T P wrote:
I think assuming that Scout McCloud's POV outweighs mine is bad.
I don't. I stay away from all science discussions because I don't know science. People may be smart to do the same regarding webcomics, especially when we have people who DO know webcomics who have more significant input.
I am not claiming that the field is not important. I am claiming that we shouldn't take Scout McCloud's word for it that it is important.
The idea that an "expert" (I put it in quotes for a reason) wouldn't better understand the importance of something is somewhat insane, Adam. This isn't our traditional content debate, where we're discussing whether something is verifiable - verifiability doesn't really change depending on whether a person is an expert or not - but it's a discussion as to something's significance in the absence of traditional reference. Maybe in 15 years, people will write books and papers on webcomics, and we'll be able to refer to seminal webcomics the way we can with seminal emo bands now - bands that were significant 15 years ago, but only got written about recently. Until then, do we look stupid and ignore it, or invite input from people who know better than us? We talk about "common sense" here, this seems like a no-brainer to me.
-Jeff