Artist or writer?

[chongjasmine]

Will you prefer to read a comic by a good artist but poor writer or good writer but poor artist?

[Shawn Hopkins]

You need both to make a great comic, but the writer comes first always with me.

[Detox]

Of the two options, I will always choose to read a well written story with sub par artwork.

[Custodes]

One needs both really. Story, and good writing, always comes first!

No WARTISTS either please. That is, no artists who think they can write. Only a few really can write well.

[MRP]

It doesn't matter how good the writer is if the artist cannot tell a story visually. If you cannot follow the narrative because the art fails; it doesn't matter how good the story is in script form, it doesn't read well in comic form. The artist controls the pacing, staging, body language, acting, direction, mood and tone of the story through the visuals even if the writer is using full script. Conversely, no matter how pretty the pictures, a poor story/script isn't going to result in a satisfying read either as the artist can't tell a good visual story if there isn't one to work with. It's a collaboration (unless it's a cartoonist who does all the heavy lifting of story and art themselves at times a la Eisner, Barks, Mignola, McNeil, McCloud, etc.) and both have to be good storytellers for it to be a satisfying read. If a book doesn't have a good writer, I am not likely to even give it a second look, if it doesn't have an artist with strong storytelling skills, I'm likely to pass no matter who the writer is. The style of art can vary wildly, as long as it tells the story well. However comics is a visual medium, and a good script is only the start of a good comic. Without strong visual storytelling it's not a good comic (just as a movie with a strong screenplay is not a good movie unless it has good directing and acting, cinematography, and editing, etc.). I am not reading the writer's script, I am reading a visual sequential narrative. But again the visual storytelling doesn't even come into play unless there is a story worth telling, so it starts with the writer.

It's not an either or proposition for me. There are too many good comics out there to read past and present for me to waste time and money on a product/story that doesn't measure up in both areas.

-M

[Spike-X]

I'll dump a comic for poor writing before I'll dump it for poor art*. I'm also more likely to try out a new comic if it's by a writer I like and an unknown (to me) artist, than vice versa.

*Unless the artist is Leinil Yu, who can turn the best-written story into incomprehensible garbage with his non-existent storytelling skills and butt-ugly art.

[Paradox]

It's all about execution. I've seen both good writers with bad artists and bad writers with good artists produce reasonably decent material. I've seen each combo fail miserably. I've also seen utter shite from good artists with good writers, too. It's too individual to break down binarily (which is probably not a real word ).

[mathew101281]

Good art can grab your attention but it takes a good writer to keep you coming back once the art style looses it's novelty.

[t hedge coke]

They're all storytellers to me. So I just want good people doing good work. Whoever. Or, everybody.

[RexVander]

Good art is necessary, but I'll drop a book a whole lot quicker if the writing isn't up to par. I suffered through too many pretty books with no substance back in the nineties to abide sloppy writing now.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Story always comes first for me, even in a purely visual medium like comic books.

[jeanvaljean]

You need both to make a great comic, but the writer comes first always with me.

It's like that 99% of the time for me, but I will skip a Greg Land book pretty much no matter who writes it.

[Arfguy]

I will not read a great writer's book, if the artist is not to my liking. However, I can withstand mediocre, to even terrible writing, if the artist is awesome.

[Hero]

Of the two options, I will always choose to read a well written story with sub par artwork.

+1 for me too.

[DanArt]

Without art itself, I would probably be into photography instead. Without art Japan would be another Thailand or mainland deep China.
Without art I would probably have a harem instead of books.

Look at the horror show Aeon flux was in the theaters............Is TrevorGoodChild a fat slow moving tubby????? Where is Aeons signature hair and weightless breasts? That entire movie should have been fit tall people but no. They wasted good film, food, and peoples lives just to make a terrible movie. Why? Because MTV executives already was pushing for a certain actress to be Aeon.............................................. .................................................. .................................................. ........................why MTV....why??????????????

You have tons of boring stuff out there, to read or look at. Thanks to the art it is worthy of being in my stacks or my desktop.

Yes the artist is the writers bitch. But the artist gets to decide how things are viewed. You show me a comic with terrible art but the writing is of biblical proportions. There is none. The art has to be good otherwise I would fall asleep. Even some artwork from 1500's is worthy, and I do not know half the stuff that is going on.

.....................

However writing does matter in terms of stories. Take "Starwars". It is like "Gilgamesh" for some people. When 1-3 was out, the only thing that made that film any good was the relationship with Annie and Vador, throwing the emperor over a cliff. Now this new movies ( under Disney flagship ) also have a lot of haters. What will be it's saving grace? I personally did not like the 1-3 now until years later.