published editorial


Happy comicbooks Wednesday! I share with you a little proyect I have with my pal @danieruhuli, the anthropomorphization of our favorites comics publishing houses (and seals)! Hope you like it, and please make me know if you want us to design another one of your liking!


HOLY PRINTERS: The printed object


Holy printers is a visual study of the printer machine and the action of printing but also a visual response to the question: IS PRINT DEAD? Proposing the functional object as a symbol of the culture it’s involved and how it’s being glitched out of it.

Holy printers is separated in two projects: one is printed and the other one digital in order to create a dialogue between the computer and the printer. This is the tangible part of the project.

watch the digital part here: holy printers: the audiovisual

Printed in riso green and black

luna-y-amores  asked:

Hello! So... I wanted to know if there is a way to send fanmail to Adachitoka. The reson why is Noragami is going to be published at Mexico by Editorial Panini Manga! Yay! And also because of the hiatus :) I just want to let them know that even in Mexico we care about the two of them :( and that we hope everything goes fine. Thanks -May

Took some digging, but I found a Twitter post from Gekkan Shounen Magazine instructing to address fan letters to the Gekkan Shounen Magazine Editorial Department and they will be handled from there.

The address is:

Gekkan Shonen Magazine Editorial Department
2-12-21, Otowa
Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 112-0013


東京都 文京区音羽2-12-21

International postage tends to be determined by weight, so you’ll have to take the letter to the post office to determine the necessary postage.


Covers to a line of books about (mostly) Italian comics auteurs published by Editori del Grifo in the early 1980s (save for #11, which came out in 1994).

  1. Guido Crepax
  2. Hugo Pratt
  3. Dino Battaglia
  4. Milo Manara
  5. Andrea Pazienza
  6. Gianluigi Bonelli/Aurelio Galleppini
  7. Jean “Moebius” Giraud
  8. Altan
  9. Tanino Liberatore
  10. Attilio Micheluzzi
  11. Giorgio Cavazzano

“Depicting women in chains was ubiquitous in suffrage cartoons from the 1910s, in which women sought to be emancipated by gaining the right to vote.

…Wonder Woman is bound in almost every one of her adventures, usually in chains. The bondage in Wonder Woman comics raised hackles with [publisher Max] Gaines’s editorial advisory board, but [Wonder Woman co-creator William Moulton] Marston insisted that Wonder Woman had to be chained or tied so that she could free herself — and, symbolically, emancipate herself.

—From “The Secret History of Wonder Woman” by Jill Lepore

Can we please do away with the notion that bondage in 1940s Wonder Woman comics is nothing more than her creator’s sexual kink? 

The Wizarding World and General Fandom Rant

I hope this comes out as eloquently as I’ve been thinking it up in my head, but I I fear I’ve already failed with my first sentence. My fury at the respect given to The Wizarding World fandom and the works it’s grown from has reached a fever pitch, and what I’m angry about is multi-faceted and quite complex, so please bear with me while I try to explain it in some reasonably sane way.

I’ve realized that, to be honest, a lot of people do not respect the Harry Potter stories and the world it created. They don’t. And among a very large size of the population, that ignorance and that disrespect is promoted. Forgive me for being over-dramatic, but the stories are patronized and trivialized to an astonishingly laughable and horribly shocking extent, you’d almost think it was vendetta-ized, and it partially is. My irritation and my seeming irrationality comes from the fact that (with full respect to other fandoms,) The Wizarding World is the last fandom/extended universe to deserve this kind of treatment. 

I hate the fact that I even have to argue a point that I think is proved by The Wizarding World IP already: That this franchise is astonishingly mature for a four quadrant piece of branded, commercial fantasy entertainment. It’s overall very stylistically dark and gritty, thematically heavy, disturbing, and complex, contextually violent and shocking, and, in a narrative sense, extremely ambitious and groundbreaking. It takes risks where other IP’s don’t. It’s a coming of age epic that translates and segues into a global conflict/drama, that manages to hang onto personal and intimate storytelling, rather than blow every plot element out of proportion with ridiculously cosmic effects and plot elements a la Star Wars, or Marvel, allowing the content to be moving, upsetting, affecting, and deeply life-changing. It is, despite so many people’s insulting trivializations, a modern classic, in my opinion. From every facet you look at it, its hardly indistinguishable from adult fantasy, and that’s because Rowling created it for adults as much as she did a younger audience of teenagers or even tweens. No one is saying its the best intellectual property ever to grace this earth, but it is supremely intellectual and truthful and important for modern IP, and that, to me, is obvious. From an aesthetic and stylistic standpoint to a deeper thematic one.

Yet so many people, including those within the fandom, I will add, seem to never want to represent it as this, or give it any of the credit they would give any other film or book forg maintaining even a quarter of the gravitas Harry Potter has. In the case of Harry Potter and J.K. Rowling’s Wizarding World, no one ever addresses anything meaningful within the series. It’s always torn down, placed on a lower shelf, and even actively pushed aside by people hoping to exclude and already biblically popular story from the cultural consciousness.

What I mean by this is as follows:

1) What is Harry Potter known for?: Think about it. What is the first thing that someone who doesn’t have a very good knowledge of The Wizarding World going to associate with the series? If my time spent outside the fandom is any indication (lol, I live here,) it’s all irrelevancies. Ignorant journalists forced to publish and editorial on the Potter fandom use universally known photos from irrelevant scenes of a fresh faced, geeky looking Harry James Potter from film 1 because that’s the only face of the story they’re familiar with. Often, it seems oddly intentional. Journalists often seem to write about Potter with as patronizing a tone as possible. Repeatedly associating the fandom and the story with geeky, awkward first film promotional photos and rare cartoons of Harry from some once-published 2014 commonwealth re-release or that old Goblet of Fire cover is an easy way to undermine the strength of the story, and it’s not something you see done to any other property.

But also, what do people talk about when Harry Potter comes up? People might bring up the melodramatic “Luke, I am your father” quote from Star Wars, “You Shall Not Pass,” from Lord of The Rings or the heart-ripping scene from Indiana Jones, but with Harry Potter, people only seem to be able to mumble out a screed of irrelevancies, typically consisting of “10 points to Gryffindor, Bertie Bott’s Beans, and Quidditch,”…that’s shameful. Here’s a list of things that are hardly associated with the Wizarding World brand despite the fact that they extend far beyond a few symbols of innocence/world building details from the first book:

The Death Eaters, The Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore’s Army, The unforgivable curses, The Philosophers stone, The Chamber of Secrets, Sirius Black and the Marauders, the Sacred Twenty Eight and the House of Black, Draco Malfoy and the Malfoy Family, Peter Pettigrew and his betrayals, Lily and James’ Heartbreaking romance, The First and Second Wizarding Wars, The Goblet of Fire, The Triwizard Tournament, and the Rebirth of Voldemort, The Battle of the Astronomy Tower, Department of Mysteries, the Seven Potters, and Hogwarts, Gringott’s Wizarding Bank, Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade, The Dark Mark, Albus Dumbledore’s tragic past, Lord Voldemort and his entire back story, Dolores Umbridge and the corrupt ministry of magic, Horcruxes, divination, prophecies, and seers, Sybill Trelawney, Cho Chang, Lavender Brown, the Patil twins, the Weasley twins, Delphi Diggory, Bellatrix Lestrange, Azkaban, the entire extended story on Pottermore and the International Confederation of Wizards and Regulus Black, wandlore, MACUSA, the Deathly Hallows, Leta Lestrange, Credence Barebone, and the entire events of Fantastic Beasts and Cursed Child, Obscurials, Grindelwald, Dumbledore’s sexuality, love potions, combat spells and wizarding academics and ministry departments, and international wizarding communities and dementors, inferi, and on and on and on…

Why do you never hear of these things when you ask someone to discuss Harry Potter? Why do I have to read editorials about how quaint Harry Potter is because it imbues magic with “eating jellybeans?” Because it would totally blow the patronization attempt out of the water if they were to focus on anything remotely plot related. Instead, we live in a world where even members of the fandom have joked themselves into thinking that the only things about these stories that matter are Hogwart’s houses, fucking magic candy only ever mentioned once, and a niffler that appears for 1/16th of the scenes in Fantastic Beasts. Can we grow up and talk about plot and character shit, you know, the stuff that actually matter? Thanks.

This leads me to my second point:

2) Blatant patronization. Infantilization. Treating the franchise as diminutively as possible, handling it like a crayola turd just dropped from a 3 year olds asshole. I can’t honestly believe I’ve had to sit through article after article of journalists and even fandom members who contribute Potter’s success to “eating jellybeans,” “being more innocuous than Bambie,” “lighter than the Chronicle’s of Narnia,” “similar to Percy Jackson and Savvy,” called “G-rated wizardry,” have tv shows and books and films be termed “a grown up Harry Potter,”…its just extraordinarily insulting to me, especially there’s no coherent argument I can give. It’s hard to be able to think coherently when you’ve just read an editorial on how “squeaky clean, harmless, and unchallenging,” all the Wizarding World films are when they rated Mrs Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children appropriate only for 15+ year olds and called the Star Wars franchise a “sci-fi epic for mature adults.” My brains reacts to it as if I’ve just heard someone compare Game of Thrones to Spongebob. It’s just horribly incongruent to everything this series has come to be known for.

These are some of the more extreme examples, but too often I’ve seen members of fandom who still treat it diminutively. “The childish stuff is what Harry Potter is about,” and, when confronted with the dark realities of Merope Gaunt’s treatment of Riddle and Severus Snape’s murder, “yea, but I just forget about that dark stuff because it’s a childrens book.”

Jesus Christ, lets set something straight:

Allow me to drop some facts on these commenters for a hot second. The majority of the audience, as researched by a number of publishers, lies within the 15-30 year old age range. In terms of marketing, there are no toys, very little kids clothing, comparatively few young skewing published editions globally, little to no instances of kid-marketed visual media. live entertainment, fandom experiences instances of retail…It’s all adult retail, items sold through Pottermore, and Hot Topic, The Noble Collection, Primark, Interior Design, Elope, Hot Rags, The WB Shop, Universal Orlando, Spencers, BMW, King Ice, Carat Jewelers, Hallmark…. It’s mainly marketed to a mature audience. So patronizing treatment on this front is unwarranted. 

The second part of this is content. The questionable content is never indulgent. But it is often shocking, horrific, tragic, occasionally graphic, bloody, mild to moderately gory, disturbing, thematically resonant, and intentionally creepy to say the least, and there’s increasingly no magical veneer to hide beneath. The setting is more or less realistically painted and the altercations are personal, the emotions real, the characters realistic…most of the films are rated PG-13, a number of the films nearly R, and restrictively rated in regions from Australia to Eastern Europe, to Asia, to the UK and Ireland and Latin America…

This is all extremely important. Its extremely important that we recognize potter for these things. Conflict is only dramatically effective if it contains the strength and potency to make it so, and by, excusing it away, calling it safe and clean where it isn’t, you’re effectively neutering it for no other reason than to give someone a false impression. 

It isn’t for kids. That’s not saying they can’t and don’t read it, or an audience of children has never been sought after or even directly marketed to. But look at Star Wars: Marketing through Disney Channel cartoons, Toys R Us, Sippy Cups, The Disney Store, and look at DC and Marvel doing the same thing. Look at all of those brands doing the “fast and funny action spectacle” films to please as wide an audience as possible. It takes, in essence, no creative risks, and yet it feels as if these franchises get lauded for, again, having only a quarter of the gravitas the Wizarding World has. 

Recognizing these stories for being unique in the sense that they are mature and they are challenging is exactly what’s appropriate for Rowling’s storytelling. Percy Jackson, often finding itself at the base of comparisons for the Harry Potter series, clearly skews younger than it. With short books, slang-y writing, an over-abundance of sophomoric humor, clean conflict, and chapter titles like “I Scoop Poop,” I’m equal parts bemused and frustrated that comparisons are made. At the same token, Chronicles of Narnia is an extremely lighthearted, short, simple, puritanical story of adventure and fantasy. Potter isn’t. It’s contemporary, edgy (in the non-eye-roll-worthy sense of the word,) inventive, sophisticated, and energetic, but slow, complex, extremely adult in sensibility, aesthetic, tone, and writing. Star Wars, while immersive, preoccupies itself with far more childish oddities and humorous diversions than Potter does and maintains an extremely irreverent and light tone throughout, Marvel is similar but even more conveyor-made, and Lord of the Rings, for all the intellectuals who champion its brilliance (and it is brilliant) and superiority over Potter fail to realize the importance of maintaining recognizable thematics, mature conflict, and emotion within a story. 

And this is beneficial to those younger children that do read the stories. You are, by suggesting the Potter stories are merely escapist inconsequential fantasy for childish types, telling a lie, and you are also insulting their intelligence. What type of judgment are you making about an adult or a child’s character when you suggest, however innocently, that their favorite stories are nothing but irreverence, that they’re clean, and dispute any kind of attempt to get you to see that they are thematically relevant and important! Harry Potter and Jo’s Wizarding World is so deeply and emotionally attached to our society for a reason. let’s treat it accordingly. These stories are bold, and groundbreaking, and thrillingly dark and heartbreaking, and WE LOVE THEM FOR THAT.

That’s not to say we can’t ever mention irrelevancies. But to caricaturize the Potter stories with them like we have is shameful and disappointing. And the oft-repeated argument is “kids books are still important.” Yes you’re right. They are. But not in the way I’m discussing. Not in the way Potter is. Harry Potter does not fit in such a young-skewing, streamlined, narrow category:

The story includes thematics pertaining to murder, betrayal, torture, war, depression, abuse, tragedy, love and hatred, spirituality and the nature of life and death, sadomasochism, genocide, totalitarianism, corruption, blood purity and inbreeding, corruption, lust and desire, fascism and naziism, vengeance, gray morality, even rape and manipulation and grooming and forced murder and torture…Keep making comparisons to the 100+ year old “Grimm’s Fairy Tales” and likening it to just another kids book all you want, but it will never fit that mold, and I think we need to treat the series like it’s worthy of the majority adult audience and marketing scheme that it already has and has had for years.

That’s my issue: where is the proof that it’s “for kids”?! There is none! I find it strange that people will praise The Hunger Games, an increasingly vapid and typical dystopia for being “mature and sophisticated” or even Rogue One and Civil War for being “very adult and heartbreaking,” but then turn around to The Wizarding World, a universe that has about 5x the sophistication, and repeat the tired “Grimm’s fairytales did it first argument. Im sick of it.

This whole rant came about because I saw so many reviewers admonishing Fantastic Beasts for being dark, and thematically resonant, and too political, either openly shaming that side of the story, or pretending like it didn’t even exist. Every time Potter film is released, there’s someone somewhere writing a review admonishing the “horrendously dark tone” at the expense of “kid-skewing charm” or some other stupid shit. I just don’t know where to end this.

The Wizarding World is, evidently, the ballsiest, most truthful, most ambitious and dark and heartbreaking and resonant four quadrant piece of branded entertainment out there. It’s every bit as important and as grim and truthful as any fantasy ever has been. 

Can we start treating it like it is? Please?

(pardon the typos. Absolutely no time to edit this. Just embrace the general message. Hope it flows well enough.) 

Universal literacy was supposed to educate the common man to control his environment. Once he could read and write he would have a mind fit to rule. So ran the democratic doctrine. But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given him rubber stamps, rubber stamps inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of the tabloids and the platitudes of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man’s rubber stamps are the duplicates of millions of others, so that when those millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. It may seem an exaggeration to say that the American public gets most of its ideas in this wholesale fashion. The mechanism by which ideas are disseminated on a large scale is propaganda, in the broad sense of an organized effort to spread a particular belief or doctrine.
—  Edward L. Bernays, Propaganda

Ok but imagine someone finds out that some journalist for a gossip website is writing an article on Kara and the DEO tries but they can’t get access to it and they’re all freaking out thinking it’s a Supergirl reveal and the article comes out titled ‘Who the hell is Kara Danvers?’ And it’s got a series of photos of her with Clark Kent and Lois Lane, her following after Cat Grant and interacting with Maxwell Lord. There are pictures from her college internship working at Wayne Enterprises - including candids of her eating lunch with the elusive Bruce Wayne himself. There’s a photo from years ago when she met Diana Prince while visiting Clark. A picture of her and Lena Luthor sitting close, leaning in to each other and whispering. There are excerpts of her quotes from supergirl, someone she seems to know personally.

At no point does the article mention her possibly being supergirl. It only talks about how this seemingly plain, average 20-something from a coastal small town is somehow connected to many of the most powerful and influential people from coast to coast. And thanks to the DEOs attempts to get the article before it’s published, there’s an editorial addition at the end that says after announcing plans to write on the reporter, their servers were attacked and nearly hacked in to in an attempt to stop its publication.

“So I ask you,” the article ends, “who exactly is this Kara Danvers?”

On This Day: April 26

Lesbian Visibility Day

  • 1905: French anarchist filmmaker Jean Vigo was born.
  • 1907: Belfast Dock Strike beings 1907 lead by Jim Larkin.
  • 1937: Fascist bombing of Guernica during the Spanish Civil War, 1650 killed.
  • 1943: Easter Riots in Uppsala, Sweden as anti-fascist protesters are dispersed by the police as they protest nationalist meeting.
  • 1946: Jewish anarchist Philip Josephs dies in Sydney, Australia.
  • 1958: Founding of All India United Trade Union Centre, labour body of Socialist Unity Centre of India.
  • 1960: President of South Korea Syngman Rhee is forced out of office by “April Revolution” after twelve years of dictatorial rule.
  • 1966: Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzales founds Crusade for Justice, the start of a campaign for gaining Chicano civil rights.
  • 1968: National student strike by 1million US high school and college students against the Vietnam War.
  • 1989: The Chinese newspaper People’s Daily publishes an editorial criticising protests in Tiananmen Square, further inflaming movement.
  • 1994: Black people vote in South Africa’s first multi-racial election following defeat of Apartheid.
  • 1998: Human rights activist Bishop Juan Gerardi Conedera killed after blames US-backed govt for atrocities in Guatemala’s civil war.
  • 1999: WAAKE-UP! held a rally encouraging the University of Colorado to dissolve the University’s neutrality policy on investments and sign a basic commitment to human rights.