Eisners 2008 Take The ~DIGITAL~ Out Of Best Digital Comic Award

Yes, the official definition of webcomics is obviously vague enough that comic books online can be seen as digital comics.  And yes, I’m probably one of the only people to even care about such frivolities.

But Brigid, Steve, and I did a podcast on this very subject and so my mind has already been made up.  And the verdict?  Any comic deserves to win that wasn’t created by Joss Whedon and hosted on MySpace.com.  So… let the winner stand up!  Not so fast, Billy DogmaWould he be ok with this?

No, it looks like no one listened to our Eisners 2008 podcast from a few week’s back where we all agreed, unequivocably, that we would be fine with The Abominable Charles Christopher, PandaeXpress!, Billy Dogma, or The Process winning Best Digital Comic, so long as the comic book-in-disguise, Sugarshock, didn’t even dream of approaching the podium.

Now, get ready for some feedback, because this just plain sucks.

I’ll be the first to defend anything Joss Whedon works on, and the comic itself is certainly a quality one.  But the manner in which it’s been translated to the web (re: poorly) and the company it has chosen to keep (MySpace carries diseases, you know) make it about five evolutionary steps backwards for webcomics.

And A.D. wasn’t even nominated!

Steve?  Brigid?  Care to elaborate?

Share

5 thoughts on “Eisners 2008 Take The ~DIGITAL~ Out Of Best Digital Comic Award

  1. You said it, Midnight! I’m usually willing to define the term “webcomic” pretty broadly, but if its competing for an award it should at least be a comic that is designed to be on the web and embedded in a website. Sugarshock looks like scans of a comic book. That’s a matter of style as well as format; to my untutored eye it looks like standard-issue comic book art. It just doesn’t compare to the lovely, silvery look of The Abominable Charles Christopher or the painterly work of The Process.

    But what really offends me is that it is on MySpace. I have nothing against MySpace when used as intended, although to be honest I’m not sure what that would be. But it’s a terrible comics interface. It’s busy and distracting, and navigating the archives is almost impossible. Compare that to The Process, which is embedded in a carefully designed website that is obviously unique to the comic itself. Now that’s webcomics! Sugar Shock, not so much.

  2. I started to go on a rant disagreeing vehemently with everything both of you said. Then I realized it’s all sarcasm.

    “It’s busy and distracting, and navigating the archives is almost impossible. Compare that to The Process, which is embedded in a carefully designed website”
    That was the dead giveaway. Doh! You almost fooled me!

  3. Hallelujah, Brother! I posted the same opinion on my obscure blog:

    http://floatinglightbulb.blogspot.com/2008/07/memo-to-eisner-awards.html

    and didn’t receive comments, so I was feeling a bit alone on this issue. This was a blatant rip-off, a lapse in judgment with the aroma of disdain and an award that should have been refused by the recipient. I admit I let my guard down because I didn’t think they’d stoop so low, but as far as I’m concerned, the Eisners are in disgrace.

    Good piece.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *