Last week I suggested you start reading comic books, and if I did my job right (or if you’ve been to see "Watchmen"), you may have wondered where to begin.
I’m not an expert, so in search of the perfect entry point to the world of comics, I asked some: Nick Thompson, owner of Flagship Comics & Games, Stephen Lazorick, owner of Fables Comics & Collectibles and George Fietkiewicz, owner of Omni Comics & Cards, Inc.
“What would you recommend to a new reader?” I asked them, and I was instantly barraged with questions. What age was this reader? What sort of things was the reader interested in? What was the reader’s level of interest in comic books?
I guessed: “Adult? No experience with comic books? Interested in…gardening?”
But it became clear that my asking about “the typical reader” of comic books was as nonsensical as asking about the typical shoe-wearer. There are thousands of comic books of all kinds, suited to all ages and interests, as our shop owners kindly informed me, and many of them are excellent.
Still, in pursuit of a simple answer, I persisted. “What’s your favorite comic book right now?” I asked.
They each gave a different answer. Fietkiewicz’s current favorite is the Green Lantern series written by Geoff Johns. Thompson likes "Titans" and "Teen Titans." Lazorick reads “Y: The Last Man,” which is not a superhero comic.
Each owner described his favorite comic to me in some detail – all sounded interesting, but each was unique.
If I couldn’t get a single, easy answer, I’d try for a set of guidelines, so I asked the age-old comic book question: “DC or Marvel?” But our shop owners refused to take sides.
Thompson says he used to be "big into ‘Iron Man’ and ‘X-men,’" which are part of the Marvel universe, but recently he’s "shifted into DC because the writing’s a little better." All three shop owners cited good comics from each publishing house. No easy answers there.
That’s probably just as well. Many of us don’t know DC from Marvel, anyway, and in general, our shop owners say individual writers rather than publishing houses have become the focus for comic book fans.
Some fans follow Alan Moore, author of "Watchmen," from project to project, for instance, and Steven King’s "Dark Tower" comic book adaptations have kept selling at Fables. But you have to like superheroes or Steven King novels to be into those comics.
And it can be tough to break into a superhero comic midstream, too – many of the more popular storylines, like Batman or X-men, go back decades. Sometimes a movie is a good starting place, Fietkiewicz said, and cited “V for Vendetta" and "Batman: The Killing Joke" (the inspiration for “Dark Knight”). Thompson mentioned "30 Days of Night," which was made into a movie a few years ago.
There are also jumping-on points within the series: Thompson pointed out that “Invincible Iron Man” started up about six months ago, for new “Iron Man” fans, and Fietkiewicz said “Batman: Battle for the Cowl,” which comes out next month, is a good starting place.
Everyone mentioned "Watchmen," which is a complete story in one book — so you don’t have to buy multiple paperbacks, or wait for the next one to come out, which can be frustrating, Lazorick said.
But not everyone likes men in capes or women in knee-high boots. For the non-superhero crowd, there are other genres — crime, horror, memoir, adventure, etc. — and for all ages.
Unfortunately, there’s no single answer for everyone.
But our three local shop owners are there to help find yours.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Comments on 12/5/08 and 12/19/08, and responses
Average Joe wrote on Nov 14, 2008 7:11 AM:
"As someone who has always marched to the beat of a different drummer, I can sort of understand her point of view. Also there is something to be said about the lack of employer loyalty to employees, which has now existed for many decades. Add to that the fact that all too many in management have reached or exceeded the pinnacle of the "Peter Principal" ("In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence.") and can make life miserable. As a sailor I know that it is sometimes good to be able to change direction with the changing winds to eventually get to where you want to go. My philosophy of "If you don't find your job easy (in spite of the hard work it may entail) and enjoyable, you shouldn't be doing it." still guides me. Yet unlike my resume which contains a long list of significant achievements, contributions to and awards from almost everything in which I've been involved (even at her age), I cannot help but suspect her resume would be "accomplishment lite". My impression from reading her column is that she is either suffering from chronic hippie beach bum syndrome....or is a high achiever in early onset of the Peter Principal. Then maybe she simply has failed to find her niche or is too young and naive to realize that at some point you have to buckle up and settle down if you want to start saving and planning for "retirement" rather then always relying on the generosity of patrons or ending up on the public dole. "
*****
Average Joe wrote on Dec 5, 2008 5:00 AM:
"This type of article reminds me of the "creative writing" class I took in high school (45 years ago) where we grasped at the most idiotic and outlandish topics in order to impress our teacher and get a good grade. What most would consider truly good creative writing (like that of the greatest, most revered authors this very same teacher raved about and to which level of writing she wished we could aspire in the "advanced reading" class) got a "C" or "D". Weird and way out (often infantile) trash got an "A". Guess it depended on what your definition of "creative" was...at the moment. (Where was Bill Clinton when we needed him the most?)
Perhaps articles like this one are what have contributed to the potential closing of the Press come the first of the year. I'm all for entertaining, even amusing columns, but this seems like a total waste of space. (Need we remind all you liberals that others are entitled to their opinions even if they disagree with yours? So please don't label me uninformed, unenlightened or anti anything.)
It does have redeeming social value though, since she openly reveals her true self as a radical left wing liberal by equating "Republicans", "enemies" and "town dumps" in the same category as negative factors. Perhaps if she got a real job where you actually had to work for a living and produce something of value or take responsibility as a business owner rather then be dependent on the generosity of patrons or public funding (note her past "employment" and claims to fame), she would not have time or inclination to write such whimsy! But then she does have the appearance and philosophy of a modern day hippie...with a zero "sleves" and a minus 10 "moms" factor plus a rating of a gazillion "cult miles" from the average Joe. "
*****
Objective Reader wrote on Dec 20, 2008 4:16 AM:
"Just can't seem to understand why these writings get to take up space in this publication. They are not informative, humorous, thought provoking, spiritual, debatable or entertaining. In the back of my mind it cannot help but be asked whose niece or daughter she is.
Is it me? I am told I have a great sense of humor, am willing to participate in a good debate on many subjects, inquisitive, appreciative of art and intellect, etc..... Nope, just can't wrap my mind around anything read in this column. I keep trying and then tell myself that I must just be getting too old to appreciate whatever the purpose of this space is intended to be. "
*****
Wow. Well, here's my admittedly unsolicited advice, Average Joe and Objective reader (I suspect you're the same person, though that may not be the case): Stop reading my columns.
Or maybe you already have, since it's taken me so long to get back to your comments.
Let me correct a few factual errors here, anyway, just in case people who continue to read have the same misconceptions, or in case you ever wander across my column blog archive by chance.
My column on scales meant to quantify emotions (sadness, dissatisfaction with geographic location, etc.) did not equate "Republicans" with "enemies."
It said, in fact, that "an active local hippie population [for hippies]" would be considered a benefit, while "an active local hippie population [for Republicans]" would be considered a drawback. Grammatically and intentionally, this meant that "hippies" might like to live near other "hippies," while Republicans probably wouldn't.
Of course, the whole thing was a joke.
Nobody's actually going around measuring their sadness in "kittens" -- though I have to say that these sorts of comments definitely increase my kitten count for the day significantly.
In fact, the column as a whole was meant to point out that these things can't be quantified, and our tendency to focus on math and science often leaves the more subtle art of self-description or expressing emotions out in the cold. (It did this satirically -- and while I don't know your age or type of sense of humor, I can say that a lot of people don't really enjoy or "get" satire. And that's fine.)
I'd say that quantifying "creativity" in the way your teacher did, Average Joe, falls in the same category of silly/ridiculous as the idea that we can quantify our emotions. It causes exactly the results that you point to -- with a teacher determining subjectively what s/he likes, or what s/he defines as "creative" and putting a quantity to it (an "A" or a "D").
The only possibly quantifiable elements in "creative writing" are spelling, grammar and word count. We can legitimately grade on these if we have standards to judge by. Luckily, we American English-speakers have dictionaries, grammar books and word processing programs (which count the number of words for us).
The rest is all opinion.
So let me point out, for the record, that my use of brackets ("[for Republicans]") causes my meaning to be clear -- not that I'm lambasting Republicans, but that I'm joking that Republicans probably won't like living near hippies -- and that my writing is impeccable in spelling, grammar and word count, insofar as I control it. (It gets edited after I submit it to the newspaper.)
I get an "A" for that.
You may fail me on content, and that's your right as a reader -- your opinion is just as vital and valuable as mine, as an American and citizen of the world.
As for my column contributing to the potential closing of The Bristol Press, well, it's nice to know that someone thinks a weekly 600-word column written by a local citizen can have that kind of impact. I hope it does, though I wouldn't wish that kind of responsibility on myself. I'd like to believe that individuals still have that kind of power over corporations, and that our opinions matter that much.
I am a hippie, after all, as revealed...wait, where was that "revealed"?
Still, I'm glad The Bristol Press didn't close. (Does the fact that it stayed open mean that people like my columns so much that they decided to keep it going? If I was to be responsible for its downfall, I'd like to be credited for its success...unless, as I do, you suspect that it actually had more to do with a new publisher appearing who realized the Press and The Herald could be financially viable papers with good coverage of local news and issues, than with the success or failure of my Friday columns.)
I'm sorry you weren't entertained by my column, and I'm certainly not going to label you anti-anything -- though you seem to be anti-your-old-creative-writing-teacher.
And I'm not going to delve into what very little I know of your personal work history (you imply you're a business owner?) to insult you personally. I won't attempt to divine whether your accomplishments are "lite" or not based on your three or four comments on my columns.
I don't know you that well, Average Joe, and if I did, I probably would find some value in what you've accomplished in your life even if the way you went about it was different than the way I would have. I probably still wouldn't accuse you of not having a "real job," or put the word employment in scare quotes, to imply you hadn't worked for your wages.
As you do to me.
I would remind you, as I reminded Cindy from Fairfield in the summer, that 600 words a week is not sufficient information to apply to the question of who someone is. You're welcome to question the premises of my columns, or even the broader question of why I get to write them. Unless I apply for a job with you, however, don't expect that you've gotten a complete resume from me, or that you can gauge even my political beliefs by what I write each week.
I gently remind you that you can't. Not correctly, anyway.
I'm also not sure what it was that made you label my appearance (a low blow, there, Joe) as a "modern day hippie's." Was it the tasteful, single necklace purchased at a downtown Plainville jeweller? Was it the part of the sweater bought at the Kohl's you can see in the fade-out headshot of me? Was it the haircut, which I got at a Supercuts in Southington?
Was it the glasses? I got those in China, true. (Though China doesn't have many hippies, modern-day or otherwise.) But I got the red ones because I'd had red glasses as a fifth-grader in New Britain, and those came from an eyeglass store downtown.
I'm not sure what passes for hippie-wear these days. Maybe it's the freckles or the blue eyes.
Maybe it's just my apparent age.
*****
To Objective Reader, I can only reply that though I consider the answer firmly embedded in the "none of your business" category, I will respond to the question that plagued the back of your mind (and your comment) in December: I'm the daughter of a disabled veteran.
She doesn't work for the paper. None of my relatives do.
In fact, I'm the only one in my family who has ever worked for the newspaper: I delivered it door-to-door in middle school.
Thanks for your comments, O.R. and A.J. -- though I hope you've freed yourselves from the obligation of reading my column, and so will probably likely not comment again. I wish you the best.
"As someone who has always marched to the beat of a different drummer, I can sort of understand her point of view. Also there is something to be said about the lack of employer loyalty to employees, which has now existed for many decades. Add to that the fact that all too many in management have reached or exceeded the pinnacle of the "Peter Principal" ("In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence.") and can make life miserable. As a sailor I know that it is sometimes good to be able to change direction with the changing winds to eventually get to where you want to go. My philosophy of "If you don't find your job easy (in spite of the hard work it may entail) and enjoyable, you shouldn't be doing it." still guides me. Yet unlike my resume which contains a long list of significant achievements, contributions to and awards from almost everything in which I've been involved (even at her age), I cannot help but suspect her resume would be "accomplishment lite". My impression from reading her column is that she is either suffering from chronic hippie beach bum syndrome....or is a high achiever in early onset of the Peter Principal. Then maybe she simply has failed to find her niche or is too young and naive to realize that at some point you have to buckle up and settle down if you want to start saving and planning for "retirement" rather then always relying on the generosity of patrons or ending up on the public dole. "
*****
Average Joe wrote on Dec 5, 2008 5:00 AM:
"This type of article reminds me of the "creative writing" class I took in high school (45 years ago) where we grasped at the most idiotic and outlandish topics in order to impress our teacher and get a good grade. What most would consider truly good creative writing (like that of the greatest, most revered authors this very same teacher raved about and to which level of writing she wished we could aspire in the "advanced reading" class) got a "C" or "D". Weird and way out (often infantile) trash got an "A". Guess it depended on what your definition of "creative" was...at the moment. (Where was Bill Clinton when we needed him the most?)
Perhaps articles like this one are what have contributed to the potential closing of the Press come the first of the year. I'm all for entertaining, even amusing columns, but this seems like a total waste of space. (Need we remind all you liberals that others are entitled to their opinions even if they disagree with yours? So please don't label me uninformed, unenlightened or anti anything.)
It does have redeeming social value though, since she openly reveals her true self as a radical left wing liberal by equating "Republicans", "enemies" and "town dumps" in the same category as negative factors. Perhaps if she got a real job where you actually had to work for a living and produce something of value or take responsibility as a business owner rather then be dependent on the generosity of patrons or public funding (note her past "employment" and claims to fame), she would not have time or inclination to write such whimsy! But then she does have the appearance and philosophy of a modern day hippie...with a zero "sleves" and a minus 10 "moms" factor plus a rating of a gazillion "cult miles" from the average Joe. "
*****
Objective Reader wrote on Dec 20, 2008 4:16 AM:
"Just can't seem to understand why these writings get to take up space in this publication. They are not informative, humorous, thought provoking, spiritual, debatable or entertaining. In the back of my mind it cannot help but be asked whose niece or daughter she is.
Is it me? I am told I have a great sense of humor, am willing to participate in a good debate on many subjects, inquisitive, appreciative of art and intellect, etc..... Nope, just can't wrap my mind around anything read in this column. I keep trying and then tell myself that I must just be getting too old to appreciate whatever the purpose of this space is intended to be. "
*****
Wow. Well, here's my admittedly unsolicited advice, Average Joe and Objective reader (I suspect you're the same person, though that may not be the case): Stop reading my columns.
Or maybe you already have, since it's taken me so long to get back to your comments.
Let me correct a few factual errors here, anyway, just in case people who continue to read have the same misconceptions, or in case you ever wander across my column blog archive by chance.
My column on scales meant to quantify emotions (sadness, dissatisfaction with geographic location, etc.) did not equate "Republicans" with "enemies."
It said, in fact, that "an active local hippie population [for hippies]" would be considered a benefit, while "an active local hippie population [for Republicans]" would be considered a drawback. Grammatically and intentionally, this meant that "hippies" might like to live near other "hippies," while Republicans probably wouldn't.
Of course, the whole thing was a joke.
Nobody's actually going around measuring their sadness in "kittens" -- though I have to say that these sorts of comments definitely increase my kitten count for the day significantly.
In fact, the column as a whole was meant to point out that these things can't be quantified, and our tendency to focus on math and science often leaves the more subtle art of self-description or expressing emotions out in the cold. (It did this satirically -- and while I don't know your age or type of sense of humor, I can say that a lot of people don't really enjoy or "get" satire. And that's fine.)
I'd say that quantifying "creativity" in the way your teacher did, Average Joe, falls in the same category of silly/ridiculous as the idea that we can quantify our emotions. It causes exactly the results that you point to -- with a teacher determining subjectively what s/he likes, or what s/he defines as "creative" and putting a quantity to it (an "A" or a "D").
The only possibly quantifiable elements in "creative writing" are spelling, grammar and word count. We can legitimately grade on these if we have standards to judge by. Luckily, we American English-speakers have dictionaries, grammar books and word processing programs (which count the number of words for us).
The rest is all opinion.
So let me point out, for the record, that my use of brackets ("[for Republicans]") causes my meaning to be clear -- not that I'm lambasting Republicans, but that I'm joking that Republicans probably won't like living near hippies -- and that my writing is impeccable in spelling, grammar and word count, insofar as I control it. (It gets edited after I submit it to the newspaper.)
I get an "A" for that.
You may fail me on content, and that's your right as a reader -- your opinion is just as vital and valuable as mine, as an American and citizen of the world.
As for my column contributing to the potential closing of The Bristol Press, well, it's nice to know that someone thinks a weekly 600-word column written by a local citizen can have that kind of impact. I hope it does, though I wouldn't wish that kind of responsibility on myself. I'd like to believe that individuals still have that kind of power over corporations, and that our opinions matter that much.
I am a hippie, after all, as revealed...wait, where was that "revealed"?
Still, I'm glad The Bristol Press didn't close. (Does the fact that it stayed open mean that people like my columns so much that they decided to keep it going? If I was to be responsible for its downfall, I'd like to be credited for its success...unless, as I do, you suspect that it actually had more to do with a new publisher appearing who realized the Press and The Herald could be financially viable papers with good coverage of local news and issues, than with the success or failure of my Friday columns.)
I'm sorry you weren't entertained by my column, and I'm certainly not going to label you anti-anything -- though you seem to be anti-your-old-creative-writing-teacher.
And I'm not going to delve into what very little I know of your personal work history (you imply you're a business owner?) to insult you personally. I won't attempt to divine whether your accomplishments are "lite" or not based on your three or four comments on my columns.
I don't know you that well, Average Joe, and if I did, I probably would find some value in what you've accomplished in your life even if the way you went about it was different than the way I would have. I probably still wouldn't accuse you of not having a "real job," or put the word employment in scare quotes, to imply you hadn't worked for your wages.
As you do to me.
I would remind you, as I reminded Cindy from Fairfield in the summer, that 600 words a week is not sufficient information to apply to the question of who someone is. You're welcome to question the premises of my columns, or even the broader question of why I get to write them. Unless I apply for a job with you, however, don't expect that you've gotten a complete resume from me, or that you can gauge even my political beliefs by what I write each week.
I gently remind you that you can't. Not correctly, anyway.
I'm also not sure what it was that made you label my appearance (a low blow, there, Joe) as a "modern day hippie's." Was it the tasteful, single necklace purchased at a downtown Plainville jeweller? Was it the part of the sweater bought at the Kohl's you can see in the fade-out headshot of me? Was it the haircut, which I got at a Supercuts in Southington?
Was it the glasses? I got those in China, true. (Though China doesn't have many hippies, modern-day or otherwise.) But I got the red ones because I'd had red glasses as a fifth-grader in New Britain, and those came from an eyeglass store downtown.
I'm not sure what passes for hippie-wear these days. Maybe it's the freckles or the blue eyes.
Maybe it's just my apparent age.
*****
To Objective Reader, I can only reply that though I consider the answer firmly embedded in the "none of your business" category, I will respond to the question that plagued the back of your mind (and your comment) in December: I'm the daughter of a disabled veteran.
She doesn't work for the paper. None of my relatives do.
In fact, I'm the only one in my family who has ever worked for the newspaper: I delivered it door-to-door in middle school.
Thanks for your comments, O.R. and A.J. -- though I hope you've freed yourselves from the obligation of reading my column, and so will probably likely not comment again. I wish you the best.
Comment on 12/26/08, and response
Average Joe wrote on Dec 26, 2008 7:25 AM:
"Praise for "hard work" vs "smartness" produces better results in children. WOW! At last something of substance and applicable to daily life. No fanciful rambling (well, at least not totally). Alicia, you’re finally catching on. Just one question: What does this do to the philosophy of "Working smarter not harder." and is this technique as effective on adults but only if properly applied?"
*****
Ha! Well, Average, you're welcome. I'm glad I wrote something helpful to you, and I'm sorry it's taken me so long to check over the Bristol Press comments and reply.
I'm not sure what it is I'm meant to be "catching on" to, as I write an opinion column rather than straight news or a how-to, and opinions (especially ones we disagree with) may often be viewed as "fanciful rambling," but I'm glad you think I've done it. Or did it, that one time.
The saying "work smarter not harder" actually has nothing to do with being called "smart" versus "a hard worker" -- it's about working efficiently, and thinking through the process required to accomplish what you'd like before starting the work, rather than just beginning a task without planning.
This is a skill like any, and it can be encouraged in the same way any other skill would be: "Wow, A.J., I like the way you thought about your comment before you posted it. You spent half the time you might have normally spent on it and the result was just as good, because you put the work in in advance and made sure to plan out what you were going to say."
For instance. (I don't actually know if you planned your comment in advance, though it sounds like you'd been thinking about it -- or at least thinking about my column as "fanciful rambling" -- for awhile.)
Thinking strategically is a skill, in short, and that's what people mean when they say "work smarter."
Adults also benefit from having their efforts praised rather than their "smartness," yes. Effective management technique should include this rather than empty gold-starred "you're so smart!" -- though I would suspect that more often, bosses err on the side of not praising at all, rather than praising the wrong way.
Hope you've found some other columns since December that had substance and applied to your daily life, A.J. -- mine or anyone's -- and thanks for commenting.
"Praise for "hard work" vs "smartness" produces better results in children. WOW! At last something of substance and applicable to daily life. No fanciful rambling (well, at least not totally). Alicia, you’re finally catching on. Just one question: What does this do to the philosophy of "Working smarter not harder." and is this technique as effective on adults but only if properly applied?"
*****
Ha! Well, Average, you're welcome. I'm glad I wrote something helpful to you, and I'm sorry it's taken me so long to check over the Bristol Press comments and reply.
I'm not sure what it is I'm meant to be "catching on" to, as I write an opinion column rather than straight news or a how-to, and opinions (especially ones we disagree with) may often be viewed as "fanciful rambling," but I'm glad you think I've done it. Or did it, that one time.
The saying "work smarter not harder" actually has nothing to do with being called "smart" versus "a hard worker" -- it's about working efficiently, and thinking through the process required to accomplish what you'd like before starting the work, rather than just beginning a task without planning.
This is a skill like any, and it can be encouraged in the same way any other skill would be: "Wow, A.J., I like the way you thought about your comment before you posted it. You spent half the time you might have normally spent on it and the result was just as good, because you put the work in in advance and made sure to plan out what you were going to say."
For instance. (I don't actually know if you planned your comment in advance, though it sounds like you'd been thinking about it -- or at least thinking about my column as "fanciful rambling" -- for awhile.)
Thinking strategically is a skill, in short, and that's what people mean when they say "work smarter."
Adults also benefit from having their efforts praised rather than their "smartness," yes. Effective management technique should include this rather than empty gold-starred "you're so smart!" -- though I would suspect that more often, bosses err on the side of not praising at all, rather than praising the wrong way.
Hope you've found some other columns since December that had substance and applied to your daily life, A.J. -- mine or anyone's -- and thanks for commenting.
Comments on 1/23/09, and responses
willy lump lump wrote on Jan 25, 2009 7:55 AM:
" It would help if we taught today's kids some good old US history, so they would know how this contry has evolved. I have a young friend, a coollege student who didn't know anything about Pearl Harbor. She thought it was a battle in WW2. Didn't know we weren't at war when it happened. Can you imagine what she knew of the French and Indian War, the Revolution, war of 1812 and on and on? "
*****
I'd agree that history is important, though I'd add that we should be teaching world history just as much as American.
For one thing, America is a young country created in a larger global context. How can we understand our own revolution if we don't have the context of medieval and Renaissance times in Europe?
And how can we understand the times we're living in now without the histories of rising non-European powers? Americans seem to know very little about non-Western countries, and at least from an economic perspective, it's important that we learn.
Thanks, willy.
*****
Eugene wrote on Jan 28, 2009 11:49 AM:
" The only thing we need to teach our Children are the 3 r's.Spanish should not be it should a up to the country sending them here to speak English at their exspense. History should be home schooled which is also available in any library. One just hsa to watch the Jay Leno show and his Jaywalking skit to see what a waste this subject and others produce.6 assistants are the really needed? "
*****
Eugene, I'm afraid your policies on education are lacking, well, an educated perspective.
I've written about bilingual education before, so I won't get into that here. But suffice it to say that teaching kids other languages prepares them for an increasingly global workforce and also allows them to use their brains in new ways that will allow them to learn new languages more quickly, encourage parallel thinking and make them more versatile and better critical thinkers overall.
Also, countries don't send people to America, in general. People choose to come here on their own.
If as Americans we'd like to make sure we don't benefit from any of their experiences or allow recent immigrants to contribute to our society with any of their skills, then we should definitely do as you say and make sure they're responsible for learning English in advance, at their expense.
Alas, many of them will still thwart us, learn English despite our lack of encouragement or help, and become great contributors to American society. That's the cross we bear as a nation that attracts some of the best minds in the world. We're just going to have to learn to put up with it.
I've never heard of anyone suggesting we stop teaching history. This seems an excessively extreme view to me.
I'm curious, in fact, what "reading" (one of the "R's") would be worth in that case -- what would you like kids to learn to read, if not history, or, presumably, literature, which can also be found in any library? There would have to be some content for them to practice on, right?
What would you suggest they read?
" It would help if we taught today's kids some good old US history, so they would know how this contry has evolved. I have a young friend, a coollege student who didn't know anything about Pearl Harbor. She thought it was a battle in WW2. Didn't know we weren't at war when it happened. Can you imagine what she knew of the French and Indian War, the Revolution, war of 1812 and on and on? "
*****
I'd agree that history is important, though I'd add that we should be teaching world history just as much as American.
For one thing, America is a young country created in a larger global context. How can we understand our own revolution if we don't have the context of medieval and Renaissance times in Europe?
And how can we understand the times we're living in now without the histories of rising non-European powers? Americans seem to know very little about non-Western countries, and at least from an economic perspective, it's important that we learn.
Thanks, willy.
*****
Eugene wrote on Jan 28, 2009 11:49 AM:
" The only thing we need to teach our Children are the 3 r's.Spanish should not be it should a up to the country sending them here to speak English at their exspense. History should be home schooled which is also available in any library. One just hsa to watch the Jay Leno show and his Jaywalking skit to see what a waste this subject and others produce.6 assistants are the really needed? "
*****
Eugene, I'm afraid your policies on education are lacking, well, an educated perspective.
I've written about bilingual education before, so I won't get into that here. But suffice it to say that teaching kids other languages prepares them for an increasingly global workforce and also allows them to use their brains in new ways that will allow them to learn new languages more quickly, encourage parallel thinking and make them more versatile and better critical thinkers overall.
Also, countries don't send people to America, in general. People choose to come here on their own.
If as Americans we'd like to make sure we don't benefit from any of their experiences or allow recent immigrants to contribute to our society with any of their skills, then we should definitely do as you say and make sure they're responsible for learning English in advance, at their expense.
Alas, many of them will still thwart us, learn English despite our lack of encouragement or help, and become great contributors to American society. That's the cross we bear as a nation that attracts some of the best minds in the world. We're just going to have to learn to put up with it.
I've never heard of anyone suggesting we stop teaching history. This seems an excessively extreme view to me.
I'm curious, in fact, what "reading" (one of the "R's") would be worth in that case -- what would you like kids to learn to read, if not history, or, presumably, literature, which can also be found in any library? There would have to be some content for them to practice on, right?
What would you suggest they read?
Comment on 2/13/09, and response
Sally wrote on Feb 20, 2009 1:17 PM:
"I would expect this sentiment from a man. There certainly must be a reason.... And really, red roses and a romantic fancy dinner...a tired routine? You confuse routine with tradition. Do you also resent birthday cakes, corned beef and green beer on March 17, pumpkins at Halloween and on and on? Sorry that you feel so left out."
*****
I'm actually laughing out loud at this comment -- thanks, Sally, though I don't think you intended it to be funny.
I'm amused that expecting this sentiment from a man appears to be a criticism. Are men supposed to be less evolved than women in the way they approach Valentine's Day?
I agree that the stereotype is that men don't know romance. But I haven't found a lot of evidence for this being the case, at least not in my experience, and not compared to the women I know.
The red roses and romantic dinner being called "a tired routine" was partly a joke -- which I thought would become clear when I mentioned the marriage proposal as part of that "tired routine" (as though a marriage proposal would be a yearly occurrence). But I do think that a lot of the V-Day routines we've come to expect are, well, expected. And for my money, I'd rather have something more personal and thoughtful than that.
I don't really like cake, whether it's my birthday or not; I like corned beef, but don't drink, so green beer is out; I do like pumpkins, but not so much to carve as to boil and eat.
I'd prefer something else on those occasions, related to me rather than blind adherence to tradition. That's pretty much my point in the Valentine's Day column, as it was my point in the anti-Mother's-Day column I wrote last year -- not that we shouldn't have traditions, or that we shouldn't celebrate these things, like moms, or romantic love, but that we should be thoughtful about them.
I don't feel left out, though, Sally, and I don't resent Valentine's Day for any of the reasons you're probably supposing. (You seem to imply, along with the idea that I don't have the "womanly virtues" of caring about tradition or romance, that I may be bitter or lonely in being "left out." I'm actually neither one...and yet I hold my opinions, anyway.)
And I don't have anything against the traditions people love: I'm glad you enjoy red roses and dinners out, and I hope you had a great Valentine's Day that included both.
That's why I said in my column, "if, like me" -- you and I are just different, and we can both exist and do things our own ways, happily. Without being "men" and without resentment.
For my part, I had a pretty great time with my horror movie marathon.
Thanks for commenting, Sally.
"I would expect this sentiment from a man. There certainly must be a reason.... And really, red roses and a romantic fancy dinner...a tired routine? You confuse routine with tradition. Do you also resent birthday cakes, corned beef and green beer on March 17, pumpkins at Halloween and on and on? Sorry that you feel so left out."
*****
I'm actually laughing out loud at this comment -- thanks, Sally, though I don't think you intended it to be funny.
I'm amused that expecting this sentiment from a man appears to be a criticism. Are men supposed to be less evolved than women in the way they approach Valentine's Day?
I agree that the stereotype is that men don't know romance. But I haven't found a lot of evidence for this being the case, at least not in my experience, and not compared to the women I know.
The red roses and romantic dinner being called "a tired routine" was partly a joke -- which I thought would become clear when I mentioned the marriage proposal as part of that "tired routine" (as though a marriage proposal would be a yearly occurrence). But I do think that a lot of the V-Day routines we've come to expect are, well, expected. And for my money, I'd rather have something more personal and thoughtful than that.
I don't really like cake, whether it's my birthday or not; I like corned beef, but don't drink, so green beer is out; I do like pumpkins, but not so much to carve as to boil and eat.
I'd prefer something else on those occasions, related to me rather than blind adherence to tradition. That's pretty much my point in the Valentine's Day column, as it was my point in the anti-Mother's-Day column I wrote last year -- not that we shouldn't have traditions, or that we shouldn't celebrate these things, like moms, or romantic love, but that we should be thoughtful about them.
I don't feel left out, though, Sally, and I don't resent Valentine's Day for any of the reasons you're probably supposing. (You seem to imply, along with the idea that I don't have the "womanly virtues" of caring about tradition or romance, that I may be bitter or lonely in being "left out." I'm actually neither one...and yet I hold my opinions, anyway.)
And I don't have anything against the traditions people love: I'm glad you enjoy red roses and dinners out, and I hope you had a great Valentine's Day that included both.
That's why I said in my column, "if, like me" -- you and I are just different, and we can both exist and do things our own ways, happily. Without being "men" and without resentment.
For my part, I had a pretty great time with my horror movie marathon.
Thanks for commenting, Sally.
Comment on 2/27/09 and response
Chewenlai wrote on Mar 4, 2009 4:04 AM:
"You look like you could use all the help A Dong could provide. I used a ruler once, but that didn't make me wish I was the King of England for the rest of me life. If you are so enamored of peanut-walnut milk, feed your cow some Jiff, poke its teats with a sack of walnuts and enjoy the ensooooing results. Of course it would fall short of the high standards of the Chinese people, but in America we have a lot to learn."
*****
I'm posting this comment here not so much because I have a response, but because I found it amusing.
I can use all the help A Dong provides. I like that store; I go there pretty frequently, and I'm always pleased with the things I find there. I've never claimed to be a chef, in any culture, and making jiaozi (dumpling) wrappers, for instance, would be impossible for me -- thank goodness I don't have to.
I've tried to make my own hot pot mix and not done very well at that, either.
I think your recipe for peanut-walnut milk probably leaves a lot to be desired (like scientific support), but I like the use of "ensooooing." And I'm going to keep my eye out for it, as usual, at A Dong.
I'm not sure what the King of England or "high standards" have to do with my column, which was much too short to deal with any of the controversy over trade with China, FDA standards and their implementation in foreign countries, American-Chinese political relations of any kind, or even dumplings.
I only wish I could have included something about that last one. The other topics aren't suited to a weekly 600-word column written by a citizen.
I don't claim to be a chef, a ruler, a standard-maker or a political expert of any kind. I'm a writer. I write about what I know...like Ramen noodles.
"You look like you could use all the help A Dong could provide. I used a ruler once, but that didn't make me wish I was the King of England for the rest of me life. If you are so enamored of peanut-walnut milk, feed your cow some Jiff, poke its teats with a sack of walnuts and enjoy the ensooooing results. Of course it would fall short of the high standards of the Chinese people, but in America we have a lot to learn."
*****
I'm posting this comment here not so much because I have a response, but because I found it amusing.
I can use all the help A Dong provides. I like that store; I go there pretty frequently, and I'm always pleased with the things I find there. I've never claimed to be a chef, in any culture, and making jiaozi (dumpling) wrappers, for instance, would be impossible for me -- thank goodness I don't have to.
I've tried to make my own hot pot mix and not done very well at that, either.
I think your recipe for peanut-walnut milk probably leaves a lot to be desired (like scientific support), but I like the use of "ensooooing." And I'm going to keep my eye out for it, as usual, at A Dong.
I'm not sure what the King of England or "high standards" have to do with my column, which was much too short to deal with any of the controversy over trade with China, FDA standards and their implementation in foreign countries, American-Chinese political relations of any kind, or even dumplings.
I only wish I could have included something about that last one. The other topics aren't suited to a weekly 600-word column written by a citizen.
I don't claim to be a chef, a ruler, a standard-maker or a political expert of any kind. I'm a writer. I write about what I know...like Ramen noodles.
Comment on 2/27/09, and response
Alex wrote on Mar 5, 2009 12:12 AM:
"I hate to nitpick, but yes there was in fact a "General Tso" and the reason most Chinese people would not have heard of them is because not everyone is a historian.
Zuǒ Zōngtáng, aka General Tso, was a General during the time of the Taiping Rebellion. Along with Zeng Guofan, General Tso was able to put a halt to the rebellion by dethroning Hong Tianguifu, the leader of the rebel forces.
The real let down of this story is that Zuǒ Zōngtáng, the man who was largely responsible for ending a rebellion that cost 20 million lives, is remember through a chicken dish.
For more info on Zuǒ Zōngtáng (General Tso) check out Encyclopedia Britanica, lots of great stuff. "
*****
Yes, true! There was a real, historical General Tso.
My column didn't say there wasn't one -- it was meant to say exactly what you point out, in part, which is that not everyone is a historian. And while Americans might think General Tso is so famous that he needs no introduction, the Chinese people I talked to who did know about the general said that to Chinese, he's not that well known. They called him "a small figure" in history and said they were surprised that Americans knew anything about him.
None of the Chinese I talked to had ever eaten "General Tso's chicken," though that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in China. It only means that none of the people who I asked in the provinces in which I taught (Sichuan and Ningxia) had heard of or eaten it. But ask an American who's been to a Chinese restaurant, and most of them will say they've tried it, or at least heard of it.
My point was that American Chinese food isn't the same as what people are eating in China. I didn't have space to go into Chinese history, so I'm glad you added your comment.
Thanks, Alex.
"I hate to nitpick, but yes there was in fact a "General Tso" and the reason most Chinese people would not have heard of them is because not everyone is a historian.
Zuǒ Zōngtáng, aka General Tso, was a General during the time of the Taiping Rebellion. Along with Zeng Guofan, General Tso was able to put a halt to the rebellion by dethroning Hong Tianguifu, the leader of the rebel forces.
The real let down of this story is that Zuǒ Zōngtáng, the man who was largely responsible for ending a rebellion that cost 20 million lives, is remember through a chicken dish.
For more info on Zuǒ Zōngtáng (General Tso) check out Encyclopedia Britanica, lots of great stuff. "
*****
Yes, true! There was a real, historical General Tso.
My column didn't say there wasn't one -- it was meant to say exactly what you point out, in part, which is that not everyone is a historian. And while Americans might think General Tso is so famous that he needs no introduction, the Chinese people I talked to who did know about the general said that to Chinese, he's not that well known. They called him "a small figure" in history and said they were surprised that Americans knew anything about him.
None of the Chinese I talked to had ever eaten "General Tso's chicken," though that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in China. It only means that none of the people who I asked in the provinces in which I taught (Sichuan and Ningxia) had heard of or eaten it. But ask an American who's been to a Chinese restaurant, and most of them will say they've tried it, or at least heard of it.
My point was that American Chinese food isn't the same as what people are eating in China. I didn't have space to go into Chinese history, so I'm glad you added your comment.
Thanks, Alex.
Friday, March 6, 2009
3/6/09: Graphic novels really are good literature
If you’re like me, you’re reading this column either in line at the local cineplex while waiting for your prepurchased ticket to be torn before you’re allowed to find the best possible theater seat from which to view the “Watchmen” movie released today, or while being distracted by mental review of its triumphs and flaws after having seen it last night at a midnight screening, or both.
That’s right. Sometimes I read over my own columns, occasionally while waiting in long lines.
But if you’re thinking about whether that makes me narcissistic or obsessive, or both, you’re missing the point, which is that I can’t wait to see this movie.
If it’s half as fascinating and intricate as the graphic novel it’s based on, it will be well worth watching.
For the “true believers” in comic books, I should admit that I’m a Janey-come-lately to the whole scene: I started reading comic books in anthology form around this time last year, with the first volume of “Cerebus,” a 300-issue independent comic created by Canadian Dave Sim.
While having read the entire “Cerebus” series should earn me some nerd cred, I don’t have the background in Silver Age comics that true lifelong fans have. Before last year, Comic Book Guy from “The Simpsons” was my only real contact with comic book fans — and he’s a cartoon. But since then, I’ve come to appreciate what comic books can do.
Traditionally, comic books haven’t gotten much respect, and neither have the people who love them.
The knee-jerk impulse to dismiss comic books “because they have pictures” might come partly from residual guilt over preferring film strips to lectures, or field trips to, well, anything, in school, combined with the axiom “reading is good for you.” But there’s no evidence that children or adults learn best from line after line of text. In fact, there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.
We can stop feeling guilty for liking to look at pictures, in other words.
And beyond learning styles, graphic novels are able to tell stories that neither books nor movies can tell — because description of the level of visual detail included in even a single panel of comic is impossibly dense in an ordinary novel, while moving pictures go so quickly as to make serious frame-by-frame study impractical.
Alan Moore, writer of “Watchmen,” is largely credited as the guy who figured out how to tell a story that could only be told in comic form. It was considered the unfilmable comic book.
Now, of course, it’s been filmed.
But that kind of genre bending is just what comic books these days are thriving on.
Beyond the summer box office successes of “The Dark Knight” and “Iron Man,” which were based on comic book series, memoir comics such as Marjane Satrapi’s “Persepolis” have garnered critical acclaim and new fans — new fans who dig back into the oeuvre of artists who preceded their favorites and discover an entire alternate history of literature.
And it is literature. That wasn’t a typo or poor word choice.
The characterization of memoir comics isn’t in question; these are actual people, who choose to tell their stories with pictures included, and to some extent, this still-emerging subgenre has legitimated what most people see as a world of superheroes.
But fictional comics — even superhero ones, though those aren’t nearly the breadth of comic art — don’t need legitimizing, any more than text-only fiction does. George Eliot’s “Middlemarch” is one of my all-time favorite novels, but it has nothing on “Watchmen” in cast of characters, plotting or execution.
So if you’re not in line for “Watchmen” right now, I recommend it.
Better yet, read the book.
That’s right. Sometimes I read over my own columns, occasionally while waiting in long lines.
But if you’re thinking about whether that makes me narcissistic or obsessive, or both, you’re missing the point, which is that I can’t wait to see this movie.
If it’s half as fascinating and intricate as the graphic novel it’s based on, it will be well worth watching.
For the “true believers” in comic books, I should admit that I’m a Janey-come-lately to the whole scene: I started reading comic books in anthology form around this time last year, with the first volume of “Cerebus,” a 300-issue independent comic created by Canadian Dave Sim.
While having read the entire “Cerebus” series should earn me some nerd cred, I don’t have the background in Silver Age comics that true lifelong fans have. Before last year, Comic Book Guy from “The Simpsons” was my only real contact with comic book fans — and he’s a cartoon. But since then, I’ve come to appreciate what comic books can do.
Traditionally, comic books haven’t gotten much respect, and neither have the people who love them.
The knee-jerk impulse to dismiss comic books “because they have pictures” might come partly from residual guilt over preferring film strips to lectures, or field trips to, well, anything, in school, combined with the axiom “reading is good for you.” But there’s no evidence that children or adults learn best from line after line of text. In fact, there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.
We can stop feeling guilty for liking to look at pictures, in other words.
And beyond learning styles, graphic novels are able to tell stories that neither books nor movies can tell — because description of the level of visual detail included in even a single panel of comic is impossibly dense in an ordinary novel, while moving pictures go so quickly as to make serious frame-by-frame study impractical.
Alan Moore, writer of “Watchmen,” is largely credited as the guy who figured out how to tell a story that could only be told in comic form. It was considered the unfilmable comic book.
Now, of course, it’s been filmed.
But that kind of genre bending is just what comic books these days are thriving on.
Beyond the summer box office successes of “The Dark Knight” and “Iron Man,” which were based on comic book series, memoir comics such as Marjane Satrapi’s “Persepolis” have garnered critical acclaim and new fans — new fans who dig back into the oeuvre of artists who preceded their favorites and discover an entire alternate history of literature.
And it is literature. That wasn’t a typo or poor word choice.
The characterization of memoir comics isn’t in question; these are actual people, who choose to tell their stories with pictures included, and to some extent, this still-emerging subgenre has legitimated what most people see as a world of superheroes.
But fictional comics — even superhero ones, though those aren’t nearly the breadth of comic art — don’t need legitimizing, any more than text-only fiction does. George Eliot’s “Middlemarch” is one of my all-time favorite novels, but it has nothing on “Watchmen” in cast of characters, plotting or execution.
So if you’re not in line for “Watchmen” right now, I recommend it.
Better yet, read the book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)