Talk:Dave Sim
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Quotes section
What is going on with the quotes section? My vote is that we choose quotes that are the wisest things Dave has said. Perhaps others want ones more characteristic of his eccentricities. Does anyone have any views one way or the other? Gregory Shantz 23:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)Gregory Shantz
I think that we should choose quotes that have significance and are relevant- wise, eccentric or otherwise. To limit quotes to those that portray Sim well or badly would be a disservice. Snipergirl 0558 (Aust Pacific Time), 4 March 2006
My feeling is that the quotes should be a sentence or two max and no more than 3 or 4 in total, but that's just me. Think in terms of sound bites. Full size quotes are readily available elsewhere. -- Richfife 23:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that the quotes should only be a couple sentences. I think they should be Dave Sim quotes only, not quotes from characters in Cerebus. It would be nice if the quotes were referenced. So if someone wanted to look up the rest of the essay it came from, then they could. Also, the quotes could easily be verified. Margaret 23:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Most of the material out there is directed towards his eccentricities (not surprising). I'm going to assume that area is either covered or very easily covered. I culled some links that are focused elsewhere: [1] [2] [3] [4] -- Richfife 16:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dave's Bio
I removed the sentence "Sim was admitted to Kitchener General Hospital by his wife and mother after several days of taking LSD" as the source used has several factual errors and is not a reliable source. If a reliable source would be cited, then I would understand including it. Margaret 02:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I switched to a more reliable source. -- Richfife 02:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The article should feature something about Sim's contretemps with Jeff Smith. I will add it if no-one beats me to it. Gregory Shantz 03:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Attending city council meetings, etc.
I'm not TOO offended by the last insert by 129.97.22.158 (I'm certainly not going to pull it), but a cite would be nice for verifiability. -- Richfife 21:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't add the statement you discussed above, but it is verifiable, Dave wrote a series of articles for Xen Magazine which from this article [5] (which appears now to be taken offline, but the google cache is still up): "As you have expressed interest in the hitherto closely-guarded secret of my Monday evenings—I am the only citizen of Kitchener, so far as I know, to attend all of the Public Committee meetings and City Council meetings" also, in Collected Letters 2004 on p. 204 is Dave's letter to Mayor Carl Zehr, the mayor of Kitchener which Dave talks about his attending City Council meetings. Margaret 02:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
This is probably a more stable link: [6] I'm of several minds here. Attending city council meetings doesn't mean you're not a recluse. Attend one sometime and you'll see what I mean. A lot of the people there come across like this is the only time they get out of the house. My gut instinct is that his reclusiveness is overstated, but I don't have any evidence either way. The "Saturday Night" article here [7] refers to him as reclusive, but implies that's only because of deadline pressure. -- Richfife 07:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I made the last couple of changes re: City Council meetings, etc. I was the co-publisher of Xen and live in K-W and can confirm, yes he goes to all the City Council meetings. That, plus attending SPACE and other conventions, doing guest work for stuff like Too Much Coffee Man and Following Cerebus, I think, kind of kills the "recluse" tag. Actually, as you can see from one of the XEN articles (the one on the Schoerg Barn), I would actually describe him as active in the local community. - Sandeep S. Atwal
[edit] Tangent
I reverted back the edit which made "Tangent" to "Tangents" as Dave's essay Tangent does not have an 's' on the end. I cited page 18 of Collected Letters 2004, quoting Dave: "...[I]f Dave Sim is so inherently and self-evidently wrong in "Tangent" and his other essays (and let me express my appreciation: you are the only person who has used the correct name instead of "Tangents")..." Margaret 02:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Highly Critical of Feminism vs. Opposed to Feminism
To be honest, the former is a much better description and is not unencyclopedic. -- Richfife 06:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dave is quoted in numerous sources stating he is "opposed to feminism." Stanley Lieber 21:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- That's all well and good, but he only gets one vote. Hardly anyone thinks of themselves as anything but a moderate, even people you and I would describe as extremists. -- Richfife 22:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- That's just it though: Sim doesn't think of himself as or portray himself as a moderate. He describes himself as "vehemently opposed to feminism in all of its forms." He's fairly easy to contact and we could ask him which way he wants it. The answer might surprise you. (Before this turns into an argument, I understand your point that how someone wants to be described may not be the best way to describe them; but my point here is that "opposed" is probably more accurate than "critical" precisely because Sim doesn't even pretend to be moderate -- in fact, he takes pains to explain that he is not moderate.) Stanley Lieber 20:41, 12 May 2006 (UT
-
-
-
-
- I see the problem. To me "Highly Critical" is a stronger term than "Opposed". To you, it's the other way around. Of course, Gregory Shantz changed the term already, so it's kind of a moot point. And "Driven into a state of psychotic rage that he attempts to mask with sarcasm" doesn't really work on Wikipedia. -- Richfife 16:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Day Prize
The entry about the Day prize makes it sounds like Dave Sim nominates AND selects the winner of the prize. Following Cerebus talked about how Dave picked the nominees and Gerhard selected the winner. So the entry should be changed, right? I'm new to this, so I haven't made the change yet, in case there's some reason it's how it is.
[edit] Sim's Religion
Dave Sim's take on "Abrahamic religion" is so very much outre that it cannot be blithely lumped in with the mainstream the way the article has done. It's way out on the fringe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogface (talk • contribs)
- I agree. - Richfife 02:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph beginning "He's also in the process of reading the gospels..." is completely garbled. I don't know very much about Dave Sim, and I can't even guess what this paragraph is trying to say, or else I'd edit it myself. I can say, however, that Westcott and Hort is a Greek New Testament, not a "Greek to English translation." The paragraph's bizarre defensiveness about Jehovah's Witnesses (note spelling) also doesn't make much sense to me; it seems to be arguing against a view that nobody has proposed. I hope somebody who knows something both about Dave Sim and about religion edits this into clear, meaningful English without the factual errors that riddle it now. --Hapax 20:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Cards on the table here, and with all due respect to the other editors, but some of the contributors to this article (and Sim fans in general) scare me (Not you, Hapax). I haven't been working on it much lately. - Richfife 01:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Picture?
What's with the picture? There must be a better one and one which doesn't make Sim look like an asshole.
- But he is one, so it seems approriate.
[edit] Influenced
Sim influenced Gaiman and Moore too.I'm adding.Anyone who doesn't agree should post here after reading Gaiman's blog and reading a little about Moore and Sim's relation.
[edit] Pre-Cerebus Work
For completeness it might be helpful to add Dave's contributions to both Captain Canuck [poster in Summer Special edition] and his pencil and ink work on Phantacea, which he was doing just prior to launching into Cerebus. Verne Andru 18:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
There is also his strip, The Beavers.Guest
[edit] Dave Photo
Who cropped that photo of Sim by Dave Fisher? Obviously someone without any design skills, it looks like crap now. I'm going to upload another one. Don't crop it! 216.16.232.250 (talk) 19:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you want to upload a better photo, please go ahead. I cropped that one because the purpose of Wikipedia photos is not to provide "action shots" of the subject or to promote their opinions, but to show what the subject looks like. - JasonAQuest (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- I concur. The original, uncropped photo was pretty inappropriate. I think the current cropping point is about the best that could be done given the source. - Richfife (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- If y'all would like a different photo, please feel free to grab one of the ones I took at SPACE last year and crop it as you see fit. Margaret (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- I concur. The original, uncropped photo was pretty inappropriate. I think the current cropping point is about the best that could be done given the source. - Richfife (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The picture has been updated. Thanks to Willbyr for the nice cropping job. I'll do the same to Mr Messner-Loebs picture and post his when I get back from work. Margaret (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Graphic novel
There are a number of sources which describe Cerebus as a single graphic novel. What that does to our definitions of te phrase is somewhat irrelevant. In Invaders from the North: How Canada Conquered the Comic Book Universe it is described as a "300-issue graphic novel", Graphic Novels: Stories to Change Your Life describes it as "a massive and massively daring novel mapped out over 6000 pages", indeed according to Kelly Rothenberg in Cerebus: An Aardvark on the Edge (A Brief History of Dave Sim and His Independent Comic Book) in 1979 "Sim proclaimed that Cerebus would be a 300 issue graphic novel with a definite beginning and ending". Dissent is voiced from Charles Hatfield, who notes in Alternative Comics: An Emerging Literature that Sim's "books are at best problematic examples of the 'graphic novel'". So, how to proceed, since ignoring these sources because of what they might do to a perceived definition of the graphic novel isn't really within our remit, is it? Hiding T 18:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- As in any field of art, a creator self-proclaiming that his comic-book series is a graphic novel doesn't make it so. James Frey called his autobiographical novel a memoir, for example, but that doesn't change the objective fact (as he, Oprah, and a highly embarrassed publishing company found out). Our definition of graphic novel at Graphic novel isn't so much the issue; it's how the publishing industry and general usage define it. And with all respect to John Bell and the over quarter-century old Dundurn Press, and to Paul Gravett and the even more distinguished publisher HarperCollins, these seem very much to be minority views.
- My suggestion, for what it's worth: Put this information in a footnote. I, for one, certainly think it's worth noting that Sim has said this and that two books report his doing so, because it adds to our understanding of the author/artist. But I don't believe Sim's saying so changes the fact of what was physically published. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'd be curious as to why you state these are minority views. And it isn't two books reporting him as saying so, it is two books describing it as so. There is one journal paper recording him having said so. How we proceed from here probably needs more editors, but I'm happy to let the facts speak for themselves. If we have sources which state the single body of work itself isn't a single graphic novel, fine. But using our definition of graphic novel or somebody else's definition to decide what it is or isn't is prohibited per no original research. Hiding T 19:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- The Frey, etc. issues you raised related to people making statements that were demonstrably false, as opposed to an author or critic's statements on how something should be classified. If Sim said Cerebus was a memoir, I certainly wouldn't support changing the classification to please him. - Richfife (talk) 19:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Creators, as many an aesthetics professor and professional critic has rightly noted, are not the best judges of their own work. And many are prone to grandiose self-assessments. Sim's opinion is not disinterested. Again, Steven Spielberg could call Taken a 20-hour movie — does that make it so? --Tenebrae (talk) 20:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
-
MERGE TAG REMOVED - IT BELONGS ON EACH OF THE ARTICLE PAGES - NOT ON THE TALK PAGE --Kevin Murray (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- I did try to begin a discussion on that page, and even gave a "hangon" rationale when that page was suddenly up for speedy deletion ... but it was deleted anyway:
- 01:33 . . NawlinWiki (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Talk talk:Dave Sim" (G8: Orphaned talk page of non-existent or deleted page)
- 01:33 . . NawlinWiki (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk talk:Dave Sim" (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup)