Why I Haven't Reviewed Green Lantern Mosaic 

Mosaic as a young black comic fan was the first time i felt seen by the medium. It's a work that contain deep and complex ideas that i did not at the time was able to express. While Jones is at points naive and not being Black missess the mark at points, I will forever applaud the fact that he for one confronted these issues head on and did not shy away from John's Blackness and two also the level of context and internal struggle and introspection given to all the characters in the book . I feel alot of unity in your remarks and also am still uneasy. Thank you for posting this.

Green Lantern Mosaic was one of my favorite comic books as a teenager, and it has a special place in my heart. I refuse to let Jones' actions in real life take that away from me.

First of all, ALL CRIMES MUST BE PUNISHED. I don't want what I'm about to say to be misinterpreted in any way. If someone commits a crime, the law must punish it. So, let me tell you, yesterday I was watching an art critic talking about this problem, and how neopuritan is the idea of discarding all the work of an artist who committed a crime. Laws must punish crimes, but not artwork. Some of the greatest artists have committed some horrible crimes, but we should censor their creations only when the artworks itself are in the service of some despicable cause (Like Heidegger, who put his work at the service of the Nazis) or when the artwork it's a crime by itself (the "art" that mistreats animals or people), or works that promotes nefarious agendas, like racist, classist or homophobic propaganda masked as art. Because that's not art. There's no art without ethics. But that's entirely different when some artists commit a horrible act in their private lives, out of their work. Picasso is said to have committed sexual harassment and is suspected Edgar Degas did so too; Leonardo da Vinci had to escape from Florence due te many scandals with his lovers; Francis Bacon was a painter who pursued all kind of life's excesses - from drink and drugs to promiscuity... the history of arts is full of people who comited many reprehensible acts, but that doesn't make their work less valuable from the aesthetics point of view. As bad as their acts were, that doesn't make their work less good. So, we should be able to see above the artists, and see the art they made, and see what they created. Especially when it is a collaborative work with innocent artists who did nothing wrong! We shouldn't punish them nor sweep their work under the rug for something a jerk did (a talented jerk is still a jerk, there's no discussion in that). And yeah, maybe one could never see their work as before, but we should keep apart what is art, and what is life. You've talked many times about this series, and I'm very intrigued about it. I hope you can overcome the writer's private life, and find the joy his work was meant to bring to the world. Personally, I think I'll give it a try. If those stories are as good and valuable as you said, maybe DC should make the same that SpectreVision did after director Richard Stanley (Color Out of Space) was accused of domestic violence, saying that all of the profits of that movie were going to be donated to charities devoted to stopping domestic violence. Maybe we should write to DC asking them to do that. Thanks for the video, you're becoming one of my favourite youtubers.

Your ability to describe your experiences is really impressive. I feel like I grew by watching this. I also respect the honesty about how you’re meeting the challenges here. It’s important to see you acknowledge the very real consequences of a project like this. I wish I saw more responses like this when harmful behavior gets tied to things that are important to us. The honest application of context lets us choose our level of participation for ourselves as we go along with you

I am honestly ok with releasing the material as long as he receives none of the profits or a percentage is donated to s charity. I remember having the same issue with H.P. Lovecraft especially as a minority, but I just conclude that he is dead, and can't receive any profits or be glorified because the fact that his views have been exposed for how wrong they are.

Finally answering the question I've had since I first found your channel :)

Wow, great video, thanks for the trigger warning 👍🏿 and I like that you didn't assume there's a definitive answer in dealing with this but left it open

I agree with Sergios idea that Jones' profits should be donate to charity, but I believe that would violate some sort of contract and/or law on the books about creator percentages and royalties. Moving forward perhaps any further contracts should have laws about "conduct becoming" and stipulate under what circumstances a profit chain can be cut off, and establish a proper restoration process and "backpay" should allegations be revealed to be untrue. But then you get into corporate law, if not criminal law, and clearly I'm woefully unprepared to speak on such topics, so I'll leave them as mere suggestions. It's something I wrestle with as well Dan. Recently I received my Green Lantern #43 (the Blackest Night prologue issue where Black Hand kills himself) graded and officially signed by Doug Mahnke and....Geoff Johns. As you personally well know, I started reading comics regularly with the Rage of the Red Lanterns Final Crisis one-shot. The Johns era and its entire impact on my fandom is the ESSENTIAL FOUNDATION on which all further comic book fandom of mine rests. Yet I cannot look at that slabbed, graded, and signed KEY ICONIC ISSUE on my wall without trepidation. Johns has been accused of some very callous behavior, and his near disappearance from the public eye doesn't help (however smart of a PR move it may be to some public strategist who thought up the idea). It's tricky business to cherish and admire the works of someone accused of (or guilty of) such awful things. Praising their creative efforts feels like praising THEM. Like aligning with them. As if lauding the portion of the mind responsible for the work on the page, is a compliment to the rest of the brain that committed such acts. And as someone who took their fandom a step further and dove DEEP into comic book history, and who started a podcast LITERALLY called CREATIVE CREDIT, I cannot help but struggle internally with such concerns as well on that level. Fighting for recognition and financial compensation for the creative pioneers behind series and characters takes on a whole new meaning when you're forced to consider, "Ok, but where's the line where they SHOULDN'T be compensated."

Wow, ok. That's a shock! Jones was (is) one of my favourite writers cos he's a damn good one. His work endures, even shines still today. I feel my respect for the work has not changed, just my respect for the man.

As some have said, it depends upon your attachment to the creator, the work itself, or both. I usually can just set the creator aside and the work they created and released is the important part. You can’t hold the faults of the creator beholden to their output.

I wish DC would release a trade of GL Mosaic. I loved that series, and I started reading GL with Emerald Dawn, when Jones was the writer. The quality of Mosaic tapers off toward the end, but I still want a trade sitting on my bookshelf. I want the entire series, plus GL #14-17 in one nice big trade.

Regardless of his actions, we can't have a person work for or a person's works for free. And we the people have no problem ignoring the problematic creators of somethings we enjoy and benefit from daily. Nazis helped give us the smartphones and satellites we use. The Declaration of Independence was written by a slave owner and most of the other US founding fathers were as well. Perspective has to be applied when these things happen. GLMosaic wasn't some veiled treatisefor child pornography acceptance but Lovecraftian stories were allegories for the horror of racial integration. Cosby's committed a crime but the other actors stopped receiving royalties as well when the show was scrubbed from viewing. One actor had to become a bagger at Trader Joe's to survive once the checks stopped coming in. It's the part where we keep treating companies as if they are a living person and responsible for responding to the individual emotions of people. If a person doesn't want to buy the works of a problematic creator then they shouldn't buy them not force the company to remove the works altogether or in the case of comics continuity, ignore it was written...unless the work itself is problematic. I'll probably be hit with an "ok boomer" for my comment (I'm GenX fyi) but this type of cancellation of not just the creator but the creations is an acceptable form of censorship because people feel justified because the person is bad. Hell, if that's the case why are we still reading Hemingway?

I don’t blame DC for pulling the books. I have a lot of his GL already on ComiXology and am still able to access them, but it’s hard going back and reading them now. It’s not fair to DC or these characters to sweep all these stories under the rug, but I wish they could strike his name from the books and re-release them with sales going to charities that help victims.

I understand man

The question we should be asking is, will refusing to enjoy the art of an artist who committed a horrible crime deter crime in the future? A lot of people fail to ask this question, because the answer is obviously "No." There are no criminals out there who are completely undeterred by the fear of prison time, but are deterred by the fear that someone might not read some comic they wrote 30 years ago. The very idea is absurd. There is no one out there who is willing to risk losing their freedom, but unwilling to risk losing their miniscule residual check for some old book they wrote. If avoiding the work of criminal artists doesn't deter crime, then what's the point? If it doesn't save a single victim, then it's just pointless self-flagellation.

I also enjoy mosaic and I think I'm only missing 2 books from the run (both in the teens ( been a while since I saw them) but can't remember which exact numbers I need ? Have to hit my attic soon. PS. It's hard to ignore nonce crimes,so I do feel a bit unsettled enjoying his work,but it's something we all need to work out how to handle it personally ?

Take your time in making a dedicated Mosaic video. I completely understand struggle of loving the work of a creator and yet being ashamed, or disappointed by the creator. Be it for something truly criminal like you point to here or even just openly disagreeing with the politics of a creator. Like finding the creator of something you love is homophobic, even if they don't actively fund hate groups it makes you question if you can enjoy the work of someone like that without supporting their bigotry.

People need to learn to separate the artist from the art. It is completely irrelevant to a product what the private lives of the people behind it are.

I guess many people don't know because his name only appears on issue 17, my brother actually wrote the last 10 issues of this book.

I think the material should be seen, but Jones shouldn't receive any of the profits. I believe one other person commented the same thing, and I agree. I don't think the material should be hidden at all.

I hated most of the Gerard Jones run (1-47 of GL vol 3).

Underrated youtuber.

you know I actually heard that gl mosiac wasn't that good

I understand. It is not easy separating the artist from the artist, especially when the artist commited a terrible crime. You must accept the good with the bad.

Is really complex stuff...right now we have Joe Bennett been cancel, out of Marvel and im pretty sure that's the reason Immortal Hulk just ended on #50...maybe Immortal Hulk end up like this comics of GL, on the back burn with no reference and no TPB and stuff, only to avoid been related with this problematic person

Take your time making the video, however long it might be. No hurries. I feel art should be separated from the authors in these cases. We have multiple instances of beloved art works where author have done something wrong. But a lot of time, the art itself has very emotional connection with the fans. Thus leave the art to be. The author should be punished through laws, as well as improving laws and system to deal with these issues.

Where was John when Hal blew up the central battery

It's okay to separate the art from the artist

Is that why Mosaic hasn't been reprinted? But the first few issues of Green Lantern 1990 have been reprinted, and many other things by Jones. Confused.

I remember after the “Leaving Neverland” documentary premiered on HBO a writer made an interesting point about whether society could (or should) continue to engage with Michael Jackson’s music. She said, “The entertainment industry is the only one in the world in which this is even a question. You would never be standing in line at a bakery and think ‘Well, I guess it’s true that the baker here abuses children in his kitchen…but he makes a fantastic baguette!” And I thought that was very true. Why do we continue to weigh how much we enjoy an artist’s work against the crimes they’ve committed?

Will you do a more videos on the gold lanterns from legion of super heroes

How do you feel about Beau Smith’s work on GL?

Triggered! Triggered! Triggered!