelling on the darker implications. Lenny using the same drug retributively against an ex and videotaping the result takes it to an altogether nastier level with closer real-life parallels. And while I don't think that sort of ugliness is necessarily forbidden territory for a comic to cover or even outside the bounds of Lenny's established character, it
is jarringly at odds with the light tone of the strip so far, and makes the titillating nature of that particular panel seem like very poor taste.
For me, I think, a lot is going to swing on how/if the incident is addressed in next week's wrap-up. The light in which the script presents Lenny's actions will make all the difference to me in whether it comes off as a momentary lapse into questionable taste or something considerably more toxic.
On a different note, Dredd was brilliant. As mentioned above, wonderful to see a post-DoC story that felt post-DoC. And the art was gorgeous. The depiction of that ambitious, overly self-assured face was brilliance. The colouring was superb as ever. Really looking forward to next week!
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 August, 2012, 06:16:53 PM
Quote from: jamesedwards on 30 August, 2012, 02:29:50 PM
If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.
James, I'm a bit taken aback here.
If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics. Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation. I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape in the real world as expressed here.
However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie. Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal. It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.
Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.
Read what I wrote. I still think that anyone who believes the forceful removal of sexual integrity is a valid method of retribution holds a rather vile opinion. Maybe that's something we agree on! Maybe you haven't thought this through.
Zero's ex - who is such a cipher I can't even remember her fucking name - was acting to prevent Zero from abusing the awesome powers vested in him. She was doing her job, and upholding vows she made. Yes, the Judges are all fascists. Zero is a fascist turned freebooter. She was doing her job and she rejected him. For that she gets to be mutilated and violated on camera. It's a rapist's revenge fantasy strip now. Zero spend the whole strip planning this.
Getting someone pissed and knowingly having sex with them against their usual sober wishes is outright rape. This example - which trappings aside is really not that fantastic - simply uses sci if magic to remove the rapist from the rape and make the victims do all the work. My initial reaction was "Jesus, they're going to wake up feeling dirty and used" which was an upsetting reaction to fiction. The one liner seals it for me - this is supposed to be funny, but it ain't. Strange Days has a sci-fi rape too, but that was never played for giggles.
Having met Diggle a few times and having hoped he'd do well in America there's absolutely nothing about this I'm not taken aback on. It's just so weird, sad and pointless.
James: you're conflating what you wrote with being the only valid reading of the strip. Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with your reading of the strip, and defend your right to be offended by it, you've made your point repeatedly and at length, and I suspect that it's your assertion that anyone who disagrees is a 'scumbag' or 'vile' that's getting up people's noses.
I imagine it was Andy's intent that the drug causes the judges to shed their inhibitions and give in to their own (albeit repressed) desires in a Rocky Horror-esque orgy of liberation, rather than a grim compulsion to fuck the first thing with a pulse the victim lays eyes on. If that was Andy's intention, then I feel that the execution is somewhat wanting: the scene certainly goes too far for me. Nonetheless, I recognise that this is a text and other readings are possible, and even valid, and you may want to lay off accusing people with views other than yours of being tacit supporters of rape.
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 07:17:15 AM
James: you're conflating what you wrote with being the only valid reading of the strip. Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with your reading of the strip, and defend your right to be offended by it, you've made your point repeatedly and at length, and I suspect that it's your assertion that anyone who disagrees is a 'scumbag' or 'vile' that's getting up people's noses.
I imagine it was Andy's intent that the drug causes the judges to shed their inhibitions and give in to their own (albeit repressed) desires in a Rocky Horror-esque orgy of liberation, rather than a grim compulsion to fuck the first thing with a pulse the victim lays eyes on. If that was Andy's intention, then I feel that the execution is somewhat wanting: the scene certainly goes too far for me. Nonetheless, I recognise that this is a text and other readings are possible, and even valid, and you may want to lay off accusing people with views other than yours of being tacit supporters of rape.
Jim
I would like to start this post by exclaiming that I loved the rest of this prog! Can I also put my hands up and acknowledge that I am also Mr Repeatedly and At Length-I apologise if this getting tedious for people.
Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition. Arguably even if it was the latter as James said people have the right to their inhibitions, though for the reasons just stated I don't think we can confine what happened to that context.
Tbh the story-line has me on the horns of a dilemma-one in which I will gladly take the advice of this board. This may get a derisory laugh but I'll risk it. I'm an old newbie-by which i mean I am a relatively old fart who hadn't read 2000ad since the 70's after departing for all things spandex. I came back on board at Christmas and while my newsagent didn't stock it, he was kind enough to order me one. Lately i have noticed that instead of just ordering me one he orders a few more and puts them out on the shelves, right beside the rest of the comics with no distinctions made. Now just in case anyone gets the wrong idea I like a great many aspects of 2000AD's adult orientation but for a few weeks now I have felt that maybe I should say something to the newsagent in case a comic was bought in ignorance on the basis of a colourful cover and ended up in a kids hands but frankly struggled for the right formula of words to express what I wanted to say. I'm sitting here this morning more convinced than ever that I now really need to say something but really don't want my local newsagent picking up the copy reading it and viewing me as one of the smaller towns lead pervos.
Right what am i asking?? Simply this. Where do other folks newsagents place this publication and should I wear a disguise?
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 08:25:31 AM
Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition.
Forgive me, but I really, really wasn't talking to you, and I don't think you've read what I wrote properly. I'm not disagreeing with James' point about rape being horrific and unjustifiable (or yours, for that matter). I'm disagreeing with his assertion that his
must be the only correct reading of the strip and
therefore if you disagree then you align yourself with rape apologists.
(Without wishing to digress too far, I have
long been a vocal advocate of making 2000AD all-ages appropriate again and
that would be my preferred solution to your newsagent quandary. Much to everyone's relief, however, I'm not Tharg's right-hand man.)
Jim
Don't worry Prodigal, youre not alone. I know for sure that if WHSmith, for example, were to be made aware of 'that panel', the comic would run the risk of being displayed right up high with the FHMs and CLiNTs. They're notoriously touchy about such things.
Currently the prog is displayed on the bottom shelf, next to DWM and The Fortean Times, alongside Empire, Batman, MWoM, etc. Well away from 'the kids comics', but down low where people dont expect nudity and raunchy prod-games.
But the prog doesnt have this kind othing regularly- in fact this panel is (ignoring last week's) only the second i can remember, after Necrophim's infamous 'fucking miss piggy, doggystyle' bit. And that was years ago.
From time to time, 2000AD has a penis in its pages (usually when simon davis is around- he's always lurking somewhere in the prog, ready to surprise you with one of his purple organs) but i think most are okay with that.
The problem we have here is an old one- yes, OF COURSE there's nothing wrong with (cont)
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 08:38:05 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 08:25:31 AM
Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition.
Forgive me, but I really, really wasn't talking to you, and I don't think you've read what I wrote properly. I'm not disagreeing with James' point about rape being horrific and unjustifiable (or yours, for that matter). I'm disagreeing with his assertion that his must be the only correct reading of the strip and therefore if you disagree then you align yourself with rape apologists.
(Without wishing to digress too far, I have long been a vocal advocate of making 2000AD all-ages appropriate again and that would be my preferred solution to your newsagent quandary. Much to everyone's relief, however, I'm not Tharg's right-hand man.)
Jim
Jim I know you were not talking to me specifically but its a public board and maybe some of the broader issues raised were not located entirely with James so I just weighed in. Forgive me but I thought that was ok to do so. I also did read what you wrote very carefully. I appreciate what you say-all I was saying is that I didn't think that construction maybe stood up that well in the context of what I described.
Of course people have different takes and opinions. That's a given. As long as we conduct those in a context of mutual respect then all should be good.
(cont) sex, and yes, of course naked people having fun is- as representation of an act- far more 'positive' than depictions of violence. Of course. Sadly, this is the real world, and the man with a huge bruce lee/ arnie dvd collection is not seen as weird, while the man with a cupboard full of porn, is. Similarly, if i take up cage fighting, i get a model girlfriend. If i take up fucking strangers for a living, i get my kids taken away.
Society finds sex difficult and we live with that. And i'd rather 2000AD didnt go there.
Im now ready for the usual suspects to come along and bemoan the readership for being so 'repressed' so we can prostrate ourselves before their so well-balanced humanity.
SBT
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 31 August, 2012, 08:45:47 AM
Don't worry Prodigal, youre not alone. I know for sure that if WHSmith, for example, were to be made aware of 'that panel', the comic would run the risk of being displayed right up high with the FHMs and CLiNTs. They're notoriously touchy about such things.
Currently the prog is displayed on the bottom shelf, next to DWM and The Fortean Times, alongside Empire, Batman, MWoM, etc. Well away from 'the kids comics', but down low where people dont expect nudity and raunchy prod-games.
But the prog doesnt have this kind othing regularly- in fact this panel is (ignoring last week's) only the second i can remember, after Necrophim's infamous 'fucking miss piggy, doggystyle' bit. And that was years ago.
From time to time, 2000AD has a penis in its pages (usually when simon davis is around- he's always lurking somewhere in the prog, ready to surprise you with one of his purple organs) but i think most are okay with that.
The problem we have here is an old one- yes, OF COURSE there's nothing wrong with (cont)
Mate genuine thanks for this. That actually helps a lot and I now know the gist of what I need to say. I actually shared this with a few non comic reading mates and they were busting a gut laughing about my dilemma and my incapacity to articulate an appropriate speech. This really helps and I am genuinely grateful.
I should say i do appreciate this past couple of weeks doesn't represent the norm. While I am a relative newbie I have spent a small fortune on various trades right across the 2000ad spectrum since Christmas and so appreciate the "norm."
Thanks again.
As usual, people like TordelBack are able to articulate things much better than I ever could, I'm just here shouting at the screen, "it's a comic, for Christ's sake, it's not real!!" The whole publication's full of violence!! The comic is geared towards adults and, surely, within reason on that basis anything goes. As I said before, it's not real, it didn't actually happen!!!
The only area where I would agree with the Prodigal is that retailers should be careful where they place the comic on their shelves, I wouldn't want my three year old grandson picking it up and looking through it, but that's because of the whole content of the comic not just one particular story.
I take Jame's and Prodigal's point and personal point of view entirely, plus the other reasoned posts natch, but I'll say this; a quick perusal of the board will show that neither Tordels or Dark Jimbo are reactionary, vile or even scumbags. Not that they need my defence, just saying like.
I'll add that the panel got some great debate going. Until that scumbag Jimbo started his nonsense ;)
M.
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 08:46:51 AM
Jim I know you were not talking to me specifically but its a public board and maybe some of the broader issues raised were not located entirely with James so I just weighed in.
I wasn't raising any broader issues.
Jim
Quote from: Mikey on 31 August, 2012, 09:27:36 AM
I take Jame's and Prodigal's point and personal point of view entirely, plus the other reasoned posts natch, but I'll say this; a quick perusal of the board will show that neither Tordels or Dark Jimbo are reactionary, vile or even scumbags. Not that they need my defence, just saying like.
I'll add that the panel got some great debate going. Until that scumbag Jimbo started his nonsense ;)
M.
Since joining this board a few months back I have found it to be one of the most welcoming places on the interweb. Your list of recommended reading has brought untold pleasure, a hole in my current account and several serious breaches of diplomatic relations with my wife. Despite the latter two I salute you.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 09:33:06 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 08:46:51 AM
Jim I know you were not talking to me specifically but its a public board and maybe some of the broader issues raised were not located entirely with James so I just weighed in.
I wasn't raising any broader issues.
Jim
Really? I thought you were alluding to the story-line and how it might be interpreted during the post and that struck me as broad enough to post a reply.
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 09:39:20 AM
Really? I thought you were alluding to the story-line and how it might be interpreted during the post and that struck me as broad enough to post a reply.
No. I was saying that it is
possible to read the story in ways other than one which jamesedwards is doing and that such readings are not automatically invalid, so he might want to stop conflating
his reading of the story with the fact that rape is bad and equating disagreement with one as disagreement with the other.
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 09:42:56 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 09:39:20 AM
Really? I thought you were alluding to the story-line and how it might be interpreted during the post and that struck me as broad enough to post a reply.
No. I was saying that it is possible to read the story in ways other than one which jamesedwards is doing and that such readings are not automatically invalid, so he might want to stop conflating his reading of the story with the fact that rape is bad and equating disagreement with one as disagreement with the other.
Jim
I getcha Jim-I understand the core intent of your post and who it was directed at. I genuinely do and respect every persons take on this board as perfectly valid and as good as mine. That's a given. I simply weighed at the point of where you gave one construction of the story-line to say where that maybe didn't work for me as it was depicted as it maybe did for others.
That's all. I don't want to start sounding like Mr Contentious on this board either. All the best.
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 09:50:43 AM
That's all. I don't want to start sounding like Mr Contentious on this board either. All the best.
No worries. I wasn't telling you to butt out, I just wanted to clarify that my post was addressing a very specific issue and that issue didn't relate to you!
Cheers
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 10:13:41 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 31 August, 2012, 09:50:43 AM
That's all. I don't want to start sounding like Mr Contentious on this board either. All the best.
No worries. I wasn't telling you to butt out, I just wanted to clarify that my post was addressing a very specific issue and that issue didn't relate to you!
Cheers
Jim
No problem Jim. Thanks and have a good one.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 07:17:15 AM
James: you're conflating what you wrote with being the only valid reading of the strip. Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with your reading of the strip, and defend your right to be offended by it, you've made your point repeatedly and at length, and I suspect that it's your assertion that anyone who disagrees is a 'scumbag' or 'vile' that's getting up people's noses.
I imagine it was Andy's intent that the drug causes the judges to shed their inhibitions and give in to their own (albeit repressed) desires in a Rocky Horror-esque orgy of liberation, rather than a grim compulsion to fuck the first thing with a pulse the victim lays eyes on. If that was Andy's intention, then I feel that the execution is somewhat wanting: the scene certainly goes too far for me. Nonetheless, I recognise that this is a text and other readings are possible, and even valid, and you may want to lay off accusing people with views other than yours of being tacit supporters of rape.
Jim
The point, Jim, is that inhibitions are part of someone's personality. Spiking someone's drink,or getting them plastered are both classic date rape scenarios. Kramer (I looked her name up) has to be making the choice to move towards shedding them. In this case she's had her ability to decide - and thus consent - removed, along with the other two guys. The cleavage, porn star poses and one liner all indicate this is not a sudden reevaluation of Lenny As a shithead but more fantasist wish fulfillment. The ability to explore this as anything more than a sick joke has already been lost.
Todel's choice of words... Was pretty shocking to see?
ANDANUTHATHING: if the gas was simply removing inhibitions, there would be varied (and very dangerous) expressions of inhaling it. As it only has one outcome it's pretty obviously a sex gas.
Quote from: jamesedwards on 31 August, 2012, 11:02:32 AM
The point, Jim...
The point, James, is about you being right and everyone else being wrong. You seem to have missed the part where I point out that what I find objectionable about your posts is not your reading of the story,
with which I broadly agree, but your out-of-hand dismissal of alternative readings and your willingness to brand people who disagree with you as rape apologists.
It is
this, and not your stance on rape (with which not only I but --I assure you-- everyone else reading this agrees completely) which is marking you out as an objectionable prick. To be fair, this has broadly been my opinion of you for as long as I've been aware of your posts, so you're certainly consistent.
It's a little rich for you to take others to task for not reading your own posts, when you won't extend the same courtesy to me but, for the benefit of the hard of thinking, here is my
actual argument rather than the one you seem to believe I'm making:
Rape is bad.
If one accepts your reading of the story, then actions depicted are certainly tantamount to rape and therefore also bad. Your eagerness to accuse others of being 'vile' and 'scumbags' for disagreeing with you is only acceptable if one accepts
your reading of the story, and of authorial intent, as the
only possible reading.
Whilst I broadly agree with your reading of the story, I do not affect to know authorial intent, and I can see there are alternative readings and possible authorial intentions that
do not deserve labelling as those of rape apologists or fantasists, and it is your single-minded adherence to your reading and willingness to denigrate those who disagree to which I am objecting.
You may continue to argue with whatever point you imagine I'm making from the comfort of my ignore list.
Jim
So let's get this straight. I am obliged to condemn all fiction in which a fantastical artificial change in personality on another leads to sexual congress, or I'm a scumbag.
This would include, to grab just a few random pop-cultural examples, the legend of the Minotaur, A Midsummer Night's Dream, every version of Star Trek, Stargate and Buffy, Futurama and bloody Harry Potter (Voldemort's mother magically drugs his father).
These are stories. I don't approve of or condone Lenny's actions, any more than I approve of Zeus' or Oberon's or Parmen the Platonian's. I sympathise with Pasiphae, and Lysander, and Uhuru and Tasha Yar - but I still enjoyed the stories. In this very same story should I not also be condemning the presence of Satellat, who was responsible for spreading the not-dissimilar Block Mania contaminant? Or do you think I approve of Borrisenko's murdering of 350 million mega-citizens through the mind-altering Chaos virus because I enjoyed that story too?
I appreciate (and frequently make) the argument that rape as a crime is fundamentally different from murder as a source of humour and entertainment because of the ubiquity of its presence and effects, and its bizarrely contested existence. I question whether drugged rape is what Diggle actually intended to depict in this Austin Powersish set-up of repressed judges taking off their tight boots, but I can appreciate that it can be read that way.
Ultimately, however, Lenny isn't a moral character, the system he betrayed and which betrayed him isn't a moral one, the particular story he's in isn't a moral one. Why in this one instance must I be expected to approve of this character's behaviour in order to accept this story as entertainment? I don't look to 2000AD's anti-heroes and villains to set my own moral compass.
As it happens, I also thought the use of the sex-drug on Kramer was unfortunate, because it was unoriginal and predictable, coming after the exact same thing in previous episode, in a story that otherwise has been fresh and surprising. I too wish that 2000AD was all ages and didn't go quite so far with the sexual content, particularly as my eldest has just become an ardent fan of Ro-Busters and (early) ABC Warriors, but right now it isn't for kids, and that's what we get.
Quote from: TordelBack on 31 August, 2012, 12:06:08 PM
So let's get this straight. I am obliged to condemn all fiction in which a fantastical artificial change in personality on another leads to sexual congress, or I'm a scumbag.
This would include, to grab just a few random pop-cultural examples, the legend of the Minotaur, A Midsummer Night's Dream, every version of Star Trek, Stargate and Buffy, Futurama and bloody Harry Potter (Voldemort's mother magically drugs his father).
And Buck Rogers in the 25th Century!
Can't we all just agree that rape is bad and that bit in Lenny Zero was possibly just a bit of a mis-step?
I don't know Andy Diggle from Adam but I think it's pretty safe to assume he doesn't condone date-rape.
Forgive and forget eh?
No one got this excited when we talked about bewbs an that in Flesh >:(
M.
The Dredd artist, this Laurence Campbell fella, is he new? Can't remember seeing this style of art in the prog before. Seems to be a bit of photo manipulation going on, but it's a lot more successfully executed than the Langley-Droids efforts. The knife sticking out of Dredds armour was a great wee touch.
Sorry, am I dragging this thread off topic?
Quote from: pops1983 on 31 August, 2012, 02:59:52 PM
The Dredd artist, this Laurence Campbell fella, is he new? Can't remember seeing this style of art in the prog before. Seems to be a bit of photo manipulation going on, but it's a lot more successfully executed than the Langley-Droids efforts. The knife sticking out of Dredds armour was a great wee touch.
Sorry, am I dragging this thread off topic?
Feel free mate.
I have been just staring at that Dredd art. Lurve it.
http://2000ad.org/?zone=droid&page=profiles&choice=LAURENCE
Yeah he was in 2000ad loads in the day. Reason he looks different is he used to be inked by other people (Dylan Teague mostly) - he's been orf with Marvel doing stuff - and yeah there's a lot of photo references there - lightbox if those are pencils? OR SUMFINK MORE ELABORATE.
Quote from: TordelBack on 31 August, 2012, 12:06:08 PM
So let's get this straight. I am obliged to condemn all fiction in which a fantastical artificial change in personality on another leads to sexual congress, or I'm a scumbag.
This would include, to grab just a few random pop-cultural examples, the legend of the Minotaur, A Midsummer Night's Dream, every version of Star Trek, Stargate and Buffy, Futurama and bloody Harry Potter (Voldemort's mother magically drugs his father).
These are stories. I don't approve of or condone Lenny's actions, any more than I approve of Zeus' or Oberon's or Parmen the Platonian's. I sympathise with Pasiphae, and Lysander, and Uhuru and Tasha Yar - but I still enjoyed the stories. In this very same story should I not also be condemning the presence of Satellat, who was responsible for spreading the not-dissimilar Block Mania contaminant? Or do you think I approve of Borrisenko's murdering of 350 million mega-citizens through the mind-altering Chaos virus because I enjoyed that story too?
I appreciate (and frequently make) the argument that rape as a crime is fundamentally different from murder as a source of humour and entertainment because of the ubiquity of its presence and effects, and its bizarrely contested existence. I question whether drugged rape is what Diggle actually intended to depict in this Austin Powersish set-up of repressed judges taking off their tight boots, but I can appreciate that it can be read that way.
Ultimately, however, Lenny isn't a moral character, the system he betrayed and which betrayed him isn't a moral one, the particular story he's in isn't a moral one. Why in this one instance must I be expected to approve of this character's behaviour in order to accept this story as entertainment? I don't look to 2000AD's anti-heroes and villains to set my own moral compass.
As it happens, I also thought the use of the sex-drug on Kramer was unfortunate, because it was unoriginal and predictable, coming after the exact same thing in previous episode, in a story that otherwise has been fresh and surprising. I too wish that 2000AD was all ages and didn't go quite so far with the sexual content, particularly as my eldest has just become an ardent fan of Ro-Busters and (early) ABC Warriors, but right now it isn't for kids, and that's what we get.
Tordel in the light of our recent interaction I hope its ok to say that firstly (and obviously) you're no scum-bag and secondly I really enjoyed the thought provoking you induced on my part by your post. Excellent post.
Tordel at a very basic level I appreciate the adult nature of 2000AD. I appreciate sex is a fundamental and will feature in story-lines. For me its probably a question of how it is approached and at a very basic level what is depicted. Reading that story for me was like I had just tuned into a pictorial version of a male fantasists porn movie-explicit as hell and full of wonderfully submissive women performing like a male fantasist would want. It honestly made me feel a bit of a sleaze bag when I was reading it in a way no other 2000AD story-line ever has. It was the particular and graphic nature of the sexual scenes and what was being depicted that set it apart from many of the other examples you cite. So there's probably something else in that other than the implied rape thingie.
Cheers Tordel.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2012, 11:26:20 AM
Quote from: jamesedwards on 31 August, 2012, 11:02:32 AM
The point, Jim...
The point, James, is about you being right and everyone else being wrong. You seem to have missed the part where I point out that what I find objectionable about your posts is not your reading of the story, with which I broadly agree, but your out-of-hand dismissal of alternative readings and your willingness to brand people who disagree with you as rape apologists.
It is this, and not your stance on rape (with which not only I but --I assure you-- everyone else reading this agrees completely) which is marking you out as an objectionable prick. To be fair, this has broadly been my opinion of you for as long as I've been aware of your posts, so you're certainly consistent.
It's a little rich for you to take others to task for not reading your own posts, when you won't extend the same courtesy to me but, for the benefit of the hard of thinking, here is my actual argument rather than the one you seem to believe I'm making:
Rape is bad. If one accepts your reading of the story, then actions depicted are certainly tantamount to rape and therefore also bad. Your eagerness to accuse others of being 'vile' and 'scumbags' for disagreeing with you is only acceptable if one accepts your reading of the story, and of authorial intent, as the only possible reading.
Whilst I broadly agree with your reading of the story, I do not affect to know authorial intent, and I can see there are alternative readings and possible authorial intentions that do not deserve labelling as those of rape apologists or fantasists, and it is your single-minded adherence to your reading and willingness to denigrate those who disagree to which I am objecting.
You may continue to argue with whatever point you imagine I'm making from the comfort of my ignore list.
Jim
The only "alternative readings" suggested thus far:
1) She secretly wanted it
2) she deserved it, the hussy.
Now, the terrible dialogue and inane sci-fi plot devices do make it hard to relate to the strip (a complaint you could never level at Low-Life), but I've not seen one reading of this strip that doesn't ammount to rape or resemble the two classical justifications of rape listed above.
This strip has no depth. For all he's vile about it at least there are layers to an Alan Moore sexual assault. Unless you have a magic alternate reading - and I suspect you don't, and I suspect it would not be a valid or well constructed reading in any case - you cannot fault me for being disturbed about this strip or what Todel said. I don't care how polite he is online, the words he chose to use were dodgy and ugly.
Quote from: jamesedwards on 31 August, 2012, 04:29:46 PM...you cannot fault me for being disturbed about this strip or what Todel said. I don't care how polite he is online, the words he chose to use were dodgy and ugly.
James, I would really much rather not continue this discussion, as I come here to relax and enjoy dissecting my favourite dystopian fiction, not to have my real-world values impugned. The quote above implies, or at least my inference is, that I present a polite facade online while secretly reveling in rape fantasies and 'she was asking for, you honour' banalities.
Much as I try never to get angry with people I've never met, I confess you've got my goat this time, so I'll press on against what past experiences and my better judgement recommend.
These are the words in question:
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 August, 2012, 11:06:09 AM
Lenny Zero: Loving this series, but for the first time this episode seemed to unnecessarily repeat elements from the previous one: stub guns and boinking judges was clever and funny last week, this week it's a bit tired: if you're going to build a story around surprise guest-stars and gags you better keep them fresh! Couldn't be bothered less by the spit-roast (repressed judges lose inhibitions and are filmed in act of savagely poetic vengeance, so what?), but I did think the arse-to-camera-teetering-on-stillettoes art on Mink was the slightly skeevy part of this instalment.
I take it that the bolded bits are where you see my moral degeneration revealed? I'll agree it's an unlovely paranthesis in a poor excuse for a sentence, but it's also part of a quick a review thrown up between putting the kids to bed and doing the washing up, so sue me.
What is this scene if not 'savagely poetic vengeance'? It's savage. It's an act of vengeance. It's poetic, in the sense which I borrowed from the parent-phrase 'poetic justice', which I understand to mean a specific fate visited on a character which directly relates to a wrong they themselves have done: crudely, one that
rhymes.
Note that I very deliberately didn't use the
second part of the phrase 'poetic justice', which would imply Kramer deserved her fate as per some absolute morality, but rather substituted 'vengeance', which implies only that
Lenny believes she did. It's not a great piece of English, but I'll stand by the sentiment, and I do not believe that anything here establishes me as a covert apologist for rape. If you knew me at all away from this forum, I think you'd be aware that that is very, very unlikely, although I don't really see what I feel the need to assert that.
Seeing as you didn't attack my subsequent sentence regarding the depiction of Mink can I assume you're okay with the overly sexualised male-gaze depiction of women across all media? No, I can't, because that would be a ridiculous over-reading of your posts.
For the record, I also don't support fascist city-states, galactic empires built on religiously-driven bigotry, genetically engineering humans for a life of war, oppressing the planetary consciousness of Mars, or the use of Ratwar. Just so we're clear.
Ooh did anyone notice that Dredd still got knife in his uniform shoulder? Awesome!
Umm, TB? Objectionable prick. Ignore list.
Just sayin'...
Cheers!
Jim
Quote from: Goaty on 31 August, 2012, 06:05:08 PM
Ooh did anyone notice that Dredd still got knife in his uniform shoulder? Awesome!
Pointed it out a few posts back. Just remembered that Frank Miller tried to do something similar when he drew
that cover (you know the one, I'm not going to post it here), but he went over the top with it.
Did anyone else detect notes of A Clockwork Orange in this weeks Dredd? I thought the demonstration of [spoiler]the 'innocence' drug[/spoiler] was similar to the scene where Alex is brought out in front of the great and good to demonstrate the Ludovico method. I liked it.
Quote from: pops1983 on 31 August, 2012, 07:21:57 PM
Pointed it out a few posts back. Just remembered that Frank Miller tried to do something similar when he drew that cover (you know the one, I'm not going to post it here), but he went over the top with it.
Y'know, that was my
immediate thought. I figure it can't be coincidence, and rather enjoyed the reference.
Cheers!
Jim
okay done with this prog's thread.
See ya next prog folks!
Just a couple of thoughts about the prog.
I'm not blown away by Dredd. As has been said it seems like the 'grumpy Dredd proven right about new but obviously flawed idea' formula. I'm not too keen on photo referenced art either and the Planet Replicas helmet sticks out like a sore thumb.
Apologies for picking up this hot potato but I had no problem whatsoever with Lenny Zero. It's been shown many times in the Dredd strip that there is a lot of barely concealed lust simmering under the surface of your average Judge. Dredd is the exception, not the rule and I saw the 'sex gas' as a way to break down the training and abstinence that has been forced on these people from an early age.
The Judges still have sexual feelings and desires but they fight to keep a lid on them. Who's to say that Kramer hadn't privately fantasised about doing rudies with those male Judges and the gas just made her brain go "Ah, fuck it!"?
The rest; loving Aquila. Really top quality. Ichabod begs a one-sitting re-read and 3rillers is action packed fluff (no bad thing).
The thing with the gas is that Lenny says that they won't remember a thing when it wears off so they have no control of what they are doing whatsoever. A moral compass say's Lenny would get his comeuppance, but I doubt it.
V
Quote from: vzzbux on 01 September, 2012, 12:37:05 AM
A moral compass say's Lenny would get his comeuppance, but I doubt it.
I don't think 2000AD has
ever gone in for moral endings.
All the same, a crisp new Fargo note says Lenny doesn't get more than a single cred out of this scheme.
Lovely cover mech blasts giant beastie which can never go wrong. Dredd was I thougt a touch up even on last week a mysterious murder and some excellent visuals (the statue of judgment head as referred to by others), More mech- a- tastic(see what I did there ::) :-[) beastie blasting with 3thrillers and Lenny Zero had more bonking Judges but the star is still the giant vehicle which should have it's on mega epic in a Bolo's style way.
Ichabod has lost me but Aquila was tops this week.Lovely art and last panels.
oh boo-I just realised he ain't a blasting it on the cover just battling the alien mega-beastie-still lovely though. Inside it's a blasting- with nuclear bullets!
Interesting how there's an Innocence drug and a Sex drug in the same issue. It would suggest a general social anxiety about an individual's free will being eroded is peaking at the moment.
Lenny Zero has been making me feel increasingly uncomfortable. I don't like how the women are portrayed in it visually anyway (Mink especially) and the drug is icky. Maybe I'm a prude but I read 2000AD for fun not to feel nervous. It's a shame because I like the setting (albeit I don't get many of the shout outs to the past - which might actually be good as it's fresher to me) and the polar bear is ace. MORE POLAR BEAR LESS LENNY!
The other stories are great. MC1 finally looks like it's had the stuffing knocked out of it in the Dredd story and I was surprised by the last panel. The 3riller is a bit light on depth but looks gorgeous. Aquilla is putting down roots but it's still early days. If it carries on like it is now it will be a slight but fun story but if it carries on for a long time it could have the chance to become an epic. I love the art.
I love Ichabod. I just love it. I think it's the most romantic thing I've seen in 2000AD in years, even with the strong competition from Dante. If Shelley had written comics (and been given a kick up the arse first) they might be like this. Maybe Byron would have written Dante. He'd have been doing the arse-kicking.
Bah, I wish I'd never read this thread now, it's absolutely ridiculous!
It's awful what happened to the person that James knows and the effects it's had on him and I'm sure others. However, another boarder may have gone through similar trauma as someone they know may have been shot, should we ban/admonish Sinister Dexter now? Another may have witnessed a friend who's been stabbed, should be ban Nikolai Dante who flippantly stabbed a fair few of his enemies? I'm sure there's been some casual hit and runs in Dredd, we gonna slate that now? Nukes in DR and Quinch, ay yi yi!
Since Prog 1 there's been several victims of something pretty bloody horrible every week. ALL violent crimes are appalling and wrong, are we going to take them all out of 2000AD or just the ones that affect us personally?
Crap and generally void of a point as it was, Sinister Dexter was at least clearly advertised. It's definately a precursor to Lenny Zero. But! There are vast differences between getting shot and getting raped. Not least that there's no social stigmata to getting shot. Right now in America nobody is arguing to remove medical treatment for gunshot victims. Most gunshot crimes get reported, etc etc. I've been mugged and I've narrowly escaped after having my drink spiked by a girl who resembled grotbags and only the latter made me feel dirty and ashamed. My dad didn't laugh down the phone at me after I got mugged.
There's rape in Dante. It always drove home the human impact of the horrible things that happened. It also subverted Dante's revenge arc in order for his mother to pull the trigger on Dimitri. I appreciated that.
Quote from: Pete Wells on 01 September, 2012, 12:25:05 PM
Bah, I wish I'd never read this thread now, it's absolutely ridiculous!
It's awful what happened to the person that James knows and the effects it's had on him and I'm sure others. However, another boarder may have gone through similar trauma as someone they know may have been shot, should we ban/admonish Sinister Dexter now? Another may have witnessed a friend who's been stabbed, should be ban Nikolai Dante who flippantly stabbed a fair few of his enemies? I'm sure there's been some casual hit and runs in Dredd, we gonna slate that now? Nukes in DR and Quinch, ay yi yi!
Since Prog 1 there's been several victims of something pretty bloody horrible every week. ALL violent crimes are appalling and wrong, are we going to take them all out of 2000AD or just the ones that affect us personally?
Pete I am going to put my hand up and say like static I may be prudish but the issue for me goes even beyond the plausible reading of the story as a de facto rape as revenge plot. I just don't want to see scenes that look like something out of a male fantasists porno flick. Sex is a fundamental and its going to feature and its an adult orientated comic but I would like some sense of proportion and not feel kinda sleazy while I'm reading it.
Where that puts me in relation to the violence component of the mag that you refer to I don't know (and you make very good points). I lived in north Belfast at the height of the troubles in Northern Ireland and have been very, very close to multiple shootings and bombings with all the visual and other impacts of those events that you might imagine. For me having experenced and survived those real things has made me regard things that feature in dredd etc as remote, fantastical and not remotely triggering. for me the sexual thing in Lenny does transcend the fantastical story context much, much more.
Dear me I haven't half gone on with this. Does anyone know what I am trying to say?
That Dredd could only have been more Wagnerian had a fleet of Valkyries delivered the Prog to my hands. MAGNIFICENT.
5 really good strips. JHD's art looks incredibly better when he doesn't have to draw the human body. He's a crazy mix of Dillon and Belardinelli that kid! As for poor Ichabod! Eeeks! I really would have loved more and more of Ichabod trudging around the afterlife killing stuff and this 'worlds collide' stuff has seemed a bit 'final' (and also hampered by it being hard to distinguish era's with an art style that doesn't do detail or background too much) but these final few eps have ramped up the suspense... come on crazy mean gun-man, we're rooting for ya!
And stop all your bellyaching about sex. Its grand. Try it.
QuoteAnd stop all your bellyaching about sex. Its grand. Try it.
It is, but rape on the other hand , which is what the conversation is actually about, is a completely different thing. I trust you can see the difference between the two.
Sorry to drag this up again, but I've just read this prog today, and found the comedy sexual assault in Lenny Zero to be pretty disgusting.
I suppose it doesn't help that I haven't really been enjoying the whole 'cool bits I remember for 2000AD 20 years ago' feel to it. And I'd be surprised if this would have been commissioned if anyone who was not a 'name' writer had pitched this plot.
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2012, 06:15:28 PM
QuoteAnd stop all your bellyaching about sex. Its grand. Try it.
It is, but rape on the other hand , which is what the conversation is actually about, is a completely different thing. I trust you can see the difference between the two.
Err... nope, plenty of comments about the sexual content of the panel before that ridiculous rape debate cropped up. If I wanted to talk about that I'd being in Foucault, Rose, Wendy Brown and all sorts of arguments on the construction of violence and the governance of the body in Dredd's 'world'. Just to show I'm all learned and things etc etc. But I'm just talking about the 'adult' content of the comic. So keep me out of your Rape debates please.
QuoteSo keep me out of your Rape debates please.
Maybe you should refrain from making flippant comments about it then, eh?
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2012, 06:15:28 PMI suppose it doesn't help that I haven't really been enjoying the whole 'cool bits I remember for 2000AD 20 years ago' feel to it. And I'd be surprised if this would have been commissioned if anyone who was not a 'name' writer had pitched this plot.
Quite. With this and Flesh and then even the absurd stance of Anderson on next week's cover ("LOOK AT MY ARSE, WHICH I'M CONTORTING TOWARDS YOU!"), I'm hardly surprised Mrs G feels no desire to read 2000 AD, when she's very happy sitting down with Hellboy. I don't think 2000 AD's anywhere near as bad in this area as a lot of US dross, but that almost makes it more of a disappointing surprise when uncomfortable things like Lenny Zero do show up. Still, this is also the comic that's been running Ichabod alongside it, so I guess no-one in editorial noticed. That in itself might be considered a little worrying, but perhaps it's down to pretty much everyone involved with the comic being a bloke—something that's not going to change any time soon.
To my mind, it's a real pity, too, because it soured the return of a great character, with a suitably absurdist old-school MC-1 set-up.
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2012, 07:00:39 PM
QuoteSo keep me out of your Rape debates please.
Maybe you should refrain from making flippant comments about it then, eh?
Maybe you should moderate yourself.
All this talk most certainly makes me think I'm right to be prudish when editing stories - rape and sexual violence can be as artistically justified (or not in this case) as it wants, but it's got to be in context, and done correctly. Now - whether this IS "rape" - which I'm not sure that it is - given that all involved are under the influence of the same drug. What Zero does turns it from a mutual breakdown of inhibition into a scenario where his ex has been deliberately and viciously humiliated. You could argue that the males involved are being equally exploited but obviously this isn't the intention. Before this part it was a knockabout heist thriller with continuity cake - why skew it?
It's there for a reason. But in my opinion it's not justified. That's what makes it stick out. If Diggle has put that there just to shock and cause this kind of lengthy and self-perpetuating debate then it's worked. But now for many many readers that's all this story will ever be remembered for - not for the heist, not for Max Normal, not for the polar bear or the Fargo notes, but for overly-eroticised drugsex which may-or-may-not-but-certainly-looks-like-gang-rape. Which, I think, would be disappointing. If not for Diggle, then for the creators of the four other stories which shared this issue and that have been overlooked in it's favour.
I've seen it in some submissions I've got - give some writers five pages and one out of ten of them will try and get either sexual violence, graphic sex, or rape in. Why? Because it's shocking and it causes this kind of reaction. It instantly, without really having to do much, makes the story seem provocative. But more often than not it's a massive shot in the foot. Well done, you've reduced your story instantly into something people will only harbour queasy feelings for. Not naming names but there was a small press comic I recently tore up after reading because not only did it swear every other caption (SHOCKING) but it featured perpetual and graphic references to rape (HOW SHOCKING). I certainly don't remember that for it's plot or art. It's why I don't like Spurrier's Crossed webcomic. Bunch of arse.
I didn't want to add to this debate as it certainly doesn't need another voice - but if the thread serves to make one aspiring writer look at their "edgy" exploitation-themed script and say "this really isn't worth the hassle I'd be better off just telling a good story that doesn't rely on cheap tactics" then it'll have done it's job.
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2012, 06:15:28 PM
rape on the other hand , which is what the conversation is actually about, is a completely different thing. I trust you can see the difference between the two. Sorry to drag this up again, but I've just read this prog today, and found the comedy sexual assault in Lenny Zero to be pretty disgusting
Maybe he didn't use the term
rape because he wasn't convinced that's what was depicted. As I understand the description of the drug's properties, it lowers inhibitions, rather than rendering the subject insensible or incapable of resistance. There's no suggestion in either gang bang scene that anyone is acting against their inate desires or their own volition, and it's Kramer who initiates sex, expresses desire, and undresses herself.
Analogies with Rohypnol seem misplaced, since the introduction of Dizzy's chemical agent as a party drug that lowers inhibitions figures it as something more akin to ecstacy- which increases empathic responses and sensual awareness without violating individual will. That said, I'd agree with everyone who's made the point that sex (even consensual sex) and revenge narratives are uneasy bedfellows.
This week's events would have been entirely in keeping with the playful tone established by the rest of the series if it wasn't for Lenny's decision to take a tour of the cockpit- placing him in that room complicated what should have been the straightforward enjoyment of seeing the hubris of a bunch of uptight fascists ascetics undermined by their own natural desires. A-a-and as I was typing, I see
Fox has made some pretty similar points.
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 September, 2012, 08:21:52 PM
What Zero does turns it from a mutual breakdown of inhibition into a scenario where his ex has been deliberately and viciously humiliated.
I must admit I didn't read it like that.
What you seem to be suggesting is that Zero revelled in gaining revenge by making her the powerless victim of a serious sexual assault.
On the other hand, my interpretation of the story was that Zero humiliated her by undermining her puritanical self-discipline -- the implication being that the gas lowers inhibitions on
existing desires (rather than making a person have sex against their will).
Like I say, that's the way I read it and I presume that's the way it was intended.
Now they're some of the most level headed evaluations that've been posted so far. I've been struggling with this.
Diggle shows the gas getting into the cockpit, and if he'd left it at that, the story could have been told just the same, I'd still have known that those Judges no longer posed a threat to Lenny's plan. But he doesn't stop there, he shows us that Lenny fancies having a wee perv on his ex and the whole thing becomes a bit grubby. Of all the things he could have shown 3 completely unihibited judges doing, he shows that.
Quote from: bikini kill on 02 September, 2012, 08:27:06 PM
Analogies with Rohypnol seem misplaced, since the introduction of Dizzy's chemical agent as a party drug that lowers inhibitions figures it as something more akin to ecstacy- which increases empathic responses and sensual awareness without violating individual will.
I sort of understand where the date-rape drug analogies come from. Sex seems to be the only out-come when it's used on Judges. But the difference between this sci-fi drug and the vile real-life date-rape drugs, is that all parties involved in the actual sex are doped. But why was the first response of ALL parties involved to shag their workmates? The Judges are repressed, but I doubt sex is the only thing Judges repress. What if one of those SJS Judges was really outraged by what they saw as judges disgracing their uniforms and started summarily executing everyone around him or her? What if one of those people piloting the vehicle decided they wanted to pull off some crazy stunts, just for shits and giggles?
Lenny's plan seems to hinge on the fact that this drug will just make people horny, and not send them dangerously out of control. Because ye know....illegal narcotics can't make people do stupid things and it's impossible for anyone to have a bad reaction to them.
Or it could be that Diggle just used a half-arsed maguffin to insert cheap shocks into the prog.
Damned edit function snuck off on me.
Quote from: pops1983 on 02 September, 2012, 09:24:23 PM
Or it could be that Diggle just used a half-arsed maguffin to insert cheap shocks into an otherwise excellent story.
Quote from: pops1983 on 02 September, 2012, 09:24:23 PM
I doubt sex is the only thing Judges repress. What if one of those SJS Judges was really outraged by what they saw as judges disgracing their uniforms and started summarily executing everyone around him or her? What if one of those people piloting the vehicle decided they wanted to pull off some crazy stunts, just for shits and giggles?
I've largely enjoyed the story too
Pops. I think Afro Dizzy's name is as good an indication as we're going to get that the properties of her caper vapour act specifically on the libido. Crucially, in the scene in which she's introduced (1794), Both she and Lenny are exposed to the agent without pouncing on the first available partner. I presume Lenny's rejection of the
avoirdupois who propositions him in that same scene was specifically intended to demonstrate that the drug's effect doesn't negate sexual or aesthetic preference or compromise free will.
Yeah, I'm afraid I don't see what all the fuss is about, neither me nor my girlfriend batted an eyelid at it. I was under the impression the drug just lowered inhibitions and made folks horny. So can alcohol but I certainly wouldn't consider two (or three) drunk people all quite clearly consenting to sex to be rape.
I guess they didn't consent to being drugged though. I suppose if I stopped to think about it and gave it a bit of analysis it might appear pretty unpleasant but certainly on a first read just flicking through enjoying the story I wasn't offended in the least. In fact, I'm afraid I may have chuckled slightly.
Quote from: bikini kill on 02 September, 2012, 10:08:45 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 02 September, 2012, 09:24:23 PM
I doubt sex is the only thing Judges repress. What if one of those SJS Judges was really outraged by what they saw as judges disgracing their uniforms and started summarily executing everyone around him or her? What if one of those people piloting the vehicle decided they wanted to pull off some crazy stunts, just for shits and giggles?
I've largely enjoyed the story too Pops. I think Afro Dizzy's name is as good an indication as we're going to get that the properties of her caper vapour act specifically on the libido. Crucially, in the scene in which she's introduced (1794), Both she and Lenny are exposed to the agent without pouncing on the first available partner. I presume Lenny's rejection of the avoirdupois who propositions him in that same scene was specifically intended to demonstrate that the drug's effect doesn't negate sexual or aesthetic preference or compromise free will.
Bill that is a very kind interpretation but for me that represents an excessive extrapolation. I wish there was that neat gullotine but I am far from convinced. For me there is still a very blurry line in the narrative that might still be construed in ugly fashion.
Again though I have to be honest-its not just the possible interpretation of de facto date rape that makes me uneasy. I am a prude in that I find the graphic nature of the scenes themselves too much in themselves. They have all the appearance of male fantasist porno poses to me.
This whole thing has me wondering how female readers/writers might view the story. I get the feeling this neck of the woods is still very much a male arena.
Firstly, please have me committed to a padded cell, no sharp objects allowed, for posting on this thread...
Secondly, thirdly, etc...
I don't think Lenny deliberately targeted his ex with the aphrodisiac
There was no hoo-haa on these forums for the previous prog when the same thing happened to other judges
Yes, THAT panel went further than most and arguably too far
I can't believe Andy Diggle or Tharg intended people to be offended they way they obviously have
Please don't get cheesed off and "ignore" me on the forums. I like seeing the variety of opinion and I hope you can bear reading mine. I could be totally wrong about all this, in which case it's safe to relax and not get angry.
I haven't read the last part yet as Saturday's prog didn't arrive. So this is written not knowing the end or how Max Normal presumably suddenly plays a key role to justify bringing him back... It'd better be good, that's all I'm saying...
Lastly, don't forget to put me in that padded cell, yeah?
The whole plot for Lenny was revenge on Kramer. Miss PSI pointed it out a number of times.
V
Really? How did I miss that?
Then doesn't all this hoo-haa come down to whether his intent was for her specifically to get done via the drug?
Cheers V for a factual response. Shall re-read tonight!
Don't normally do this, but feel i should throw in my three-pence worth....
The way the scene was illustrated was, IMO, just crass and degrading to the characters in question.
Theres a time and a place for images like that, and 2000AD is not the place (i was reading it at about 2pm, so probably not the time either).
After reading this thread, i looked again at the page in question. I honestly feel that all this could have been avoided if the panel merely showed 2 judges snogging, and starting to unzip their uniforms.
The sentiment is the same, the judges would still be in trouble (probably), and the gas could have worn off before anything offensive happened.
As it stands, we have an image of an horrendous crime that we're supposed to find entertaining.
What i'm trying to say is that i find the artwork the most offensive part of this. The gas could have been explained in the way that wasn't overtly sexual (Pops 1983 explained this bit better than i could), but when we get a panel that can only be described as [spoiler]MMF porn[/spoiler] it becomes clear that non-consensual sex is the only use for the gas.
Not quite rape by dictionary definition, but a forced sex act against the will of the involved parties all the same. Which is close enough to rape in my book.
Rather stunned something like this made it past editorial. Be interesting to know wether it was scripted this way, or if Willsher just went too far when drawing it. (although, the fact that so many of us picked up on this upon a single glance doesnt bode well for either creator here.)
Be even more interesting if either Andy Diggle or Ben Willsher would respond to this thread, wether it be to defend or apologise for the offending panel.
Just for the record, i don't believe either droid was actively trying to be offensive, but i do believe that the proverbial ball has been well and truly dropped here.
Why would the creators want to apologise or defend their work, their job is to put the story and the artwork out there and for other people to comment on it, as they have, surely?
Quote from: Old Tankie on 03 September, 2012, 05:46:30 PM
Why would the creators want to apologise or defend their work, their job is to put the story and the artwork out there and for other people to comment on it, as they have, surely?
You're quite correct, this is work-for-hire after all.
I wasn't suggesting they
should comment, i'd just like to know what their thoughts are considering the reaction some people (myself included) are having to what should be a light-hearted and fun comic strip.
Quote from: Woolly on 03 September, 2012, 04:44:40 PM
...Pops 1983 explained this bit better than i could...
That statement right there is solid proof (if any were needed) that this thread has gone completely off the rails.
Quote from: Woolly on 03 September, 2012, 04:44:40 PM
As it stands, we have an image of an horrendous crime that we're supposed to find entertaining.
At this point I have to accept, through weight of numbers if nothing else, that my stance on this episode has been incorrect. Enough sane people (and the odd nutter) have been appalled by the scene in question that it clearly was a misstep. I can see how people read it this way, and although I still doubt it was Diggle and Willsher's intention that it be read like that, that's probably neither here nor there. I apologise if my comments added to the discomfort anyone feels, I just saw, and indeed see, the whole thing differently.
Even so, the quite from Woolly's well-argued post may illustrate the confusion as well as anything else: what has
Judge Dredd been these past 35 years if not a series of horrendous crimes (including Justice Dept itself) that we're supposed to find entertaining?
The difference is in what
type of crime is depicted - where the sequence in question can be read as rape, and clearly it can, it touches on a crime with a particular character that make its use as titillating entertainment utterly unsupportable.
May i say as someone who has went on ad infinitum that I am sorry if anyone died of tedium during my posts. It was genuinely not my authorial intention at the outset though on re-reading the thread I can see how it might have happened.
2000Ad is a great comic. This newbie has immensely enjoyed the company and advice of all on here. My wife says to stop telling me about things I should read.
Good night.
Quote from: vzzbux on 03 September, 2012, 08:46:03 AM
The whole plot for Lenny was revenge on Kramer. Miss PSI pointed it out a number of times.
Ok, I've done my re-reading. I remembered there was a large dose of revenge involved but what threw me was I hadn't seen a line in the dialogue previously where Lenny had explicitly said he was going to get his revenge via the gas. Revenge, "a dish best served with a big fat payday on the side", could have been ruining Kramer's career by stealing the loot while she was in command of the team transporting it.
In 1798 where Lenny tells Satellat to stop Kramer and co driving off, "hit 'em before they floor it", Satellat doesn't cut the vehicle in two with the stub gun but cuts a hole in the window to let the gas in. It wasn't immediatley clear to me whether this is Satellat's own doing or part of Lenny's plan that he's previously (and off screen) discussed with Satellat.
However on page 3 Lenny wants to go back to see Kramer, suggesting the latter and he wants to savour the moment. I say this because all Satellat says on page 2 is "Target immobilised" not "Atmospheric integrity compromised" etc. Thus for Lenny to want to go to check out Kramer he must have known the love gas was in her vehicle.
This then leads to THAT panel...
So Does this mean a) Lenny's a real b*stard, b) many boarders end up surprised/dismayed/and worse by THAT panel, c) that I've been trying to sort out the clarity in my head on this for far too long, d) I really shouldn't have to spend all this time tryin to sort out said clarity or e) all of the above?
Anyway... I'm off now back to my padded cell. Just me and 1799, cuddling up for a quiet read... What could possibly go wrong?!?
Definitely e) all of the above.
Here's a linky (http://cellarofdredd.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/dredd-innocent-by-campbell-williams.html) to see how Dredd came about this week!
Dredd - Ahh, this is better - feels more like post DoC. And some very nice art, to boot from the Campbell droid. Much to like in this episode.
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 September, 2012, 03:59:34 PM
Here's a linky (http://cellarofdredd.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/dredd-innocent-by-campbell-williams.html) to see how Dredd came about this week!
Yes, thought that was you, on the 3rd page CF.
3riller As with last week, quality art, though having only just read this episode, it did seem to be a bit confusing as to what was happening (probably me!), so ill have to re-read it in its entirety.
Still enjoying
Aquilla and
Ichabod - definitely gonna have to either get the trade or the back issues for this Fella, and last of all
Lenny......
..a fun series ive enjoyed immensely, but a more stupendous misstep is hard to imagine. And reading this weeks final episode (prog 1799), doesnt change that - and actually enforces that opinion.
Three people doing something they normally wouldn't because they've been drugged, someone films it and makes a funny quip about cocks?
Seems that was always going to provoke a response from the readership to me and I'm one of those disappointed it had to see print in the comic.
But... I can't really comment further without knowing something of authorial intent otherwise any reading I might take would be presumptuous on my part and a disservice to Diggle and Smith, who for all we know may have discussed this very issue at length.
Thread resurrection!!!!
Was talking to Andy Diggle at the Dublin International Comic Expo last weekend, and of course I couldnt resist an attempt to make a former Tharg blush!
Andy claimed to be completely unaware of the recent Lenny Zero controversy, and told me he'd never even seen the artwork! The villain!
Having a copy of Prog 1798 on my person (ok, it was in my man-bag!), we had a little chuckle and Andy kindly signed a message for any offended forum users / readers;
...he'd never seen the artwork....?
So he claimed. Bizarre eh?
Quote from: Link Prime on 04 October, 2012, 01:18:44 PM
So he claimed. Bizarre eh?
Admittedly, my dealings with Tharg's editorial minions predates the ubiquitous use of email, but I didn't see either the finished pages or the art until my comps turned up.
Cheers
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 October, 2012, 01:44:18 PM
Quote from: Link Prime on 04 October, 2012, 01:18:44 PM
So he claimed. Bizarre eh?
Admittedly, my dealings with Tharg's editorial minions predates the ubiquitous use of email, but I didn't see either the finished pages or the art until my comps turned up.
Cheers
Jim
I am given to understand that this is still true today.
I'm not sure if it's better or worse that he never gave it a second thought.
Well he's written "sorry!" and that was the first time he'd ever seen it so it's all fine.
...right?
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 04 October, 2012, 05:29:56 PM
Well he's written "sorry!" and that was the first time he'd ever seen it so it's all fine. ...right?
I think he was being sarcastic. With good reason.
Quote from: sauchie on 04 October, 2012, 05:46:48 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 04 October, 2012, 05:29:56 PM
Well he's written "sorry!" and that was the first time he'd ever seen it so it's all fine. ...right?
I think he was being sarcastic. With good reason.
Donc
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 04 October, 2012, 01:10:45 PM
...he'd never seen the artwork....?
Bullshitometre activated! :lol:
He would have got the prog.
Quote from: sauchie on 04 October, 2012, 05:46:48 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 04 October, 2012, 05:29:56 PM
Well he's written "sorry!" and that was the first time he'd ever seen it so it's all fine. ...right?
I think he was being sarcastic. With good reason.
Disingenuous perhaps...