Whose hype did you buy into?

Dude, Gaiman's brain is, like, this awesome story making factory. He thinks up these marvelous ideas and molds it into something readable. I can't- I can't believe you-

You just need to read more of his stuff. What did you read?

Well, I don't think he's all that self-obsessed. He writes in his online journal everyday, answering people's emails. He also makes sure to sign books for everyone standing in line, no one gets turned away. I think he cares a lot of about his fans and works really hard.

He's not selfish, no. Whatever else there is on his plate, if you want to idolise him, he'll make time for you :)

What he isn't is some kind of Kirby-esque ideas factory. He's ten times the craftsman than he is the artist.

I would definitely disagree with that, as he really does seem to be a pretty humble guy. As good as his reputation is something else entirely, as I'm sure in some circles his name is synonomous with "literary comic" or what have you.

I don't know, I haven't read everything he's done (at least comics-wise), but I have enjoyed what I've read and he's way ahead of the curve at any rate.

(I also think he suffered from not doing the weekly UK comics grind - his plotting and pacing lacks the tightness you get from most of his UK import peers)

The best things about Sandman were the short stories - the Augustus one in particular I remember as being good - but my favourite Gaiman comic moment was in Books Of Magic, with the kid exploring some magical rural landscape, partly because it reminded me of childhood holidays but it really did seem to capture some of the power and capriciousness of fairy-tale, a genuinely 'magical' moment. ISTR that the rest of the series was a bit rub tho.

Um.

VG: I've read every single Sandman trade, bought and reread most of them. And I even bought that Sandman companion. I have to admit that the meta-arcs of Sandman eluded my attention for the most part (yes, in certain ways, I'm a sloppy/lazy reader), but what most rubbed me the wrong way was his prose, which at times seemed to be derived from gothy, teen-whinging-in-a-diary style of writing (e.g. "She... has decided she no longer loves me.") (paraphrase). In other words, I found him to be overly precious. As a tool for comparison, check out Dave McKean's Cages. His dialogue trumps Gaiman's in terms of cadence, authenticity (take w/ a grain of salt because a Yank is speaking here) and maturity.

(And what Tico Tom sez about the overall UK-crew -- even though I'm hardly a fan of any of them, I agree with him that their pacing is usually spot on.)

(I'll stop before I start the literariness debate, which would be difficult to discuss objectively.)

BUT. The "Dream Hunters" novel with Yoshitaka Amano was superb. (I haven't seen you mention that yet VG, make sure you check it out.) As far as I'm concerned, the best thing he's ever done.

as something to find in the library at fourteen and obsess over for a couple months it was more or less perfect. also they were missing a couple so i got to assume that if i'd read the rest it'd all make perfect sense, which buying the other two or three sort of proved they didn't. (if the plot of the series does hang together at all it's by depending on really cheap fantasy getouts, somewhere, but i'm not sure) so i bought into the reputation for a while.

problem with gaiman is that he doesn't seem able to balance the sides of him that think morpheus is SO COOL with moments like the thing above, perhaps

favorite thing he's written ever is maybe the story about the adolescent obsessed with elric, but then again it might be awful.

I think I'd love it if all comics writers goofed off with their superheroes/angels/demons/mythological manifestations instead instead of, you know, doing what they do.