Cuteness

[Jorkens]

A lot of people (particularly those that don't like the comic) are talking about the high levels of cuteness in Erfworld, but personally, I'm bit confused by this. There seem to be two areas that are bothering people.
1) The 'childish' language. But what we're actually seeing is basically just 'w' substitutions in the names of mythic / fantastic beasts - about four so far - spidews, gobwins, dwagons and gwiffons to be specific. Beyond that, there's just a few silly names and (gasp) use of something other than Approved Fantasy Naming Convention for the casters. To read some of the forum posts you'd think that the whole comic is written in baby talk or something, but the language itself is actually really cool - I love the way that the characters talk and the window that that gives you onto their respective, er, characters. So Wanda comes across as being terse, serious and intelligent while Stanley talks just like someone who is (as the cast of characters puts it) good at giving orders and knowing what he wants, but bad at strategy, critical thinking and human resource management. Missing all this because they say 'dwagon' instead of 'dragon' to describe something that may not be exactly like a dragon is missing a lot IMO.
2) The art. Yeah, there are cutesy bits here too. But again they don't seem to me to be as dominant as some people are suggesting, and they fit into and enrich a fairly broad style. So the plush gwiffon and the arkenhammer are cute, but stuff like the flight scenes on page 3, Bogroll stood in the courtyard and the scene in Stanley's office feel more like something out of a Vertigo comic or something. The contrast between the two and the way that they intermesh isn't always laugh-out-loud funny but from where I'm sitting it adds a lot of background humour and individuality to the world.

So yeah - sorry about the length, but is anyone else finding that 'cute' isn't actually their overriding impression of the comic? I know that I can't make people like things that they don't, but it seems that a lot of people are getting so annoyed at the percieved cuteness of the comic that they're seeing a lot more of it than there actually is...

[Brickwall]

If the Mona Lisa had a big green splotch above her left eye, it would suddenly become much worse, right? Right. Now pretend the Mona Lisa has a much smaller audience. You get a reaction like the one you see.

It's not cute. That's the problem. It's stupid, and it really seems like a speed bump in the road of dialogue.

The art is all good, though. Not as deceptively complex as OoTS (it's complexity is obvious, I mean), but good.

[mikeejimbo]

I still think Wanda is kind of hot....

Other than that, I'd have to say "What cutesy speak?" After all, a spider is different from a spidew. They might not have griffons, but they're not the same thing as gwiffons.

The characters are not using cutesy speak, because that's actually what they are called in this world.

[Roethke]

As for myself, I tend to vocalize things that I read, especially comics, in my head. What ends up being jarring is that the "voice" that I end up with that has the 'w' for 'r' speech impediment is pretty childish or silly. (think cartoonish child, or the priest from Princess Bride).

[Demented]

If the Mona Lisa had a big green splotch above her left eye, it would suddenly become much worse, right? Right. Now pretend the Mona Lisa has a much smaller audience. You get a reaction like the one you see.

Heavens no.

It'd more like the reaction to Mona Lisa if it had been painted by a dadaist.
...oh wait...