Comic Fury Webcomic Hosting - Forum search

You are not logged in. Log in, Register, More info
Forum > Search results
Pages: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [17]

6 days ago, 2:55 AM #1
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Too late to suggest a fanart/describe a horrific murder?
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Result in thread: To absent friends
27th Dec 2018, 12:01 PM #2
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
I still miss Wake the Sleepers.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
11th Dec 2018, 2:42 AM #3
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
AntiGrandbean:So let me ask - Are you suggesting smaller scope due to mainly artistic difficulty or because of a collective whole, story, progression, characters and art?


Part of it is artistic difficulty, sure. Part of it is learning your craft. Part of it is learning what works for you, specifically. Part of it is getting in the habit of finishing stuff, and yes, I believe that is a habit that can be learned (as is not finishing stuff). Part of it is getting the chance to build some name recognition and a fanbase, because the days of a comic being successful just because it's consistently there and very good are over--there's too much competition competing for people's time and brainspace, and quality doesn't really factor in to what's popular. Part of it is having finished work to show off even if the Big Project fizzles out before it's done.

There are tons and tons and tons of reasons to start as small as possible and organically start going bigger. There are very few reasons, in my reckoning, to start with the biggest project you can think of.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
10th Dec 2018, 2:36 PM #4
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
So, I like the concept of the comic, but here's the thing:

I would not start with this project as your first comic. Comics have a steeper learning curve than you think, and they require a lot more work than you think ("I draw all the time!" leads to "One page wasn't so bad! It was only five drawings!" leads to "Just twelve more pages to go on this chapter..." leads to "This isn't even fun anymore" and if you can't push past that last one your comic ends).

My recommendation is to start small. If you've got a story you can tell, beginning-middle-end, in twenty pages, start with that. If you've got one you can do in a page, start with that instead. Finish the small project. Start the next one. Learn your craft. Build an audience. Start getting some fans.

Everybody wants to make The Lord of the Rings or Avatar: The Last Airbender or Star Trek or Bendis's like two hundred issue run on Ultimate Spider-Man, because that's what made them want to tell stories, but the only one of those that was a solo act was The Lord of the Rings and that took decades of writing before Fellowship ever even came out. The others had network backing and teams of thousands of people and any individual could focus on the project because it was their job.

This is the advice I wish someone would have given to me before I started any of my webcomics. Had I taken it, I might have a bunch of finished comics and still have another regularly coming out, instead of two unfinished, long-ago-eaten-by-the-internet comics and one that's on indefinite hiatus while I'm adulting.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Result in thread: The Ctrl Alt Del guy
9th Jul 2018, 2:42 AM #5
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Sheik:I feel like it's more about shits and giggles at a fair game.

If dickish behaviour can be ignored, does that by extension mean that you can ignore public outcry you disagree with?


Sure. In fact I've been doing it more and more, just as a matter of my own mental health.

ETA: And yes, I probably ought to have ignored this thread, too
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Result in thread: The Ctrl Alt Del guy
9th Jul 2018, 2:09 AM #6
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Sheik:If someone does some not so nice things in public, what's the alternative realistic way people should deal with it?


Ignoring it often works wonders.

EDIT: Added a word to clarify that for some stuff public outcry is totally justified and necessary. But garden variety egotism and dickishness? Is public outcry really constructive or helping anything at that point?
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Result in thread: The Ctrl Alt Del guy
8th Jul 2018, 11:08 PM #7
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
SMAComix:But the mentality of "oh this world is morally grey blah blah blah nihilism is justified, no need to judge others harshly" mentality belongs to the previous generation. Some authors and artists grow huge egos and need to be called out for their mistakes. Morality and ethics are not bad things.


The fact that you think calling out an author that you'll likely never personally know or interact with for their perceived ego is a moral or ethical act is a perfect encapsulation of my issues with internet culture.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
29th Jan 2018, 1:15 PM #8
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
There's a symphony director at local college that's bad at his job. He hated it, but he was stuck. Even though he had no talent for the role and his students were unteachable, there he was. He had frequently tried to explain to his superiors that he wasn't a good fit for the position, that he could flourish somewhere else, but to no avail.

Eventually, the pressure finally got to him, coming in day in and day out at a job he was no good at and one of the cellists gets sarcastic with him and he strangles the kid. The kid dies.

Well, you can't just kill someone. The director is arrested. He's tried and the judge sentences him to the electric chair. The man waits out his sentence on death row. His last meal is a plate of bananas.

He's brought into the room, strapped into the chair. The executioners throw the switch, and .... nothing happens. He has miraculously survived the electric chair unharmed. Well, he's served his sentence so they have no choice but to release him.

After this, obviously, the man is utterly unemployable. He looks for work for weeks and finds nothing. Desperate, he ends up back at the local college. He pleads for a different job at the college, but they refuse. With the symphony he will stay.

Obviously, this did nothing for the man's mental health, to be trapped in this dead-end job yet again. Finally, he brings a gun to class one day and shoots several students.

Well, you can't just kill three people. The director is arrested. He's tried and the judge sentences him to the electric chair. The man waits out his sentence on death row. His last meal is a plate of bananas.

He's brought into the room, strapped into the chair. The executioners remember this guy, and they're not letting this guy out again. They crank up the voltage as high as it'll go, let it build up power, and throw the switch. There are sparks everywhere, the lights flicker, fuses break, and .... nothing. The man has once again survived unharmed. As he's served his sentence, the executioners, coughing through the now smoke-filled room, have no choice but to let the man go.

Long story short, he ends up back at the college, forced into the same position. This is the last straw. This is where he snaps. He gets rifles, grenades, body armor. He starts a hostage situation. It's on the nightly news. The standoff lasts for nineteen hours.

Well, you can't just start a hostage situation that lasts for nineteen hours. The director is arrested. He's tried and the judge sentences him to the electric chair. The man waits out his sentence on death row. His last meal is a plate of bananas.

The executioners are very familiar with the man at this point, and they're not gonna mess around. When the strap the guy in, the reroute the auxiliary power into the room ... the chair is getting enough electricity for a couple of city blocks. The entire room is humming like a generator when they throw the switch.

Sparks explode everywhere, lightning arcs through the room, and finally there's an explosion! The executioners pick themselves up from the rubble, stunned. They see the silhouette of the man through the dust that fills the room! He's waving his hands in frustration, and as the ringing finally clears out of their ears they can hear him screaming:

"That's what I've been trying to tell you!!!
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Result in thread: Insult my OC
29th Sep 2017, 12:09 PM #9
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Insult my OC


How? His face insults him worse than I ever could.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
26th Aug 2017, 2:21 AM #10
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
EDIT: Nah, nevermind.

I'll keep it constructive.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 10:01 PM #11
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Me, as a white dude, advocating that minorities should make nice-nice with people who want them dead or harmed is absolutely asking them to put their necks on the line. (Keep in mind that Davis didn't win over KKK members by compelling arguments, he did it by becoming friends with them. That's a very, very different animal.)

How is my whiteness irrelevant? It's not irrelevant to the supremacist: he already views me as human, if deluded. My making friends with the supremacist doesn't impact his worldview at all.

My specific words were "I don't know that [this] is an actionable plan." It certainly works on the small scale. I do not see a way we can scale it up in any realistic way.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 9:34 PM #12
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
I've heard of him, yes.

I don't know that asking black people to quite literally put their necks on the line by stepping up to befriend supremacists is an actionable plan, particularly as a white dude.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 8:36 PM #13
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
MissElaney:@Zomburai Someone who is skeptical is not the same as a supremacist, so I am not sure I understand your point. A skeptical person is someone who just doesn't believe you on a specific thing yet, and you can't convince them to believe you by telling them examples that turn out to be irrelevant and/or untrue even if the broader idea of what you are trying to convince them about is 100% truth. If you want to convince a supremacist about racialized police brutality, you honestly can't start with proving racialized police brutality. You'd have to start by proving that his supremacist worldview is wrong in the first place, THEN move on to racialized police brutality.


Well, if we're trying to convince people of the problem, it's probably better to go to the statistical realities first.

Because my point was, there is no case you can point to where, in your words, "it couldn't happen to someone of a different race." Charlottesville aside, racism doesn't usually look like a dude in a high-and-tight with a swastika screaming racial slurs. It's almost always someone being a little more judgey... or more to the point, a little more scared ... and in the case of cops, being more willing to make an according choice to use lethal force. Until we invent recordable telepathy, every instance of police killing someone is going to look like, at worst, ill judgement.

I brought up Philando Castille because that was about as close to an unimpeachable case of wrongdoing as you can get, and racists and supremacists (or, excuse me, "skeptics") still pick at every nit they can find to justify the death of a human being.

(Incidentally, I'm not convinced you can prove to the supremacist his worldview is wrong. They already have to believe in objectively wrong and completely illogical things to accept a supremacist worldview. How do you logic someone out of that?)
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 4:35 PM #14
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
MissElaney:@MistakeNPotatoes: He did have a gun and he did reach for it. I can break it down for you citing footage of the event itself and the exhibits that his family's lawyer used but I won't do that unless you or someone else is genuinely interested.

Debunking Terrence Crutcher however, does not debunk the broader picture of police brutality.

The only reason why I am bothering to say the Terrence Crutcher thing is debunked is because when you try to convince someone who is skeptical about racial police brutality, you can't put forth an example that will undermine your point and expect to get traction. Crutcher's case is an example where a shooting is frankly to be expected to have happened to anybody regardless of race and thus undermines the point of racialized police brutality.


See, I think this is incorrect because the supremacists can always find something to undermine this person or that person and make that instance "okay," if only in their own heads.

When people started making excuses justifying the shooting of Philando Castille ("But if she was so concerned, why didn't she start filming until after he was shot!?!?"), it was clear that nothing will convince some people that an injustice occurred, if it happened to a particular racial, religious, or political group.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 12:43 PM #15
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
That is literally a privilege. "I do not have to go through this bad thing that other people do," is baseline privilege.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
25th Aug 2017, 3:56 AM #16
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
EDIT: Nah, what I snarked was expressed much better by defo and Jack. Just couldn't wait to get back into the chat and start swinging, I guess.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
23rd Aug 2017, 4:45 PM #17
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
Respheal:What purpose does breaking some innocent bystanders' windows serve to defeat or surpress fascism?


The same purpose breaking a glass or a bar stool serves when you're out drinking and the big dude in the room wants a fight: sending the message of "I will use violence if I have to."

It should be pointed out, though, that riots and violence are a natural outcome of gathering large groups of humans together, and the larger the group, the more likely this is to occur. I mean, when you gather tens of thousands of sports fans together after their team wins the big game it's not unusual for cars to get overturned and set on fire, but nobody complains about that or cares about the people who are out a car.

I think we can all agree that fascists are bad--I mean, duh? But harming innocents or the property of innocents isn't good. It's not bad on the same level of fascism, but it's not good.

Sorta seems that any argument going on in here is trying to say that you can't call anti-fascists who damage property bad because that equates them to fascists. Holy shit what if there are actually varying levels of badness and fascists are more bad? What a novel idea.


If you want to discuss bad thing [x] over bad thing [y], that lends more credence to bad thing [x]. Imagine someone got ran over in the street and someone kept insisting we, right this second, talk about the person who vandalized a store. "Yes," the person says, "someone died, and that's bad, but we really need to talk about this broken window and spraypaint because it is also bad."
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
22nd Aug 2017, 5:08 PM #18
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
T_Deines:Yes. This is their intention from their pov. There are people that also claim that they, themselves, are also fascists due to their movement becoming politically charged, while anarchist? I'm not clear on this. Not at the moment anyway. Not eager to add more to my search history to jog memory.


Yes, fascists and their ilk are quite eager to say that any use or threat of violence makes the other "the real fascists," which is not only a fallacy, it's a very knowing and deliberate one.

Violence is not the sole or the major determining factor of a fascist political movement.

This is what I'm looking for, thank you. For awhile I got "he offends me" "what he believed in is wrong" "I don't like it" and I felt there must be more to it than that.


Glad I could assist.

I will agree when its bigotry that is clearly intentional in most cases.


But what even started the topic was people being loud, proud advocates for their own bigotry. The "but what about--!?" and "what if some guy--!?" is a useless question when white supremacists feel comfortable marching in the street.

"What about when you don't know if they're a Nazi or not?" isn't a question I care about when I'm talking about these guys (image spoilered for violence):



These are the guys I'm talking about. "What about--?" feels like a distraction of the issue, a red herring. These people are making it completely obvious that they're white supremacist scum by their actions and their symbols, both of which they brandish proudly.

What I also believe is that in order to fight the bigotry, we need to learn why they're bigots, why they choose this. The more you know about it, the better arguments you can have against it. The more honest the responses will be. The stronger the conversation the stronger the outcome.


I don't believe there's a conversation to be had.

This whole idea that you can out-logic a supremacist is insane to me, because white supremacy is a worldview that requires accepting things as true that are in defiance of known facts or stunningly illogical. Richard Spencer was on TV a few months ago, and had to back up his assertion that only white people have created great things and great societies by claiming the Ancient Egyptians were white.

You can't logic against that.

A quick corollary to this: One of the most consistently backed-up bits of pscyhological science we've ever found is that when one is confronted with evidence contradicting a belief one is invested in emotionally, they don't reconsider, they double down ... and the stronger the evidence, the stronger this effect is. Now think of how much emotional investment it requires to get with six or seven other guys and attack a man because of his skin color.

They have. They're idiots.

I follow up and ask that those that aren't extremists, do you wonder if they feel pressured to pick one or the other in fear of going against natural herd behaviour? Even if they don't completely believe it at the time (and might later)?


What do you mean, "aren't extremists"? I'm going to need some clarification here. Are you talking about garden-variety people who hold bigoted views?

What are your thoughts on this militant killing all the white supremacists (and others associating or looking like one) being seen as a genocide by other people due to it being a certain demographic? Because that is something they are eager to use against them.


I can't speak for JackFractal (he may have responded by the time I've finished this ****ing essay of a post), but for me:

A) I don't get behind people attacking others because they "look like" a supremacist, depending on what one means by "look like" (I feel like that entire subject involves everyone talking past each other on this thread), and

2) It's not genocide because they can stop being white supremacists any time they like.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
22nd Aug 2017, 3:37 PM #19
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
T_Deines:That'd be fantastic, if antifa was safe.


Here's the thing, though: assuming that the definition earlier in the thread of Antifa being the action arm of anti-fascist movement is correct (I don't know that it is, but I'm happy to assume that), the correct course of action then isn't to grouse about Antifa, it's to help counter fascism. By definition, Antifa can only exist in the presence of a politically meaningful fascist movement. Dismantle fascism, and Antifa goes away. If it mutates into something else, we can deal with that something else.


I have to ask because I'm not even like 50% sure on this, but why would a statue ever be established if the person or event its for is still alive or happening? Just your thoughts I'm looking for.


Propoganda. Memorialization. Two of the Marines depicted in the Marine Corps War Memorial (the statue of the six Marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima) lived to see the Memorial itself go up, though that's not an exact example, seeing as the Memorial isn't dedicated to those soldiers specifically).

There could be other ways of it being removed if that's the case.
My hometown is split between religious and being a large home to a lot of dinosaur bones. This conflicts a LOT of things. To the point where, I think, some truth bending had to be spread so the dinosaur monuments could still stay up and the religious people can be happy. Very off topic, but relating to how I feel about not just this recent event, but what a lot of both groups want to do with history.

Here we are.
You'll have to excuse my home town. It lacks graphic and web designers.

[[Edit: A better layout link.


Oh hey, fellow Montanan!

I really, really don't want to veer this into a religious discussion, so I won't really comment on the Dinosaur Museum. But yeah, I think it's a situation that has some parallels, though I don't know we'd agree on what those parallels are.


Are they heroes because there's the assumption that people share an idea? Or are they a hero just because they have a statue?


I'm saying they're presented as heroes because the statues are obviously presenting them in a heroic light. Lee, astride a military charger, back straight, shoulders back, from an elevated position so we have to look up at him -- these are design choices that are rooted in both baseline automatic response (humans unconsciously respond to things like body language) and thousands and thousands of years of art theory (literally; Hellenistic and Roman sculptors used a lot of these same techniques). That these statues, certainly including the one whose removal sparked (or was used as the excuse for) the white supremacist protest, show these figures in a heroic light should be obvious.

I'm not against your pov, because its yours, but I wanna know more about it. I'm not going to like, smash you in the face just cause I disagree. But since I do disagree, I want to understand what's important to you so maybe I can have a different level of empathy than I did when I saw the news.

If that makes sense.


I appreciate you trying to understand.

We can start with the fact that I consider bigotry to be perhaps the single most objectively evil thing we as humans have to contend with, and there aren't many other contenders. It doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't deserve a seat at the table. It doesn't deserve a platform.

We can then move on and say that these various groups that showed up for the Unite the Right protest, even "the very fine people" who maybe weren't chanting about white power or how Jews won't replace us or who weren't brandishing torches or clubs, were still there to promote bigotry and reinforce a racist status quo. They have abdicated their humanity.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
22nd Aug 2017, 1:26 PM #20
Zomburai

User avatar
Posts: 332
Registration date: 21st Nov 2010
Location: Latveria
T_Deines:*head in hands at the clear misunderstanding of why she worded it the way she did*
I mean... In the same way. I could edit very few words of this and it'd also look like a sentence about Antifa and BAMN. But that's what my point entirely is about.


Yeah, but the words you'd have to change are pretty important. "Oh, they want to make America safe for non-whites and oppose fascists politically, physically, and mentally" is completely different on a moral and ethical level than "they want to make America a white country and harm American citizens of color."

I'm not ever going to claim that the ends automatically justify the means, but the ends buy you a hell of a lot of leeway.

I know that. I didn't speak otherwise. I'm talking about their perspective. What is this? xD You're preaching to a choir here. You're responding to me as if I don't know these guys are vile even though I said as such.


What I was trying to say is that their perspective doesn't matter.

To remove a text or monument because the person used for that monument was an asshole takes away the turmoil that the other side had to endure. People wouldn't be able to look at and think, "We've come so far since this dick here". You may remove the evil face of the matter, but what you also remove, is the other side too.

"Yo, what are you doing?"
"I'm breaking down this statue here. This dude was a prick."
"But he was a prick ___ years ago."
"Yes, but his ideas bother me today because there are people that think like this and see him as an inspiration."
"But what about the other people from ___ that didn't agree with him then and now? If you remove it, they might not know that there was a victory against this particular prick."
"This group and I agreed for the rest of the nation that it must go and no one will know about him/her./etc"
"But then no one will know about those that fought for the cause as well."

And so on.

I dunno, I personally disagree with defacing anything that is meant to tell a story about history. Even though its a shit part of history, it means something. I do agree with dropping a flag though. I mean, with this line of thinking, a LOT of text and stuff would be destroyed and future generations would have no idea what happened. There's a reason its in the past. But the past also needs proof. Otherwise its just... people making shit up and hoping the other side believes.


The thing I think you're missing is that these statues are, in fact, lying about the past. Most of them are lionizing these figures and downplaying what they were actually fighting for. The vast majority of these statues didn't even go up at the time these people were alive, to memorialize recent history; they went up during the Jim Crow and civil rights eras as a psychological reinforcement of white supremacy. (It seems unlikely that Lee or Davis would have wanted these statues of them, looking heroic on horseback in Confederate grays, seeing as they refused to be buried in their Confederate uniforms or have any flags of the Confederacy flown at their services.)

These are history, but not the history that you think they are. Losing a piece of art ever is always tragic in one way or another, but the monuments and statues showing these people as heroes are better off in a museum where their history can be taught and discussed and the piece can be curated. They do not need to be on top of our buildings, literally watching over our cities and where we physically need to look up to them.
_______________________
"Painting is not done to decorate apartments. It is an instrument of war." -- Pablo Picasso

image
Forum > Search results
Pages: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [17]