phoenix64 | When you call me that, smile

I suppose I consider westerns to be something of a guilty pleasure. Genre fiction fights for respectability with mainstream fiction, but westerns have to fight for respectability in genre fiction. People seem to be a lot more willing to judge westerns as a whole by their worst examples while being much more forgiving of the embarrassments to be found in fantasy, science fiction, or mystery/crime fiction. Heck, the "paranormal romance" genre gets better press these days, which just goes to show that success provides its own respectability.

It's a shame that Westerns don't get more respect, because at their best they contain incredibly powerful mythic storytelling. To be fair I find this much more in western movies than western novels, but that's probably as much an issue of what I've been exposed to more than anything else. When it comes to westerns I'm really more of a movie girl, though that expands a bit when you consider writers whose aren't really thought of as writing straight westerns, such as Joe R. Lansdale. Plus, I have issues with John Wayne.

If you've hung around here long enough you might remember that last year I was planning on doing something for Script Frenzy with a Woman With No Name character (started, didn't finish). That actually used a modern setting, but there's no doubting the theme's western roots (I also like revenge tragedies). Anyway, I've been thinking about giving NaNoWriMo another stab this year (I'm overdue; I tried it in 2003 and 2005 but failed to finish both times), and I'm seriously considering a western, preferably something that captures what I like about western movies. With two female protagonists, mind you. No use of The Person With No Name character this time. Expect further noodling on the subject, probably.

How do you feel about westerns? Oh, and have any of you read Preacher by Garth Ennis?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

People seem to be a lot more willing to judge westerns as a whole by their worst examples while being much more forgiving of the embarrassments to be found in fantasy, science fiction

I haven't thought about it before, but I would have guessed the opposite! Non-fantasy/sci-fi people that I know regard the genre as being mostly cheesy and weird and full of hack writers, but they wouldn't say the same about Westerns.

With movies especially, I've always gotten the impression that they're well-respected - the ones I know about are regarded as great movies with good acting and writing and such. But like I said, I've never been much involved in the genre.

I guess my viewpoint might have something to do with being surrounded most of my life by people who were huge fans of fantasy and science fiction. Generally you say "western" to a lot of those people and they're going to talk about the ones that are basically the masculine equivalent of cheap romances. The movies, yes, do get a little more respect.

I'm weird about genre, partly because, as I said, I grew up around people who were fantasy and science fiction fans. Which meant those were the last things I wanted to read - I grew up reading horror. I've gotten over my knee-jerk rejection a lot since then, but I still don't think of myself as being part of that group. Which is odd, because I'm sure most people would put me quite squarely in that classification.

If I still had the kind of funds I did when reading Sandman, Hellblazer etc I'd have bought a few Preacher GNs by now. It looks like my kind of comic.

I don't know much about westerns, but I love that element in Firefly, and I've played Gun, which is brilliant. I suppose I haven't thought much about it, but I do like it.

Sadly when Preacher was first running I was actually buying comics, but the Glenn Fabry covers, especially the one for the premiere issue, really put me off. Now I'm sad that I spent all those years not knowing it (because I'm weird like that). But I still can't stand Glenn Fabry's covers.

I kind of wish I could quit Hellblazer. Sandman, Preacher, and Transmetropolitan at least only had finite runs (and Swamp Thing only had a finite amount of issues I gave a damn about), but Hellblazer passed its 20th anniversary this year and is still going like the freakin' Energizer bunny. It's a good thing I don't have kids, because I think that's the only way I can afford my graphic novel habit.

I had to give up Hellblazer in Mike Carey's run, which was a shame because I love Carey like crazy. I'll pick it up again some day because it's just brilliant.

I'm kind of thinking about splashing out on a graphic novel or two tomorrow, but in case they don't have the first volume, is it essential to start Preacher at the beginning? Or is there no problem picking up the story if I just grab one at random?

It's definitely a single story arc. I started in the middle and I wouldn't recommend it. (actually it was more like: 3, 6, 5, 1, 2, 7, 4, 8, 9) The only thing I'll warn you on is that the artwork is a bit rougher in the first volume. While it might be a bit confusing, you could start with the second volume, which will break your heart a little and give you possibly the best feel for the series as a whole. Mostly though I'd say read at least the first two before you decide you don't want to read the rest of it.

Any chance you could get them through the library system? I've found interlibrary loan, while taking forever, can actually get me access to most graphic novels. I was able to read The Invisibles that way.

Advice taken! I'll see what they have.

I'm not overly keen on library books. It's probably a good idea to check it out though.

When you call me that, smile

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject