You know, I didn't really think about the tragic/not tragic/tragic pattern in this volume until you pointed it out. I have to wonder why Gaiman planned it this way. I mean, in a graphic novel collection, the stories are back to back. But back when he was writing, storytelling based around single issues was still a norm. When people originally read it, a month would pass between each issue, so by the time they get to the next issue, the impact wouldn't be quite as immediate. And Gaiman had to have planned the issues with that in mind.
Listening to you guys talk about where writers get inspiration, I couldn't help but think - I know exactly where I get my inspiration. At least most of the time. I'm inspired by Chicago locations. I'm inspired by news items. I'm inspired by just imagining my characters interact. In a lot of cases, I'm inspired by the people who inspired the characters. Sometimes, I get random ideas (like, "how would Vasilisa the Fairest work in the Urbis Arcana universe"), but they are at least based on something.
So I guess what I'm saying is that, personally, I never had trouble explaining where I get ideas.
Oh, and as far as Death explaining that she wasn't just an embodiment of an aspect of Death, I'm pretty sure I've read an interview where Gaiman explained that it was a direct response to the Captain Atom issue.
Speaking of which... I can see why Neil Gaiman was upset about the story - it contradicted his idea of what Death and the rest of the Endless were, and this is before there was a semi-separation between DC and DC-Vertigo verses. But I can also understand where writers Cary Bates and Greg Weisman were coming from. There are several different depictions of Death in DC Universe, and their idea for reconciling them all was actually pretty elegant and kind of poetic.
I guess that's one of the mixed blessings of shared universes - different ideas that may not be bad in their own right, but which can't co-exist in a shared setting.
You know, reading what you are saying about where you get your ideas, it is entirely possible that Stephen King hates that question not because he doesn't know where the ideas come from, but instead that he realizes the answer is often pretty simple and not the interesting story most people are probably hoping for when they ask the question. Or at least that could be partially true.
Because you're right, sometimes ideas come from places you go, things you hear about, conversations you have. dreams, etc. But generally the story itself is far more important than where it came from.
I agree about the odd decision to cluster all of these oneshots together, but they are an interesting group of tales.
The only one I actively dislike is "Calliope". I see the two very complex threads he's trying to weave - a metaphor about an author who doesn't respect stories, who just wants fame and success instead of creating something he cares about, as well as the exploration of abuse and sexual slavery, and the way abusers use dehumanization and self-justification to keep doing what they do to their victims - but both have falters that really make this story even more uncomfortable than it's aiming to be. On the one, it's a really cheap shot at "commercial" authors, and all the ribbing at the writer going to Hollywood and trying to edge more creative control for himself is actually quite prophetical about where Gaiman's own career has since gone. As for the abuse angle, it fails because it doesn't actually make Calliope a character. There's some vague backstory, but she's never allowed to be anything more than a victim, a tool, and when she shows sympathy on her abuser, it feels undeserved. Jones' art is great, though, in both this and the next one.
The cat story is a cat story. I'm not a cat person. It's a lovely parable, but I wasn't particularly drawn to it. :)
"Midsummer Night's Dream" is very nice. It has some of the clunky plot structure issues I have with Gaiman, but it is a great concept and mostly well executed.
"Facade" is just... weird. It feels like a volume 1 story, or maybe something you'd find in Hellblazer, and I don't entirely get why it's here. It's a very nice, if brutal and disturbing, story about severe depression, but it feels like filler.
In fact, I think you give Gaiman a lot of credit in terms of how he sets up and weaves together his plot threads. Most of the setup we've seen is "here's something I'll leave hanging, maybe I'll figure out something to do with it later, maybe I won't." And this volume is nothing but filler as he's still trying to figure out where to go next. Some of these characters pop up again, but arbitrarily.
This has been Noel, continuing his role as gloomy gus.
You know, I didn't really think about the tragic/not tragic/tragic pattern in this volume until you pointed it out. I have to wonder why Gaiman planned it this way. I mean, in a graphic novel collection, the stories are back to back. But back when he was writing, storytelling based around single issues was still a norm. When people originally read it, a month would pass between each issue, so by the time they get to the next issue, the impact wouldn't be quite as immediate. And Gaiman had to have planned the issues with that in mind.
ReplyDeleteListening to you guys talk about where writers get inspiration, I couldn't help but think - I know exactly where I get my inspiration. At least most of the time. I'm inspired by Chicago locations. I'm inspired by news items. I'm inspired by just imagining my characters interact. In a lot of cases, I'm inspired by the people who inspired the characters. Sometimes, I get random ideas (like, "how would Vasilisa the Fairest work in the Urbis Arcana universe"), but they are at least based on something.
So I guess what I'm saying is that, personally, I never had trouble explaining where I get ideas.
Oh, and as far as Death explaining that she wasn't just an embodiment of an aspect of Death, I'm pretty sure I've read an interview where Gaiman explained that it was a direct response to the Captain Atom issue.
Speaking of which... I can see why Neil Gaiman was upset about the story - it contradicted his idea of what Death and the rest of the Endless were, and this is before there was a semi-separation between DC and DC-Vertigo verses. But I can also understand where writers Cary Bates and Greg Weisman were coming from. There are several different depictions of Death in DC Universe, and their idea for reconciling them all was actually pretty elegant and kind of poetic.
I guess that's one of the mixed blessings of shared universes - different ideas that may not be bad in their own right, but which can't co-exist in a shared setting.
You know, reading what you are saying about where you get your ideas, it is entirely possible that Stephen King hates that question not because he doesn't know where the ideas come from, but instead that he realizes the answer is often pretty simple and not the interesting story most people are probably hoping for when they ask the question. Or at least that could be partially true.
DeleteBecause you're right, sometimes ideas come from places you go, things you hear about, conversations you have. dreams, etc. But generally the story itself is far more important than where it came from.
I think you are right - on both counts.
DeleteI agree about the odd decision to cluster all of these oneshots together, but they are an interesting group of tales.
ReplyDeleteThe only one I actively dislike is "Calliope". I see the two very complex threads he's trying to weave - a metaphor about an author who doesn't respect stories, who just wants fame and success instead of creating something he cares about, as well as the exploration of abuse and sexual slavery, and the way abusers use dehumanization and self-justification to keep doing what they do to their victims - but both have falters that really make this story even more uncomfortable than it's aiming to be. On the one, it's a really cheap shot at "commercial" authors, and all the ribbing at the writer going to Hollywood and trying to edge more creative control for himself is actually quite prophetical about where Gaiman's own career has since gone. As for the abuse angle, it fails because it doesn't actually make Calliope a character. There's some vague backstory, but she's never allowed to be anything more than a victim, a tool, and when she shows sympathy on her abuser, it feels undeserved. Jones' art is great, though, in both this and the next one.
The cat story is a cat story. I'm not a cat person. It's a lovely parable, but I wasn't particularly drawn to it. :)
"Midsummer Night's Dream" is very nice. It has some of the clunky plot structure issues I have with Gaiman, but it is a great concept and mostly well executed.
"Facade" is just... weird. It feels like a volume 1 story, or maybe something you'd find in Hellblazer, and I don't entirely get why it's here. It's a very nice, if brutal and disturbing, story about severe depression, but it feels like filler.
In fact, I think you give Gaiman a lot of credit in terms of how he sets up and weaves together his plot threads. Most of the setup we've seen is "here's something I'll leave hanging, maybe I'll figure out something to do with it later, maybe I won't." And this volume is nothing but filler as he's still trying to figure out where to go next. Some of these characters pop up again, but arbitrarily.
This has been Noel, continuing his role as gloomy gus.