Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Dave Sim's blogandmail #414 (October 30th, 2007)

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Tundis
    Tuesday, October 30 - _____________________________________________________ Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist
    Message 1 of 12 , Oct 30, 2007

      Tuesday, October 30 -

      _____________________________________________________

      Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

      1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

      2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

      3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

      4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

      5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

      6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

      7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

      8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

      9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

      10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

      11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

      12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

      13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

      14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

      15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

      _____________________________________________________

      Scott's update on ANUBIS

      "The handcrafted "shoe box" version of boxed minis is a complete success. I've finally figured out the right design! So now, I have a temporary format to work with along the way to completion. And I can exhibit it in a limited sense as I go. I think at this point, having a bit more hindsight, I'm ostensibly not far from the position I was in a little over a year ago with my plan for delaying publication (although, now in possession of a much-needed temporary format for my graphic novel). I really don't think of the boxed sets as a vehicle for publication. It's more a form of printmaking than anything else. It is a temporary format, no more. And I have streamlined my operation to the point that the ANUBIS graphic novel proper is going to be the only creative purpose that I will be tending to from now until the day it is done. There will be no more painting schemes or nebulous down-the-road creative plans between here and the last pages of ANUBIS. I've packed up by ox-hair brushes, canvas and hand tools. My catalog of paintings is stowed away. The future is a blank slate: reserved for ANUBIS. And although I do not know how I will get it digitally adapted, I know that I will somehow get it done, and hopefully be able to self-publish in the conventional sense of the word someday."

      A blast from the past from Mr. D.:

      "I first met you almost exactly half of my life ago in [deleted] 1993 when you gave a signing at [deleted] (I've always thought it weirdly-timed if not quite synchronistic that I lost my virginity about 5-7 hours before coming into work the day of your signing…an event that only grew more synchronous as sex and women began to play larger thematic roles in your story). I was the `kid worker' at the shop and it was really cool to meet you at the time – you drew some Elrod bunnies and Cerebus trees for me along with a head sketch. You probably remember the manager, [deleted] better than the owner because [deleted] was pretty hip to the radical changes going on in the industry in the early/mid 90s. As I recall, you printed one of his articles concerning the impending distributor consolidation crisis in CEREBUS. I saw [deleted] about a decade ago…married in L.A. – wonder what he's doing now."

      Yes, it's really amazing how people come and go in this business. I remember having a lot of discussions with [deleted] through all of the convulsions going on. As it turned out, we were all pretty well informed about what was happening, in what order and for what reason. There just turned out to be nothing we could do about it as individuals when the time came.

      "I am kind of writing for the Sandman parody issue but mostly just using the opportunity to say "Hi" and thank you for all you've done. In fact, don't bother with CEREBUS 161 as I have every issue from 50 on and all of the trades except the GOING HOMES (which is weird because I've gone back to re-read through the footnotes of both of those stories). [deleted] told me to start reading CEREBUS the day 151 came out – the beginning of the Second Half – astutely knowing that that would be a good place to jump on board. Then he gave me the first trade for my birthday and that about all it took. I know you're readership changed a lot over the last few years (maybe a decade for all I know) but I eagerly awaited every single issue for many years. It was very rewarding to read THE LAST DAY trade once it was all over.

      "I think that's why I'm writing actually. I wanted to tell you that you have had a profound effect on my life and I don't imagine that effect will ever wear off. I don't agree with all your ideas, I'm not ascetically minded at all, and I have nothing to do with the comics industry short of reading and supporting the alternative creators that I like. While I certainly hold CEREBUS in very high regard as one of the greatest stories I've ever read and gained immense satisfaction out of your panel layouts, word balloons, and dialect-laden lingo (not to mention humor, themes and narrative structure), it's really more your artistic integrity that has improved my life so much. And it's not like my life has ever sucked (so far as I've noticed) and has needed improvement – it's more the idea that your example has always been for me a high-water mark of what we humans can achieve in this life, on this world. (At the risk of disappointing you, I'm gonna stick to `on this world' for the time being because I don't share your spiritual inclinations…yet. I'm 32 so I do have a lot more growing up to do…if I start conceiving of the highest echelons of the increasingly ascending chess boards of life in ways that reflect your Islamic-Judeo-Christian view of the universe, then I may just write you another letter).

      "But here and now I live and breathe my influences – I think we all do. People with serious drives, creativity, and the will to see things through are the inspiration that makes me excited to wake up every day and to be creative, thoughtful and life-loving every moment. When I think about it, there are really only a few people who have had such profound effects on me. I'm a musician so people like Frank Zappa and Miles Davis are a few who would come to mind. As you no doubt notice, those guys are some of the only creative figures in pop music who have had career-spanning creativity and – importantly – malleable, changing and developing approaches to their life's works. I don't imagine you're too into Miles and Frank (as I recall you've gotten less and less into music and got rid of your stereo years – a decade? – ago). I know comparisons to Eisner, Eddie Campbell or *maybe* someone like Alan Moore would speak more your predilections and artistic ideals. But I see the world as being full of beautiful possibilities and I cherish having found influences that have led to certain aspects of life-enriched experience. And CEREBUS has always been that. And so have Dave Sim's ideas, writings, interviews and pictures."

      Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now see that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind of actual meaning. But for people who aren't there (or, perhaps, aren't there "yet") I think the example of Miles Davis or Frank Zappa or Alan Moore points in the direction of always giving a 110% so that you set your name apart from those people who were just "putting in time" on their creativity and settling for what they settle for. The biggest lesson is: Pass It On. "Measure up". It's very easy to dig down a few layers and find your inner professional musician and produce work that puts food on the table and a roof over your head. It's a very different thing to dig down to your inner Miles Davis or Frank Zappa and find that vein of work that will inspire future generations the way they inspired you.

      Tomorrow: More with the Mysterious Mr. D

      _____________________________________________________ 

      IN STORES NOW!

      ___________________________________________________

      This may also be viewed at http://davesim.blogspot.com/

      ___________________________________________________

      http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=25ED8C60667D0A95

      ___________________________________________________

      If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

      Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
      P.O. Box 1674
      Station C
      Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

      Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

      http://spectrummagazines.bizland.com/cerebusgn.chtml

      Or, you can check out Mars Import:

      http://www.marsimport.com/display_series.php?ID=142

      Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors. Here are the Diamond Star System codes:

      Cerebus #1-25 $30.00 STAR00070

      High Society #26-50 $30.00 STAR00071

      Church and State I #52-80 $35.00 STAR00271

      Church and State II #81-111 $35.00 STAR00321

      Jaka's Story #114-136 $30.00 STAR00359

      Melmoth #139-150 $20.00 STAR00431

      Flight #151-162 $20.00 STAR00543

      Women #163-174 $20.00 STAR00849

      Reads #175-186 $20.00 STAR01063

      Minds #187-200 $20.00 STAR01916

      Guys #201-219 $25.00 STAR06972

      Rick's Story #220-231 $20.00 STAR08468

      Going Home I #232-250 $30.00 STAR10981

      Form and Void #251-265 $30.00 STAR13500

      Latter Days #266 - 288 $35.00 AUG031920

      The Last Day #289 - 300 $25.00 APR042189

      Collected Letters - $30 FEB052434

      Collected Letters 2 - $22 MAR073054

    • Ryan Dunne
      ... So atheistic great Art is meaningless? Really dissapointing to read this from Dave. -- Ryan
      Message 2 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
        >
        > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now see that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind of actual meaning.

        So atheistic great Art is meaningless? Really dissapointing to read
        this from Dave.
        --
        Ryan
      • Matt Dow
        ... I m thinking less meaningful . The Last Supper is better than the Mona Lisa . But the Mona Lisa is better than any given Picasso. Really
        Message 3 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
          On 10/31/07, Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
          >
          > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now see that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind of actual meaning.

          So atheistic great Art is meaningless?
           
          I'm thinking "less meaningful".
           
          "The Last Supper" is better than the "Mona Lisa". But the "Mona Lisa" is better than any given Picasso.

          Really dissapointing to read
          this from Dave.
          --
          Ryan
           
          Why?
           
          Matt Dow

           
        • Ray Pullar
          ... see ... But Dave wrote any kind of actual meaning not lesser kind. *Any kind*. Ray
          Message 4 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
            > On 10/31/07, Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > >
            > > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now
            see
            > > that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind of actual
            > > meaning.
            > >
            > > So atheistic great Art is meaningless?
            >
            >
            > I'm thinking "less meaningful".
            >

            But Dave wrote 'any kind of actual meaning' not lesser kind.

            *Any kind*.

            Ray
          • Ray Pullar
            ... that creativity needs to be in service to ... Given that Dave created a substantial part of Cerebus prior to him accepting God as his Lord and Saviour and
            Message 5 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
              > >
              > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now see
              that creativity needs to be in service to
              > > God to have any kind of actual meaning.
              >
              > So atheistic great Art is meaningless? Really dissapointing to read
              > this from Dave.
              > --
              > Ryan
              >

              Given that Dave created a substantial part of Cerebus prior to him accepting
              God as his Lord and Saviour and placing himself and his work in service to
              Him it raises a question about whether Cerebus prior to that commitment by
              Dave to God has 'any kind of actual meaning'.

              Can Dave, in retrospect, place the early Cerebus in service to God when he
              didn't think in those terms at all at the time of its creation?

              Ray
            • Ryan Dunne
              ... As Ray pointed out, it says for any meaning it needs to be in service of God. ... It suggests that he s abandoned previously rigorous aesthetic standards
              Message 6 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
                On 31/10/2007, Matt Dow <mouseskull@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > On 10/31/07, Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and I now see that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind of actual meaning.
                > >
                > > So atheistic great Art is meaningless?
                >
                >
                > I'm thinking "less meaningful".

                As Ray pointed out, it says for "any meaning" it needs to be in service of God.
                >
                > "The Last Supper" is better than the "Mona Lisa". But the "Mona Lisa" is better than any given Picasso.
                >
                > > Really dissapointing to read
                > > this from Dave.
                > > --
                > > Ryan
                >
                >
                > Why?
                >
                > Matt Dow
                >

                It suggests that he's abandoned previously rigorous aesthetic
                standards in favour of a religious-based hierarchy. It reminds me of
                those right-wingnuts who object to , say, colleges teaching Angels in
                America (we even study that at Glasgow University).


                --
                Ryan
              • Rick Sharer
                ... Art pleases Man. The Pleasing of Man is meaningless in the Service to God department by exponents of exponents. So Art pleasing only Man is meaningless,
                Message 7 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
                  --- Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:

                  > >
                  > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over
                  > the years and I now see that creativity needs to be
                  > in service to God to have any kind of actual
                  > meaning.
                  >
                  > So atheistic great Art is meaningless? Really
                  > dissapointing to read
                  > this from Dave.

                  Art pleases Man. The Pleasing of Man is meaningless
                  in the Service to God department by exponents of
                  exponents. So Art pleasing only Man is meaningless,
                  is what he's saying.

                  In other words, stop worshipping Art.

                  TTM


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                  http://mail.yahoo.com
                • Steve Bolhafner
                  ... Dave exaggerates to make points. He obviously doesn t really mean that art that doesn t serve God is meaningless and/or valueless. He s championed the work
                  Message 8 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
                    --- In cerebus@yahoogroups.com, "Ryan Dunne" <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > On 31/10/2007, Matt Dow <mouseskull@...> wrote:
                    > >
                    > As Ray pointed out, it says for "any meaning" it needs to be in
                    > service of God.

                    Dave exaggerates to make points.

                    He obviously doesn't really mean that art that doesn't serve God is
                    meaningless and/or valueless. He's championed the work of Alan Moore
                    and others he thinks of as "atheists" or "pagans" too often to believe
                    that.

                    He was making a point. He now believes that that is the *most
                    important* thing art can do, that every artist needs to establish his
                    (or, occasionally, her, but we all know what Dave thinks about women
                    artists) relationship with God first and foremost, not only because
                    that's more important to one's own life than one's art, but because
                    one then produces art that is more worthwhile.

                    People, you've GOT to stop taking Dave literally! It'll drive you crazy!

                    Steve Bolhafner
                  • Dominick Grace
                    ... From: Matt Dow Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [cerebus] Dave Sim s blogandmail #414 (October 30th, 2007)
                    Message 9 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007


                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: Matt Dow <mouseskull@...>
                      Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 12:32 pm
                      Subject: Re: [cerebus] Dave Sim's blogandmail #414 (October 30th, 2007)
                      To: cerebus@yahoogroups.com

                      > On 10/31/07, Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > >
                      > > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years
                      > and I now see
                      > > that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind
                      > of actual
                      > > meaning.
                      > >
                      > > So atheistic great Art is meaningless?
                      >
                      >
                      > I'm thinking "less meaningful".
                       
                      "To have any kind of actual meaning" doesn't sound like a relative scale to me.
                       
                      Dom
                    • Ray Pullar
                      ... Too late! P.S. as others on the list commented recently, Dave pays a lot of attention to the precise wording used by others in their statements and often
                      Message 10 of 12 , Oct 31, 2007
                        >
                        > People, you've GOT to stop taking Dave literally! It'll drive you crazy!
                        >
                        > Steve Bolhafner
                        >

                        Too late!

                        P.S. as others on the list commented recently, Dave pays a lot of attention
                        to the precise wording used by others in their statements and often draws
                        conclusions from their particular choice of words. The details of discourse
                        seem to matter to him, in both his own writing and that of others,
                        especially in discussions concerning God.

                        We have to assume that Dave means exactly what he says. Dave himself has
                        objected to attempts by some persons in the past to re-interpret his views
                        in a light favourable to their own (more Marxist/Feminist/Homosexualist
                        compatible) position.

                        These persons frequently resorted to the argument that one should not take
                        Sim at his word but instead realise that he didn't really mean what he had
                        written.

                        In response, Dave forcibly asserted the truth of what he'd originally wrote.

                        Does Dave view atheistic art as without meaning i.e. as mere gibberish and
                        nonsense that one can't understand?

                        I doubt it because it would seem almost impossible to sustain that position,
                        given that people can apparently comprehend some sort of coherent viewpoint
                        from atheistic art. He probably means that art of that sort has a meaning
                        but only a totally false one.

                        Ray
                      • Jeff Tundis
                        ... and I now ... of actual ... - That certainly seems to be his personal point of view, yes. And to me, I agree it s unfortunate. Not really surprising from
                        Message 11 of 12 , Nov 4, 2007
                          --- In cerebus@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Pullar" <ray.pullar@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > > On 10/31/07, Ryan Dunne <cerebusboy@...> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years
                          and I now
                          > see
                          > > > that creativity needs to be in service to God to have any kind
                          of actual
                          > > > meaning.
                          > > >
                          > > > So atheistic great Art is meaningless?
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > I'm thinking "less meaningful".
                          > >
                          >
                          > But Dave wrote 'any kind of actual meaning' not lesser kind.
                          >
                          > *Any kind*.
                          >
                          > Ray
                          >

                          - That certainly seems to be his personal point of view, yes. And to
                          me, I agree it's unfortunate. Not really surprising from someone so
                          overwhelmingly posessed by religion. There's also the "easy out" of
                          claiming any inspiring work produced by an atheist is actually the
                          product of God working through them, even without their knowledge or
                          consent.

                          - Hmm. God raped me??

                          -Jeff ;^D
                        • Jeff Tundis
                          ... I now see ... read ... accepting ... service to ... commitment by ... when he ... - I think so, yes. It all lead down one path, as if God was trying to
                          Message 12 of 12 , Nov 4, 2007
                            --- In cerebus@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Pullar" <ray.pullar@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > > >
                            > > > Well, obviously, my perspective has changed over the years and
                            I now see
                            > that creativity needs to be in service to
                            > > > God to have any kind of actual meaning.
                            > >
                            > > So atheistic great Art is meaningless? Really dissapointing to
                            read
                            > > this from Dave.
                            > > --
                            > > Ryan
                            > >
                            >
                            > Given that Dave created a substantial part of Cerebus prior to him
                            accepting
                            > God as his Lord and Saviour and placing himself and his work in
                            service to
                            > Him it raises a question about whether Cerebus prior to that
                            commitment by
                            > Dave to God has 'any kind of actual meaning'.
                            >
                            > Can Dave, in retrospect, place the early Cerebus in service to God
                            when he
                            > didn't think in those terms at all at the time of its creation?
                            >
                            > Ray
                            >

                            - I think so, yes. It all lead down one path, as if God was trying to
                            tell him something (or more appropriately, *show* him something).
                            Dave getting it wrong in the early days was because to his inability
                            to "see clearly" due to his faithlessness.

                            - The machinations of God are too wondrous to comprehend, and allow
                            for any contradiction to be explained away;)

                            -Jeff

                            (OK, I'll stop now. Just got back from a Zappa concert. They
                            played "Dumb All Over." And I'm still a little buzzzzzzzzzed.)
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.