Critiquing Comics 011: “Z-Blade XX”

Z-Blade XXA couple months ago on Deconstructing Comics, Tim talked to Reed Greenfield, creator of Z-Blade XX. This week, Tim and Mulele read and critique the first issue…uh, sorry, Reed, better hold on to your hat!

Published by


Resident of Japan since 1989, creator of "The Crazing Spider-Hag"

11 thoughts on “Critiquing Comics 011: “Z-Blade XX””

  1. What I found hilarious was your lazy podcast recording. Next time do it in a studio, not the train station cafe you were in.

  2. Not my deal to help you pay for studio time. Don’t be lazy, take pride in your podcast.

  3. See that’s a shitty critique – cause I don’t know your deal . . . why you don’t have studio, or why you don’t record at home. So I use a term like “lazy” cause I’m being an asshole. Critique would to be analyze the work . . . ie – “the integration of photos and art was unsuccessful. The work itself was done a disservice by the integration.”

  4. Sorry to be a little snide, and sorry that our recording setting didn’t work for you.

    Normally we record on Skype, because we don’t live near each other and our schedules don’t mesh well, but that day it was convenient to meet in person at a certain location and that’s what was available.

  5. That’s a perfectly fine explanation, none was needed. But you see how your decision could be interrupted as “lazy” when it was actually you guys not being “lazy.” If the point of the podcast is to be “snide” fine, but don’t ask to be taken seriously.

  6. As far as being snide, I was referring to my initial response to you, not to the podcast!

    As far as being taken seriously, I’ve heard perfectly respectable podcasts (e.g. Reduced Shakespeare Company) where they’ve recorded interviews in settings with more background noise than we had to deal with. I would hope that listeners will judge our podcast primarily on the content, rather than on where we record.

  7. I did judge your content. You didn’t offer a critique; other than saying the book needed an editor, what your offered was snarky banter that seemed to revel in tearing down a creator rather than actually giving a critique. You offered criticism not critique . . . interestingly enough you called yourself out on this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.