Slashdot Mirror
How Comic Fans & Shops Are Stereotyped
brumgrunt writes "Why do TV shows, such as 30 Rock, The Simpsons, Heroes, and Everybody Loves Raymond, persist in so ferevently stereotyping comic book fans and stores? Den of Geek has pulled together eight examples, with video evidence to back them up ..." Minus one point for doubling up on Malcolm in the Middle. Plus 10 points for referencing Spaced, which I hope you all have seen.
I walked into to different comic book stores, in two different states while being for the first time in the US, in February. There were exactly I imagined them! Huge piles of old comics, new comics, action figures, maniacal comic books guys (the one from Colorado told me he had 500.000 comic books at his home but he was nice, giving me a free '60 Action Comics incomplete issue as a bonus plus a 20% discount to a nice DC Comics Cover Girls huge album, since I've spent some bucks there). So, anything I I saw in cartoons and movies about comic book guys and stores is perfectly true. I'm not being sarcastic or mean here, I like comic book shops!
You insensitive clod!
Seriously though, attempting to legitimize them as "Graphic Novels" is just spin and makes you look more ridiculous.
Although I agree with you 'cause the "graphic novel" label gets thrown at every comic under the sun, technically a graphic novel is a subset of all comic books; a graphic novel has the whole plot structure (rising action, climax, falling action) wrapped up in one book (or over the course of the series), whereas many other types of comics stretch the plot out over the course of an arc, and a few collective arcs can be combined into an overarching arc, and a comic series often has many overarching arcs. Basically "graphic novels" have one big climax. A good rule of thumb is: do all the chapters/books in this series tie into one big event (usually at the end)? if yes: graphic novel
open source modern art: laser taggi
You've never been around small children for extended periods of time, have you?
Children by nature are extremely selfish. Parents have to work hard to get little kids to share. Seriously, try working at a daycare or something with kids from 2-4 years old. They tend to start getting better and more civil around 4 years old. Definitely a lot easier to reason with at that age, you simply can't reason with a 2-year old.
In my experience (I volunteered once a week at a daycare for about 6 years), those children who do share well at an early age have either been actively taught that by their parents from day 1, or they have a timid or mousey personality. In the case of timid children, they tend to have things demanded from them and taken rather than actively sharing with the other children.
Kids may play reasonably well together, but they certainly don't share well naturally. It's an unnatural thing that must be taught.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on comic books.
Damn! You city is way better than mine. In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on feminine hygene products.
I'd much rather shop at you comic book shop.
I'd rather shop at yours.
"Hey there, good lookin'! So... shopping for yeast infection medicine, huh? Vagisil -- great choice. Clearly you're a woman of class. The kind of lady I'd like to take out on Friday night, say, 8 o'clock, Denny's? I'd pick you up, but my mom needs the car."
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
The law is stupid - there was a supreme court case ruling "virtual" child pornography to not be illegal, and this law flies in the face of it.
When it was created, the legislators said it would only be used to prosecute those who ALSO have ACTUAL child pornography. They lied, I guess.
It's a witch hunt, plain and simple.