[META] A march RACC Presents? Not exactly...
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
I had this idea. Since Mike won't let me put together an issue of RACC
PRESENTS, why not put together a goofy parody called RACC DEMENTS the
while technically wouldn't come out in March, but would be around soon
then the real thing.
The stories in this hypothetical parody would have to meet four
basic criterion.
a) etremely silly, almost pointlessly so.
b) be a really bizzare story set in a current imprint that you
right or a parody of any exsisting RACC IMPRINT.
C) Be ready to me by March 23, so I can get the issue out by
Apirl 1st. (Heh heh, an excuse for weirdness... heh heh.)
Anyone interested...
MEscutia
Jesse Willey wrote:
>I had this idea. Since Mike won't let me put together an issue of RACC
>PRESENTS, why not put together a goofy parody called RACC DEMENTS the
>while technically wouldn't come out in March, but would be around soon
>then the real thing.
Um.
First of all, I don't seem to recall you asking me to let you put
together a March issue of RP, or at least, I don't remember it
that way. What I -do- remember is you wondering if a March
issue could still happen. That's it.
Second, I'd like to go on record and state that I feel that a
parody of RACC Presents would be a Bad Idea, at least at
this stage in the series's life, and *especially* in a month
when there's no regular issue.
For the sake of RP, Jesse, I'd prefer it if you didn't do this.
However...
> The stories in this hypothetical parody would have to meet four
>basic criterion.
> a) etremely silly, almost pointlessly so.
> b) be a really bizzare story set in a current imprint that you
>right or a parody of any exsisting RACC IMPRINT.
Provided one got permission from the writers whose work one
was parodying, this would have possibilities by itself. But taken
in this context, it becomes considerably weaker.
> C) Be ready to me by March 23, so I can get the issue out by
>Apirl 1st. (Heh heh, an excuse for weirdness... heh heh.)
If it wasn't so soon after RP's beginning, I wouldn't have a
problem with this. IOW, wait a year and maybe I'll let you do
it. :)
There. I've said my piece.
-Mike
Mike Escutia - mesc...@aol.com - er...@eyrie.org
http://www.eyrie.org/~ergh/
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
MEscutia wrote:
>
> Um.
>
> First of all, I don't seem to recall you asking me to let you put
> together a March issue of RP, or at least, I don't remember it
> that way. What I -do- remember is you wondering if a March
> issue could still happen. That's it.
When I asked if I could handle it, I wasn't joking. You must have
mistaken me for the Evil Jess, who is never serious.
> Second, I'd like to go on record and state that I feel that a
> parody of RACC Presents would be a Bad Idea, at least at
> this stage in the series's life, and *especially* in a month
> when there's no regular issue.
That's kinda the point though. To trick people into thinking it's
RACC PRESENTS, when really, it's something else.
> For the sake of RP, Jesse, I'd prefer it if you didn't do this.
> However...
>
> Provided one got permission from the writers whose work one
> was parodying, this would have possibilities by itself. But taken
> in this context, it becomes considerably weaker.
Actually, whenever possible I'd being using parodies from Imprint
creators. I could just see Matt Rossi doing an Omega parody. Tom
Russell slapping 'Durfworld'. I've already started plotting a very dark
and angsty Greptile and SPLoTcH! tale. (What the??? Grim and Dark? are
we talking about the same people here?)
> If it wasn't so soon after RP's beginning, I wouldn't have a
> problem with this. IOW, wait a year and maybe I'll let you do
> it. :)
> There. I've said my piece.
I recently had a talk with Mark Evanier, famous comic writer over
email. We talking about Mad magazine. He said that at least while he
worked there, they DID NOT have to ask if they could parody something.
They aren't really using anyone else's intellectual property. Weird Al
Yankovic on the other hand, does have to ask, because he is using the
tunes of the songs in his work. As for the time, well, how do we know
that RACC PRESENTS won't be another RC2.
Stephen Reid
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death <wil...@erols.com> wrote:
>> Second, I'd like to go on record and state that I feel that a
>> parody of RACC Presents would be a Bad Idea, at least at
>> this stage in the series's life, and *especially* in a month
>> when there's no regular issue.
>
> That's kinda the point though. To trick people into thinking it's
>RACC PRESENTS, when really, it's something else.
I'd have to agree with Mike here. The point of RACC Presents is that it's
supposed to be representative of the group as a whole - it gives new
readers a jumping on point, somewhere where they can sample a whole mess of
different universes, hopefully different writing styles. While the idea of
doing a parody of RACC Presents is okay, in theory, trying to trick readers
is a Bad Idea (to borrow Mike's style). That would only confuse and
possibly alienate people, and that's not what RP was set up for.
I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's What
The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for writers to
let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's scope to do
that in the RACCafe.
>> Provided one got permission from the writers whose work one
>> was parodying, this would have possibilities by itself. But taken
>> in this context, it becomes considerably weaker.
>
> Actually, whenever possible I'd being using parodies from Imprint
>creators. I could just see Matt Rossi doing an Omega parody. Tom
I think having writers parody their own stuff is really the only way to go.
Point to consider: wouldn't a parody of the LNH be a waste of time? Before
I go any further I have to preface with my usual comment that I don't
really read LNH, but... if the LNH is traditionally a parody of traditional
Spandex-style comics, then a parody of a parody... uh? Wouldn't that be
like a bad photocopy of an artist's rendition of an event?
> I recently had a talk with Mark Evanier, famous comic writer over
>email. We talking about Mad magazine. He said that at least while he
>worked there, they DID NOT have to ask if they could parody something.
>They aren't really using anyone else's intellectual property. Weird Al
>Yankovic on the other hand, does have to ask, because he is using the
>tunes of the songs in his work. As for the time, well, how do we know
>that RACC PRESENTS won't be another RC2.
In the real world, you're right. Mad magazine gets away with it. But RACC
is a writing community, and none of us are getting rich off of it.
Parodying when people don't want to be parodied could be at best
insensitive, at worst, spiteful and / or disheartening. I'm sure people who
have a lot invested in their universes/imprints wouldn't be too happy to
see a parody of their work being put around RACC without their permission -
it diminishes the original.
Just my two pence.
--
..Stephen, who says come visit http://members.aol.com/writeruk/newtroy/
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
Stephen Reid wrote:
> I'd have to agree with Mike here. The point of RACC Presents is that
> it's supposed to be representative of the group as a whole - it gives
> new readers a jumping on point, somewhere where they can sample a
> whole mess of different universes, hopefully different writing styles.
To quote Sisko: "I'm not Picard."
In other words, we aren't really RACC PRESENTS.
> While the idea of doing a parody of RACC Presents is okay, in theory,
> trying to trick readers is a Bad Idea (to borrow Mike's style). That
> would only confuse and possibly alienate people, and that's not what
> RP was set up for.
I was going to try to trick the readers into thinking it was the
norm. (IE: My SPLoTcH!/Greptile....)
> I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's
> What The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for
> writers to let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's
> scope to do that in the RACCafe.
Actually, I've felt the RACCafe has a limit to it's oddness. This
would be no holds barred weird.
> I think having writers parody their own stuff is really the only way
> to go.
That and it's funny just let everyone's inferiority and running with
it. :-)
> Point to consider: wouldn't a parody of the LNH be a waste of time?
> Before I go any further I have to preface with my usual comment that I
> don't really read LNH, but... if the LNH is traditionally a parody of
> traditional Spandex-style comics, then a parody of a parody... uh?
> Wouldn't that be like a bad photocopy of an artist's rendition of an
> event?
If any LNH stuff were in their it would all have to be grim stuff.
Remember the other choice are stories that wouldn't oridinarily happen.
I'm working on a serious Greptile/SPLoTcH! story right now.
> In the real world, you're right. Mad magazine gets away with it. But
> RACC is a writing community, and none of us are getting rich off of
> it.
Then I must be the community satanist, alright. I enjoy leaving dead
cats nailed to peoples front doors
Parodying when people don't want to be parodied could be at best
> insensitive, at worst, spiteful and / or disheartening. I'm sure
> people who have a lot invested in their universes/imprints wouldn't be
> too happy to see a parody of their work being put around RACC without
> their permission - it diminishes the original.
>
Can I help it if am a bit insensitive? I can I help it, if I think
and thing, no matter how good it is, should be parody for just for the
sake of a few cheap jokes? No I can't and I'll you why. Over the FIVE
YEARS that I've been sporidically email Mark Evanier, he has been
molding me to be almost exactly like him. (Except, I do about most
super heroes and I have TWO jokes, instead of just one.) I thrash
everything, whenever and whereever I please. It's in my
psycoprograming.
Byron Molix
On 24 Feb 1998, The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death wrote:
> Stephen Reid wrote:
>
> > I'd have to agree with Mike here. The point of RACC Presents is that
> > it's supposed to be representative of the group as a whole - it gives
> > new readers a jumping on point, somewhere where they can sample a
> > whole mess of different universes, hopefully different writing styles.
>
> To quote Sisko: "I'm not Picard."
>
> In other words, we aren't really RACC PRESENTS.
>
> > While the idea of doing a parody of RACC Presents is okay, in theory,
> > trying to trick readers is a Bad Idea (to borrow Mike's style). That
> > would only confuse and possibly alienate people, and that's not what
> > RP was set up for.
>
> I was going to try to trick the readers into thinking it was the
> norm. (IE: My SPLoTcH!/Greptile....)
This is why you fail.
> > I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's
> > What The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for
> > writers to let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's
> > scope to do that in the RACCafe.
>
> Actually, I've felt the RACCafe has a limit to it's oddness. This
> would be no holds barred weird.
>
> > I think having writers parody their own stuff is really the only way
> > to go.
>
> That and it's funny just let everyone's inferiority and running with
> it. :-)
Huh?
> > Point to consider: wouldn't a parody of the LNH be a waste of time?
> > Before I go any further I have to preface with my usual comment that I
> > don't really read LNH, but... if the LNH is traditionally a parody of
> > traditional Spandex-style comics, then a parody of a parody... uh?
> > Wouldn't that be like a bad photocopy of an artist's rendition of an
> > event?
>
> If any LNH stuff were in their it would all have to be grim stuff.
> Remember the other choice are stories that wouldn't oridinarily happen.
> I'm working on a serious Greptile/SPLoTcH! story right now.
>
> > In the real world, you're right. Mad magazine gets away with it. But
> > RACC is a writing community, and none of us are getting rich off of
> > it.
> Then I must be the community satanist, alright. I enjoy leaving dead
> cats nailed to peoples front doors
>
> Parodying when people don't want to be parodied could be at best
> > insensitive, at worst, spiteful and / or disheartening. I'm sure
> > people who have a lot invested in their universes/imprints wouldn't be
> > too happy to see a parody of their work being put around RACC without
> > their permission - it diminishes the original.
> >
> Can I help it if am a bit insensitive? I can I help it, if I think
> and thing, no matter how good it is, should be parody for just for the
> sake of a few cheap jokes? No I can't and I'll you why. Over the FIVE
This doesn't many any sense. Are you saying you will respect people or are
you saying you want to stomp all over them for the sake of a cheap laugh
that will get you turned into 'Ejected from Newsgroup Man'?
> YEARS that I've been sporidically email Mark Evanier, he has been
> molding me to be almost exactly like him. (Except, I do about most
> super heroes and I have TWO jokes, instead of just one.) I thrash
> everything, whenever and whereever I please. It's in my
> psycoprograming.
>
I find this hard to believe, first off Evanier had been doing serious
stuff before you could read if I'm gauging your age correctly. He can do
funny stuff, he's versatile, he's also an accomplished artist in the
literary sense because he knows a) how far to take a joke and b) what
makes good stories whether they be funny or serious. So I would have to
say you are missing the point of what he has been telling you. I can't
believe he'd tell anybody to become a completely irreverant, insult a
minute machine for the sake of a few jokes. That stuff may work on South
Park but in real life it gets old really fast, and anything like this
where the creative community is the audience it's even harder to deal
with. Writing is a very personal process for some people. You ever notice
how the LNH only parodies big trends and professionals if it's not
parodying the idea of comics in general? That's why. There will never be
an LNH story parodying Invasions unless the Invasions authors write it, it
wouldn't sit well, and besides who has time to write that much for one
joke?
(Above comments based on paragraph above and are not intended as a
personal attack, simply taking your ridiculous situation and inflating it
in an effort to show you how ridiculous it is)
Byron Molix
MEscutia
Jesse Willey (J>) scrawled
J> To quote Sisko: "I'm not Picard."
J>In other words, we aren't really RACC PRESENTS.
Then why do you want to trick people into thinking that you
are?
Stephen Reid (S>) wrote:
S> While the idea of doing a parody of RACC Presents is okay, in theory,
S> trying to trick readers is a Bad Idea (to borrow Mike's style). That
S> would only confuse and possibly alienate people, and that's not what
S> RP was set up for.
Exactly. RP is more than just an anthology series. It serves a
vital function to the group, and to misuse that function would
be... just wrong.
J> I was going to try to trick the readers into thinking it was the
J>norm. (IE: My SPLoTcH!/Greptile....)
Then why not just do a Cybernet Elsewhirls story, instead?
Then you can do whatever you want with Splotch and Greptile
without stepping on other people's toes (or worse).
S> I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's
S> What The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for
S> writers to let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's
S> scope to do that in the RACCafe.
Right. And one parody's enough.
J> Actually, I've felt the RACCafe has a limit to it's oddness. This
J>would be no holds barred weird.
Seeing as how I have never been involved in the RACC Cafe
(and never will be), I can't comment on it.
S> I think having writers parody their own stuff is really the only way
S> to go.
And lets the writers themselves decide if there will -be- any
parodies of their works.
J> That and it's funny just let everyone's inferiority and running with
J>it. :-)
I'm sorry, but this sentence doesn't parse.
S> Point to consider: wouldn't a parody of the LNH be a waste of time?
S> Before I go any further I have to preface with my usual comment that I
S> don't really read LNH, but... if the LNH is traditionally a parody of
S> traditional Spandex-style comics, then a parody of a parody... uh?
S> Wouldn't that be like a bad photocopy of an artist's rendition of an
S> event?
Something like that. It'd be populated mostly be one-dimension
characters, though, as opposed to two-dimension characters.
J> If any LNH stuff were in their it would all have to be grim stuff.
The LNH has already had grim. The "Falling to Pieces" arc
in Decibel Dude & Vigilante Guy, for example. Or the entire
run of Legion of Occult Heroes. Or Birds Fly.
>Remember the other choice are stories that wouldn't oridinarily happen.
>I'm working on a serious Greptile/SPLoTcH! story right now.
I don't know... With a character named SPLoTcH!, a story can't
be -too- serious...
S> In the real world, you're right. Mad magazine gets away with it. But
S> RACC is a writing community, and none of us are getting rich off of
S> it.
What he said. RACC has always been, for me, a training ground
for developing and improving my writing skills, as I'd like to be
a full-time writer sometime within the next ten years.
S> Parodying when people don't want to be parodied could be at best
S> insensitive, at worst, spiteful and / or disheartening. I'm sure
S> people who have a lot invested in their universes/imprints wouldn't be
S> too happy to see a parody of their work being put around RACC without
S> their permission - it diminishes the original.
It wouldn't be parody. It'd be a ripoff.
J> Can I help it if am a bit insensitive? I can I help it, if I think
J>and thing, no matter how good it is, should be parody for just for the
J>sake of a few cheap jokes? No I can't and I'll you why. Over the FIVE
J>YEARS that I've been sporidically email Mark Evanier, he has been
J>molding me to be almost exactly like him. (Except, I do about most
J>super heroes and I have TWO jokes, instead of just one.) I thrash
J>everything, whenever and whereever I please. It's in my
J>psycoprograming.
I'm sorry, but I can't accept that a professional writer,
particularly one of Evanier's supposed caliber, would be
"molding" someone to be "almost exactly like him". ANY
self-respecting writer would encourage young writers to
develop their own unique style. Yes, you can be influenced
by a particular writer (or two... or five...), but you'll only
really do well if you develop your own style and voice
that is -uniquely yours-.
And it occurs to me that you were probably barely ten years
old five years ago. Poor Mark.
Stephen Reid
mesc...@aol.com (MEscutia) wrote:
>And it occurs to me that you were probably barely ten years
>old five years ago. Poor Mark.
Poor us, too. Thanks for saying everything I was about to say, Mike. I
think I'll leave this thread now. :)
Mark Evanier
On 24 Feb 1998 18:05:48 GMT, mesc...@aol.com (MEscutia) posted:
>I'm sorry, but I can't accept that a professional writer,
>particularly one of Evanier's supposed caliber, would be
>"molding" someone to be "almost exactly like him". ANY
>self-respecting writer would encourage young writers to
>develop their own unique style. Yes, you can be influenced
>by a particular writer (or two... or five...), but you'll only
>really do well if you develop your own style and voice
>that is -uniquely yours-.
ME: Absolutely correct.
I don't even encourage myself to be like me.
---------------------------
Mark Evanier - 363 S. Fairfax Ave., #303 - Los Angeles, CA 90036
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
Byron Molix wrote:
>
> I find this hard to believe, first off Evanier had been doing serious
> stuff before you could read if I'm gauging your age correctly.
True, he has done serious stuff, but he is training enough of the
other twevle to be serious. I wanted to learn the art of oddness.
(Before Mark found me, I was doing stuff more serious stuff with very
little humor.)
> He can do funny stuff, he's versatile, he's also an accomplished
> artist in the literary sense because he knows a) how far to take a
> joke and b) what makes good stories whether they be funny or serious.
Yes, the one thing he told me though is he may be a mentor, but he
doesn't want to chuck out clones of himself. He told me, find my thing,
stick with it. While I can do some really serious work (IE: The Man in
the Trenchcoat...) Everybody needs a chance to cut loose. This would be
my big
> So I would have to say you are missing the point of what he has been
> telling you. I can't believe he'd tell anybody to become a completely
> irreverant, insult a minute machine for the sake of a few jokes.
No, he said there are times for all sorts of things. Man in the
Trenchcoat was dark, as were many of it's predeccessors. The past three
issues have been odd. The anniversary issue goes back to normal, and
then things get out of wack by situation. I'm not saying EVERYTHING has
to be a parody, just slightly out of place. (IE: An Omega story about a
circus clown, or LNH about a serial killer.)
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
MEscutia wrote:
Mark told there must be balance. Most IMPRINTS LNH aside, have been
grim, grim, grim. I little light heartedness could actually be good.
When a chance to use a joke arises, use. April Fools Day, and a
parodying go hand and Hand. When given the chance to rip things to
shreads, like such an invent, go all out. As for the suggestion for
doing my story as an elsewhirld, it wouldn't go. This story I had in
mind fits into real continuity, though it is NOT the standard story.
Not a parody exactly, just out of place with the usual. The story
revolves around the world view of heroes and the expectations put on
them. REALLY grim stuff.
Eagle
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death <wil...@erols.com> writes:
> Mark told there must be balance. Most IMPRINTS LNH aside, have been
> grim, grim, grim.
You appear to be reading a different rec.arts.comics.creative than I am.
> As for the suggestion for doing my story as an elsewhirld, it wouldn't
> go. This story I had in mind fits into real continuity, though it is
> NOT the standard story.
Then you will need to work with the other people who are also writing
about that continuity to make sure you don't step on their toes. That's
why we call these *shared* writing universes.
--
Eagle (ea...@eyrie.org) Windrider of Crossroads
<URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> rec.arts.comics.creative moderator
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
When I said all that stuff about EVERYTING deserving parody no matter
how good it is, it's basically I life lesson Mark has told me a few
times over the years, which has stuck with me.
"Sometimes, the emperor isn't wearing any clothes, and no one stops to
tell him."
In other words, we come to except things with out question.
EVERYTHING in life must be clearly examined. Everything has it's flaws.
Nothing human is perfect and we must as writers, wheter it be through
series or ridiculous means, point that out. I don't think anyone
(except for maybe Sean Daugherty...) got my TRUE MESSAGE about the
observations I made of human nature for Hell's Titans. I left people
alive, hope is not dead. Though in essence all Hell's Titans was a
chance to point out social ills. Established religon, televison,
popular music, and the comic book genre itself. All systems I find
extremely flawed, and the first of which I find the notion almost
disturbing.
Nothing can be perfect. Other people, when they read my eariler story,
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death Special, just because it had the
words LNH in the front lines thought I was joking. I meant the story to
be dead serious. I'm sure many people will be mad about that, but I
just want them to stop, examine, find the imperfections in my chains of
thought, then do something to mock it, even if it's only to yourself.
You must see things out of the ordinary. Like I said, NOT EVERYTHING
would be a parody. Just a bit out of the norm.
If you look at things correctly, everything we do is either absurd or a
parody. Everything that can be done, can be logical detrimined to be
wrong. EVERYTHING. You brush your teeth. You're doing it wrong,
you're supposed do it the other way. You go to the supermarket.
Everything in life, if looked at is funny funny funny!
Examine, look back, see the joke, laugh, move on. Sit back. Look at
yourself, see how pathetic an exsistence you lead. I do, and I enjoy
the view....
sw
In article <34F24B...@erols.com>, The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death wrote:
>When I said all that stuff about EVERYTING deserving parody no matter
>how good it is, it's basically I life lesson Mark has told me a few
>times over the years, which has stuck with me.
>
> "Sometimes, the emperor isn't wearing any clothes, and no one stops to
>tell him."
To shamelessly quote myself, "...and sometimes, the Emperor is fully clothed,
and you're just being a pervert."
> In other words, we come to except things with out question.
>EVERYTHING in life must be clearly examined. Everything has it's flaws.
>Nothing human is perfect and we must as writers, wheter it be through
>series or ridiculous means, point that out. I don't think anyone
>(except for maybe Sean Daugherty...) got my TRUE MESSAGE about the
>observations I made of human nature for Hell's Titans. I left people
>alive, hope is not dead. Though in essence all Hell's Titans was a
>chance to point out social ills. Established religon, televison,
>popular music, and the comic book genre itself. All systems I find
>extremely flawed, and the first of which I find the notion almost
>disturbing.
What the *Hell* are you going on about?
>If you look at things correctly, everything we do is either absurd or a
>parody. Everything that can be done, can be logical detrimined to be
>wrong. EVERYTHING. You brush your teeth. You're doing it wrong,
>you're supposed do it the other way. You go to the supermarket.
>Everything in life, if looked at is funny funny funny!
>
>Examine, look back, see the joke, laugh, move on. Sit back. Look at
>yourself, see how pathetic an exsistence you lead. I do, and I enjoy
>the view....
And you thought *I* was bitter and cynical.
You're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I can't tell you you're
wrong (well, I *can*, but I won't). You have a right to believe such things,
just as I have a right to believe that squirrels are messangers from God.
On the other hand...
On the other hand, there's a difference between teasing and insulting.
The former is (generally) light-hearted, but, more to the point, it
doesn't put the recipient in a frame of mind generally reserved for
homicidal mania. The latter is... well... insulting. Both require a fair
grasp of the target material, be it a person, a religion, a government or
what have you. Teasing or insulting or parodying or any of that just make
you look like a twit if you don't research your material.
During said research, it ought to become apparent just how much you can get
away with. Ergo, if you cross that line, one can only assume you're being
deliberately malicious. And that makes you fair game (which you don't want
to be, I assure you). For example, if you were to suffer a disturbing lack
of any higher brain function whatsoever for a brief period of time, and were
to somehow choose *me* as a target, in this hypothetical situation, it would
be one thing to point out in a parody how so many of my key characters
happen to be female (and cutely red-headed, to boot), it would be another
thing entirely to parody me as a raging, sexist pervert (who you callin'
sexist?!), or worse ('or worse' has actually happened, as a matter of fact,
so even originality would be denied you). See? Even in a situation
substantially different from this, the intents and results remain the same --
are you trying to analyse someone's work, or just piss them off?
Case in point: RACC Dements. A magnificent idea which I or, for that matter,
the vast majority of people with the entirety of our brains at our disposal,
would no doubt have pulled off amazingly well. You should be shot for
handling it like you did and ruining such things for the rest of us. What
posessed you to plan a parody of one of the most interesting meta-ideas
(and I say this even though I don't read it, and don't plan to) that RACC
has seen in... um... as long as I've been reading it and NOT CONSULT THE
CREATOR?! Not only that, not only do you do that, which *nobody* who takes
parodying seriously does (well, nobody that I can recall off-hand -- and if
I don't know 'em, they're obviously not important); not only that, but you
post publicly about how you had a conversation with the Poster Boy of RACC
Presents which he apparently doesn't recall in the same light that you
recall it. Now, granted, Mike's cognitive processes are not exactly beyond
reproach, but he's a *lot* more credible than you are, at this point.
It boggles my mind. *My* mind. I do not boggle easily. Why are you doing
this? What madness rests itself within your thoughts? To quote a Red Dwarf
episode -- "Justify yourself."
It is now my firm and widely-held belief that Bizarro Good Jesse should not
be allowed to have any more ideas. I believe the United Nations needs to
be called in to search B.G. Jesse's mind to ensure that he is not
secretly stockpiling ideas to be used against us. It is the only way to
ensure that he does not once again do naughty things in the Middle East
involving large amounts of oil and an undisclosed number of foreign nationals.
And...
Hm.
Took that line of thought just a *bit* too far.
I've used up my budget of electrons today, so that's all. Tune in next week
for another edition of 60 Minutes.
--
"Ideas are not usually a good thing..." -- Tom Russell, describing RACC.
"I do believe that if you read [the last post] that you will see that
my points are meaningless and that I cannot get certain obvious things."
-- Zark
sw
In article <34f201ea...@news.demon.co.uk>, Stephen Reid wrote:
[snip]
>I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's What
>The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for writers to
>let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's scope to do
>that in the RACCafe.
RACCafe? *RACCAFE*? As in, "Author's Altiverse, only without the really
astoundingly funny people"? Ha, ha! For a moment there, I thought you were
actually serious! Whew, what a relief.
Matthew Andrew William Thomas Rossi III
sw (s...@eyrie.org) wrote:
: In article <34f201ea...@news.demon.co.uk>, Stephen Reid wrote:
: [snip]
: >I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's What
: >The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for writers to
: >let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's scope to do
: >that in the RACCafe.
:
: RACCafe? *RACCAFE*? As in, "Author's Altiverse, only without the really
: astoundingly funny people"? Ha, ha! For a moment there, I thought you were
: actually serious! Whew, what a relief.
You know, I haven't really read much Superguy lately, but what of it
I did catch wasn't all that funny.
:
: --
: "Ideas are not usually a good thing..." -- Tom Russell, describing RACC.
: "I do believe that if you read [the last post] that you will see that
: my points are meaningless and that I cannot get certain obvious things."
: -- Zark
Badger
Jeff McCoskey
sw wrote:
>
> The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death wrote:
> >When I said all that stuff about EVERYTING deserving parody no matter
> >how good it is, it's basically I life lesson Mark has told me a few
> >times over the years, which has stuck with me.
> >
> > "Sometimes, the emperor isn't wearing any clothes, and no one stops to
> >tell him."
>
> To shamelessly quote myself, "...and sometimes, the Emperor is fully clothed,
> and you're just being a pervert."
>
And if that's not my cue to jump in, I don't know what is. I'd just
like to offer that I think the parody idea has a lot more going for it
than Cabbage has been able to convince, and was dismissed far too
readily. I think it could have been done, and done acceptably well as a
playful/respectful jab. The debate strayed from there though.
The critical thing about any parody, of course, is that it's got to be
funny. Otherwise it's just a mean-spirited embarassment. Even these
may amuse where the recipients are not a meaningful percentage of the
audience -- but that ain't here.
The tough ones to pull off are the already-humorous universes, as others
have noticed. Waaay back when I started fleshing out a Cerebus takeoff
(anyone remember hype for Misantelope?). While I had great things in
mind for Sim's later series', which is crying to be skewered, I found
myself bogged down in the _Swords_ book. Which was itself a parody of
comic book sword-and-sorcery. Parody of parody -- couldn't make it
work. "OK" sez me, "work on the Sloth character." Which was my
Roach-like vehicle to skewer RACC characters. Again, many ideas about
Omega, my own G-Men, and a few others (poor Dark Imp). But it broke
down with the LNH. I'm not comedically gifted like a certain Mr. Rogers
and couldn't possibly hope to make fun of fun.
Bottom line? Maybe give it some time, Willey, then come back quietly
and friendly. I think this idea has real merit that needs to get
divorced from philosophy and remarried to fun (of course, older and
wiser and pre-nup in hand). JJMcC
BTW -- was it my imagination, or did Evanier step out of the lurking
shadows, in this thread of all places? Naw, who'm I kidding. Prob'ly
just saw himself in DejaNews ;]
Matthew Andrew William Thomas Rossi III
Jeff McCoskey (jjm...@home.com) wrote:
:
: And if that's not my cue to jump in, I don't know what is. I'd just
: like to offer that I think the parody idea has a lot more going for it
: than Cabbage has been able to convince, and was dismissed far too
: readily. I think it could have been done, and done acceptably well as a
: playful/respectful jab. The debate strayed from there though.
Strayed? I have been trying to figure out exactly what in God's name
this debate was even about since I discovered this thread. I mean, I saw
my name, so right there you know I'm going to jump in: and then I noticed a
fairly decent idea involving creators parodying their own work, which
seemed pretty cool to me. From there, it became some sort of intellectual
property debate, and somehow Evanier got mentioned (Was Jesse claiming
to be Evanier's apprentice? I couldn't figure it out) and the next thing
you know, all sorts of angsty debates are flinging around and I'm
totally confused.
So in short: Is this going to happen or not? If so, was my name being
mentioned in vain, or is there interest?
:
: The critical thing about any parody, of course, is that it's got to be
: funny. Otherwise it's just a mean-spirited embarassment. Even these
: may amuse where the recipients are not a meaningful percentage of the
: audience -- but that ain't here.
:
The nature of parody. God, i don't want to get NEAR this argument. Is a
mean spirited one funny? Yeah, sometimes. Go look at the Young Ones for
the ultimate example of that. But God knows I've got enough pain in my
life without earning the instant bad karma the assemblage is capable of
throwing my way if I'm a dick, so that's not anything I'm interested
in doing. (In other words, if RACC Dements DOES happen, I'd write something
for it unless it became nothing but jabs. Then I'd be out.)
:
: Bottom line? Maybe give it some time, Willey, then come back quietly
: and friendly. I think this idea has real merit that needs to get
: divorced from philosophy and remarried to fun (of course, older and
: wiser and pre-nup in hand). JJMcC
While I find it odd that Jeff is continually forced by our foibles to
assume the dad of RACC role, I'd agree with him here.
:
: BTW -- was it my imagination, or did Evanier step out of the lurking
: shadows, in this thread of all places? Naw, who'm I kidding. Prob'ly
: just saw himself in DejaNews ;]
That's be my guess. Unless he really IS training Jesse...
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
sw wrote:
>
> The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death wrote:
> >When I said all that stuff about EVERYTING deserving parody no matter
> >how good it is, it's basically I life lesson Mark has told me a few
> >times over the years, which has stuck with me.
> >
> > "Sometimes, the emperor isn't wearing any clothes, and no one stops
> > to tell him."
>
> To shamelessly quote myself, "...and sometimes, the Emperor is fully
> clothed, and you're just being a pervert."
But, in todays soceity full of to many people who can't see the true
dangers of authority, he is naked and no one tells him.
>
> What the *Hell* are you going on about?
The reason to write. There is meaning. Hiding things. As for the
most flawed things, organized religon (Many conservative Christains have
said that wearing aids, which one thing I will probobally have to do my
whole life, is a disgrace to god's will. They said I was meant to be
with little hearing. Not to mention what even more liberal minded say
about other people.) Any religon that actually tells people who to hate
or distrust is wrong. Which is why I tend to steer away. Not all
televison is bad, I really hate how what is supposed to be news shows
like today, will go from talking about sex in the white house one
minute to having Martha Stewart showing us how to make pie plates out of
tin foil the next. Music, well, a few bands are still good. They Might
Be Giants is a good example. They've got a nice rthyme, and all their
songs make perfect sense.
> >If you look at things correctly, everything we do is either absurd or a
> >parody. Everything that can be done, can be logical detrimined to be
> >wrong. EVERYTHING. You brush your teeth. You're doing it wrong,
> >you're supposed do it the other way. You go to the supermarket.
> >Everything in life, if looked at is funny funny funny!
> >
> >Examine, look back, see the joke, laugh, move on. Sit back. Look at
> >yourself, see how pathetic an exsistence you lead. I do, and I enjoy
> >the view....
>
> And you thought *I* was bitter and cynical.
Trust, you're quite absurd. and I'm not cynical, I'm just tellin' it
the way I see it.
> You're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I can't tell you
> you're wrong (well, I *can*, but I won't). You have a right to believe
> such things, just as I have a right to believe that squirrels are
> messangers from God.
If he exsists, God is a hypocrit. He says is loving and willing to
forgive anyone, then sends them to hell anyway. He in fact, allows
there to be hell. Twice actually, if you count life here on earth.
Secondly, Heaven if it is just an authortarin prison camp, in a sense,
since you can't do a lot of what you want to do.
> On the other hand...
>
> On the other hand, there's a difference between teasing and insulting.
> The former is (generally) light-hearted, but, more to the point, it
> doesn't put the recipient in a frame of mind generally reserved for
> homicidal mania. The latter is... well... insulting. Both require a
> fair grasp of the target material, be it a person, a religion, a
> government or what have you. Teasing or insulting or parodying or any
> of that just make you look like a twit if you don't research your
> material.
I've done my research. I've read parts of The Bible. Take my ears
the I might teach. Even if he took my fraggin' ears, I couldn't hear
him. He'd have to take my mouth so I could lip read... The only
section of it I like was Revelations, even that didn't get good till
near the end.
> During said research, it ought to become apparent just how much you
> can get away with. Ergo, if you cross that line, one can only assume
> you're being deliberately malicious. And that makes you fair game
> (which you don't want to be, I assure you). For example, if you were
> to suffer a disturbing lack of any higher brain function whatsoever
> for a brief period of time, and were to somehow choose *me* as a
> target, in this hypothetical situation, it would be one thing to point
> out in a parody how so many of my key characters happen to be female
> (and cutely red-headed, to boot), it would be another thing entirely
> to parody me as a raging, sexist pervert (who you callin'
> sexist?!), or worse ('or worse' has actually happened, as a matter of
> fact, so even originality would be denied you). See? Even in a
> situation substantially different from this, the intents and results
> remain the same -- are you trying to analyse someone's work, or just
> piss them off?
Neither. They are flawed, part of a bigger cosmic joke. Why build
onto the joke. It's perfectly logicall it me.
> Case in point: RACC Dements. A magnificent idea which I or, for that
> matter, the vast majority of people with the entirety of our brains at
> our disposal, would no doubt have pulled off amazingly well. You
> should be shot for handling it like you did and ruining such things
> for the rest of us. What posessed you to plan a parody of one of the
> most interesting meta-ideas (and I say this even though I don't read
> it, and don't plan to) that RACC has seen in... um... as long as I've
> been reading it and NOT CONSULT THE CREATOR?!
Consultation is not really need. If were doing this type of writing
for real, would I just walk up to (pulling a name of of a hat,) the real
Michal JAN Friedman and ask to parody Kahless? Of course not. I just
do it. Why? It is flawed.
Stephen Reid
eva...@ix.netcom.com (Mark Evanier) wrote:
Damn. I love Usenet sometimes. This cheered me up on a depressing
evening....
Sean Daugherty
Matthew Andrew William Thomas Rossi III wrote:
> Strayed? I have been trying to figure out exactly what in God's name
> this debate was even about since I discovered this thread. I mean, I saw
> my name, so right there you know I'm going to jump in: and then I noticed a
> fairly decent idea involving creators parodying their own work, which
> seemed pretty cool to me. From there, it became some sort of intellectual
> property debate, and somehow Evanier got mentioned (Was Jesse claiming
> to be Evanier's apprentice? I couldn't figure it out) and the next thing
> you know, all sorts of angsty debates are flinging around and I'm
> totally confused.
In other words: Like any other flame war on RACC.
> So in short: Is this going to happen or not? If so, was my name being
> mentioned in vain, or is there interest?
It doesn't look like it's going to happen. Shame, really. I thought Jesse's
idea had real merit. That, and as the only person on RACC who I've met in
person, I feel obligated to support him whenever possible.
> That's be my guess. Unless he really IS training Jesse...
Well, yes and no.
--
Sean Daugherty (sean...@erols.com)
"Long live all of us crazy soldiers | "I'd like to thank Microsoft
Who were born under calico skies | for making companies put that
May we never be called to handle | 'Made for Windows 95' logo on
All the weapons of war we despise. | their products. That way
- Paul McCartney, "Calico Skies" | know what not to buy."
2500 posts and Belthasar's Post of Reason to alt.games.final-fantasy
Sean Daugherty
Byron Molix wrote:
> I find this hard to believe, first off Evanier had been doing serious
> stuff before you could read if I'm gauging your age correctly. He can do
> funny stuff, he's versatile, he's also an accomplished artist in the
> literary sense because he knows a) how far to take a joke and b) what
> makes good stories whether they be funny or serious.
As one of the few people probably acquainted with Jesse's writing outside of
RACC, I'm gonna have to jump to his defense. He's a very talented writer.
He's... weird, perhaps, but his stories are very good. As far as things go,
he's not a serious writer, but that doesn't preclude him from being a good
one. It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round. And I, for one, think
Jesse's work is quite good.
Eagle
Sean Daugherty <sean...@erols.com> writes:
> As one of the few people probably acquainted with Jesse's writing
> outside of RACC, I'm gonna have to jump to his defense. He's a very
> talented writer.
Be that as it may, posting to this group claiming that you're being
personally trained by some famous writer is going to accomplish nothing
besides get you laughed at.
From time to time, I get the impression from one writer or another that
they feel like they're "better than RACC" (as distinct from "better than a
lot of the stories posted," which is something else). I personally don't
have much desire to be condescended to, and therefore will simply not read
the stories posted by those people. *shrug* You can be the greatest
writer in the world, and if no one will read your stories because you've
pissed them all off, no one will know.
sw
In article <34F4D9F4...@erols.com>, Sean Daugherty wrote:
>Byron Molix wrote:
>> I find this hard to believe, first off Evanier had been doing serious
>> stuff before you could read if I'm gauging your age correctly. He can do
>> funny stuff, he's versatile, he's also an accomplished artist in the
>> literary sense because he knows a) how far to take a joke and b) what
>> makes good stories whether they be funny or serious.
>
>RACC, I'm gonna have to jump to his defense. He's a very talented writer.
>he's not a serious writer, but that doesn't preclude him from being a good
>one. It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round. And I, for one, think
>Jesse's work is quite good.
Thank you, thank you.
I'd like to thank the Academy, and all the little people who made tonight
possible. You've all been great.
(Who says having an Evil Twin isn't fun?)
sw
In article <6d053n$jdt$1...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>,
>: In article <34f201ea...@news.demon.co.uk>, Stephen Reid wrote:
>: [snip]
>: >I quite like the idea of a RACC Dements, in a similar vein to Marvel's What
>: >The? (I believe that's the title), because it'd be somewhere for writers to
>: >let off steam and lampoon their own stuff. However, there's scope to do
>: >that in the RACCafe.
>:
>: RACCafe? *RACCAFE*? As in, "Author's Altiverse, only without the really
>: astoundingly funny people"? Ha, ha! For a moment there, I thought you were
>: actually serious! Whew, what a relief.
>
>You know, I haven't really read much Superguy lately, but what of it
>I did catch wasn't all that funny.
I wasn't talking about Superguy, I was talking about the Author's Altiverse.
I suppose the confusion is partly due to the difference between Superguy
The Universe, and Superguy The Mailing List. All stories in the Superguy
universe are on the Superguy mailing list, but not all stories on the
Superguy mailing list are in the Superguy universe.
Honest.
Jeff McCoskey
Matthew Andrew William Thomas Rossi III wrote:
>
> assume the dad of RACC role, I'd agree with him here.
>
If you kids don't knock off this faux-philosophic fighting, I'm going to
stop this car. I mean it! Another peep and you're grounded!
In my day, we had REAL faux-philosophic fighting. Why I
remember..(droooo.o.o.o.o.o...o...o...ne)
The Opinonated Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
Sean Daugherty wrote:
> As one of the few people probably acquainted with Jesse's writing
> outside of RACC, I'm gonna have to jump to his defense.
Home you bought one of the Turbo robots and the Saban close out
sale...
> He's a very talented writer.
Thank you, but I have eaten this morning.
> He's... weird, perhaps, but his stories are very good.
Blame Mark. Before I started reading Groo, which suggested if I like
the Garfield cartoon (which at the time was my favorite being
produced..) to try it, most of my stories focuesed around a boy name
Arnie and his supposedly imaginary friend in a battle against the evil
forces on the school playground, which of course included a few space
aliens. All of it was serious. Mark tells me, find something funny in
everything, and suddenly the imaginary friend becomes real and saves the
day. That's when it started...
> As far as things go, he's not a serious writer, but that doesn't
> preclude him from being a good one.
Being absurdist by nature, I tend to think all things, no matter how
are a serious, but also a joke, depending on how you look at it. A
salami might be fine ordinary lunch meat to you, but I think the name is
quite funny.
> It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round. And I, for one, think
> Jesse's work is quite good.
Thank you Sean. I pulled your name out, because you said you also put
allot of mesages in your stuff. sorry for typing funny these past few
lines, my left hand is scratching the bottom of my right foot.
Dave Menendez
In article <slrn6f9t...@eyrie.org>, s...@eyrie.org (sw) wrote:
> In article <6d053n$jdt$1...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>,
> Matthew Andrew William Thomas Rossi III wrote:
>
> >sw (s...@eyrie.org) wrote:
> >:
> >: RACCafe? *RACCAFE*? As in, "Author's Altiverse, only without the really
> >: astoundingly funny people"? Ha, ha! For a moment there, I thought you were
> >: actually serious! Whew, what a relief.
> >
> >You know, I haven't really read much Superguy lately, but what of it
> >I did catch wasn't all that funny.
>
> I wasn't talking about Superguy, I was talking about the Author's Altiverse.
Given that the last Author's Altiverse post was in June 1997, and the last
one that was part of the mainstream "continuity" was in November 1996
(isn't the Autocollector fun?), it's not surprising that people aren't
familiar with it.
-- Dave Menendez
Peter J. Milan
On 26 Feb 1998 03:12:29 -0000 Eagle <ea...@eyrie.org> writes:
>Sean Daugherty <sean...@erols.com> writes:
>
>> As one of the few people probably acquainted with Jesse's writing
>> talented writer.
>
>Be that as it may, posting to this group claiming that you're being
>personally trained by some famous writer is going to accomplish
>nothing
>besides get you laughed at.
Yeah, I know. Now take me. I'm being trained by Grant Morrison,
and he--
*RUTCH RUTCH RUTCH*
Ow.
Pete
(You know, one of these days I'm going to have something to
contribute to one of these flamewars...just not right now.)
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Mark Evanier
On 25 Feb 1998 07:05:54 GMT, Jeff McCoskey <jjm...@home.com> posted:
>BTW -- was it my imagination, or did Evanier step out of the lurking
>shadows, in this thread of all places? Naw, who'm I kidding. Prob'ly
>just saw himself in DejaNews ;]
ME: Actually, I got a message from someone that my name was being
taken in vain here so I took a peek. I have not been following this
newsgroup...and really don't know what this entire discussion is
about. Not that it appears anyone else does...
The Cabbage Wielding Angel of Death
Mark Evanier wrote:
>
> On 25 Feb 1998 07:05:54 GMT, Jeff McCoskey <jjm...@home.com> posted:
>
> >BTW -- was it my imagination, or did Evanier step out of the lurking
> >shadows, in this thread of all places? Naw, who'm I kidding. Prob'ly
> >just saw himself in DejaNews ;]
>
> ME: Actually, I got a message from someone that my name was being
> taken in vain here so I took a peek. I have not been following this
> newsgroup...and really don't know what this entire discussion is
> about. Not that it appears anyone else does...
Back in the day I had so many alias ya' probobally didn't did realize
he was given the tips to the same kid. Cra-Z One and The Jesster on
Relay Net were me. I was ?! on other boards. Those are just the ones I
can remember. (Wait there was Cra-Z Jess, but that was only for a small
netmail service I ran.) I think it was only when My early Erols
access that I dared use Jesse Willey. (Like anyone would believe a name
like that...)