••

In just the way I did in my post.

••

Then it becomes about context. Any artist can look at any other artist's work and think Hmm, I would have done that differently. Artists can even spot fundamental errors in the work of others (and hopefully themselves!!).

Problems arise when some of these artists assume a position that allows them to "correct" the work of the other artist when there is not, in fact, an error to be corrected. Such as Larsen's apparent fixation on imaginary "tangents" in my work, or his demonstrating how he would have rendered a particular sequence (as with the GENERATIONS spread) but presents this as a "correction" of my work.

••

In a perfect world, no. In a perfect world there would be a line drawn, and no one whose work fell below that line would be allowed to draw professional comics. Luckily, this is not a perfect world, or I would have been kept out of the industry for DECADES!!

Let's talk turkey for a moment. Comic books are very low on the totem, as "ART". For every Joe Kubert there are a dozen hacks. More. And while some fans/readers are discriminating and even educated in the matters of art, most are not. Most respond solely to the "Cool Factor". Which is why there are many who would pick Rob Liefeld over Joe Kubert. Any one with a truly perceptive eye would know that choice was WRONG -- but taste is taste, and, in the end, it's actually a GOOD thing that we don't all have the same taste. After all, how BORING would that be!!

William S. Gilbert said it best. . .

Don't the day seem lank and long
When all goes right and nothing goes wrong
And isn't your life extremely flat
When you've nothing whatever to grumble at!