In comic books which is more important to you or Important in Genreal the writing or the art work?
@JediXMan: You got good point. which do you look forward the most in a comic?
Depends. But I'll buy certain comics just because of the writer; won't do that for the artist most of the time. I didn't like the art in Sandman's the Kindly Ones arc, but the writing made up for it.
The writing. Look at this way. Take a story arc with writing you didn't like, and replace the art with whoever you think is a great artist. Do you suddenly like the story? Is it suddenly a book you'd recommend to others? In my case..it isn't. Now take a story arc you loved, and replace the art with whoever you think is a bad artist. Does it now become a comic you'd tell others to stay away from? Folks might have different answers than I do to those questions, but I've never said to anyone "Read this comic, the story's stupid, but the art is great! " I have said "Read this comic, the art isn't the greatest, but I loved the story."
Usually the story, but the art does have to be tolerable. I can think of several instances where the art of a book was so nausea inducing that I physically couldn't read it anymore. It just made my eyes hurt. I'd say 60/40, and it doesn't really matter which is out front. I'll read a slightly sub par story if it's still somewhat enjoyable and the art is really good, and likewise I'll read a comic with sub par art if the story is really enjoyable. But they need a good relationship. If the writing is horrendous, great art won't make it too much more enjoyable. Likewise, if the art is so horrendous that you can barely tell what's going on, or everything looks like crap, it will seriously impact my ability to enjoy it, no matter how good the writing.
I have never bought a book because of an artist but I have tried several new series because I like the author. I prefer realistic art as opposed to the fuzzy/shadowed/artsy stuff but the art would never preclude me from purchasing a well written story. If the art is bad, I just pretend it is a novel and get as much context as possible and change it in my imagination as I see fit.
Well first story and writing are not the same thing. Good art can and often does tell a story, you know? Sequential art? Sort of what comic books is all about. Not just that, just because a comic doesn't have words in it doesn't mean it doesn't have a writer. Some of the most critically praised Marvel comics are the special Nuff Said issue which contain no writing, but you know have writers. So as bizarre as it is, writing versus art as far as generally in comic books can be tricky. Traditionally in comics the comic books considered the best are thought of because of the writing, then again, comic books actually need the art to be considered a comic book, and some of the best comic books have artists who have tended to make the comic what it is, and allow the story to flow. Then you actually bring in talent into the mix? Like comparing Stan Lee's writing as the recipe for success or Jack Kirby's designs and visuals? Where is the actual story in a comic book? Is it in the speech dialogue or in the way Spider-man's facials or body moves and reacts? Not all writer to artists working relationship is the same, nor every comics dialogue to visuals relationship as far as telling a story.
See this was my issue with "manhattan project" I was digging the story. But the art was so friggin bad. very flat and everyone looked the same. I recall an issue of Wolverine right after Genisis tried to put back the adamantium back in him causing the 90's Feral wolverine. Anyways the entire issue had no dialogue, but had a story.
She can be the smartest and most caring woman in the world. but if shes ugly i'm not putting a ring on her finger...