Posted by Sean C on Oct 10th, 2007
There are numerous webcomic review blogs on the internet, and most of them are terrible. They reward low-quality comics, and many authors seek out support and friendship rather than strive for honest criticism. However, I’ve come across a blog entitled Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad, by one John Solomon, which takes the opposite approach.
And I hate it.
Solomon is anti-webcomics; he’s very up front about that, and his goal is to highlight terrible webcomics in the hopes that not only will people stop reading these strips, but that the creators themselves will stop making them. I don’t agree with that goal. Webcomics are a hobbyist’s medium, and Solomon expects nothing but perfection and professionalism from webcomic creators. Too bad he can’t apply those rules to his own writings.
You see, Solomon is a terrible writer. His prose is rife with scores of curse words, which so overwhelms each article that he negates the point of his review. His critiques are lost in a haze of obscenity, which kills any credibility he may have had. Solomon also rambles on about various problems he sees with each comic, revisiting them throughout each article, and with all those swears, it’s boring to read through it all. It’s such poor writing that it makes a person actually feel like they’ve lost a bit of their intellect by the time they’ve finished reading. That’s not journalism, nor is it even clever - it’s literary syphilis.
His other major problem is that he’s a self-righteous hypocrite who can’t take any criticism himself. He has stated that he doesn’t write for any audience - a great goal for any writer - and doesn’t care whether or not people enjoy or dislike his reviews. They’re really just for him, which doesn’t exactly explain why he now has a stable of contributors helping him. The lone wolf has a staff because he apparently couldn’t come up with one review a week, which until recently was his goal. Believe me, that’s a lie, and now that he’s got an audience, he’s full of himself and into the attention. Why would he claim his work is not really for anyone but him, and then put it on the net for the entire planet to see? He plays the part of a “serious” critic, but when someone criticizes him, he belittles and ridicules them in a childish manner. One of his targets even came into his comments section, and politely admitted that Solomon was right, and Solomon told him to get “dick cancer”. Why? He thought it was funny. That says so much about John Solomon right there, doesn’t it? No class and a piss-poor sense of humor. Let’s face it - when a guy has to spend a sizable chunk of each article writing personal attacks against the creators, one really shouldn’t expect that much to begin with. It’s also cute when he uses guest strips in his examples of how the creators had done such a terrible job.
He also enjoys playing the role of a pariah. There are multiple posts explaining how he’s such a persecuted fella. He’s claimed to have received death threats from cartoonists and their fans; this I can believe - there’s just so many crazies out there. However, he wants to be seen as infallible. His ego is so fragile that he actively berates those in his comments section that attack him, and he does this while pretending that it doesn’t bother him. He claims that one of the biggest complaints against him is people asking, “Where’s your webcomic”? Well, folks, it looks like Solomon is responsible for the reprehensibly bad parody webcomic Dominic Durgan, which takes Mookie’s already bad strips and makes them infinitely worse. With more pointless cursing and the dick-and-fart humor of a twelve year old, Solomon proves once again what a clever boy he really is. He’s told creators that once their work is online, then it’s there for the world, and it’s practically a crime when that material is pitifully amateur. If only Solomon could recognize the irony in his statement…
When I first started reading Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad, I thought Solomon was some kind of character - a crotchety, cranky, “fan” who was so over the top that the whole thing was a joke. As time went on, it became apparent that he wasn’t, and he is really like that. Solomon is also Fuego Fish from the Something Awful forums, and his posting style there is pretty much the same; however, he actually offers some thoughtful and useful insights on those forums. It’s a shame that didn’t carry over. The SA crowd can be brutal as all hell, but a lot of people there know what they’re talking about when it comes to webcomics. Honestly, Solomon could have still pointed out the flaws and highlight the out of control egos that litter the medium if he simply baited creators famous for that into flame-fests; an approach like that would not only prove a point, it would likely be far more entertaining. You could get ten years of material off Bobby Crosby alone.
I don’t knock Solomon for his intentions; I just can’t stand his execution. He doesn’t critique - he whines incessantly like a spoiled child. To do that with webcomics of all things…it makes him worse than a Star Trek fan who actually knows Klingon. It’s that pathetically picky. How miserable does a person have to be to intentionally troll the net for bad webcomics to berate? If you come across a webcomic you know sucks, you move on. Sometimes, it may take time to realize it sucks. I know many people who were former Ctrl-Alt-Del and Megatokyo readers; they woke recognized those crappy comics for what they were. I don’t like Solomon’s style of review; it contributes nothing. I don’t like ass-kissing critics, either. As for me, all I try to do is highlight lesser-known good comics or new comics that show potential that the average reader might not encounter during their web-surfing.
Since this will likely find its way back to Solomon - that’s the nature of the net, then I advise Solomon to take his own advice and quit. Since he’s such a hypocrite, I doubt that will happen. He’s not funny. He’s not clever. He can’t even write a decent review. His idea of parody and humor in general is so juvenile that only grade-schoolers would laugh. John - you suck at what you do. Deal with it.
Note: This is an opinion piece and does not reflect the views of all the Way of the Geek staff.
Posted in comics, opinon
| email this article
If you liked that, try...
- The Big Debut Webcomic Review - Horribleville by KC Green
- A New Comic Review and some Webcomic Idol Stuff
- Webcomic Idol Finalists Chosen!
- The Way of the Geek Guide to Webcomic Creation - Lesson One - The Concept
- The Current State of Comicspace
Podcast RSS
Devin de Gruyl
October 10, 2007 at 1:46 pm
“95% of everything is crap.” A refrain we know too well. But only on the Internet would that truism serve to discredit the 5% that’s actually good. Just because most webcomics are terrible, that means they all are? Sorry, not buying it.
Perhaps knowledge of what this site is will help discredit this guy in the eyes of everyone he’s insulted. Constructive criticism is one thing, personal attacks are quite another. And then there’s “Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad.” It’s not just a personal attack, it’s a personal Shock & Awe Campaign. With H-bombs.
Caldi-Chan
October 10, 2007 at 3:01 pm
I remember running across this site before. While most people dislike Dominic-Deegan, I rather like it. It lets me just read something, laugh, or groan and then move on.
However his attack on Mookie was well, poorly written and it was all personal attacks.
I remember this clearly because I usually read the comments on the Deegan live journal community, because yes some of us LIKE the comic and like discussing what kind of drama is in store.
As someone who tried her hand, in webcomics. (Blinded by Fate) I was rather interested in him, however as he started to get worse in what he does I gave up and moved on. I wrote a brief rant about in my live journal several months ago. He never found it, or if he did he did not recognize the challenge issued.
I moved on since then, but your opinion piece makes me remember the poorly executed writings on his Blog.
Over all, I am glad that you wrote this.
I am unsure if it will get back to him, however if he has actual readers it might.
Well written Sean. Very well done.
Sean C
October 10, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Huh. He just reviewed Dominic Durgan and confirmed it was his. Maybe he did see this and did that in response. Heh.
VGML
October 10, 2007 at 8:32 pm
“To do that with webcomics of all things…it makes him worse than a Star Trek fan who actually knows Klingon. It’s that pathetically picky.”
You know what’s even more picky? Writing an article about a guy who rips on webcomics.
Seriously, when are you people going to stop throwing hissy fits over this dude?
October 10th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
So lemme get this straight, Solomon gets a free pass because he’s the jackass, and people aren’t allowed to write objective criticism of his behavior without being “picky”? No, I think I’ll give that opinion a pass, but thanks. Solomon deserves a lot worse than he gets, but the common perception of “being the good guy” prevents people from giving it to him.
VGML
October 10, 2007 at 9:19 pm
No, what I said is that calling Solomon picky because he takes a piss on something very obscure is kinda hypocrite, seeing as how you’re basically ripping on somebody ripping on something very obscure.
Solomon doesn’t “deserve” anything. He’s just a guy with some free time on his hands and a blogger account, and for some reason people just can’t shut the fuck up about it.
April 14th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I hope you see the irony in your statement.
“He’s just a guy with some free time on his hands and a blogger account, and for some reason people just can’t shut the fuck up about it.”
…is that so?
By your logic, the webcomic artists are just “guys with some free time on their hands and their own website” and Solomon should… what was that phrase again…
oh yeah, he should “shut the fuck up about it”
Sean C
October 11, 2007 at 9:02 am
The critic can’t be put on a pedastal where he/she can’t be questioned. I remember the shitstorm back when Roger Ebert said videogames were not art and could never be. People debate the intentions and tone of op-ed writers all the time. Look at the well-deserved backlash Ann Coulter opens her mouth. She practically shoots killer bees from her throat - she’s a vicious bitch and people call her on it. That’s why I wrote this article.
He claims there’s a culture of nice in webcomics. Hard to argue that, but he’s promoting a culture of mean-spiritedness that offers nothing but venom. It’s useless criticism. Sometimes a jerk is a jerk, and you want to call him on it.
And VGML, I do recognize the fact that I ripped on a guy ripping on obscure comics. That’s not hypocrisy, though - I meant that to have a hint of irony. But, hey, if it’s really hypocrisy, then I’ll freely admit to it.
October 11th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Don’t think it’s hypocrisy myself, it’s more along the lines of a journalist/columist (sp?) calling Solomon on his behavior.
Solomon can do as he pleases, but personal attacks result with even more personal attacks. That may be his gimmick. A poorly chosen gimmick, but eh. People will go up in arms, but later on forget about it.
Example: The Goldman fiasco. I believe most of the webcomic community got up in arms about that. Others remained on the sidelines and simply watched the show.
After all was said and done, people moved on.
It’s the internet. Someone is *bound* to write something about anything these days.
October 11th, 2007 at 11:38 am
Agreed wholeheartedly on the “culture of mean-spiritedness” comment. Unfortunately, we now live in a world where there is no middle ground when it comes to “reviews”; something (be it a webcomic, book, movie, game, whatever) is either the greatest thing in history, or it doesn’t deserve to exist. Unless you just rip the high holy hell out of it, you’re accused of being on the take. (I know I’m generalizing here, and I profoundly apologize to anyone unfairly tarred and feathered by that blanket statement. However, it’s hard to dislodge the stereotype from my mind after having so much experience, direct and indirect, that perpetuates the image.)
Solomon’s not to blame for this, however. He’s merely a symptom of a much larger problem at the core of American culture. I don’t want to get political in this context, but it does say something sad about our society when elected officials, up to and including the President of the United States, can get into office based almost exclusively on what they don’t stand for, as opposed to what they do…
VGML
October 11, 2007 at 8:35 pm
What the hell does American culture have to do with this? From what I’ve read, Solomon isn’t even American.
I shouldn’t really be replying here, since I just told you to shut the fuck up about some guy and his little blog, but what the hell. I’m bored. Who cares if he writes venomous reviews? They’re not even real reviews, it’s just him pointing out why a certain webcomic is bad, which in a lot of cases is just pointing out the obvious. For some reason people take it serious as shit, and I bet he’s laughing his ass off at all the people going apeshit over his little blog posts.
If you don’t like his blog, why bother writing about it and give it more exposure? It’s not like it’s harming anybody. I think what bothers all you people is the fact that more people like his juvenile reviews than your own little comic/blog.
JEM
October 11, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Learning about legends in my First Nations class (I’m not Aborigional but they make me take it anyways), We learnt of one story about a crazy witch lady who lived in the woods. Parents told their children if they wandered into the woods at night the crazy witch lady would snatch them up and take them away to be eaten. It was just a story to keep your children from wandering away, but I always thought John Solomon is a bit like that crazy witch lady. He’s like a warning to webcomickers “Put effort into your comics or John Solomon’ll get you!” He makes people who make bad webcomics strive to be better, and people who’d make half-assed comics stay off the internet. We need a few guys like him, to make people nervous.
On another note that girl Lilith that also writes for ywibaysfb is very good at writing said articles.
Migo
October 12, 2007 at 1:05 am
So someone doesn’t like a comic, it’s all a matter of taste anyway. He seems to be doing it as a sort of alter-ego and, from what I’ve heard, isn’t at all the same person on the Something Awful forums. So, perhaps it is a “character” after all.
FlameAdder
October 17, 2007 at 4:39 am
Well it looks like you were partially wrong. He’s on ‘hiatus’. Commence laughter.
Sean C
October 17, 2007 at 8:15 am
Wrote this before he went on hiatus, bud. No laughter required.
Rebochan
October 23, 2007 at 3:19 pm
A great article that hits on everything that is so horribly wrong with the Solomon blog. If he ever comes back from hiatus to scream at his readers some more, I’m sure he’ll comment on it.
Richard Preston
October 25, 2007 at 3:25 pm
WARNING! THE FOLLOWING COMMENT DOES NOT AGREE WITH YOU AND CONTAINS THE PHRASE ‘BUTTHURT’ A FEW TIMES! PLEASE ADOPT THE USUAL PROCEDURE OF WHINING LIKE A LITTLE CHILD THAT HAS BEEN TOLD IT CAN’T HAVE ANY ICE CREAM!
*sigh*
Once again, we have yet another individual butthurt at the fact that John Solomon said some mean words. Disguising your butthurt by claiming Solomon’s humour is juvenile and hypocritical is rather clever, but pointless when you actually read his reviews and find them well-written and, if not consistently hilarious (His PvP review, specifically, his paragraph of fatty jokes) then at least funny enough to support his truthful invective (his review of that hideously awful webcomic by JDR).
You think he’s mean? I’ve got news for you: JDR and mookie and all the little no-talent hacks need to realise that they are not talented - they are the opposite of talent. Sadly, having taste is not a mandatory prerequisite to being able to have an internet connection, so these idiots go on in their delusions by their circlejerking hordes. Therefore, Solomon has to be the truthful yang to their oblivious yin.
Oh, and patting yourself on the back for Solomon’s hiatus? One word: pathetic.
October 25th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Why would anyone whine because you used the term “butthurt” or didn’t agree with a point of view? Last I’d checked, “butthurt” wasn’t profanity and no one here is going to hold it against you for having a differing opinion.
As for back-patting over Solomon’s hiatus, I don’t recall anyone taking credit for that in the first place. So calling anyone pathetic over that means that you might not have fully paid attention while reading the article or accompanying comments. That and the fact that you went back no less than three pages to find this article and complain about it kind of worries me.
I do agree, however, having taste and/or some common sense should be a prerequisite for obtaining an internet connection. Sadly, it is not. Thanks for the reply, though. It’s always nice to see our site get feedback, be it positive, negative, or neutral.
James
November 5, 2007 at 12:40 am
Well, Sean C, I have read several of his blog entries and now your take on them, and I have to call you on a couple inaccuracies (at least, distortions) that I think you’ve made in your review of his website.
First off, Solomon isn’t “anti-webcomics”, as you claim in your second paragraph. If you bothered to read his first blog post, entitled “The Purpose of This Blog”, you would have noted, as I did, The following statement:
“This blog is about the terrible webcomics, the horrendous webcomics, the webcomics that manage to attract readers even though they really shouldn’t.”
That was a fairly simple find, took me all of one minute on his blog-site, and yet you absolutely ignore it or distort it right off the bat. The fact that there is also a link to a site called “Your Webcomic Can Still Be Saved” prominently displayed on the main page of his blog, clearly reinforces the message that while John Solomon might hate your webcomic now, there is still a glimmer of hope for you if you expend the effort to improve your writing, art, text or whatnot.
Also, I cannot agree with your assessment of his writing as “terrible”. I have seen terrible writing before and it is characterized by poor grammar, vague and confusing structure, spelling errors and tense disagreements. I don’t see any of that in either Solomon’s writing or, to be fair, in yours. I agree with your assessment of his prose as being unnecessarily profane, but that, I think, is a style choice more than anything else. To my mind judicious use of profanity can enhance that sort of rant-blog, but that’s a judgment call by the writer and I can say that the message of “I really hate this” doesn’t get missed with the stream of vitriol he spews.
I’m not particularly a fan of Solomon’s, but I absolutely loathe some of the horrific comics he so rightfully skewers and enjoyed his method of linking directly to the artistic failings he was seeing, and being able to judge those failings for myself. I wish more blog “journalists” put such effort into citing primary sources. He got it right more than he got it wrong, might be a fitting eulogy for this controversial blog.
Luck to you, Sean,
James.
INTERNET MALE!!!
December 6, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Wow, what an exercise in arrogance. This piece screams of hurt feelings.
OH NOS SWEAR WORDS AND DISAGREEABLE STATEMENTS
Migo
December 7, 2007 at 11:56 am
Even buried under two months worth of posts this piece is still a magnet for people to complain. Wow, I’m not sure, but I think that means we win.
December 8th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
It’s amusing is it not? It give me a chuckle.
December 9th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I’m especially amused by people who think this article was written because the guy dissed us… which, as far as I know, isn’t true ‘tall.
I guess the only exercise some people get is jumping to conclusions… ;^)
December 10th, 2007 at 1:00 am
I know, right? I love it when people start moaning and whining without getting all sides of the facts straight. Hooray for the Internet for giving everyone a voice!
Tina
January 11, 2008 at 12:39 am
Even though this reply is ‘months later,’ I want to point out that this link is one of the top results for a google search of ‘your webcomic is bad and you should feel bad.’ (The actual blog isn’t even among the results, so I came here to click on your link instead.) I don’t think saying that you ‘win’ because people supposedly ’scroll through x number of pages to find it’ is quite appropriate.
Also, Migo seemed to have a condescending reply to Richard’s obviously biased post, but no one addresses James’ very good points. Your article is inaccurate and biased and you shouldn’t be self congratulatory about it. :<
As a note, I agree with a lot of the article’s points, and find Solomon’s blog too negative and unconstructive (though often truthful). However, skewing facts as you have definitely doesn’t put you above him.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:04 am
After reading over my reply again I agree with you, it does sound condescending. Which wasn’t my point at all. I was shooting for sarcasm, but seemed to have missed my mark by a long shot. So, I do apologize for that. That’s one of the problems with the written word over spoken, there’s no contextual tone to accompany it. At any rate, I was wrong and will take my lumps like an adult.
To address the points that James made, Solomon may not be anti-webcomic but pointing out that a comic is horrible is more of an opinion than anything else, and the interpretation of the comic is really up to the reader. On the other hand, it is Solomon’s blog and it’s his opinion he’s writing from, so I guess like webcomic quality and the Constitution, it’s really just up to the point of view from which you’re looking. Offering a link to “salvation” is always a nice good-faith gesture though.
I haven’t read much of Solomon’s blog, mostly due to lack of time, but his writing didn’t impress or drive me away. It was pretty much your typical blog writing style, writing like you would think. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, many of us at Way of the Geek are “guilty” of the same thing, myself included. Not having read through the blog in its entirety, I also can’t call Sean on any inaccuracies.
As for the profanity, that call is completely up to the author. While we try to keep things family-friendly here, that doesn’t mean that we don’t curse or know anyone who does. I’ve known plenty of “colorful” people in my day and have been known to leave a string of angry words in my wake that would make them blush. Profanity isn’t a mark of poor writing, it’s just another tool the author has at his or her disposal, although I believe it should be used in moderation otherwise it loses its effectiveness.
While I’m not a fan of his site either, I didn’t and still don’t begrudge him for his site. Granted, I think there is room for him to improve as he wants others to improve, but we’ve all got a little room for that.
I hope this has covered what had gotten lost in the shuffle, and thanks for bringing my slip-ups to my attention. I try not to let things like that go, but sometimes they get right past me. Thanks for commenting as well. Even though the post is old it’s nice to see it can still bring in some new voices and fresh opinions.
Tina
January 11, 2008 at 5:01 am
I’m glad I found this tab still open and decided to refresh it (against what I thought was my better judgement), or I probably wouldn’t have seen your admirable reply. =)
I really appreciate the response!
Sean C
January 11, 2008 at 10:52 am
Okay, I haven’t really jumped in and responded to any of the comments I’ve read so far, but since this won’t seem to die, I might as well.
I’d like to say that I stand by my writing, including my stating that Solomon is “anti-webcomicsâ€. On the Something Awful forums, he goes by the name of Fuego Fish. It’s common knowledge that the two are one and the same, as Fuego often discussed his next targets, ranted against comics, and at one point, specifically stated he hated webcomics. If there was sarcasm in his statement, I didn’t detect it, as it was part of a gang-up on another bad webcomic. That’s the context I took, and given his writings, I don’t think it’s much of a reach at all to make such a conclusion; it came from the horse’s mouth. I regret not including that in the article.
People have thrown out accusations of arrogance, but this is the nature of opinion pieces; there are those who will passionately disagree with them, which is what I was doing with my article. I was disagreeing with Solomon and his style. I never went and declared victory of any kind, and I’m not putting myself on a higher level than anyone. I just don’t like what he did, and listed the reasons why. There was no revenge – I was never burned by Solomon.
I still stand by my statements that Solomon has a poor writing style. He jumped around, hammered you with profanity until he appeared to be little more than a ranting mental patient, and in some cases, linked guest strips rather than the work of the webcomic authors he targeted. He also was prone to gloating. His “whining bingo†card article, and his absolute dismissal of criticism, which was done in a child-like, vulgar manner, all go to show that HE was guilty of arrogance. I never called him on that, but the evidence was there.
Alright, I’m done with this now, so can we all just move on, please?
Thomas
January 13, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Criticism, even not-so constructive, does not make you “anti-”anything. Personally, I find his work funny, and rather than anti-webcomic, it tends to have the effect of introducing me to new comics, where I make the decision myself.
Norm
February 19, 2008 at 11:30 pm
I think you guys are missing the point. His site is not a “review site”. It’s a hall of shame for the worlds worst webcomics. The comments aren’t meant to be constructive. They are meant to be funny… and I think he succeeds in this (to an extent).
Robyn E. Kenealy
August 21, 2008 at 4:32 am
While I often find Solomon’s vitriol a little on the catty side, I have to say that whatever his style and however much of a “hater” he may be, he does valuable work. My respect for Solomon is based in the fact that, criticism of story structure or art aside, he unfailingly pings authors of webcomics for being sexist, racist and homophobic. As an ideological warrior, he never misses a trick, and I’ve found his attention to these details - especially when it comes to the two dimensional, boobylicious and downright regressive female characters some geekboy artists are wont to produce - pleasing, and frankly, I’ve waited a long time for some of these criticisms.
It’d be great if Solomon could tone down the passive agressive gay-bashing (see: Chasing Amy,) but he still has my vote for second funniest feminist.