SALE: "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest
Terence Kam
I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
http://au.auctions.yahoo.com/au/auction/14570617?u=terence_kam
If you do not have have a Yahoo ID to take part in the auction, you can
easily get one for free at the above mentioned URL.
Thank You.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty irked
about the existence of another writer with his name).
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 12/23/99
My latest novel is DRAGON WEATHER, ISBN 0-312-86978-9
Richard Horton
[snipped the two instances of rec.art.comics.marvel.universe in the ng
line]
On Tue, 04 Jan 2000 07:56:22 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
<lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam" <teren...@usa.net>
>wrote:
>
>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
>
>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty irked
>about the existence of another writer with his name).
Didn't the comics writer Christopher Priest change his name from
something else, that being the real source of the wonderful SF writer
Christopher Priest's irritation?
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard...@sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>[snipped the two instances of rec.art.comics.marvel.universe in the ng
>line]
Oops. Missed that.
>On Tue, 04 Jan 2000 07:56:22 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
><lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam" <teren...@usa.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
>>
>>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty irked
>>about the existence of another writer with his name).
>
>Didn't the comics writer Christopher Priest change his name from
>something else, that being the real source of the wonderful SF writer
>Christopher Priest's irritation?
Yeah, the comics writer used to be Jim Owsley.
Michael Alan Chary
Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Jan 2000 07:27:13 -0600, Richard Horton
><rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>><lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam" <teren...@usa.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
>>>
>>>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>>>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty irked
>>>about the existence of another writer with his name).
>>
>>Didn't the comics writer Christopher Priest change his name from
>>something else, that being the real source of the wonderful SF writer
>>Christopher Priest's irritation?
>
>Yeah, the comics writer used to be Jim Owsley.
And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
--
In memoriam Walter Payton, 1954-1999, the greatest Bear of all time.
"Being the fastest? I wasn't. Being the strongest? I wasn't. Being the biggest?
I wasn't. I had something that nobody else had. I think I was the smartest."
-- Sweetness
Priest
Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
<84t39f$q3a$2...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>In article <jxnc4.23178$W2.2...@iad-read.news.verio.net>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 04 Jan 2000 07:27:13 -0600, Richard Horton
>><rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>><lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam"
<teren...@usa.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for
auction at:
>>>>
>>>>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>>>>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty
irked
>>>>about the existence of another writer with his name).
>>>
>>>Didn't the comics writer Christopher Priest change his name from
>>>something else, that being the real source of the wonderful SF
writer
>>>Christopher Priest's irritation?
>>
>>Yeah, the comics writer used to be Jim Owsley.
>
>And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
I seriously doubt that. I think discussions of one artist being
"better" than another are stupid. Art is art. Mr. Priest obviously
is a gifted and successful writer. Even if we were working in the
same field, I wouldn't appreciate the horse race comparisons because I
think such "who's better than" observations are at odds with the
subjective nature of art.
As for the name change, I'd never heard of anyone named Christopher
Priest until DC Comics refused to solicit my work under my new last
name. All I can tell you about the name change is it is not a
pseudonym but a legal change that addressed private, family matters.
The decision had nothing to do with comics or career choices and, even
if I *had* heard of the well-established Mr. Priest, my decision would
not have changed. I would not make so intensely a personal choice
based on career concerns.
Had I realized there was a Christopher Priest in so closely a related
field, I would have insisted on being credited differently (perhaps as
James Priest, James being my middle name). As is, I tend to request
editors to credit me simply as "Priest," and my friends tend to call
me "Priest" or "Jim." This is as much out of concern for any
confusion with Mr. Priest than anything else.
I have communicated (through DC) to Mr. Priest my own chagrin at the
unintended confusion, and I can assure you my career has not benefited
in any way from drawing on Mr. Priest's fan base. Most everyone in the
comics biz and most everyone in the comics fan base knows one
Christopher Priest from the other.
Here in Colorado springs there were three Christopher Priests in the
phone book. Now there is one, I think, because I and one other Priest
became unlisted Priests.
----
please note: my name is NOT "chris"
christopher j. priest // http://home.switchboard.com/cpriest
"I have frightened Hosun. My work here is done." --Keith R.A.
DeCandido
James Nicoll
Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam" <teren...@usa.net>
>wrote:
>
>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for auction at:
>
>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty irked
>about the existence of another writer with his name).
>
the previous Christopher Priest?
--
Michael Alan Chary
Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
><84t39f$q3a$2...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>>
>>And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
>
>
>I seriously doubt that.
Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have. He's an
okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of writers just like
him and quite few better.
You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics. There are
*maybe* four or five writer as good as you. Whether you choose to believe
that or not is fine, but when people talk about you, they tend to talk
about your work. When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
> I think discussions of one artist being
>"better" than another are stupid. Art is art. Mr. Priest obviously
Banal as it may seem, it is my job :)
Priest
James Nicoll wrote in message <84t86f$7i7$1...@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca>...
>In article <l7mc4.23152$W2.2...@iad-read.news.verio.net>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 23:25:46 +1100, "Terence Kam"
<teren...@usa.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I have this book, titled "The Glamour" by Christopher Priest for
auction at:
>>
>>Note that this is not the same Christopher Priest who writes for
>>comics. It's the original, older, British writer (who is pretty
irked
>>about the existence of another writer with his name).
> I thought Owlsley [?]
My case in point for always wanting to be rid of that name in the
first place.
>dropped the "Christopher" when informed of
>the previous Christopher Priest?
"The Christopher" is on my birth certificate. :-) I only changed my
last name. "Jim" was a creation, a creature, of the Marvel editors I
worked for as an intern. Nobody'd ever called me "Jim" before that.
Not a lot of "Jim's" in the urban NY African-American community. All
my life, my friends and family have called me "Chris" They had no
idea who "Jim" was. I still answer to "Jim," but brace against being
called "Chris" by people who are not my family or close friends.
I did, however, ask my editors to credit me simply as "Priest," to
help avoid confusion. I don't know why they continue to credit both
names, but I've long given up calling New York every week to complain
about it. *sigh*
cjp
Charles
haven't yet gotten around to reading it, but the Brit would have to be
pretty amazing to compete with his comics counterpart, who is currently
the only comics writer whose work I buy on sight.
Charles
--
Charles Anders, news editor and monkey wrangler, _Anything That Moves_
Oh, and check out http://www.godhatesfigs.com
It's not just about fruit -- well, actually, it's mostly about fruit.
Priest
Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
>When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
Which I pretty funny considering Mr. Ellison had nice things to say
about some of my work. :-) This was pre-name change, of course. :-)
Thanks for the kind words.
>Banal as it may seem, it is my job :)
That's how I feel about this scene I'm struggling through...
William Davis
>Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have. He's an
>okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of writers just like
>him and quite few better.
He's actually a very respected writer, generally considered one of the
best writers to come out of the British New Wave movement in the 70's.
His list of awards is quite impressive. The main reason he's not
better known is that he is not that prolific. He seems to average
about two books a decade.
>You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics. There are
>*maybe* four or five writer as good as you. Whether you choose to believe
>that or not is fine, but when people talk about you, they tend to talk
>about your work. When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
He isn't talked about that much because he doesn't write that much.
You can only talk about a decade old book so much. Unless, of course,
the book is written by Roberty Heinlein, then you can generate threads
thousands of posts long just by mentioning his name.
Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
the lookout for something new and good.
James Nicoll
Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>[Why are we cross-posting this all over creation?]
I didn't look at the newsgroups line. Note followups.
>James Nicoll wrote in message <84t86f$7i7$1...@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca>...
>
>> I thought Owlsley [?]
>
>My case in point for always wanting to be rid of that name in the
>first place.
>
>>dropped the "Christopher" when informed of
>>the previous Christopher Priest?
>
>
>"The Christopher" is on my birth certificate. :-) I only changed my
>last name. "Jim" was a creation, a creature, of the Marvel editors I
>worked for as an intern. Nobody'd ever called me "Jim" before that.
>Not a lot of "Jim's" in the urban NY African-American community. All
>my life, my friends and family have called me "Chris" They had no
>idea who "Jim" was. I still answer to "Jim," but brace against being
>called "Chris" by people who are not my family or close friends.
As a James, I find that being called Jim says the speaker
thinks they are of higher status than I am or claiming a closer
relationship than exists. Friends know I hate being called Jim.
Could be worse: Christopher could become Chris,
'Stoph or possibly 'fer. The worst would be Christ: not only
would people combine your xmas and Birthday gifts but it might
well be dangerous around Easter.
>I did, however, ask my editors to credit me simply as "Priest," to
>help avoid confusion. I don't know why they continue to credit both
>names, but I've long given up calling New York every week to complain
>about it. *sigh*
The solution is self publishin-
Sorry, channeled Dave Sim there for a second.
--
Martin Wisse
<cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
><84ta79$qpa$1...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>
>>When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>
>Which I pretty funny considering Mr. Ellison had nice things to say
>about some of my work. :-) This was pre-name change, of course. :-)
I dare you to go to the next con he visits and introduce yourself as
Christopher Priest. On second thought, don't, the world needs its
Quantum and Woody.
Martin Wisse
Priest
Charles wrote in message ...
>I have a copy of "The Prestige" by the "other" Christopher Priest. I
>haven't yet gotten around to reading it, but the Brit would have to
be
>pretty amazing to compete with his comics counterpart, who is
currently
>the only comics writer whose work I buy on sight.
*blush*
Thanks. :-) Actually, to be fair, I believe *I* am the "other"
Christopher Priest.
cjp
Priest
William Davis wrote in message <388d494d...@news.weblnk.net>...
>Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
>anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
>things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
>most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
>Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
>the lookout for something new and good.
You will hate my stuff. Beware. Avoid. Run.
My stuff is the antithesis of most everything you've listed here.
It's a sort of Dennis Miller-David Letterman snarky take on
super-heroes, which is why the PTB don't let me anywhere *near*
Superman (my one Supes job: SUPERMAN: MAN OF STEEL ANNUAL #3, I
think, the Elseworlds Annual).
Currently I write THE BLACK PANTHER for Marvel, as well as DEADPOOL
(but, really, avoid DP. Trust me). I also write a little book called
QUANTUM & WOODY for Acclaim Comics, which may not make much sense to
you right now.
Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
copy; it's rare and pricey. It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
mythos), THE RAY ANNUAL #1 (cheaper but equally difficult to find),
QUANTUM & WOODY Trade paperbacks "The Director's Cut" and "KYAG,"
SOLAR: HELL ON EARTH (1998 miniseries), THE BLACK PANTHER #1-5, #8,
GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN v1 #1, JUSTICE LEAGUE TASK FORCE #20-22
(the "Chokula" storyline) and #34-37 (end of series), THE RAY #13,
BLACK CANARY #8.
Quarter bin stuff: STEEL #34-52. A wicked social parody of the
Superman mythos. You can get the whole run for five bucks. The
cynicism went right over the heads of most people at DC, BTW.
Martin Wisse
Chary) wrote:
>In article <84t6hk$4kg$1...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>,
>Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
>><84t39f$q3a$2...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>>>>Yeah, the comics writer used to be Jim Owsley.
>>>
>>>And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
>>
>>
>>I seriously doubt that.
>
>Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have. He's an
>okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of writers just like
>him and quite few better.
>
>You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics. There are
>*maybe* four or five writer as good as you. Whether you choose to believe
>that or not is fine, but when people talk about you, they tend to talk
>about your work.
Hmm, I think you're comparing apples with oranges here, writing comics
is different from writing novels, be it only because as a comics wroter
all your work is a collaboration.
As long as Earth 1 Priest hasn't written a novel or the Earth 2 Priest
a comic book series, I can find little basis for comparison.
Methinks you're also evaluating "our" Priest a bit too high, only four
or five writers as good as him? Really? Not that Priest isn't a good
writer, he's easily the best "mainstream" writer now working, one of the
few writers still getting fresh milage from the superhero genre, where
most good writers are basically reinventing the Silver Age or just
writing a better grade Marvel story. (Busiek and Moore not excluded)
> When people talk about the other guy, it's because
> he picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
Actually, he's undergoing a sort of renaissance in the UK, with both new
work coming out and new editions of his older stuff. He's also a nice
chap, I met him at my first sf con a while ago.
Martin Wisse
--
-We- don't flirt with Death. She runs up and sticks
her tongue in our ears.
James Nicoll, rasseff
Tom Galloway
Um, given that I'm sure that Harlan has met the British Priest, and I'm
fairly sure he's white, and that Harlan almost certainly knows about the
name change, I don't think he'd autoattack the American Priest based on
the name.
tyg t...@netcom.com
Priest
Yoink wrote in message ...
>Speaking of Quantum and Woody, are the first two TP's coming back
>into print? I can't find them anywhere... I have issue one and
>my collection jumps up to issue 8 :(
A lot of people asking that question. Check with Omar Banmally
<oban...@acclaim.net> and bug him. Tell 'im I sentcha. :-)
cjp
Priest
Michael Alan Chary wrote in message
>The Unknown Soldier.
Oh, dear-- yes. This 12-issue mini from the 80's by Jim Owsley, was
*loathed* by DC and completely ignored. And it was some of the most
satisfying and true writing I've ever done. Issue #11 was an
*extremely* thinly-veiled Tuckerization of my own emotional state at
the time, and my exit from the comic industry in 1988.
If you can find these, they will come really cheap. They are
riotously cynical, though. As Michael might put it, a political
deconstruction of the Captain America mythos. And, they actually
qualify as science fiction, so we're still almost on-topic here. :-)
cjp
Richard Horton
> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
Nonsense.
Richard Horton
>Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have. He's an
>okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of writers just like
>him and quite few better.
Michael, I've read a lot of Christopher Priest's work. He's an
outstanding British SF writer, one of my favorites. I'm not familiar
with Jim Owsley/Priest's work, but it would have to be pretty darn
good to match Chris Priest's SF. (I'm not saying that it couldn't be
that good.) Obviously, opinions might vary.
(As for the name change, I find Priest's explanation perfectly
believable, and I don't personally have anything against him.)
Hernan Espinoza
>William Davis wrote in message <388d494d...@news.weblnk.net>...
>>Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
>>anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
>>things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
>>most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
>>Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
>>the lookout for something new and good.
>You will hate my stuff. Beware. Avoid. Run.
>My stuff is the antithesis of most everything you've listed here.
Don't listen to him, William. Trusting Priest can only lead to
intemperance and morale dissolution. I like all of the writers you listed
and somehow I still manage to love Priest's writing as well. There is a
great world beyond Sandman and Priest is part of it.
-Hernan, must...find...Unknown Soldier...
Priest
Hernan Espinoza wrote in message <84uc15$k...@cmgm.stanford.edu>...
> -Hernan, must...find...Unknown Soldier...
It's really snarky. Denny O'Neil and Dan Raspler, my editors, fell
asleep at the switch and just let me go hog wild with my clinically
immeasurable level of cynicism. It's a book totally about bad guys
and worse guys, and the most snarky fun I ever had until the
killed-before-it-even-had-a-chance CONCRETE JUNGLE. If you saw JUNGLE
and liked even a panel of it, you'll like UNKNOWN SOLDIER.
cjp
Dave Van Domelen
Unless Priest is holding any fried food at the time, in which case all
bets are off. }->
Dave Van Domelen, not sure if Ellison is going to any Cons in Colorado
any time soon....
Yoink
> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
> copy; it's rare and pricey. It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
> mythos), THE RAY ANNUAL #1 (cheaper but equally difficult to find),
> QUANTUM & WOODY Trade paperbacks "The Director's Cut" and "KYAG,"
> SOLAR: HELL ON EARTH (1998 miniseries), THE BLACK PANTHER #1-5, #8,
> GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN v1 #1, JUSTICE LEAGUE TASK FORCE #20-22
> (the "Chokula" storyline) and #34-37 (end of series), THE RAY #13,
> BLACK CANARY #8.
Speaking of Quantum and Woody, are the first two TP's coming back
into print? I can't find them anywhere... I have issue one and
my collection jumps up to issue 8 :(
Spiderman vs Wolverine kicks mucho booty. A must find.
> Quarter bin stuff: STEEL #34-52. A wicked social parody of the
> Superman mythos. You can get the whole run for five bucks. The
> cynicism went right over the heads of most people at DC, BTW.
I liked 'em, FWIW.
--
\ \/ / _ |~\ _ In God We Trust. All Others Pay Cash.
> < / \|\ /|+-< | | "The world is a comedy to those that think,
/ /\ \\_/| \/ ||__)|_| a tragedy to those who feel." - Horace Walpole
Michael Alan Chary
Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>William Davis wrote in message <388d494d...@news.weblnk.net>...
>
>>Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
>>anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
>>things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
>>most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
>>Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
>>the lookout for something new and good.
>
>You will hate my stuff. Beware. Avoid. Run.
I should point out that Priest hates his own stuff suffering from an
almost HP Lovecraft level of insecurity. He's a brilliant writer and I
have been following his stuff since I was a kid. since then I have gotten
a couple of college degrees, become a writer and literary critic and my
tastes in comics has changed radically. I *still* enjoy Priest's stuff as
much as ever. And it's not some sense of nostalgia.
>Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
>copy; it's rare and pricey. It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
>mythos), THE RAY ANNUAL #1 (cheaper but equally difficult to find),
>QUANTUM & WOODY Trade paperbacks "The Director's Cut" and "KYAG,"
>SOLAR: HELL ON EARTH (1998 miniseries), THE BLACK PANTHER #1-5, #8,
>GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN v1 #1, JUSTICE LEAGUE TASK FORCE #20-22
>(the "Chokula" storyline) and #34-37 (end of series), THE RAY #13,
>BLACK CANARY #8.
The Unknown Soldier.
Michael Alan Chary
Martin Wisse <mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl> wrote:
>On 4 Jan 2000 17:21:45 GMT, mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan
>Chary) wrote:
>
>>Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>Yeah, the comics writer used to be Jim Owsley.
>>>>
>>>>And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
>>>
>>>
>>>I seriously doubt that.
>>
>>okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of writers just like
>>him and quite few better.
>>
>>*maybe* four or five writer as good as you. Whether you choose to believe
>>that or not is fine, but when people talk about you, they tend to talk
>>about your work.
>
>Hmm, I think you're comparing apples with oranges here, writing comics
>is different from writing novels, be it only because as a comics wroter
>all your work is a collaboration.
I'm assuming an equal level of ability required to master both
specialties. Thereby requiring only judging them in comparison to their
peers and then seeing where they rank. Kind of like comparing Mike Schmidt
to Larry Bird.
>As long as Earth 1 Priest hasn't written a novel or the Earth 2 Priest
>a comic book series, I can find little basis for comparison.
>
>Methinks you're also evaluating "our" Priest a bit too high, only four
>or five writers as good as him? Really? Not that Priest isn't a good
>writer, he's easily the best "mainstream" writer now working, one of the
>few writers still getting fresh milage from the superhero genre, where
>most good writers are basically reinventing the Silver Age or just
>writing a better grade Marvel story. (Busiek and Moore not excluded)
First? "Our?" He's *MINE* dammit!!!! Seriously, while I appreciate the
urge to be proprietary toward the hobby of comics, I have to think our
insular attitude is killing it now.
Second, who you got that's better? Not just now, ever. First, let's
compare Priest to some of the truly *great sf prose writers who have
worked in comics just for a start. He's better than Alfred Bester, Otto
Binder and Edmond Hamilton. He's better than LWE. He's better than Peter
David. He's better than Neil Gaiman.
But those guys aren't the real competition. The guys I think are better at
their best are Alan Moore, Carl Barks, Charles Schulz and *maybe* Gardner
Fox. I lke John Broome better. Priest is better than Frank Miller. He's
better than Waid. I might be convinced that Paul Levitz, Grant Morrison,
Herge and Jack Kirby are in the league.
Who you got?
>
>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because
>> he picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>
>Actually, he's undergoing a sort of renaissance in the UK, with both new
>work coming out and new editions of his older stuff. He's also a nice
>chap, I met him at my first sf con a while ago.
Oh, he's a good writer, but he's not even the best Brit new wave writer
(Moorcock) and I would also rank him below some of the others. Good, but
it's like comparing Willie McCovey to Larry Bird.
Michael Alan Chary
>
>
>>The Unknown Soldier.
>
>
>Oh, dear-- yes. This 12-issue mini from the 80's by Jim Owsley, was
>*loathed* by DC and completely ignored. And it was some of the most
>satisfying and true writing I've ever done. Issue #11 was an
>*extremely* thinly-veiled Tuckerization of my own emotional state at
>the time, and my exit from the comic industry in 1988.
And good dirty tricks James Bond meets American dirty tricks fun to boot.
>If you can find these, they will come really cheap. They are
>riotously cynical, though. As Michael might put it, a political
>deconstruction of the Captain America mythos. And, they actually
>qualify as science fiction, so we're still almost on-topic here. :-)
If you know Captain America "The Unknown Soldier" by Jim Owsley is one of
the most savage commentaries ever written rivalling Shaw for sheer
viciousness.
Michael Alan Chary
Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>On 4 Jan 2000 17:21:45 GMT, mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan
>Chary) wrote:
>
>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>
Hardly. Hyperbole, I'll grant you, but his feud with Ellison is the most
memorable thing about him.
Carl Fink
>
>Quarter bin stuff: STEEL #34-52. A wicked social parody of the
>Superman mythos. You can get the whole run for five bucks. The
>cynicism went right over the heads of most people at DC, BTW.
Well worth reading, provided you can ignore the incredibly careless
mistakes that riddle the art.
--
Carl Fink ca...@dm.net
I-Con's Science and Technology Guest of Honor in 2000 will be Geoffrey
A. Landis. See <http://www.iconsf.org> for I-Con information.
Michael Alan Chary
It's as good as any comics I have seen until the last two issues. Like I
said, an absolutely vicious commentary on Captain America.
Hosun Specious Lee
: On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 15:08:12 -0700 Priest <cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
: >
: >Quarter bin stuff: STEEL #34-52. A wicked social parody of the
: >Superman mythos. You can get the whole run for five bucks. The
: >cynicism went right over the heads of most people at DC, BTW.
: Well worth reading, provided you can ignore the incredibly careless
: mistakes that riddle the art.
You mean those scribbles passed for art?
--
\\ \\ Hosun S. Lee // Vorpal Bunny(TM) // http://www.vorpalbunny.com
\\-\\ "The best thing that you can do with your car is to leave the
( 0-0) keys in it in the middle of San Jose, with possibly a sign that
{_^_} says 'steal me, please.' Just don't leave your address or phone
number as they may come back to kill you for unloading such a
lemon!" - Mike Patterson, on why my 97 Chevy Malibu bites.
this damon life
Charles wrote:
>
> I have a copy of "The Prestige" by the "other" Christopher Priest. I
> haven't yet gotten around to reading it, but the Brit would have to be
> pretty amazing to compete with his comics counterpart, who is currently
> the only comics writer whose work I buy on sight.
doesn't the restraining order lower your purchase amount?
--
"Of all my imaginary friends, I don't think there was one
that I didn't end up having to kill." Jack Handey
this damon life
Priest wrote:
>
> William Davis wrote in message <388d494d...@news.weblnk.net>...
>
> >Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
> >anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
> >things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
> >most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
> >Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
> >the lookout for something new and good.
>
> You will hate my stuff. Beware. Avoid. Run.
>
you are such the salesman!
> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
> copy; it's rare and pricey.
how pricey?
It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
> mythos),
this is the one with hobgoblin?
this damon life
Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>
> In article <3879704c...@news.demon.nl>,
> Martin Wisse <mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl> wrote:
> >....
> >Methinks you're also evaluating "our" Priest a bit too high, only four
> >or five writers as good as him? Really? Not that Priest isn't a good
> >writer, he's easily the best "mainstream" writer now working, one of the
> >few writers still getting fresh milage from the superhero genre, where
> >most good writers are basically reinventing the Silver Age or just
> >writing a better grade Marvel story. (Busiek and Moore not excluded)
>
> First? "Our?" He's *MINE* dammit!!!! Seriously, while I appreciate the
> urge to be proprietary toward the hobby of comics, I have to think our
> insular attitude is killing it now.
>
> Second, who you got that's better? Not just now, ever. First, let's
> compare Priest to some of the truly *great sf prose writers who have
> worked in comics just for a start. He's better than Alfred Bester, Otto
> Binder and Edmond Hamilton. He's better than LWE. He's better than Peter
> David. He's better than Neil Gaiman.
he's better than peter david.
he's better than busiek.
he's not better than gaiman.
> But those guys aren't the real competition. The guys I think are better at
> their best are Alan Moore, Carl Barks, Charles Schulz and *maybe* Gardner
> Fox. I lke John Broome better. Priest is better than Frank Miller. He's
> better than Waid. I might be convinced that Paul Levitz, Grant Morrison,
> Herge and Jack Kirby are in the league.
>
> Who you got?
he's not better than morrison.
he's also not better than milligan, ellis, sim at his
best, kyle baker.
off the top of my head.
Frank
Chary) wrote:
>In article <84u95r$8rrk$2...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>,
>Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>
>>On 4 Jan 2000 17:21:45 GMT, mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan
>>Chary) wrote:
>>
>>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>>>picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>>
>>Nonsense.
>
>Hardly. Hyperbole, I'll grant you, but his feud with Ellison is the most
>memorable thing about him.
Maybe it's the thing *you* remember about him, but for many, many
other people, novels like THE INVERTED WORLD, THE AFFIRMATION, and THE
PRESTIGE are (some of) the most memorable things about him..
(I know someone who knows Harlan Ellison primarily as "the guy
Christopher Priest wrote about." The difference between you and him
is that he doesn't go around telling people that that's Ellison's only
claim to fame.)
Rich Johnston
>
>
>
>Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>
>he's not better than morrison.
>he's also not better than milligan, ellis, sim at his
>best, kyle baker.
>off the top of my head.
Oh he's just better than Ellis, but not quite as good as Mark Millar. Chris Ware
and Dan Clowes top him too.
We need a comics creator Top Trumps card set to play this properly. Here's
Priest's.
CREATIVITY: 9
CRAFTSMANSHIP: 8
ORIGINALITY:9
COOL TO LIKE:5
Alan Moore's.
CREATIVITY: 10
CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
ORIGINALITY: 5
COOL TO LIKE: 8
Chris Ware:
CREATIVITY: 10
CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
ORIGINALITY: 6
COOL TO LIKE: 6
Kyle Baker:
CREATIVITY: 8
CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
ORIGINALITY: 7
COOL TO LIKE: 9
Any more for any more?
>
>
>> >
>--
>"Of all my imaginary friends, I don't think there was one
>that I didn't end up having to kill." Jack Handey
Rich Johnston
twis...@hotmail.com
http://www.twistandshoutcomics.com
Ramblings 2000: It's coming when I feel like it.
Carl Fink
[entire comparison snipped]
Mike, you just implied that Mark Waid is not only a better writer
than Neil Gaiman, but in a higher *class* of writer.
This strikes me as astonishing.
Michael Alan Chary
Rich Johnston <twis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <3872F2A7...@mdo.net>, this says...
>>Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>>he's not better than morrison.
>>he's also not better than milligan, ellis, sim at his
>>best, kyle baker.
>>off the top of my head.
Priest you mean? He's better than Milligan and Ellis because he has more
range and depth of characterization than they do. Also, he's a smarter
writer.
Sim's just not as good. His story isn't as interesting and he lacks a
certain energy. Sim's awfully good in High Society, but now? I 'd put him
at about the level of somone like John Ostrander. Good writer, nothing
more. Kyle Baker I'd have to see wtriter a straight superhero story. He's
very funny, but Priest is pretty hilarious too. I've gotten more laughs
ougt of Priest than "Why I Hate Saturn."
>Oh he's just better than Ellis, but not quite as good as Mark Millar. Chris Ware
>and Dan Clowes top him too.
I have the same reservations about Clowes that I do about Baker. I haven't
seen a range of material from him. Ware is not a writer to be compared
with people in the very best. He's one of the top cartoonists, but his
entire body of work as a writer does not justify putting him into the
discussion just yet.
>We need a comics creator Top Trumps card set to play this properly. Here's
>Priest's.
No, we don't. I will buy a set if you make them, though :)
Michael Alan Chary
Carl Fink <ca...@dm.net> wrote:
>On 5 Jan 2000 01:27:32 GMT Michael Alan Chary
><mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>
>[entire comparison snipped]
You misspelled "context."
>
>Mike, you just implied that Mark Waid is not only a better writer
>than Neil Gaiman, but in a higher *class* of writer.
No I didn't. I said he was in a different class of writer for the purposes
of discussing comics writers in a science fiction literary context. I
stand by that. Gaiman has more established sf chops than Waid. I never
said it was a higher class. And I definitely never "implied" Waid ewas
better than Gaiman. I just said that someone was better than Waid.
Rich Johnston
says...
>
>Kyle Baker I'd have to see wtriter a straight superhero story.
Mike, you can't do this. PG Wodehouse never wrote a superhero story but I can
tell he was a better writer than Priest.
Remember, I'm a big Priest fan here too... No way would I return my Concrete
Jungle 1 when the shop asked me if I wanted to.
He's
>very funny, but Priest is pretty hilarious too. I've gotten more laughs
>ougt of Priest than "Why I Hate Saturn."
Okay. How about Cowboy Wally (including the Epic Lite story?)
>I have the same reservations about Clowes that I do about Baker. I haven't
>seen a range of material from him.
Oh sure you have. Pussey, Ghost World, Caricature and A Velvet Glove are
continents apart.
>Ware is not a writer to be compared
>with people in the very best. He's one of the top cartoonists, but his
>entire body of work as a writer does not justify putting him into the
>discussion just yet.
Why not? I consider Acme to be one of the finest WRITTEN comic books ever... I
have no difficulty putting Moore at the top solely down to from hell.
>>We need a comics creator Top Trumps card set to play this properly. Here's
>>Priest's.
>
>No, we don't. I will buy a set if you make them, though :)
Okay, I've got one sale. Hmmm... one for the twistandshoutcomics website I
think.
Priest
this damon life wrote in message <3872F171...@mdo.net>...
>you are such the salesman!
Oh, man, I gave up trying to sell comics to people years ago.
>> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
>> copy; it's rare and pricey.
>
>how pricey?
First printings average around $35 mint. If you can find the 2nd
printing, which is actually on better paper and squarebound, I'm sure
you can find that for around 5-10 bucks.
>
>It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
>> mythos),
>
>
>this is the one with hobgoblin?
This is the one with ned Leeds dying whom Tom DeFalco later *made* the
Hobgoblin essentially to tick off Roger Stern and lay the blame at my
feet. It's a little complicated. Neither Hobgoblin nor DeFalco
actually appear in the book, though.
We sold the snot out of that book. And Marvel never asked us to do SW
#2 and ignored Doc Bright's and my pitch to do a sequel during the
Spider-Clone/Wolverine w/o Adamantium days. Mighta been fun.
cjp
Hernan Espinoza
>It's really snarky. Denny O'Neil and Dan Raspler, my editors, fell
>asleep at the switch and just let me go hog wild with my clinically
>immeasurable level of cynicism. It's a book totally about bad guys
>and worse guys, and the most snarky fun I ever had until the
>killed-before-it-even-had-a-chance CONCRETE JUNGLE. If you saw JUNGLE
>and liked even a panel of it, you'll like UNKNOWN SOLDIER.
Then it's a good bet because I liked several panels of Concrete
Jungle. I even kept Concrete Jungle on my saver list... you know, just in
case a #2 ever shows up. I also like to watch protons decay.
-Hernan springs eternal
Randy Patton
mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>I'm assuming an equal level of ability required to master both
>specialties.
I'm expecting tsr0 to show up any minute and post full statistics on which
Priest has more points than the other.
Todd Kogutt
<cpr...@spamblock.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >And he's still a better writer than the Brit.
>
>
> I seriously doubt that. I think discussions of one artist being
> "better" than another are stupid. Art is art. Mr. Priest obviously
Bet you could kick his butt, though! I mean...he's Brittish.
--SCAVENGER
Todd Kogutt
<dva...@eyrie.org> wrote:
> Unless Priest is holding any fried food at the time, in which case all
> bets are off. }->
>
> Dave Van Domelen, not sure if Ellison is going to any Cons in Colorado
> any time soon....
Actually, He will be at the World Horror Con in Denver this year.
Priest, if you're interested (and haven't been contacted yet) I can put
you in touch with the organizers.
--SCAVENGER
Todd Kogutt
> William Davis wrote in message <388d494d...@news.weblnk.net>...
>
> >Priest, what do you write? After going five years without reading
> >anything in the comics world except Sandman, I've started picking
> >things up again. I'm currently digging everything by Warren Ellis;
> >most everything by Garth Ennis and James Robinson; some of what Alan
> >Moore is doing now and one of Grant Morrison's titles. I'm always on
> >the lookout for something new and good.
I think Ellis and Priest are somewhat complementary writers (well
Priest compliments Ellis in Solar HOE).
>
>
> My stuff is the antithesis of most everything you've listed here.
> It's a sort of Dennis Miller-David Letterman snarky take on
I like that description
> Superman (my one Supes job: SUPERMAN: MAN OF STEEL ANNUAL #3, I
> think, the Elseworlds Annual).
a brilliant & fun story.
>
> Currently I write THE BLACK PANTHER for Marvel, as well as DEADPOOL
> (but, really, avoid DP. Trust me).
I see why you aren't in sales.
>
> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
> copy; it's rare and pricey. It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
PErhaps the greatest Spidey story ever done.
---SCAVENGER
Todd Kogutt
>
> Unless Priest is holding any fried food at the time, in which case all
> bets are off. }->
>
hmmm...If there was a con pannel with both Priest and Ellison on it,
and you walked in with a big greasy bag of fried chicken for
Priest...which of the two would kill you first?
---SCAVENGER just kinda wonders:-)
Michael Alan Chary
Rich Johnston <twis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <84vei9$17v$1...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>, mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu
>says...
>>
>>Kyle Baker I'd have to see wtriter a straight superhero story.
>
>Mike, you can't do this. PG Wodehouse never wrote a superhero story but I can
>tell he was a better writer than Priest.
False analogy. Wodehouse did not choose to write adventure stories. He did
write well at whatever he chose to write. But...George Bernard Shaw and
Oscar Wilde I'll give you, but Wodehouse? What makes you think so? GK
Chesterton was a better writer than Wodehouse.
>Remember, I'm a big Priest fan here too... No way would I return my Concrete
>Jungle 1 when the shop asked me if I wanted to.
It has nothing to do with liking the work.
>He's
>>very funny, but Priest is pretty hilarious too. I've gotten more laughs
>>ougt of Priest than "Why I Hate Saturn."
>
>Okay. How about Cowboy Wally (including the Epic Lite story?)
That's Baker's very best work, and nothing else has been nearly as funny.
Comparing it to Quantum and Woody, I'd say it's funnier but QW is a better
story.
>>I have the same reservations about Clowes that I do about Baker. I haven't
>>seen a range of material from him.
>
>Oh sure you have. Pussey, Ghost World, Caricature and A Velvet Glove are
>continents apart.
I haven't read all those books, I'll take your word for it.
>>Ware is not a writer to be compared
>>with people in the very best. He's one of the top cartoonists, but his
>>entire body of work as a writer does not justify putting him into the
>>discussion just yet.
>
>Why not? I consider Acme to be one of the finest WRITTEN comic books ever... I
>have no difficulty putting Moore at the top solely down to from hell.
How many issues are there?
>>>We need a comics creator Top Trumps card set to play this properly. Here's
>>>Priest's.
>>
>>No, we don't. I will buy a set if you make them, though :)
>
>Okay, I've got one sale. Hmmm... one for the twistandshoutcomics website I
>think.
Maybe we can organize a writer vs writer boxing match.
this damon life
Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>
> In article <84v5vg$2j...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> Rich Johnston <twis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <3872F2A7...@mdo.net>, this says...
> >>Michael Alan Chary wrote:
> >>he's not better than morrison.
> >>he's also not better than milligan, ellis, sim at his
> >>best, kyle baker.
> >>off the top of my head.
>
> Priest you mean?
yes.
He's better than Milligan and Ellis because he has more
> range and depth of characterization than they do.
ellis, maybe in those areas.
but ellis is more compelling and has more depth.
as for milligan, i'd say his characterization is quite
beyond priest's, and range is much braoder, from what
i've seen/heard from priest.
just compare skin with rogan gosh with girl with eaters
with shade.
Also, he's a smarter
> writer.
>
depends on whatyou mean by that.
i have no idea what 'smart writing' is.
i do know milligan's writing is as suffused with the
same sort of eclectic knowledge of obscure facts
as gaiman's or moore's, but in different fields.
> Sim's just not as good. His story isn't as interesting and he lacks a
> certain energy.
sometimes.
but that's why i said 'at his best.
the fight scene in reads and
most of minds, some scene in church and state,
and the ending to high society counter your assertions.
Sim's awfully good in High Society, but now? I 'd put him
> at about the level of somone like John Ostrander. Good writer, nothing
> more. Kyle Baker I'd have to see wtriter a straight superhero story. He's
> very funny, but Priest is pretty hilarious too. I've gotten more laughs
> ougt of Priest than "Why I Hate Saturn."
>
umm, he did do justice inc, i think.
i forget how stright it was,
but iirc, it was played as a rather straight vertigoesque
series.
i'd have to see more from baker to disagree an ymore.
i just find baker funnier.
this damon life
Rich Johnston wrote:
>
> In article <3872F2A7...@mdo.net>, this says...
> >
> >
> >
> >Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>
> >
> >he's not better than morrison.
> >he's also not better than milligan, ellis, sim at his
> >best, kyle baker.
> >off the top of my head.
>
> Oh he's just better than Ellis, but not quite as good as Mark Millar. Chris Ware
> and Dan Clowes top him too.
>
haven't readmuch of them.
and i think i overstated when i said he was better than busiek.
as for ellis, he might have been better
than ellis before transmet and planetary and authority, but not now.
> We need a comics creator Top Trumps card set to play this properly. Here's
> Priest's.
>
> CREATIVITY: 9
> CRAFTSMANSHIP: 8
> ORIGINALITY:9
> COOL TO LIKE:5
>
> Alan Moore's.
>
> CREATIVITY: 10
> CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
> ORIGINALITY: 5
> COOL TO LIKE: 8
>
> Chris Ware:
>
> CREATIVITY: 10
> CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
> ORIGINALITY: 6
> COOL TO LIKE: 6
>
> Kyle Baker:
>
> CREATIVITY: 8
> CRAFTSMANSHIP: 10
> ORIGINALITY: 7
> COOL TO LIKE: 9
>
> Any more for any more?
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >> >
> >--
> >"Of all my imaginary friends, I don't think there was one
> >that I didn't end up having to kill." Jack Handey
>
> Rich Johnston
> twis...@hotmail.com
> http://www.twistandshoutcomics.com
> Ramblings 2000: It's coming when I feel like it.
--
this damon life
Priest wrote:
>
> this damon life wrote in message <3872F171...@mdo.net>...
>
> >you are such the salesman!
>
> Oh, man, I gave up trying to sell comics to people years ago.
>
suuuure.
i think you're just conducting a reverse psychology test.
> >> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
> >> copy; it's rare and pricey.
> >
> >how pricey?
>
> First printings average around $35 mint. If you can find the 2nd
> printing, which is actually on better paper and squarebound, I'm sure
> you can find that for around 5-10 bucks.
oh, no, i Have it.
first printing.
somewhere.
not mint, and god knows how it's aged since i haven't looked at it
in years.
> >
> >It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
> >> mythos),
> >
> >
> >this is the one with hobgoblin?
>
> This is the one with ned Leeds dying whom Tom DeFalco later *made* the
> Hobgoblin essentially to tick off Roger Stern and lay the blame at my
> feet. It's a little complicated. Neither Hobgoblin nor DeFalco
> actually appear in the book, though.
>
my bad.
yes, i liked leeds dying.
i liked the book.
of course, you *are* the one writer whom i have
a huge collection fo fromt he 80's that i am *unaware*
that i have a collection of, until people keep mentioning
what you've done.
like powerman and iron fist which i really enjoyed.
even though i keep thinking you finished off that series,
and the lastfew issues were really sort of annoying, with the dragon
and the death, which i didn't like at all.
> We sold the snot out of that book. And Marvel never asked us to do SW
> #2 and ignored Doc Bright's and my pitch to do a sequel during the
> Spider-Clone/Wolverine w/o Adamantium days. Mighta been fun.
>
i dropped almost all marvels before wolvie lost his adamantium,
and haven't regretted it much.
i did like bright's artwork, although i remember it mostly from
the rejuvenation of iron man [next you'll be telling me you did
the reworking at 200 also].
CARAMBA
feet of any human,especially little boys you fag.
--
Free audio & video emails, greeting cards and forums
Talkway - http://www.talkway.com - Talk more ways (sm)
Kirk McElhearn
> I should point out that Priest hates his own stuff suffering from an
> almost HP Lovecraft level of insecurity.
I don't think that is really true. I met him recently at a convention
in France, and had a few meals with him. He is not insecure, maybe he
feels a bit misunderstood... He did find it interesting that he has a
better reputation in France than in the UK or the US.
Very nice guy, with no doubt about what it means to be a writer (ie,
selling his work and making money).
Kirk
jayembee
> I think discussions of one artist being "better" than another
> are stupid. Art is art.
In some respects, I agree. These respects usually concern the
point at which the "discussion" turns into "argument". When a
discussion generates reasoned dialogue, it's a Good Thing.
Still, discussions of this type generally reveal more about the
discussors than the subjects.
> [...] I can assure you my career has not benefited in any way
> from drawing on Mr. Priest's fan base.
Probably not to any significant degree. But when I embarked on
a hiatus from comics in the early 90s, I still knew of you as
James Owsley. When I started getting back into comics several
years later, I was excited at seeing the name "Christopher
Priest" on some DC comics, thinking it was The Other Guy. It
quickly became obvious from the writing style that you weren't
he. Regardless, there were likely others like me, who bought
some comics under the same mistaken impression. Such is life.
--- jayembee (Jerry.B...@eds.com)
"Some people find their Mok Man-Yees, but
some people don't. That's the way it is."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
jayembee
> Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have.
> He's an okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of
> writers just like him and quite few better.
I've also read his work, and while he's had a few duds (DARKENING
ISLAND and INDOCTRINAIRE, to name two), I've loved most of his
work. "Palely Loitering" is, I think, a superb novelette, and
his Wells pastiche, THE SPACE MACHINE, is delightful. Yes, there
are others who are better, but so what?
> You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics.
> There are *maybe* four or five writer as good as you.
Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Will Eisner, Alan Brennert, Jack Cole,
Bill Messner-Loebs (when he wants to be), Warren Ellis, Bruce
Jones (when he wants to be), Gilbert Shelton, Frank Miller
(when he wants to be), Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez,
Carl Barks, Archie Goodwin, Michael Gilbert, Art Spiegelman,
Doug Moench (when he wants to be), Carlos Sampayo... I could
go on.
Christopher Priest, the comics writer, is not in that company.
(Sorry, CP)
> Whether you choose to believe that or not is fine, but when
> people talk about you, they tend to talk about your work.
> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he picked
> a fight with Harlan Ellison.
When *I* talk about "the other guy", I talk about his work.
If anyone only talks about the fight he picked with Ellison,
I wouldn't consider them much worth talking to.
eternally
Priest wrote:
> Definitive Priest: SPIDER-MAN vs. WOLVERINE #1 (if you can find a
> copy; it's rare and pricey. It kind of deconstructs the Spider-Man
> mythos), THE RAY ANNUAL #1 (cheaper but equally difficult to find),
> QUANTUM & WOODY Trade paperbacks "The Director's Cut" and "KYAG,"
> SOLAR: HELL ON EARTH (1998 miniseries), THE BLACK PANTHER #1-5, #8,
> GREEN LANTERN: EMERALD DAWN v1 #1, JUSTICE LEAGUE TASK FORCE #20-22
> (the "Chokula" storyline) and #34-37 (end of series), THE RAY #13,
> BLACK CANARY #8.
man, i loved The Ray. i could've kept reading that series forever.
any chance of him turning up in other books or perhaps
another mini...? or do you feel his potential's been tapped
and you're no longer interested...?
-= e.
Hernan Espinoza
>I don't think that is really true. I met him recently at a convention
>in France, and had a few meals with him. He is not insecure, maybe he
>feels a bit misunderstood... He did find it interesting that he has a
>better reputation in France than in the UK or the US.
Historically, it's not surprising, though. The French like
Jerry Lewis (made you look)
>Very nice guy, with no doubt about what it means to be a writer (ie,
>selling his work and making money).
Shhhh. You're not playing right. We ALL know how good
Priest is, but we're trying to have a dysfunctional, yet emotionally
satisfying relationship here. Priest says his work is bad, we
say, "Oh no, Priest! Your work is great and we love you very much" then
WE say fans suck and then Priest says.... Hey, waitaminute!
-Drama Boy, fandom is such sweet sorrow
Richard Horton
wrote:
>mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>
>> Jim, you haven't read any of Christopher Priest's work. I have.
>> He's an okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of
>> writers just like him and quite few better.
>
>I've also read his work, and while he's had a few duds (DARKENING
>ISLAND and INDOCTRINAIRE, to name two),
>
And it's worth noting that these are his first two novels.
_Indoctrinaire_ is indeed a dud, though IMO showing that the writer
had talent, just hadn't harnessed it yet. _[Fugue for a] Darkening
Island_ is not bad, but certainly not his best, IMO.
Among the short stories, I'd strongly recommend "An Infinite Summer",
which in some ways was the source of his feud with Ellison.
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard...@sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)
jayembee
> Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>> mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>>> picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>> Nonsense.
> Hardly.
Actually, I think "horseshit" is closer.
> Hyperbole, I'll grant you, but his feud with Ellison is the
> most memorable thing about him.
For you, perhaps. But to be perfectly honest, until you mentioned
it, I'd forgotten that he ever *had* a feud with Ellison. And I'm
sure that there are plenty of folks out there who have read and
enjoyed Christopher Priest-UK's work who never knew about the
feud in the first place. Not everyone is deeply involved in the
behind-the-scenes workings of the world of science fiction, and
I'm sure there are a lot of others who know and don't care.
Quite frankly, this whole thread merely underscores Christopher
Priest-US's contention back at the beginning that trying to
argue "who's better who's best" has as much value as picking
horse races.
Michael Alan Chary
jayembee <Jerry.B...@eds.com> wrote:
>mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>
>> Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>>> mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>
>>>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he
>>>> picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>
>>> Nonsense.
>
>> Hardly.
>
>Actually, I think "horseshit" is closer.
Your thoughts are interesting but I bet if you asked a hundred
semi-serious science fiction fans what they thought of when they heard the
name "Christopher Priest" you'd find a fair percentage naming the feud.
>> Hyperbole, I'll grant you, but his feud with Ellison is the
>> most memorable thing about him.
>
>For you, perhaps. But to be perfectly honest, until you mentioned
>it, I'd forgotten that he ever *had* a feud with Ellison. And I'm
Given your memory I'm shocked.
>sure that there are plenty of folks out there who have read and
>enjoyed Christopher Priest-UK's work who never knew about the
>feud in the first place. Not everyone is deeply involved in the
>behind-the-scenes workings of the world of science fiction, and
>I'm sure there are a lot of others who know and don't care.
And I'm sure there are people who think Christopher Priest is thename of a
rock band. :)
>Quite frankly, this whole thread merely underscores Christopher
>Priest-US's contention back at the beginning that trying to
>argue "who's better who's best" has as much value as picking
>horse races.
Quite frankly that's your opinion and it hinges on an assumption of value.
To my mind it's fun, and that makes it valuable. If you don't find such
comparisons value, feel free not to participate. As to the value of
picking horse races, I've made quite a bit of money doing that.
Michael Alan Chary
>> He's an okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of
>> writers just like him and quite few better.
>
>I've also read his work, and while he's had a few duds (DARKENING
>work. "Palely Loitering" is, I think, a superb novelette, and
>his Wells pastiche, THE SPACE MACHINE, is delightful. Yes, there
>are others who are better, but so what?
It's the basis for comparing across discimplines.
>> You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics.
>> There are *maybe* four or five writer as good as you.
>
>Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Will Eisner, Alan Brennert, Jack Cole,
>Bill Messner-Loebs (when he wants to be), Warren Ellis, Bruce
>Jones (when he wants to be), Gilbert Shelton, Frank Miller
>(when he wants to be), Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez,
>Carl Barks, Archie Goodwin, Michael Gilbert, Art Spiegelman,
>Doug Moench (when he wants to be), Carlos Sampayo... I could
>go on.
And hopefully you'd hit some writers who have at least arguments, and then
you'd get around to offering some support.
You have named precisely *one* person, Alan Moore, who is obviously
a better *writer* than priest,.
The rest are purely party line decisions.
Why do you think speigelman is better than Priest? Subject matter? Why?
Messner-Loebs isn't even in the same zipcode as priest. Epicurus the Sage
is funny, but it's not as funny as Priest's best stuff. Flash was exciting
and thought provoking superheroics. Owz's Web of Spiderman run is better.
Gaiman's Sandman isn't as good as Quantum and Woody, and that's by far his
best work. Quantum and Woody might be Priest's best, but it could also be
Xero or Conan the King.
>Christopher Priest, the comics writer, is not in that company.
>(Sorry, CP)
You're wrong. Not only that, you've offered no support because you think
your statment is obvious.
Just for starters: how many of those writers give individual voices to
their different characters in the same series? How many take on a variety
of storylines? How many take on different types of stories? How many have
decent story structure? How many can go with the flow of as character when
using guest stars without turning them into pod people?
>> Whether you choose to believe that or not is fine, but when
>> people talk about you, they tend to talk about your work.
>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because he picked
>> a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>
>When *I* talk about "the other guy", I talk about his work.
>If anyone only talks about the fight he picked with Ellison,
>I wouldn't consider them much worth talking to.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
Charles Anders
counterproductive very quickly. De gustibus etc. However, I've already
said Priest's the only writer whose work I buy on sight (with the
exception of things like his one-shot in Vampirella, which didn't look
worthwhile.) Few other writers seem to be pushing the boundaries of
mainstream comics in a way that interests me.
As for how I first heard of the non-comics Christopher Priest (or indeed,
first heard the name "Christopher Priest" at all) it was in the context of
Doctor Who. Ask a die-hard Doctor Who fan who "Christopher Priest" is,
and they'll reply: "The guy who wrote a script for Tom Baker's last season
that was never used." FYI.
Charles
--
"Without God, there is no chocolate microchip for your brain." -- O(+>
Charles Anders, news editor and monkey wrangler, _Anything That Moves_
Oh, and check out http://www.godhatesfigs.com
It's not just about fruit -- well, actually, it's mostly about fruit.
this damon life
Michael Alan Chary wrote:
> >Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Will Eisner, Alan Brennert, Jack Cole,
> >Bill Messner-Loebs (when he wants to be), Warren Ellis, Bruce
> >Jones (when he wants to be), Gilbert Shelton, Frank Miller
> >(when he wants to be), Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez,
> >Carl Barks, Archie Goodwin, Michael Gilbert, Art Spiegelman,
> >Doug Moench (when he wants to be), Carlos Sampayo... I could
> >go on.
>
> And hopefully you'd hit some writers who have at least arguments, and then
> you'd get around to offering some support.
>
> You have named precisely *one* person, Alan Moore, who is obviously
> a better *writer* than priest,.
>
> The rest are purely party line decisions.
>
aren't they all.
> Why do you think speigelman is better than Priest? Subject matter? Why?
>
> Messner-Loebs isn't even in the same zipcode as priest. Epicurus the Sage
> is funny, but it's not as funny as Priest's best stuff. Flash was exciting
> and thought provoking superheroics. Owz's Web of Spiderman run is better.
>
what was his web run?
i have the first 50 issues or so, and those aren't outstanding.
> Gaiman's Sandman isn't as good as Quantum and Woody, and that's by far his
> best work.
incorrect.
sandman is mediocre gaiman comic work.
signal to noise and violent cases are much better.
his hellblazer story is as good as any of his sandman single issues.
Quantum and Woody might be Priest's best, but it could also be
> Xero or Conan the King.
what conan did he do?
i have maybe isues 100-150 from the early 80's.
they aren't very good.
> Just for starters: how many of those writers give individual voices to
> their different characters in the same series? How many take on a variety
> of storylines? How many take on different types of stories? How many have
> decent story structure? How many can go with the flow of as character when
> using guest stars without turning them into pod people?
gaiman does all of this in sandman, and
does it all better than any priest i've ever seen.
jayembee
> jayembee <Jerry.B...@eds.com> wrote:
>> But to be perfectly honest, until you mentioned it, I'd
>> forgotten that he ever *had* a feud with Ellison.
> Given your memory I'm shocked.
Not sure why. The reason I'd forgotten was because I didn't
think it worth remembering (it's not as if getting in a feud
with Harlan Ellison makes one a member of an elite few). And
that's kind of the point. You thought it was what made him
memorable. I didn't. The problem I have is that you're making
the assumption that what you thought made him memorable is
what most other people think makes him memorable.
It's like assessing Marlon Brando's worth as an actor by saying
that the most memorable thing about him was his Oscar ceremony
stunt. It's a cheap shot.
>> Quite frankly, this whole thread merely underscores Christopher
>> Priest-US's contention back at the beginning that trying to
>> argue "who's better who's best" has as much value as picking
>> horse races.
> Quite frankly that's your opinion and it hinges on an assumption
> of value. To my mind it's fun, and that makes it valuable.
I'm not sure what is "fun" about praising one person's work at
the expense of another.
> If you don't find such comparisons value, feel free not to
> participate.
I'd like that, but I'm a weak, weak man. In general, I loathe
"The n Best whatever" discussions (whether the subject is films,
comics, books, TV shows, artists, songs, or whathaveyou), but
at the same time, they're hard to resist.
Also, as someone who admires The British Writer's work, I felt
some defense of him was called for.
jayembee
> jayembee <Jerry.B...@eds.com> wrote:
>> mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>>> You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics.
>>> There are *maybe* four or five writer as good as you.
>> Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Will Eisner, Alan Brennert, Jack Cole,
>> Bill Messner-Loebs (when he wants to be), Warren Ellis, Bruce
>> Jones (when he wants to be), Gilbert Shelton, Frank Miller
>> (when he wants to be), Jaime Hernandez, Gilbert Hernandez,
>> Carl Barks, Archie Goodwin, Michael Gilbert, Art Spiegelman,
>> Doug Moench (when he wants to be), Carlos Sampayo... I could
>> go on.
> And hopefully you'd hit some writers who have at least arguments,
> and then you'd get around to offering some support.
Well, gee, Mike, I didn't see you offering any "support" to your
original statement. As you accuse me later of doing, you simply
made the statement as if was "obvious".
> You have named precisely *one* person, Alan Moore, who is
> obviously a better *writer* than priest,.
And why is he "obviously" the only one. Again, you just state this
without giving support.
> The rest are purely party line decisions.
> Why do you think speigelman is better than Priest? Subject
> matter? Why?
Yes, partly. MAUS says something basic about human nature that I
haven't gotten from any of Priest's work. It made me *feel* --
angry, sad, happy, and more -- in ways that I've never felt from
Priest's work.
> Messner-Loebs isn't even in the same zipcode as priest.
> Epicurus the Sage is funny, but it's not as funny as Priest's
> best stuff.
I found ETS to have biting wit. Quite frankly, I can't recall a
single Priest story that I thought of as "funny", let alone drop
dead hilarious.
> Flash was exciting and thought provoking superheroics.
Actually, the other specific work I was thinking of was JOURNEY.
> Owz's Web of Spiderman run is better.
I don't remember it. And that's part of the point. To you, that
work was memorable; to me, it wasn't. I can remember David's
Spider-Man work from the same general period, and I can remember
DeMatteis', but Owsley's doesn't stand out for me.
> Gaiman's Sandman isn't as good as Quantum and Woody, and that's
> by far his best work.
Can't compare the two works, as I haven't read Q&W. But what
other work I've read of Priest's doesn't come up to the best
of SANDMAN.
> You're wrong. Not only that, you've offered no support because
> you think your statment is obvious.
Which is no less than what you've done. Yes, you've *followed up*
with supporting statements, but your original statement was made
in a vaccuum.
> Just for starters: how many of those writers give individual
> voices to their different characters in the same series?
I would say more of them than not. Do you really think that Denny
Colt speaks with the same voice as P'Gell? Or that Dream speaks
with the same voice as Destruction? Or Thessaly? Or Lucifer?
> How many take on a variety of storylines? How many take on
> different types of stories?
Depends on your parameters. Since I'm basing some of my judgments
on limited-run series or arcs -- my assessment of Miller, for
instance, is based specifically on "Born Again", not "Daredevil"
-- variety of storylines is not necessarily an issue in the manner
I *think* your asking. But "Born Again" is certainly very different
from ELEKTRA: ASSASSIN. EPICURUS THE SAGE is very different from
JOURNEY. HOLY TERROR is very different from "The Autobiography of
Bruce Wayne". SOMERSET HOLMES is very different than KAZAR THE
SAVAGE. "Maggie & Hopey" is different from "Penny Century".
> How many have decent story structure?
I'd say all of them.
> How many can go with the flow of as character when using guest
> stars without turning them into pod people?
In most of the cases I've present, this is "Not Applicable", as
the concept of "guest stars" is meaningless in a series that's
not ongoing. And even then, exactly how many "guest stars" did
Gaiman have in THE SANDMAN? Do you think Captain America was a
pod person in his guest appearance in "Born Again"?
>> When *I* talk about "the other guy", I talk about his work.
>> If anyone only talks about the fight he picked with Ellison,
>> I wouldn't consider them much worth talking to.
> I'm sorry you feel that way.
Why? This "discussion" started with your statement that CP-US was
a better *writer* than CP-UK. Then you proceeded to support the
statement by citing the former's work and the latter's Ellison
feud. If you're not going to use the latter's work in making the
comparison, then what's the worth of the discussion? CP-UK's
feud with Ellison is irrelevant to his worth as a writer.
Michael Alan Chary
Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jan 2000 23:42:14 GMT, Jerry.B...@eds.com (jayembee)
>>> He's an okay-to-good British sf writer, but there are a lot of
>>> writers just like him and quite few better.
I'd just like to point out that I didn't call Christopher Priest a bad
writer. I just said that there are a number of writers directly comparable
to him but distinctly better.
>>
>>I've also read his work, and while he's had a few duds (DARKENING
>>ISLAND and INDOCTRINAIRE, to name two),
>>
>
>And it's worth noting that these are his first two novels.
>_Indoctrinaire_ is indeed a dud, though IMO showing that the writer
>had talent, just hadn't harnessed it yet. _[Fugue for a] Darkening
>Island_ is not bad, but certainly not his best, IMO.
>
>Among the short stories, I'd strongly recommend "An Infinite Summer",
>which in some ways was the source of his feud with Ellison.
And is an excellent story.
Peter Meilinger
: Michael Alan Chary wrote:
: Quantum and Woody might be Priest's best, but it could also be
:> Xero or Conan the King.
: what conan did he do?
He did I think the last few years of Conan The King. If he did the
storyline where Conan ended up conquering most of Hyboria, that was a
helluva good read.
He also did a fair run on the regular Conan comic, didn't he? I'm
pretty sure he did one of my favorite ever single issue Conan stories,
either #192 or #292, and most of them around there. He was the guy
who either created or at least built up that soul-eating baddie in
the helmet, wasn't he? I was never crazy about that guy as a Conan
villain, but after reading more of Priest's work and figuring out his
take on villains it makes a lot more sense.
: i have maybe isues 100-150 from the early 80's.
: they aren't very good.
I'll put issue #100 (Death On The Black Coast) up against damn near any
comic you care to name. Wonderful adaptation of the Howard story. In
a lot of ways I'd say it was better, but only because I'd already read
the story and it was even cooler to see it rendered so faithfully
in the comics. And the scene where Belit comes back to save Conan is
one of my top ten comic book moments.
Pete
Kevin J. Maroney
>Your thoughts are interesting but I bet if you asked a hundred
>semi-serious science fiction fans what they thought of when they heard the
>name "Christopher Priest" you'd find a fair percentage naming the feud.
And if you asked 100 random British readers, probably 1 of them would
have heard of the feud but 99 would have heard of _The Prestige_,
which garnered a lot of critical attention. There's more to the world
than sf fandom.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
"Love doesn't have a point. Love *is* the point."--Alan Moore
Kevin J. Maroney
>He did I think the last few years of Conan The King. If he did the
>storyline where Conan ended up conquering most of Hyboria, that was a
>helluva good read.
No, Priest (then Jim Owsley) *edited* _Conan the King_ over Alan
Zelnetz's writing. Good stuff.
He also wrote about 3 years' worth of _Conan the Barbarian_. Also good
stuff--better than pretty much anything else Conan except for the
original Howard stories.
Michael Alan Chary
>
>>> But to be perfectly honest, until you mentioned it, I'd
>>> forgotten that he ever *had* a feud with Ellison.
>
>> Given your memory I'm shocked.
>
>Not sure why. The reason I'd forgotten was because I didn't
>think it worth remembering (it's not as if getting in a feud
>with Harlan Ellison makes one a member of an elite few). And
>that's kind of the point. You thought it was what made him
>memorable. I didn't. The problem I have is that you're making
>the assumption that what you thought made him memorable is
>what most other people think makes him memorable.
Again, I think ifyouasked a room full of sf fans to name to the first
thing they thought of when you said "Christopher Priest" you'd find of
them mentioned the feud.
>It's like assessing Marlon Brando's worth as an actor by saying
>that the most memorable thing about him was his Oscar ceremony
>stunt. It's a cheap shot.
Most people think of Brando as a sort of random lunatic, in my experience.
(See, this I know because I actually went out and asked people what they
thought of when I mentioned certain people, and Brando was on that list. I
think of "The Godfather" myself.)
>>> Quite frankly, this whole thread merely underscores Christopher
>>> Priest-US's contention back at the beginning that trying to
>>> argue "who's better who's best" has as much value as picking
>>> horse races.
>
>> Quite frankly that's your opinion and it hinges on an assumption
>> of value. To my mind it's fun, and that makes it valuable.
>
>I'm not sure what is "fun" about praising one person's work at
>the expense of another.
So I take it you picketed the ESPN offices during their countdown? :)
I think it's fun and I ain't alone.
>> If you don't find such comparisons value, feel free not to
>> participate.
>
>I'd like that, but I'm a weak, weak man. In general, I loathe
>"The n Best whatever" discussions (whether the subject is films,
>comics, books, TV shows, artists, songs, or whathaveyou), but
>at the same time, they're hard to resist.
And they are also part of what *I* do.
>Also, as someone who admires The British Writer's work, I felt
>some defense of him was called for.
Go ahead. Do you think he's a better writer than Moorcock?
I think the Brit Priest's a fine author, myself.
Peter Meilinger
: Peter Meilinger <mell...@bu.edu> wrote:
:>He did I think the last few years of Conan The King. If he did the
:>storyline where Conan ended up conquering most of Hyboria, that was a
:>helluva good read.
: No, Priest (then Jim Owsley) *edited* _Conan the King_ over Alan
: Zelnetz's writing. Good stuff.
Oho! So who the heck is Alan Zelnetz and what else has he done? I'd
like to read more of his stuff.
: He also wrote about 3 years' worth of _Conan the Barbarian_. Also good
: stuff--better than pretty much anything else Conan except for the
: original Howard stories.
I don't know. I was always pretty happy with the Conan comics, no matter
who was writing them. Some of them weren't all that great, but all of
them were worth reading. And some of the Savage Sword of Conan stories
were just as good as some of the Howard stories. Not many, of course,
but even half as good as Howard is worth reading.
Pete
Martin Wisse
Chary) wrote:
>In article <3879704c...@news.demon.nl>,
>Martin Wisse <mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl> wrote:
>>On 4 Jan 2000 17:21:45 GMT, mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan
>>Chary) wrote:
>>
(I'll snip a bit, shall I?)
>>>You are one of the truly great writers in the history of comics. There are
>>>*maybe* four or five writer as good as you. Whether you choose to believe
>>>that or not is fine, but when people talk about you, they tend to talk
>>>about your work.
>>
>>Hmm, I think you're comparing apples with oranges here, writing comics
>>is different from writing novels, be it only because as a comics wroter
>>all your work is a collaboration.
>
>I'm assuming an equal level of ability required to master both
>specialties. Thereby requiring only judging them in comparison to their
>peers and then seeing where they rank. Kind of like comparing Mike Schmidt
>to Larry Bird.
Okay, I see your point but I still feel this is not very helpful.
Ranking writers isn't all that easy or clear after all, too bound by
personal tastes to be useful. It could give you a rough idea of a
person's standing yes, but then I still am doubtful if the resulting
lists can be compared to one another.
I'm still going with what I wrote below.
>>As long as Earth 1 Priest hasn't written a novel or the Earth 2 Priest
>>a comic book series, I can find little basis for comparison.
>>
>>Methinks you're also evaluating "our" Priest a bit too high, only four
>>or five writers as good as him? Really? Not that Priest isn't a good
>>writer, he's easily the best "mainstream" writer now working, one of the
>>few writers still getting fresh milage from the superhero genre, where
>>most good writers are basically reinventing the Silver Age or just
>>writing a better grade Marvel story. (Busiek and Moore not excluded)
>
>First? "Our?" He's *MINE* dammit!!!! Seriously, while I appreciate the
>urge to be proprietary toward the hobby of comics, I have to think our
>insular attitude is killing it now.
I actually meant "ours" in the newsgroup context.
>Second, who you got that's better? Not just now, ever. First, let's
>compare Priest to some of the truly *great sf prose writers who have
>worked in comics just for a start. He's better than Alfred Bester, Otto
>Binder and Edmond Hamilton. He's better than LWE. He's better than Peter
>David. He's better than Neil Gaiman.
Reasons, please?
Personally, I would say of this list I only agree with Peter David, who
I'd qualify as good. Haven't read enough LWE (sorry), Binder or Hamilton
to compare. If Bester wrote comics as good as he wrote sf, he would've
been one of the big names, Moore level or better. As for Gaiman, he at
least has a broader range and better story telling abilities then Priest
has.
>But those guys aren't the real competition. The guys I think are better at
>their best are Alan Moore, Carl Barks, Charles Schulz and *maybe* Gardner
>Fox. I lke John Broome better. Priest is better than Frank Miller. He's
>better than Waid. I might be convinced that Paul Levitz, Grant Morrison,
>Herge and Jack Kirby are in the league.
>
>Who you got?
Lewis Trondheim, Seth on his best, Spiegelman, Hugo Pratt, Franquin,
Dave Mckean as a borderline case. Plus most of your guys. Mostly people
who have mastered both writing and drawing comics.
I'd put Broome, Levitz, Gardner Fox in the good to excellent class, but
not in the absolute top. The same goes for Grant Morrison, though he's
more of a borderline case
Priest is better then Miller now, but not as good yet as the
Daredevil-Ronin-Dark Knight-Year One Miller.
Waid isn't even in the running, a flash in the pan as far as I'm
concerned.
I think Priest is handicapped because he's mostly writing superhero
comics, very weird superhero comics, but still bound by the limits of
the genre. Also the fact that he's playing with other people's toys
which tends to inhibit the best writers, whether due to external or
internal pressure. I want the Priestian version of Watchmen or From
Hell, he hasn't had a big defining work yet, only glimpses of them.
Quantum and Woody was on its way, when it was cancelled. So far, the
restart hasn't reached the quality of the older issues yet.
His best points are style; he has a distinctive, often non-lineair way
of telling a story and letting it *still* make sense, plus a very good
ear for dialogue. Both are very much improved from when he was "Jim
Owsley".
Bad points: plotting, thoug it's improving and a tendency to overdo the
neat writing tricks.
>>
>>> When people talk about the other guy, it's because
>>> he picked a fight with Harlan Ellison.
>>
>>Actually, he's undergoing a sort of renaissance in the UK, with both new
>>work coming out and new editions of his older stuff. He's also a nice
>>chap, I met him at my first sf con a while ago.
>
>Oh, he's a good writer, but he's not even the best Brit new wave writer
>(Moorcock) and I would also rank him below some of the others. Good, but
>it's like comparing Willie McCovey to Larry Bird.
If you say so. Being Dutch I really don't know what you're talking about
when you compare these two...
(They're tennis players, right?)
Martin Wisse
--
Sodom today -- Gomorrah the world
Ken Macleod _The Star Fraction_
Martin Wisse
Chary) wrote:
>I have the same reservations about Clowes that I do about Baker. I haven't
>seen a range of material from him. Ware is not a writer to be compared
>with people in the very best. He's one of the top cartoonists, but his
>entire body of work as a writer does not justify putting him into the
>discussion just yet.
I feel it does. Ware has managed to hit me more emotionally with just
one page then most writers achieve in entire series. He's a frikking
genius.
Martin Wisse
--
http://www.ad-astra.demon.nl/ Me
http://www.ad-astra.demon.nl/comix/ Comix
http://www.ad-astra.demon.nl/astro/astro.html Astro City
Tom Galloway
McCovey was a no question Hall of Fame level baseball player, but no one is
going to rank him in the top five players ever, probably not the top ten,
even excluding pitchers. Larry Bird is just about always ranked in the top
five basketball players, with reasonable debates about him being #1 possible
(other acknowledged top five candidates are Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson,
Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and perhaps Julius
"Dr. J" Erving. Yes, that's seven total for five slots. The distinction
can get very fine among these players).
tyg t...@netcom.com
Richard Horton
On 7 Jan 2000 23:05:09 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>McCovey was a no question Hall of Fame level baseball player, but no one is
>going to rank him in the top five players ever, probably not the top ten,
>even excluding pitchers. Larry Bird is just about always ranked in the top
>five basketball players, with reasonable debates about him being #1 possible
>(other acknowledged top five candidates are Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson,
>Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and perhaps Julius
>"Dr. J" Erving. Yes, that's seven total for five slots. The distinction
>can get very fine among these players).
Oscar Robertson
Elgin Baylor
Jerry West
perhaps Bob Cousy
But the point stands. (Not that I necessarily agree with the original
comparison, but as I've said, I'm not sufficiently familiar with
comics to judge.)
Danny Sichel
>:>He did I think the last few years of Conan The King. If he did the
>:>storyline where Conan ended up conquering most of Hyboria, that was a
>:>helluva good read.
>: No, Priest (then Jim Owsley) *edited* _Conan the King_ over Alan
>: Zelnetz's writing. Good stuff.
> Oho! So who the heck is Alan Zelnetz and what else has he done? I'd
> like to read more of his stuff.
Alan ZelEnetz - three syllables - wrote _Thor_ just before Walt Simonson
took over, among other things.
And I think he wrote some stuff for Eclipse.
jayembee
> Again, I think if you asked a room full of sf fans to name to
> the first thing they thought of when you said "Christopher
> Priest" you'd find of them mentioned the feud.
And I think you're qualifying the definition of "sf fan" to be
those who are heavily involved in and in touch with sf fandom.
That's actually a relatively small percentage, and one that
biases the outcome in your favor.
> So I take it you picketed the ESPN offices during their countdown? :)
Ah...no. I have no idea what "countdown" you refer to. I don't
follow sports at all.
>> Also, as someone who admires The British Writer's work, I felt
>> some defense of him was called for.
> Go ahead. Do you think he's a better writer than Moorcock?
Depends on your criteria. If I was comparing Priest's best work
against Moorcock's best work, than no. Moorcock's a better writer.
But I also think Moorcock's a lot more varied (in terms of
quality) in his output. Outside of the couple of stinkers I
mentioned (which were pointed out, correctly, as his first two
novels), Priest has been fairly consistently well above average.
Moorcock is all over the map. If I had to choose between taking
a Priest novel I hadn't read before or a Moorcock one with me
to a desert island, I'd probably take the Priest, based on the
probability of my liking it being greater.
Wm F Seabrook
"Kevin J. Maroney" wrote:
> mch...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Michael Alan Chary) wrote:
>
> >Your thoughts are interesting but I bet if you asked a hundred
> >semi-serious science fiction fans what they thought of when they heard the
> >name "Christopher Priest" you'd find a fair percentage naming the feud.
>
> And if you asked 100 random British readers, probably 1 of them would
> have heard of the feud but 99 would have heard of _The Prestige_,
> which garnered a lot of critical attention. There's more to the world
> than sf fandom.
>
As a British reader who has enjoyed Priest's books for many years, I'd
love to think 99 out of 100 random British readers would have heard of
_The Prestige_ . Unfortunately I doubt 50 would have heard of Priest
judging from the best sellers in UK bookshops; but maybe I'm wrong.
Bill Seabrook
Michael Alan Chary
Tom Galloway <t...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <38776f38...@news.demon.nl>,
>going to rank him in the top five players ever, probably not the top ten,
He's also the punchline to my favorite Peanuts strip. "Willie
why couldn't you hit the ball three feet higher!"
For our foreign readers, the 1962 World Series ended in a Yankee victory
over McCovey's Giants when Willie hit a line drive right to Bobby
Richardson. Had the ball been off by just a little, the Giants would have
won.
Pete McCutchen
Chary) wrote:
>Second, who you got that's better? Not just now, ever. First, let's
>compare Priest to some of the truly *great sf prose writers who have
>worked in comics just for a start. He's better than Alfred Bester, Otto
>Binder and Edmond Hamilton. He's better than LWE. He's better than Peter
>David. He's better than Neil Gaiman.
Is Priest better at writing comics than Alfred Bester et al., or a
better writer, period? It's quite possible that Bester's was better
at writing sf prose than he was at writing comics. Therefore, the
mere fact, which I assume to be true, that Priest is a better comic
writer than Bester was doesn't mean that he's a better comic writer
than Bester was an sf writer.
Did that make any sense at all?
Look at it this way. Michael Jordan played both basketball and
baseball. Pete Rose was undoubtedly a better baseball player than
Michael Jordan. That doesn't mean that he was a better athlete, just
that he was better at doing something that Michael Jordan did, but not
quite so well. Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
than Jordan was at baseball.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>(I know someone who knows Harlan Ellison primarily as "the guy
>Christopher Priest wrote about." The difference between you and him
>is that he doesn't go around telling people that that's Ellison's only
>claim to fame.)
Harlan Ellison may be a jerk, and some people don't like his work, but
he is, perhaps, the most decorated author in the history of science
fiction, with the possible exception of Poul Anderson. He's won what,
seven Hugo Awards? Not to mention a fistfull of Nebulas, and some
awards for his TV work, which include the teleplays for what are
widely acknowledge as classic episodes of both _Star Trek_ and _The
Outer Limits_. He's not producing as much now, but he's clearly a
hall-of-fame level science fiction writer.
Christopher Priest, on the other hand, is a solid New Wave writer of
good repute. He might have made the All-Star Team a couple of years,
but he's hardly a hall-of-famer.
It's like comparing Terry Bradshaw with Jim Hart.
--
Pete McCutchen
Glenn Dowdy
>Look at it this way. Michael Jordan played both basketball and
>baseball. Pete Rose was undoubtedly a better baseball player than
>Michael Jordan. That doesn't mean that he was a better athlete, just
>that he was better at doing something that Michael Jordan did, but not
>quite so well. Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
>than Jordan was at baseball.
>
Wanna bet?
--
Glenn Dowdy
sorry
Pete McCutchen
How would we possibly settle it?
--
Pete McCutchen
Charlie Stross
<p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Christopher Priest, on the other hand, is a solid New Wave writer of
>good repute. He might have made the All-Star Team a couple of years,
>but he's hardly a hall-of-famer.
Point of order: in the UK, at least, his main reputation is in literary
fiction -- you didn't get to be even a runner-up in the Booker Prize in
the eighties unless the establishment had taken you to their bosom. Chris
is like Ballard in that he's Respectable, with a capital-R. (Not something
anyone would ever accuse Ellison of being. :)
-- Charlie
Steve Patterson
p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net says...
>
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:27:15 -0700, "Glenn Dowdy"
><glenn...@agilent.com> wrote:
>
>>Pete McCutchen wrote in message ...
>>
>>>than Jordan was at baseball.
>>
>>Wanna bet?
>
>How would we possibly settle it?
Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete Rose
notorious?")
--
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Note: My "from:" address has been altered to foil mailbots.
Remove the "no_spam_" to get in touch with me by email.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Steven J. Patterson no_spam_s...@wwdc.com
"Men may move mountains, but ideas move men."
-- M.N. Vorkosigan, per L.M. Bujold
See my refurbished webpage! http://www.wwdc.com/~spatterson
Richard Pace
Pete McCutchen wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:27:15 -0700, "Glenn Dowdy"
> <glenn...@agilent.com> wrote:
>
> >Pete McCutchen wrote in message ...
> >
> >>Look at it this way. Michael Jordan played both basketball and
> >>baseball. Pete Rose was undoubtedly a better baseball player than
> >>Michael Jordan. That doesn't mean that he was a better athlete, just
> >>that he was better at doing something that Michael Jordan did, but not
> >>quite so well. Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
> >>than Jordan was at baseball.
> >>
> >
> >Wanna bet?
>
> How would we possibly settle it?
I dunno, but I bet it would disqualify you both from the hall of fame.
Richard
>
>
> --
>
> Pete McCutchen
--
The framework of my site is now up and most of the sections have artwork for
your viewing pleasure - http://webhome.idirect.com/~rpace/
Richard Pace
Steve Patterson wrote:
>
> >>>[Pete] Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
> >>>than Jordan was at baseball.
> >>
> >>Wanna bet?
> >
> >How would we possibly settle it?
>
> Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete Rose
> notorious?")
Uh, real bad interpersonal skills?
Richard
Steve Patterson
>
>Steve Patterson wrote:
>
>> Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete
Rose
>> notorious?")
>
>Uh, real bad interpersonal skills?
Well, that too.
William Davis
>Point of order: in the UK, at least, his main reputation is in literary
>fiction -- you didn't get to be even a runner-up in the Booker Prize in
>the eighties unless the establishment had taken you to their bosom. Chris
>is like Ballard in that he's Respectable, with a capital-R. (Not something
>anyone would ever accuse Ellison of being. :)
I read an article on an NPR interview and call-in show that mentioned
an appearance from Ellison. The host, in his introduction, referred to
Ellison as a science fiction writer and Ellison promptly threw a fit
and left the studio.
The host spent the rest of the show talking to his callers about why
some genre writers feel insecure about being identified with their
genres and the differences between genre and mainstream fiction. The
article's writer felt it was one of the host's best shows.
Pete McCutchen
Stross) wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:44:19 -0500, Pete McCutchen
><p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>Christopher Priest, on the other hand, is a solid New Wave writer of
>>good repute. He might have made the All-Star Team a couple of years,
>>but he's hardly a hall-of-famer.
>
>Point of order: in the UK, at least, his main reputation is in literary
>fiction -- you didn't get to be even a runner-up in the Booker Prize in
>the eighties unless the establishment had taken you to their bosom. Chris
>is like Ballard in that he's Respectable, with a capital-R. (Not something
>anyone would ever accuse Ellison of being. :)
>
For whatever reason, it's easier for Brits to become Respectable and
still write sf. Like Ballard.
I still don't think that Christopher Priest is in Ellison's league.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
Patterson) wrote:
>In article <pjfs7skjropa2vicq...@4ax.com>,
>p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net says...
>>
>>On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:27:15 -0700, "Glenn Dowdy"
>><glenn...@agilent.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Pete McCutchen wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>>[Pete] Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
>>>>than Jordan was at baseball.
>>>
>>>Wanna bet?
>>
>>How would we possibly settle it?
>
>Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete Rose
>notorious?")
<sound of head repeatedly smashing into monitor>
OK, I was being dense.
--
Pete McCutchen
Peter Meilinger
: In article <pjfs7skjropa2vicq...@4ax.com>,
: p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net says...
:>
:>On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:27:15 -0700, "Glenn Dowdy"
:><glenn...@agilent.com> wrote:
:>
:>>Pete McCutchen wrote in message ...
:>>
:>>>[Pete] Rose would undoubtedly have been worse at basketball
:>>>than Jordan was at baseball.
:>>
:>>Wanna bet?
:>
:>How would we possibly settle it?
: Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete Rose
: notorious?")
Just to add another off-topic subject to this thread, am I the only
one who simply couldn't care less if Pete Rose was gambling? Or
even if he was gambling on baseball? Hell, I wouldn't even care if
he was gambling on his own games, as long as he bet for his team.
It'd give him an extra incentive to win, right?
Pete
Dwight Williams
> cha...@pc.antipope.org (Charlie Stross) wrote:
>
> >Point of order: in the UK, at least, his main reputation is in literary
> >fiction -- you didn't get to be even a runner-up in the Booker Prize in
> >the eighties unless the establishment had taken you to their bosom. Chris
> >is like Ballard in that he's Respectable, with a capital-R. (Not something
> >anyone would ever accuse Ellison of being. :)
>
> an appearance from Ellison. The host, in his introduction, referred to
> Ellison as a science fiction writer and Ellison promptly threw a fit
> and left the studio.
>
> The host spent the rest of the show talking to his callers about why
> some genre writers feel insecure about being identified with their
> genres and the differences between genre and mainstream fiction. The
> article's writer felt it was one of the host's best shows.
You know...that sounds suspiciously as if the host knew *exactly what
the consequences of issuing that description of Ellison were going to
be*.
I'd be tempted to believe that Mr. Ellison was *set up* for that
purpose. I may be wrong here, mind you...
(I figure since Ellison has written stories for comics *and* for what
some sales types would classify as "prose SF" for their bean-counting
purposes, this cross-post fits. If I'm wrong, I apologize to any
offended.
And in the former case, I hope he'll return to comics from time to
time...)
--
Dwight Williams(ad...@freenet.carleton.ca) -- Orleans, Ontario, Canada
Maintainer/Founder - DEOList for _Chase_ Fandom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete McCutchen
>: Um, Pete, I think you missed the joke. (Ask yourself, "What made Pete Rose
>: notorious?")
>
>Just to add another off-topic subject to this thread, am I the only
>one who simply couldn't care less if Pete Rose was gambling? Or
>even if he was gambling on baseball? Hell, I wouldn't even care if
>he was gambling on his own games, as long as he bet for his team.
>It'd give him an extra incentive to win, right?
Gambling per se is not against the rules; Rose could have gone to
Vegas, or to the track, and played blackjack or craps or bet the
horses. He could even go to the sports book, as long as he stayed
away from baseball. But betting on baseball is against the rules,
period. I think the theory is that once you're hooked into the
gambling world, it's hard to determine whether the player or manager
is betting for his team or against it. Further, it's certainly easier
for a player or manager to make money by betting against his team,
because it's easy to guarantee that you lose than that you win. Once
a player starts gambling, he therefore has an incentive to bet against
the team.
Besides, for me it's very simple: Major League Baseball has a rule
against betting on baseball. The consequences are clearly spelled
out. Rose broke the rule. He takes the specified punishment. End of
story.
--
Pete McCutchen
Steve Patterson
ad...@freenet.carleton.ca says...
>
>William Davis wrote:
>>
>> I read an article on an NPR interview and call-in show that mentioned
>> an appearance from Ellison. The host, in his introduction, referred to
>> Ellison as a science fiction writer and Ellison promptly threw a fit
>> and left the studio.
>>
>> The host spent the rest of the show talking to his callers about why
>> some genre writers feel insecure about being identified with their
>> genres and the differences between genre and mainstream fiction. The
>> article's writer felt it was one of the host's best shows.
>
>You know...that sounds suspiciously as if the host knew *exactly what
>the consequences of issuing that description of Ellison were going to
>be*.
Especially since his inclinations on the matter are easily discovered with
the most trivial of research. Either this host didn't do his homework, or
he knew about that button and pushed it on purpose. (Or by accident.
Sometimes malappropisms slip out. I don't know in this case whether the
host tried to retract the comment or not.)
>I'd be tempted to believe that Mr. Ellison was *set up* for that
>purpose. I may be wrong here, mind you...
I have the same sneaking suspicion.
William Davis
>Just to add another off-topic subject to this thread, am I the only
>one who simply couldn't care less if Pete Rose was gambling? Or
>even if he was gambling on baseball? Hell, I wouldn't even care if
>he was gambling on his own games, as long as he bet for his team.
>It'd give him an extra incentive to win, right?
Unless he bet against his team, then he has a pretty good incentive to
screw up. Do this twice a season against teams good enough that you
might have lost anyway and you can insure yourself a fortune without
damaging your reputation as a player too much.
The reasons the rules are in place is because a team did just that
during a World Series in the 20's. Look up the Black Sox scandal, it's
actually pretty interesting.
Steve Patterson
>
>
>Just to add another off-topic subject to this thread, am I the only
>one who simply couldn't care less if Pete Rose was gambling? Or
>even if he was gambling on baseball? Hell, I wouldn't even care if
>he was gambling on his own games, as long as he bet for his team.
>It'd give him an extra incentive to win, right?
Well, baseball has been a little sensitive about this kind of thing ever
since the Black Socks scandal. And there's no way of ensuring that someone
on a sports team *won't* throw a game to win a bet.
William Davis
>William Davis wrote:
>> cha...@pc.antipope.org (Charlie Stross) wrote:
>>
>> >Point of order: in the UK, at least, his main reputation is in literary
>> >fiction -- you didn't get to be even a runner-up in the Booker Prize in
>> >the eighties unless the establishment had taken you to their bosom. Chris
>> >is like Ballard in that he's Respectable, with a capital-R. (Not something
>> >anyone would ever accuse Ellison of being. :)
>>
>> I read an article on an NPR interview and call-in show that mentioned
>> an appearance from Ellison. The host, in his introduction, referred to
>> Ellison as a science fiction writer and Ellison promptly threw a fit
>> and left the studio.
>>
>> The host spent the rest of the show talking to his callers about why
>> some genre writers feel insecure about being identified with their
>> genres and the differences between genre and mainstream fiction. The
>> article's writer felt it was one of the host's best shows.
>
>You know...that sounds suspiciously as if the host knew *exactly what
>the consequences of issuing that description of Ellison were going to
>be*.
>
>I'd be tempted to believe that Mr. Ellison was *set up* for that
>purpose. I may be wrong here, mind you...
I doubt it. From the article, the host seemed to be a class act and
the show had an intellectual bent. Hell, Ellison is an SF writer. If
the host had done his research by looking at Ellison's bibliography
and awards, which mostly come from SF organizations, and reading a few
of his stories, then why wouldn't he come to the conclusion that
Ellison is an SF writer?
Ellison's aversion to the term is really only well-known in fandom. I
read Ellison pretty widely as a teen, especially his short stories,
and I did not know about it until I got on Usenet.
And even if he knew, he was introducing Ellison to his audience. His
job at that point was to accurately describe what Ellison was, not
pander to whatever Ellison wanted to be called that day. The proper
response for Ellison would have been to begin the discussion with a
tirade about how he should be considered a "fantabulist" or whatever
term he has invented for himself.
I like Ellison's work. A couple of decades ago, he produced some great
short stories; some good, if overrated, TV scripts and some commentary
that read much better when I was 14. On the whole, though, he is
overshadowed by quite a few writers who are not ashamed to say that
read SF.