Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthorales kot
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2012
     (10622.1)
    @kperkins: Awesome! Hope it's going to be even better when you reread it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2012
     (10622.2)
    I got it, but I'm not necessarily sure if I get it. I think I'll need to reread it a few more times to figure out what it's saying--if even there's really anything to say about it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorkperkins
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2012
     (10622.3)
    @jay kay; It probably helps if you know the work of Hakim Bey, and about T.A.Z.s, although not much. :)
    • CommentAuthorArgos
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2012
     (10622.4)
    I haven't read it yet but I got mine yesterday. My local LCS had it on display and though I knew I could get it at SDCC I decided it'd be good for my LCS to have some business.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2012
     (10622.5)
    @kperkins: Never heard of him, but after looking him up, I can definitely see some similarities.
  1.  (10622.6)
    I read it. I liked it a lot. I feel that most of the things it was talking about, are things I've spent many years being about, thinking about--as I think a lot of our generation has. I think it's a smarter leaner Invisibles and something which should age very well because of how fractal it is. I feel that it can be sort of reassembled at any moment into a playlist.

    I think it's a book very much of the now. And there's some really clever stuff in there. I liked the bit with comic critics. That was a big "whoa" moment.

    It was really interesting to see Riley Rossmo try some different stuff as well. I liked his old style a lot, so it was pretty brave to try this out--and I think for the most part it worked. Actually there are some panels in there where he's starting to sort of use this style, and mix in little bits of his old style--which I thought was really beautiful. What I would like to see is more of this, mixed with his other style even more so. I am a huge huge huge huge Ashley Wood fan, and one of the things Ashley does really successfully IMO is mixing the sort of cleaner line style with the rage painting stuff--I think there's a great tension there to be worked, and it's something I want to get to in my own work. So I am excited 1) that Riley is trying shit out and 2) that it worked well enough that I hope it continues to grow.

    Also really enjoyed the coloring effects by Gregory Wright. There's a lot of talking head panels that could have been boring artistically, but because of the coloring(and Riley's linework) maintained their vitality.

    Also kudos to Ales and the team for not making this a sprawling ongoing series. This is the right size for this story and I'm glad it came out in one chunk and not in smaller bites first. I feel too often that the american comic industry is too fixated on the monthly comic. So something like this and LOEG--I hope they do well enough to get more people to go that route.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStoto
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2012
     (10622.7)
    Good review, mercurialblonde! Hope to get my hands on this soon.
    •  
      CommentAuthorphill_sea
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2012 edited
     (10622.8)
    Wild Children: bought it, read it liked it. If I had to tag line it, i'd say, "A super nova of ideas, exploding hard enough to escape a black hole."

    I left it at work, unfortunately, so can't comment on specific pages, but the art and story were all very well done, and the idea-plosions didn't outweigh or burden the narrative. Overall: Broccoli.
  2.  (10622.9)
    I don't regret the purchase and already it's given me four or five re-reads, but I'm not as impressed as everyone else here.

    It feels incredibly precious. But then again, the team has something interesting to say and that's ultimately what I want to support. I look forward to whatever's next, sir.
    • CommentAuthorales kot
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2012
     (10622.10)
    Humans - all of you - I have to shower and run, but I read all of this last night and this morning, and your responses are incredibly rewarding.

    @ebullientsoul - Thank you! Can you tell me more? I'd love to get what exactly you mean by "incredibly precious". Too much into itself? Up its own asshole? Hold no punches.

    @phill_sea - Thank you! You know the Coil track 'Broccoli', right?

    @Jay Kay - Looking forward to hearing more.

    @mercurialblonde - We already talked on twitter, but thank you for this one as well! It's fucking exciting to see people get it.
  3.  (10622.11)
    Just finished reading it, have a few thoughts, thinking that some people might be reading this thread before they've read / bought it so I'm going to have things a bit out of order here so that what should be hidden is all in one large chunk. Bear with me.

    It was a good, little story. I'd suggest it to people. Interesting art, good ideas, might not make sense to everyone the first time around, but definitely worth the read. That being said, was it ideas I've read in comics before? Yes. but the comic points that out. Is it the best way I've seen the ideas described in comics? No, not really. Why did I like it though? It was the most condensed and lightest to read comic that discusses the idea held within.

    Ales, for this being your first time out, I'd say you did a stand-up job! I haven't seen anything by the artist or colourist before so I can't comment on them, but the art really suited the story and the colour went well with the art.

    What were the things I thought should be hidden? I know that they were around here somewhere....
    [checks the couch]
    No... not there...

    Oh yeah! Okay, so, comments on parts of it:
    One of the things that I read into it right away was that the bullets weren't real because the characters lives weren't real. Their lives weren't real because they knew they were in a comic book. I really liked that bit. I also liked them taking the colour away from [looks for the name] Lotte.


    Like I said earlier, I've seen similar ideas told in ways that I preferred, but I do really like how this one was done and I would probably suggest it over the other ones, mostly because there's a lot less investment in reading Wild Children compared to similar comics.
    This next bit might seem a little weird and I can't quite figure out the right way to word it, but here we go: I think this comic is much better than I think it is.
    Yep, that seems to be about the most concise way to describe my over-all feelings about it.

    Ales -- Make sure you let us know of other writings you do. I'll buy them.
    EDIT: Something in the hide thingie didn't work right... Also, more in order than I thought and not as much to hide...
    •  
      CommentAuthorphill_sea
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2012
     (10622.12)
    @Ales Kot: I did *not* know of the coil song "broccoli" (or the band "coil" frankly) until you mentioned them just here. I feel I've been missing out, and the 2000 me was seriously missing out. Or maybe that's my nostalgia talking. Either way, thank-you for the aural introduction.

    I was referencing a penny-arcade.com update where Tycho rated a game, "Broccoli" out of 5 stars, or something equally non-sequitur but meant to mean, "Good."
  4.  (10622.13)
    @ales kot

    First. I used incredibly when I shouldn't have. I'd been reading Tucker Stone before posting and that dude's hate boner infected what I typed. Given another shot I'd just say precious.

    Second. Precious being self-satisfied in this case with something that isn't quite so novel. Students educating teachers is not revelatory for me. Same for the chestnut of drugs as gateway experience. And those things aren't as profound as it appears you think they are. Or it was profound once and is now somewhat pedestrian.

    Third: The footnotes on the gutters in the middle portion took me out of the experience, which interrupted the most gripping and colorful part of the story, I think. Specifically: That's a super-cool Lacan quote, and I'm glad I now know it, but I'm not sure it helps the comic. And goes doubly for Matt Seneca talking about Blur. I've got nothing against Matt Seneca or Blur, but if I go "oh, that's the guy who does Death To The Universe," I have to go outside the story to retrieve that knowledge. And unless someone is lying to you, telling the reader explicitly to leave the ride so they can retrieve a piece of minor information outside the story is, in my eyes, an unwise choice.

    Plus, footnotes are meant to help explain something that's not immediately apparent to the mythical average reader. Telling that reader to go Google something doesn't explain it.

    Fourth: Everyone is right. The one shot format is good for the story.

    Fifth: I get to talking with another WC lurker, and while yeah, we agree on the second and third points, our first (and deepest) point of comparison is still John Hickman. So you're doing something right. We'd both rather get something that goes for too much rather than too little with our comics. Wild Children is on the correct side of that divide.

    But ignore, or quarantine the things above, because here's the important bit, the only thing that's really worth saying: Wild Children is a swing with a mountainous oak tree. Maybe you hit whatever you were aiming at, maybe you didn't. But that the thought of the team was to uproot the tree and swing it around at all is the test.

    TL;DR Audacity has currency in the bank of ebullientsoul. If you come through Chicago, get at me. You seem like good people. I'll buy the first round of drinks or a couple Kind bars, if you don't.
  5.  (10622.14)
    Ales -- Convinced one of my friends to pick it up. He's mad at me now. I wish I had more details as to why he didn't like it, but all he would say is that it was "self-indulgent wanking that had no story."
    I have very little short-term memory so I wasn't actually able to tell him if there was a story or if you were trying to say something with the comic.
    Was there? Were you? I may have to re-read it in the next day or three.
    • CommentAuthorales kot
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2012
     (10622.15)
    @Warped Savant:

    First of all - thank you for the review! I loved it.

    The friend anecdote is bloody funny. "self-indulgent wanking that had no story." sounds like an empty complaint if it's not supported by any further explanation. If your friend decides to explain, I'd love to read why he thought that, and I'll gladly respond.

    WILD CHILDREN is built to say many things, and I don't want to explain them. The reason why is simple: I don't enjoy artists explaining their works. Everything has to be included within the comic itself, otherwise the comic won't do it for me. Additional explanations and illuminations are fine, but going through the laundry list of ideas I put in, and explaining how I wanted to make you feel and think and experience things...that would be wrong. The answer to all of that is actually within the text, and within the images, and between the panels.


    @phill_sea:

    You're welcome! I wholeheartedly recommend Coil. It's funny - you can find some of the lyrics to their 'Teenage Lightning 2005' inside Wild Children. It's one of the quotes on the first page. And thanks for the explanation!


    @ebullientsoul:

    First of all: thank you for the amazing response. I value the fact that you took the time. I'll address everything:

    1) Gotcha.

    2) First of all, why would you assume I consider drugs as a gateway experience and students educating teachers as something novel or profound? I certainly don't. Also, the whole drugs as a gateway experience idea...I'd recommend reading again, because it seems you might have missed something. I don't want to spoil it here.

    3) Footnotes - the footnotes can add to the story, but they're not necessary bits of the experience - they're tangents that can add additional meanings and link to a larger whole. The Lacan quote connects to the core of the story. If you want to give someone a whole universe, you want them to know what it's about. I don't want to be explaining it any further, because, as I explained when talking to Warped Savant, I don't like the idea of telling readers how they should read my work.

    Also, at no point does Matt Seneca talk about Blur. Those are two separate references.

    As for recommending google to the average reader, it's the right thing to do in my book. It's a tangent that includes keywords I don't want to explain it within the comic, because that would not be right - but I want to give you a chance to find out more about them. I want to connect you with things that matter to me.

    4) Glad we agree!

    5) That's nice to hear. I love most of Hickman's creator-owned work.


    Again, thank you - I appreciate all of this a lot. I might be in Chicago next year for the big con. If that happens, please do come find me, or shoot me an email!
    • CommentAuthorales kot
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2012 edited
     (10622.16)
    Also, my new announcement!


    First interview + pages here.


  6.  (10622.17)
    Ales -- Next time I talk to him I'll see if I can get something more out of him as to why he doesn't like it. Don't hold your breath though. I'm guessing it really just comes down to it's not his cup of tea.
    When I give it another read through (because it really seems like a comic that's worth reading a couple of times) I'll probably fire you off an e-mail with thoughts / questions. (I'm pretty sure there's enough that I want to say that I don't think hiding it on here is enough.)

    I haven't read the interview yet, but the beginning of the article make "Change" sound really interesting.
    • CommentAuthorales kot
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2012
     (10622.18)
    @Warped Savant:

    Yes, by all means, shoot me an email. And thanks! Change will be pretty special, if we do our jobs right.
  7.  (10622.19)
    Most of the complaints I've seen of the book have been by people who are familiar with the Invisibles, and would like to be patted on the back for that, as if the book doesn't directly cite what it references.

    I feel that's sort of missing the point, because I think the strength of Wild Children is in it's use of the medium itself. The book itself is the message. The book is about comics/sequential images. And it's notable for that in a direct to movie scripting era, that doesn't really use much of the lessons of Herriman and Moore about what makes comics powerful. The what of what is happening is I think secondary to the how of how it's happening--and I think the people who get caught up on the material this book references that they are already familiar with, are letting their personal ego get in the way of actually seeing what is worth pulling from the experience.
  8.  (10622.20)
    @ales: Smart nabbing Morgan. He makes beaaautttiiiiful art.