Oh and regarding "blog" -- I had a Livejournal for years, and never called it a "blog." It was my "journal" exclusively. Still is, even though I do not update anymore.
But my two sites on Blogger? I call them "blogs." Mostly because by the time I created them that was the accepted term and I never gave it much thought. Saying "my comics journal" or "my Hawkman journal" sound strange now. ~Luke On Jul 20, 2:02 pm, Luke <[email protected]> wrote: > I was operating from an incorrect assumption when I responded to Van > initially. Like all humans I bring my own preconceptions and biases > to a conversation. One of the reasons I abandoned CGS was the over- > abundance of "trade waiters" and their utter disdain for those of us > who bought "pamphlets" and were not "evolving" to the current market > by abandoning them entirely and were "propping up" a "dead" market. > > Nevermind the fact that now "spoiler range" extended literally for > months if not YEARS after a story ended because the majority of > posters were "waiting for the trade." > > I use the term "comics" almost exclusively. I only use "singles" in > the context of someone else buying a series in "trade." > > ~Luke > > On Jul 20, 1:43 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > It is weird how a term no one was using, (for 100 years we just called them > > comic books or comic book magazines), will suddenly become the "educated" > > way to discuss something. I also dislike the term "pamphlets," but kids > > who never owned any can view them from a distance and see them for the > > archaic old-media format they are. Since single issues is how I bought > > them for thirty years, I just saw them as comics and not as....product with > > a product's name. I thought I was a dude buying comics, but they see it as > > a "Male in Meatspace Transacting for Pamphlets" > > > Another term like this is "blog" People who didn't keep an online journal > > spread that one around, and then it was too late to fix it. What a gross > > and reductive word it is. > > > So, I think Van was just using a word he thought was up to date or what all > > the kids were using. He's obviously an old-school comics guy, but is > > keeping with the times. He's often very very wrong but I don't think he > > was pretentious here. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Luke <[email protected]> > > To: The Unique Geek <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wed, Jul 20, 2011 1:55 am > > Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Re DC new #1s giant hardcover coming > > > I regretted posting that message after I did because I posted in anger > > due to something else. Hence why I removed it. So my apologies. > > > My vehement objection is due partly to my bad mood. > > > It is also more attributed to the term being used as a perjorative by > > a lot (like, A LOT) of comics fans online to deride buying individual > > issues. The idea being that a "pamphlet" is disposable and without > > value. Over at ComicGeekSpeak, for example, that's essentially a > > codeword for "I buy in trades and if you don't you're a moron who is > > killing our industry." > > > As a side note, its not an accurate statement, at least not according > > to our wonderful federal government. A "pamphlet" by the definition > > of the Federal Depository Library Program is a monograph or what we > > would call a one-shot. Anything which is published on some regular > > basis is called a "periodical." (I spent nearly 3 years as a document > > cataloger handling federal documents.) > > > I wouldn't take anything I say as being representative of the opinions > > or feelings of anyone else on this group let alone the group in > > general. I don't know how much longer I'll be here anyway. > > > So use whatever term you would like. I like the term "singles." I > > liken it to buying trading cards back in the day as "singles" as > > opposed to "sets." > > > On Jul 20, 8:38 am, Van Allen Plexico <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Topic: > > > Luke <[email protected]> Jul 19 06:03AM -0700 ^ > > > > > ...I much preferred buying > > > > those TPBs to buying the individual pamphlet issues. > > > >>Oh get over yourself. "Pamphlet," ugh. Do you want a latte with your > > > > pretension?<< > > > > I'm not sure I get your meaning here, Luke. Disrespectful tone, sure, but > > meaning, not so much. > > > > That's a term we've used for years on the Avengers group, to differentiate > > between trade paperbacks/ hardcover collections of comics and individual > > comics. > > I prefer it to the more popular term, "floppies," but it's really all the > > same-- > > indicating a very short, thin book(let) with no actual stiff cover and few > > pages. > > > > If it's not welcome in this community, I won't use it again. > > > > What is your apparently vehement objection to it? > > > > --Van > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "The > > Unique Geek" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.-Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.
