Decent article on one person’s picks for Comic Masterpieces. All of them are from comic books of course. My question is what would a similar list limited to webcomics look like? Or maybe the question should be, are webcomics mature enough as an artform to begin asking such questions? And if not, how long does it have to go?
4 Comments
Comments are closed.
My picks would probably have to be some finished masterpieces like demian5.com. I don’t think that “masterpiece” really has to be limited to works that are finished, however. Kochalka’s American Elf, Orneryboy, Scary Go Round (or bobbins) come to mind. Sinfest, of course. Comics that are well excecuted, funny, and lasting.
I think that there are just too many webcomics out there to do such a thing, and it’s a medium that seems to still be developing. There are quite a few comics out there that are very good, but they are very obscure at the same time. Even then, what’s popular isn’t always right, but they will still tend to dominate.
I just think the vast size of the webcomics genre makes it an exception to this sort of thing. There are plenty that nobody knows about. Movies are easier to judge because there’ aren’t 7,000 of them coming out each year.
If you want one man’s qualified opinion, it’s worth looking at http://scottmccloud.com/links/links.html. I would incline to add Pete Abrams and Maritza Campos to his list, and possibly Scott himself for a baker’s dozen.
Personally, I do not feel that we’re ready for a Masters of Webcomics yet. We’re at that early stage, that nascent point. Maybe, for example, Megatokyo will be seen as the Action Comics #1 of its time. But as Bob Kane’s original Batman stories didn’t carry the depth that modern Bat-writers do now, I don’t see the depth and majesty of webcomics to come for some time. That’s no slam against Fred Gallagher or any other webcomic creator, but merely to say (as they do in any other medium) “The best is yet to come.”