Why are most Webcomic creators fucking stupid? Someone on my feed retweeted this.
Absolutely nothing posted in that tweet is wrong
>>78339569
>furry icon
>"None of these mediums can be deep"
What? Did you read it? He's saying that no matter what, it can't be read into, or show that it has meaning.
The tweet is right.
>>78339569
>certain mediums are intrinsically unable to be profound
what an idiot
>>78339596
>Concerned with the things he likes being 'deep'
Quit being a child. You are on a board for grown men who like comic books.
I've accepted that the west will never take animation seriously but I thought normies loved tv shows and films.
>>78339530
Dobson.jpg
>>78339530
But that's right.
>>78339619
You seem to be unable to understand what "profound" means. Looney Toons cannot be profound. It can be biting satire or have unique ideas, but it is not Trotsky or HG Wells.
>>78339656
>Trotsky
Did. Did you mean Dostoevsky?
>>78339596
>Did you read it?
Did you? He said: "Even if it's deep and engaging" so obviously he believes that these mediums can be deep.
>>78339530
He has 6 retweets, nobody cares.
>>78339698
Tolstoy, actually.
But the point still stands.
>>78339656
>looney toons is completely representative of television as a medium
That comment is objectively correct. Stop pretending like shit like Star Wars and Steven Universe or whatever is some kind of deep, meaningful statement. It's just entertainment, chill out.
>>78339737
It is very representative of cartoons. And guess what board you're on.
>>78339530
>Using Twitter
>>78339530
>even if it's deep and engaging, it can't be profound
The fuck?
Webcomic creators have no editorial, no oversight, and not much in the way of "peers", since every comic is an island.
When you've got nobody who can threaten your job if you're bad, and quickly surround yourself with yes-man fans, it's easy to become a shithead.
>>78339737
You're right. Looney Toons is way too good to accurately represent how stupid and terrible the majority of television is.
>>78339774
That isn't a contradiction.
>>78339619
+1
>>78339656
I suggest you read some comics like The Last days of an Immortal or Chaque Chose. I'm sure there is a lot of us comics that qualify, though they aren't my speciality. I also got a ton of profound manga if you want, but this isn't the place, even if the medium is the same.
We had a Hunting Party storytime not a long time ago, it should still be in the archives. Check it out
Also
>Wells
>profound
Oh shit man, you're out of your depth.
>>78339656
But why these things could never be profound? Who is the ine who chooses what is or isn't profound?
>>78339530
Who?
>>78339656
Comics can be profound, one example being Flex Mentallo.
>>78339656
Define "profound".
>>78339530
literally who
>6 retweets
>>78339804
>profound manga
Stopped reading there.
>>78339774
logic is toxic to them.
Comics and Cartoons are undeniably more inimical to profundity than Cinema and Literature.
The industries and the audiences of the former act as obstacles to sincere and consummate artistic expression. It's possible to overcome those obstacles, but it doesn't happen often.
>>78339804
I think that tweet's point is that your average nerd thinks anything with a slight iota of depth is comparable to Shakespeare. Do YOU think the average nerd cares about obscure comics that try to profound?
>implying anything can be deep except opera, in the original language
>>78339950
Yeah... damn honourless p'tachs just HAVE to have operas in their own stupid, mewling "language"... makes me sick.
>>78339569
Exactly. I'm a book nerd. It's still just a fucking book.
>>78339530
It's not just webcomic creators. People in general feel the need to tell everyone their opinion like it's important or something.
That said, there's a lot of evidence to the contrary of what he says, but he probably doesn't actually read comics, so who cares?
>>78339743
Being entertainment and being deep aren't mutually exclusive. Books are entertainment, but that doesn't stop them from being profound.
A medium is not profound, content is, and the content of a medium can be almost anything.
>>78339897
That's still an unneeded generalisation for both the fans and the medium.
Every outlet of expression has crazy fans and works made artists with overinflated egos. That doesn't means you can put the entire medium into the trashcan. Especially with relatively young and evolving forms of art like comics or animation.
I.e, Hollywood blockbusters don't prevent every movie ever made from being deep and meaningful.
Honestly, the tweet would have been perfectly fine (and spot-on to boot) if he just used the word "serious" instead.
>>78339845
>Hello, I'm a 100% open-minded individual with no preconcevied ideas.
A distant Neighbourhood by Taniguchi, for example. Or if you want something with more action, Ikigami.
>>78339865
Which is National Public Radio speak for yes, comics and cartoons can be just as profound as other mediums but it's harder to pull off.
>>78339710
It's badly worded but anyone who isn't autistic will understand the meaning of it.
>>78339897
I am curious. Why people act like only obscure things can be profound?
What happens if your indie or profound thing siddebly gets mainstream? Most of time, here on 4chan at least, seems to be only elitism.
What about When the Wind Blows?
>>78339596
>>78339569
>>78339597
This desu senpai
People here doesn't seem able to define what being profound actually means.
>>78340114
>>78340186
I dunno, I just feel that the tweet is calling out certain nerds who DESPERATELY try to justify their love of comics/TV/cartoon by saying this or that is "deep", but lacks the literary knowledge to explain HOW these works are "deep".
The tweet could've been better written, though.
>>78340186
I would love it if some "obscure" comics became popular.
I recommend comics from publishers like Fantagraphics and Drawn & Quarterly and Koyama and Nobrow and NBM and Oily and Space Face and AdHouse and so on at every opportunity that I'm given.
I don't know whether or not the comics that I like are "profound", but I know that I'm never going to get to have a discussion about that if nobody else reads them, so I shill them (for free) at every opportunity.
Unfortunately, /co/ (and the rest of the mainstream market in America) only seems interested in Marvel and DC, with the occasional sampling from IDW/Image/Dark Horse.
>>78339530
What is the difference between deep and profound?
>>78340460
Profound doesn't become a meme when you write it in all caps.
That's about it.
>>78339774
Profound: (of a state, quality, or emotion) very great or intense.
Deep: very intense or extreme.
>>78340498
was for >>78339802
sorry about that
>look at other tweets
>waaah waaah GamerGaaaaate
Total fag
DUDE WHO CARES ABOUT FICTION IT'S NOT REAL LIFE LMAO
*works 9-5 shuffling papers*
*spends remaining free time watching the TV*
If you dumb fucking niggers think this tweet was aiming at 'profound' or actual serious works in any medium, congratulations you're autstimo maximus.
This tweet was clearly aiming at AT/Steven universe/ most gaymers who let autism get the better of themselves and can't admit to liking kid Shit.
>>78339530
Furfags
>>78340489
PROFOUND
R
O
F
O
U
N
D
>>78340498
Hum...I ser mostly people here using deep on the same way that they would use profound.
>>78340522
Yeah, he follows the worst people, Christ.
>>78340570
What I see too often is people using "deep" the same way that they use "deepest lore".
e.g.
>Morrison comics are so deep because they're full of callbacks and references to other comics.
>>78339530
>Even if this things is deep and meaningful, it's not actually deep and meaningful because the medium it was created in
That's some next level retardation right there
>>78339753
No it's not.
>>78340626
Never saw it, I see people calling his comics deep for the meta commentary and the fact that he puts his ocultista beliefs on it.
>>78339530
>ITT: Stupid Webcomic Creators
ITT: butthurt nerds complain
>>78340556
That's, like, your interpretation, dude.
I admit it's probably the case, but he should have stated so explicitly. instead it just pops up as a "comics and cartoon are childish and inferior to other mediums".
>>78340186
>Why people act like only obscure things can be profound?
Two main reasons.
1) Knowing about a good thing that the other people ignore makes you feel special and superior. Blame your striatum for it.
2)The more specialized (including depth) a work is, the more restricted his audience. If you make a movie with a bit of everything, everybody will be mostly satified, but if you do a comedy, only people that really like comedy will appreciate, while drama fans will be disappointed.
To summarize very VERY roughtly : The mediocre/good show (rated by everyone 6 out of 10 will be considered mostly good by everyone), while the very deep and meaningful show (rated 10/10 by 60% of the viewers, and 4/10 by the rest of the viewers), will be considered good by only 60% of the audience, so inferior to the first one that has a 100% approval rating.
Plus a ton of other minor issues.
It's not always the case, though. I've read a special issue of philosophy mag recently about the themes contained in star wars. It was mostly garbage, but that's not the point. The point is that they treated it like any other, film, novel, essay, painting, etc... No question about its value despite its origins as an adventure movie. It was refreshing.
>>78340556
His previous tweets was talking about One Piece and how fans act like it's so deep, which is fine, but when he goes on to say that, it's dumb.
>>78340096
>People in general feel the need to tell everyone their opinion like it's important or something.
Yes.
Like 4chan.
>>78339530
Literature is also entertainment. So basically nothing can be profound because you are all a bunch of shallow faggots.
>>78341075
>Like the Internet
Fixed.
>>78341052
Well that's great, one piss is vastly overrated
>>78341084
Yeah but channers by habit are almost always unufferable faggots on the internet.
Kinda like reddit.
>>78339619
But that's true you fucking manchild
>>78341109
>unufferable
I disagree. If anything I'm too ufferable.
But I do find it funny that you're using "channers" like you're not posting on 4chan right now.
ITT faggots shrieking because someone said that their children's picture books aren't profound
>>78341109
it's INSUFFERABLE you imbecile.
>unsufferable
lmao. how old are you? 16? be honest
ITT: nerds getting BTFO
>>78341168
You could at least put some effort into it.
>>78340229
A couple of old retards die in a nuclear war.
It's sad, it's tragic, it ain't deep.
All fiction is entertainment. It's good to get more articulate, but it doesn't really have any kind of philosophic or intellectual value because it's an account of things that never happened.
OP the quote you posted may be badly worded, but it's right in essence.
Nerds treat their entertainment like it's some universal philosophical revelation. Among the worst offenders are the fandoms of Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who, andMy Little Pony.
Doctor Who is particularly egregious because the show is fundamentally and thoroughly full of contradictions, so treating it like some sort of guide to life, the universe, and everything is completely flawed. The show is so obviously cheesy, melodramatic, inconsistent, and slipshod, that turning it into some sort of creed is as annoying, immature, and contemptuous as OP's quote suggests.
Similar deal to lesser degrees with Star Wars that only ever wanted to be a space fairy-tale with knights and princesses and evil wizards but got elevated into guide-to-life status by nerds.
Star Trek actually has philosophical ambitions but it explores them in the way you'd expect a 20-minute television show to deal with philosophy.
AndMy Little Ponynever asked for this, never wanted this, but was raped by its fandom to fit their perceived notions of the show.
There are more examples, and even if OP's quote is worded badly, it's still fundamentally correct.
>>78339530
>Why are most Webcomic creators fucking stupid?
If you sort of turn that question backwards, you can answer it. The picture is very debatable, though.
>>78341052
One Piece is great but thematically it's incredibly basic.
>>78341228
Unless you made that tweet, you can't presume to know what he meant. That tweet mentions no fandom or works in particular and reads only as a generalization.
>>78341295
I don't read minds but the stereotypical nerd entertainment is Star Wars and Star Trek.
>>78341156
Look mate, were all faggots here, I just don't pretend to have a air of superitority about it
>>78341324
Whatever you say.
>>78341052
I've never seen someone stupid enough to claim One Piece is profound.
They place the series on a pedestal but not in the same way Evangelion fans do.
>>78341324
>I just don't pretend to have a air of superitority about it
Is there a line more self-contradictory?
>>78341295
Congratulations, you just discovered critique. By that logic reading into Morrison is a faulty endeavor because nobody is going to write cohesive statements being that drugged up
>>78339569
So does profound = good?
Great, now that we have reached a consensus about that tweet, considering that it is a valid but poorly written complaint about some specific members of fandoms, we can go back to shitposting loudly at each others. I'm glad that things are back to normal.
The only thing that hasn't been completely cleared is the distingtion between "deep" and "profound", but that's a minor issue.
>>78341084
More like everybody. It's hard to communicate without expressing opinons. Unless you're only presenting hard facts, but t becomes arid quickly in that case.
>>78341185
Unsufferable is actually a valid, if archaic, form of insufferable. He missed the "s" key, no reason for you to lose your shit like that.
I used to think litherature and shit is profound, but then I realized. It's all pointless bullshit. There's no argument in anything because nothing depicted in fiction actually happened. Only thing fiction says something about is author. So if you are into getting into some Dostoevsky's head, go ahead, read Crime and Punishment. But all you get from it is some dead Russian dude fantasies.
Fiction will not sway anyone and it will not change anything. Critique is circlejerk. If you think it's anything but entertainment, ever, you are a fool.
>>78341399
Half of the identity of a channer is rabidly hating any other part of the web(reddit,tumble and sometimes sa).
They pretend counter web culture while having the pretense only a bunch of outcast nerds could have.
>>78341285
I mean, it can be heart wrenching, but it's nothing thought provoking.
Other than trying to guess what happens next.
>>78341482
Did you actually used "channer" unironically?
>>78341458
No, good = good :^)
>>78341510
Because using Anon is a messy and incomplete term
>>78341473
That's why I only treat nonfiction seriously and fiction as entertainment.
>>78341547
why would you complain about the Anons in here that hate other sites when you are doing the exact same. Who the fuck gives a shit about your internet wars?
>>78341403
Making assumptions about elements outside of the text is a faulty endeavor unless Morrison himself (or a reliable secondary source) discusses them. There is however, no problem in analyzing what IS within the text. Recognizing repetitive imagery or symbolism, references or quotations to other works, and literary elements such as pacing or character development CAN very easily be read into using just the primary source; the words and images on the page.
>>78341473
So I guess most satire, The Jungle, Feminine Mystique,1984, Animal Farm, Asinov's books, The War of the Worlds radioshow, are just meaningless bullshit?
>>78341673
Yes. If it panders to you, you might feel it to be profound and correct, but if it isn't, you will see it as absurd and not grounded in reality. It's of no educational value.
>>78339530
He's right although I bet he's also someone who's like "finally a black/female hero in Star Wars; now all we need are trannies" or whatever.
>>78341708
What? I just because I'm not all that interested in reading Asimov (sorry I misspelled his name earlier) books doesn't mean I can't appreciate his role in the science fiction genre.
>>78341799
He listens to Mundane Matt, so I doubt it.
>>78341808
>Dude, in the future there will be robots with positronic brains!
Yeah, very profound. And of great intellectual value.
>>78341836
The Jungle, despite being fictional, lead to stronger regulations in the meatpacking industry during the early 1900s.
>>78341836
If actual scientist are already concerned about robots and AI, doesn't that make it applicable?
ITT: nerds are buttmad their medium is still treated as children's fodder
>>78341899
Funny, because author was meant it to be communist propaganda or something.
What he said? Tried to hit nation in its heart but hit its stomach?
>>78341914
Well everyone has an inner child, it's just a some people show it more than others.
>>78341931
He wanted people to be sympathetic to the plight of immigrants, but most readers focused on the poor work conditions in meatpacking companies.
>>78341914
You've been reposting the same bad bait for a while now. Might wanna change it up.
>its just comics man why are you trying to make works of art its offensive to me i only want to read fetish comics and punching comics
fuck these people they are the kind of people who would have us all still in caves if they were left in charge
>>78340186
It's more that mainstream things tend not to be profound, because your average consumer is just looking for light entertainment, so that ends up being more popular. Things can be mainstream and deep, i.e. Shakespeare.
>>78342056
You can make anything deep if you are so inclined.
>>78342082
Sure, what does that have to do with my point?
>>78342150
I mean, depth of Shakespeare is mostly a matter of received wisdom and credential. You can pull some tangential shit out of your ass about how Ophelia was gay for Gertrude or something and everyone would be "Oh, yes, that's Shakespear, he's deep and profound and you are an expert"
If you try to pull something tangential like this in Star Wars, you will be seen as nerd manchild thinking Star Wars is profound.
>>78339530
Do you disagree with that you stinking autist? How about you actually engage with some entry level literature or art and maybe realise the pablum you obsess over is the mental equivalent of chewed up newspaper.
>>78342056
>Shakespeare
>Deep
>>78341473
You're aware that the same can be said of essays, right ? I only exposes the point of view of their author, nothing more.
The frontier between essays and novels is almost non-existent in certain cases.
>Fiction will not sway anyone and it will not change anything.
Hmm, that's false. Victor Hugo and Albert Camus would like to have a word with you. Fiction, especially litterature, played a good part in changing the general view on capital punishment in Europe, leading to its abolishment.
>>78341403
>critique
What? That's not a critique, it's just "THIS IS WHAT HE MEANT GUYS." There isn't even subtext to go on because it's such a fucking short piece of text, so everything anon tossed out is just baseless assumption backed up by exactly jack shit.
>>78341473
>LaughingJulesVerne.jpg
Is this the fishing tournament?
>>78339647
I don't see enough auto-fellatio for it to be Dobson.
>>78339656
>You seem to be unable to understand what "profound" means. Looney Toons cannot be profound. It can be biting satire or have unique ideas, but it is not Trotsky or HG Wells.
Rails on funny cartoons for not being profound or truthful.
Names fiction as an alternative.
Lel.
>>78339569
"Nerds need to stop treating their entertainment like it's profound"
many people think The Beatles're the greatest thing tha' ever 'appened t'music an' t'this day y'll get universities off'rin' degrees if not doctorates in their stuff yet until Lennon's hubris set in they thought they were little more than a cabaret act try'n'o earn a crust
ditto Shakespeare's held out as this lofty exemplar of high art but in 'is own day was something akin to a porno writer/producer/director try'n'o pack 'em in up t'the rafters hence all the violence sex horror incest paranormality etc found in 'is stuff
Even Steinbeck wasn' settin' out so much to be a great writer as a faithful and accurate recorder of the human condition
It just so 'appens tho' The Beatles Shakespeare an' Steinbeck could operate at the commercially successful potboiler level an' turn 'em into somethin' far greater
it also 'appens tho' we live in times when some truly despised art forms such as comics're also bein' revealed as bein' capable o' achievin' formerly inconceivable levels of excellence
>>78339656
But what he's saying can just as easily be applied to Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, or any other writer. That's like referencing the bible or Mao's red book and saying, "Even if it's deep and engaging, it's still a fucking book." Films and popular tv shows also have the power to change lives and shift cultural paradigms.
tl;dr This furfag is a 2deep4u Dobson clone.
>>78339530
1.) He's right
2.) Web comic creators have one of two things. Ego, so they tend to be self righteous, or cliquishness, so they say what makes others happy in their group, whether its forcibly shocking for the sake of it, or social justice crap, or anything else that cliches rave on about
>>78341125
Any medium can produce something profound. Also being profound can be anything that has had an affect on the medium. The Simpsons had a profound affect on TV when it came out. Cartoons were no longer just viewed as something for kids and opened the door for more cartoons not aimed at kids. Rob Liefeld's work had a profound affect on the comic world for the majority of the 90's. It wasn't a good affect, but it was profound.
>>78339897
>I think that tweet's point is that your average nerd thinks anything with a slight iota of depth is comparable to Shakespeare. Do YOU think the average nerd cares about obscure comics that try to profound?
Shakespeare is the low brow "art" of his day anon.
Suffice to say, you're an idiot.
>>78339530
>stop making entertainment profound
>furfag avatar
8/10 kek
>>78343632
Yes, but how many low brow artwork gets taught in schools and endlessly adapted into other media centuries after the death of the original creator?
>>78342249
>Hmm, that's false. Victor Hugo and Albert Camus would like to have a word with you. Fiction, especially litterature, played a good part in changing the general view on capital punishment in Europe, leading to its abolishment.
Of course it did. This is because they wrote essays as entertainment and let people come to their own conclusions. They weren't written to simply state the view point, but allow people to see from different perspectives and make their own minds up from there.
>>78343744
>Yes, but how many low brow artwork gets taught in schools and endlessly adapted into other media centuries after the death of the original creator?
Its mostly taught so you can be exposed to simple literature you pleb. Then its adapted because people are familiar with it.
The greek tragedys are better and more fun.
>>78339804
You're a faggot. When he refers to comics/TV/etc. it's obvious hat he's referring to the pop shit. There might be some nice art comics but he's obviously referring to he 99% that's capeshit or generic indieshit or shonenshit or whatever that's shallow as fuck.
Assigning deeper meaning to things that are childish, throwaway forms of entertainment is retarded.
>>78343632
>>78339897
Well Shakespeare did both, most of his plays have a "learned" element to them targeted at his royalty/rich people audience who could afford schooling and were his patrons. These would be the Greek history references in Midsummer Night's Dream and in Juliet's speech in Romeo and Juliet, or the historical backdrops to The Merchant of Venice and Macbeth. One way you can plainly see it is how all of the "royal" characters talk in iambic pentameter and use very lofty and metaphorical language.
But he also appealed to the base low brow masses, the groundlings, which is all the gore and sex jokes, and its why the lower brow/lower class characters talk in much more accessible language and adhering much less strictly to the iambic form.
>>78343807
>>78343744
You guys are idiots, the greek tragedies were the ones that were low brow. Go see what Plato has to say about them, jesus goddamn idiots think they know what they are talking about.
And for the record, low brow isn't inherently bad. Id say Animal Farm is pretty low brow in its language and imagery but thats the point, its meant to be understood by the masses.
>>78343807
My original point was only that there are nerds out there who think a well-written cartoon is the equivalent of some of the most famous stories in fiction. Chill.
>>78340668
You're right. Looney Tunes, unlike most modern cartoons, was actually entertaining.
>Pictures can be profound
>Written dialogue and narrative can be profound
>Somehow a mix of both can't be
I'm not even referring to just cape comics but even politically-oriented cartoons in publications could be profound and they were functionally the same.
>>78343895
>You guys are idiots, the greek tragedies were the ones that were low brow. Go see what Plato has to say about them, jesus goddamn idiots think they know what they are talking about.
I know that, I said they were more fun, not more worthwhile. Sheesh.
>>78343941
I personally like Midsummer and Tempest better than any Greek Tragedy I read, but sorry for the misunderstanding. Other than those two, I basically agree with you.
>>78343926
>I'm not even referring to just cape comics but even politically-oriented cartoons in publications could be profound and they were functionally the same.
Everybody is fighting to defend themselves from the idea that their "entertainment" is worthless because as a society we abhor things that have no "value".
Its hilarious.
ITT: Angry manchildren throwing a petulant fit when someone rightly points out that their childish entertainment is in fact, shallow and aimed at children.
Read a fucking book.
With love, /lit/
>>78343988
>ITT: Angry manchildren throwing a petulant fit when someone rightly points out that their childish entertainment is in fact, shallow and aimed at children.
>Read a fucking book.
>With love, /lit/
Douchebag with no point come in to pretend his preferred medium of digesting ideas is superior to others because it has more words and takes longer to process : The Post.
Go fuck yourself, with love anyone not a raging fag.
>>78343988
Are you saying that certain books aren't aimed at children?
>>78344073
Looks like someone is triggered
>>78339656
>Looney Tunes is a medium
>>78343988
>letting a medium define its content
Fuck off to Reddit
With love, /lit/
>>78339530
Is music also mere entertainment and incapable of having a deeper meaning?
>>78342223
>literature
>not trash
The fact that a video game managed to have better writing than any book ever written makes you realize that even the finest literature isn't very different from Bay's Transformers
>>78344362
>The fact that a video game managed to have better writing than any book ever written makes you realize that even the finest literature isn't very different from Bay's Transformers
You're only pretending to be retarded right? I mean..right?
>>78339530
>Stop treating thing as if it's profound
>even if it is actually profound
Fuck outta here.
People dismissing a medium because it's "a fucking comic/TV show/ etc" are absolute hacks.
>>78339530
>I can't make anything worthwhile on my own so I must drag everyone else down to my level
>>78344362
Being officially declared best game of all time is too low an honor.
>>78344574
he won the nobel peace prize for undertale
that's a big honor to be honest
>>78344574
How many "Best Game of All Time" awards can be given before the concept itself is rendered moot?
>>78344592
Ah, you made me check you bastard.
>>78339656
>trostsky
opinion discarded
Because most of them are failures.
>>78343894
I'm not attacking the tweet (though it's so poorly written that it criticize comics and tv as mediums, even if it was probably not the author's initial intent), I'm retorting to >>78339656's rebuttal of >>78339619, that doesn't refers to pop shit but to the whole medium.
On a sidenote:
>There MIGHT be some nice art comics (but we haven't got definite proof of that yet)
>99% of it is shit
>I hate cape, indie and shonen
>comic is shallow (minus 1%, maybe)
What are you doing here? It isn't supposed to be "/co/- I hate comics and cartoons".
>>78344592
Peace Prize?
More like piece of shit prize!
Haha, just kidding. Undertale was my favourite game this year!
>>78339619
It's nothing to do with the medium. It's just that all the shit you like is low-grade pop culture created by people incapable of producing an original idea or provoking thought.
>>78345350
Now how did you expound all that from that tweet?
>>78339656
>it is not Trotsky or HG Wells.
What makes those things more profound, retard?
>google cody baier
>find this
I'm a massive furfag but even I admit that 99% of furry shit is absolutely terrible.
>>78343894
>Assigning deeper meaning to things that are childish, throwaway forms of entertainment is retarded.
You mean like Shakespeare?
I hate pretentious morons that circlejerk to things in general. It's no more legitimate if you're circlejerking to old shit. Entertainment is entertainment, sometimes it has depth and sometimes it doesn't. Da Vinci and Shakespeare aren't magical fonts of divine wisdom that cannot be challenged by contemporary art.
>>78345378
4chan is actually populated only by two categories of residents : Extraterrestrial super-intelligences with mind-reading powers trying to invade Earth, and retards sent there by the government to lure the aliens into a false sense of superiority while we devise our counter-attack.
>>78345350
>It's just that all the shit you like is low-grade pop culture created by people incapable of producing an original idea or provoking thought.
>implying the "classics" are any better
I don't care anymore. Let the assholes jerk off to their russian books and shit on everything else. Just keep your bullshit contained to places where I don't have to see it.
>>78343988
Your board is awful.
>>78339530
I dont know, this sounds okay to me.
sounds like hes annoyed with somebody acting like their stuff is hot shit.
>>78339644
And comic book movies are currently one of the most popular, if not THE most popular form of media at the moment. You're a fuckwit and here is you're reply.
>shitty webcomic author sharing their shitty opinions on twitter
>no mention of Aaron Diaz
You're slacking /co/
>>78347142
We had that shitposting thread with Star Wars and Diaz yesterday, we're all Diaz'd out.
>>78347142
>You're slacking /co/
I wish ./co/ was on Slack so that way we could chat about comics and cartoons within the safety of an insular chat program
>>78347188
>Star Wars and Diaz
What stupid shit did he say this time?
He's kinda right. The fact that Alan Moore wrote some shit in the 80s has convinced everyone that pretty people punching each other in silly costumes is serious business.
>>78349668
Alan Moore isn't even a good writer. He just seems good to retards who've only read capeshit and the horrible writing that all has.
>>78349389
Suffice it to say that he defended Rey as a character, but did so in a way which suggests that he only spoke up because the stuff other people were saying about the character was far more applicable to his own work, and he needed to protect his ego first and foremost.
>>78349921
Stupid fucker basically said you shouldn't write flawed characters because reasons.
>>78349668
>>78349817
I feel like there should be an unspoken penalty for bringing up Alan Moore in discussions about artistic merit. Something like Godwin's Law.
>>78343378
Literally every bit of this post is horrible.
>see this thread in the catalog
>open for some cheap laughs
>see all this shit
I just wanted to laugh at shitty webcomic authors.
That makes no sense. Deep is literally one of the definitions for profound. How can something be deep but not profound?
>>78339530
because they were misfits their whole life and once people like them they can't deal with and just become self destructive
>>78345708
Wow...talk about pathetic.
>>78339530
>15,000 tweets
>299 followers
kek
OP you are the one that is stupid.
>muh VITAL, IMPORTANT mediums
>>78339530
I think we all know what show he's refering to.
>>78354093
Nah the rest of his tweets for the day are about one piece, so he might just be sperging out on the anime's fans.
>>78354131
>one piece
I can see that, after while every character having a TRAGIC back story gets a little tiring. But Robin story is by far my favorite.
>ITT faggots who get asspained at the thought that a furry called their shit on how their beloved entertainment mediums meant can't always be profound and DEEP
>>78339530
I wish you had posted some actually relevant webcomicker's tweet that's actually "fucking stupid" so we could have had a fun thread mocking webcomic loons. God knows there's a lot of those, how hard can it be to pick a decent one for the OP?
He's completely right, even when a narrative is excellent and has a rich world, well-rounded, fleshed out characters and writing that handles themes on a deeper level, it's still a fucking narrative at the end of the day, not something you treat like a fucking bible and have your life dedicated to
>>78354225
>can't always
You mean "can't ever," naturally.
Goddamn this whole thread is full of retards, literally anything can be profound, which is a completely personal emotion.
Philosophers have found shapes to be profound for gods sake.
An episode of Steven Universe or an issue of Superman has just as much potential to be profound as does a russian novel. Hell, I'd say Superman has MORE potential because his character is a societal archtype.
All these limited thinking plebs here, tisk tisk.
>>78339530
What they probably intended to say is true. What they actually wrote is retarded because in many uses deep and profound are literal synonyms of each other.
>>78354491
Why even treat the bible like that? It's just a book. Here's the real contention itt, what is profound by this guy's definition? You can pretty much just say anything is just "X", but we all ready know that it's "x" and we like it regardless. That's not saying anything or at least not anything that we weren't already aware of. Liking a thing and discussing a thing isn't synonymous with dedicating your entire existence to a thing. Those people are in the minority, not nerds in general or whatever "nerds" means nowadays
>>78354491
>Woah guys don't base your life around a series of stories
>Its not like its the bible or anything
>>78345490
nothing
Zero by zero squared is the most scientifically and human naturally incorrect Web comic ever, Long Beach comic con had the creator give out issue 1 and it was weird
>ITT people wasting time talking and making threads about other webcomic creator drama
Why don't you guys get off your ass's and start your own webcomic? I know there's some of you out there that has that one great idea you want to share with the rest of the world.
Time spent bitching about failed art/bad creators could be spent creating your own shit
>>78351419
You and me both, anon. You and me both.
So, Top 3 webcomic "artists" that you would kick in the balls?
>Aaron Diaz
>Tom Preston
>
Who am I missing?
>>78355914
Ryan Sohmer. He needs to be kicked in all the balls.
>>78356062
Is he the guy that does least i could do and LFG?
(I still remember the lyrics to that little mermaid parody he did)
>>78356081
Yes.
>>78339530
Who cares? who gets this upset about other people enjoying and analyzing things?
Comics, books, films and so on are all just pastimes to distract us from work, which is itself a pastime to distract us from the fact we only have at most 100 years alivefurfags should all be shot, either way.
>>78344362LISA > UndertaleOf course this disregards Joyful
>>78355914
>Your terrible work ethic dissuades me from supporting you financially
>OH YEAH? WELL I'LL JUST WORK EVEN LESS HOW ABOUT THAT
How have morons like Diaz survived for this long?
>>78339569
>Nerds need to stop treating their entertainment like its profound. Even if it's deep and engaging, it's still a fucking book/Movie/etc.
A medium is only the method by which you deliver your message. It does not constrain what that message can be, only how it is expressed.
>>78358465
he has a niche
>>78355772
But I am creating my own PnP setting, anon, and having a lot of fun doing it.
However, dipshit artist threads are usually also fun, just a different kind.
>>78339596
He literally says they can be deep. Although that's contradictory to saying they can't be profound, so yeah the guy is a bit of an idiot.
>>78339656
What if you adapt Animal Farm as a cartoon?
Fun fact: there is a franco-belgian comic adaptation.
>>78339530
Profound and deep mean exacly the same thing though.
>>78340570
Because profound means deep. It comes from the french "profond" which is the literal and figurative translation of "deep".
>>78359239
Or walzer for Bashir.
Or maus.
Or a thousand other titles.
I'll be the first to say that most cartoons and comics are printed shit and that bronies and the like should be forced to enroll in a military like program to become fit for life among humans but he is essentially saying "they can be appropriate for a mature public, just don't act like it."
>>78339530
Is there anything left on the internet that isn't clickbait anymore?
I'm disappointed in the power twitter holds over 4chan now. One fucking tweet can spawn dozens of 500+ post threads. Stop caring about irrelevant nobodies opinions so much.
>>78358465
By the morons that accept his shitty work ethic and pay him.
>>78359993
Welcome to the Web 2.0, anon. Real life and the internet have merged so to some people, making a post online are viewed as saying it to people's faces.
>>78356062
I think in a just world, Sohmer would be a criminal. However, with the current internet climate being what it is, Sohmer does more good than harm and I wish /co/ would respect him more. In an odd way, he's a hero.
>>78360033
It's not just that, it's the fact that it's merged with celebrity culture and we're expected to care or have an opinion every time obnoxious cunts like Leth or Diaz say something.
>OMG guys look what x said! Have an opinion on it! Care about these people!
It's like reading a teenage girls' celebrity gossip mag. I used to like talking about comics and cartoons but these days we seem to spend more time talking about what their creators said on twitter. And not even respected professional creators whose opinions might be relevant, just bottom of the barrel webcomic artists.
>>78360126
The way I see it, the reason why/co/ reacts so strongly to people on Twitter having opinions is because it provides yet another opportunity to speak their mind and push their agendas.
>>78359993
Nobody cares about this guy's opinion. It just gave us an excuse to discuss the quality of comics as a medium. And piss off each other, because, yeah, this is /co/.
>>78339530
What does profound mean to this guy?
