I’m not sure if you read the complete review, but I did recognize the graphics of “Flower Mecha” in the third paragraph. I wouldn’t call it “excellence,” but I did enjoy it. I didn’t think “Weekend Abroad” was engaging by any standard of writing. I thought it was disjointed and sentimental. It’s the weakest piece in the collection in my opinion, and the collection is supposed to be about quality.

The problem I mention in the last paragraph of the review is not that the collection included feminist or gay work. The problem is the selections gave the collection an obvious theme. If it was a themed book, that would be fine. However, the only theme is supposed to be that the work is the BEST in American comics in the past few years. Bechdel’s perspective is obvious in the selections. She writes in the introduction that it bothers her that there are not more minority comic writers. So, she promotes who she wants to promote. Fine. Gaiman did it when he edited the collection. Don’t pretend I’m “biased” and have “issues” because I pointed out the obvious. I’m sure if you research other reviews from objective sources you will find that other people noticed the same things.

As far as owning my “biases,” I’m biased against BEST AMERICAN COMIC anthologies that are more about the editor promoting who he or she wants to promote rather than objectively picking the best comics regardless of popularity, sexual orientation, race, gender, indie status, politics, or any other irrelevant measure. It’s supposed to be about the work, not the writers and certainly not the editors.

I also wrote at the beginning of the last paragraph of the review that someone would rip me for questioning Bechdel.

Lana- I’m glad you enjoyed the review.