Jump to content
A. Heathen

The Unwritten

Recommended Posts

Yes!

If you like comics like Sandman. If you hate books like that, you won't really enjoy Lucifer.

It starts off a bit slowly, but give it a chance, and it very quickly hits a stride and keeps getting better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

need i consider lucifer a 'must read'?

Definitely. After finishing Sandman I'd make it a priority. Especially if you enjoyed the way Lucifer is portrayed in Sandman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly lucifer holds up a lot better than sandman does. sandman has the comic book equivalent of the gated echoey snare on 80s alt rock records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I agree. I'm rereading it now, and some parts are dated, but others hold up very very well. Dolls house is really good, so is Seasons of mist. Among others.

But I agree that Lucifer holds up magnificently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the nature of it's different stories being told in different styles, Sandman is less consistent to a person's tastes than Lucifer.

One is consistently excellent, the other is sometimes brilliant, other times very good.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly lucifer holds up a lot better than sandman does. sandman has the comic book equivalent of the gated echoey snare on 80s alt rock records.

Isn't namedropping Tori Amos all the way through the second half more of a '90s thing?

:wink2:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly find Sandman to be timeless. I find all of those pre-Vertigo DC series to be timeless, even though something like Delano's Hellblazer can be considered extremely dated, with all the topical references. It encapsulates a period in time, added to the fact that, for the most part, John's characterization under Delano speaks to more than just the 1980s.

Lucifer's style may make it less likely to feel dated in future years (I think? Lucifer is a lot more recent than Sandman), but it was also playing much more safely. Somehow, I have a harder time thinking of Lucifer as "timeless" in the sense I think of Sandman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for someone that hasn't experienced that time at all and read the delano issues rather recent, i assure you they still have an effect. i for once experienced a lot of wanting to reading up on that thatcherlady :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is when

honestly lucifer holds up a lot better than sandman does. sandman has the comic book equivalent of the gated echoey snare on 80s alt rock records.

Isn't namedropping Tori Amos all the way through the second half more of a '90s thing?

:wink2:

 

 

well her snares are pretty echoey too haha. guess she can feel it coming in the air tonight

oh lord

 

I think the moment when sandman starts really dating itself to me is the spoken word scene in issue 5 or wherever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since I mostly like Gaiman's work, I don't view "Gaimany" as a negative characteristic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it despite itself, he goes too far with the on the nose monologues IMO. not saying sandman's not worth reading but he could use an editor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaiman usually has a very smooth and poetic quality to his writing. Editing him too harshly would take away from Gaiman's style, and make his work much more generic.

I'm sure editors could have changed Gaiman's work, had they found problems with it. It's not as if Gaiman was a huge name when he started on Sandman. He had done very little work before Sandman, he was just another British guy they brought in after Alan Moore.

Much of his later work has lost all the qualities that appealed to so many about Gaiman's style, which is why his latter work is often so sub-par. He's found some more of his ability for the recent Sandman book though, but it's not quite the same.

It's not as if he's Stephen King, in need of an editor.

 

It's these kids today and not understanding the classics. They want to tear them apart, instead of realizing that the book is a work of art to be appreciated, and that they have the problem, not the story. Geesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaiman usually has a very smooth and poetic quality to his writing. Editing him too harshly would take away from Gaiman's style, and make his work much more generic.

I'm sure editors could have changed Gaiman's work, had they found problems with it. It's not as if Gaiman was a huge name when he started on Sandman. He had done very little work before Sandman, he was just another British guy they brought in after Alan Moore.

Much of his later work has lost all the qualities that appealed to so many about Gaiman's style, which is why his latter work is often so sub-par. He's found some more of his ability for the recent Sandman book though, but it's not quite the same.

It's not as if he's Stephen King, in need of an editor.

 

It's these kids today and not understanding the classics. They want to tear them apart, instead of realizing that the book is a work of art to be appreciated, and that they have the problem, not the story. Geesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second one was better.

 

Anyway, Christian pinpoints the flaw in this whole "Cut The Gaimanosity" thing.

Who needs another generic, not Gaimany book?

No-one, that's who.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...