If someone pointed a gun at your head and made you choose one of the two, which would you choose?

In my youth, it used to be the art. Now it's the writing.

Since I read sooooo many books for my yob, i'd have to say the art in terms of comics.

I have a really hard time reading a well written comic book if there's lousy art all over the page.

I have a huge collection of really great artwork, so thats what draws me specifically, to comics. I also have some marginally-drawn comics that have such great stories, that I cannot part with them. The art has to at least be somewhat comensurate with the writing, but itsa visual medium, for me.

When I think of my favorite writers, I'm struck by how many are both writers AND artists (e.g., John Byrne, Walt Simonson, Frank Miller, Tim Truman). I think that writer/artists often possess a unique sense of how to stage the visuals in a story.

I love HELLBOY and SCREW-ON HEAD. Yet, I don't consider Mike Mignola a great writer. Most Hellboy stories adhere to a similar formula and the characters aren't especially well-developed, imo. Mignola has cool - and very visual - ideas, though, and his art provides a great dark, moody atmosphere for his stories. Mignola's art alone wouldn't be a draw for me, and I don't think his stories would be as good if someone else drew them. If he writes AND draws something, though, then the odds are pretty good that I'll check it out.

It's a visual medium. Great art can elevate a bad script. And bad art can ruin a great script.

Synergy.

If Moench/Gulacy, Engelhart/Rogers/Austin, Peter David/George Perez, or Morrison/Quitely are working on a given story... I'd likely sample it.

I don't think that a comic is necessarily 100% writer or 100% artist...or even 50/50 ... so I tend to notice which groups of "the talent" produce the best books as a collaborative effort. ( Can you tell on a given page what ideas are the writer's vs. what ideas are the penciler's? )

Otherwise, the writer's name attracts me to a given book, but the art ultimately compels me to purchase it.

Jim

Bump for our newer members.

I've never seen this thread, so I'm apparently a newer member.

I voted writing. There are some artists that I absolutely love, and I'll at least give anything they work on a look, but when I think of my favorite comics, it's generally the writing that makes them a favorite.

Bullet in the head for me.Can't choose;it's like being offered water and having to choose between H2 and O.

So am I!

Writing all the way for me. Unless it's really, really good or really, really bad, I don't pay much attention to the art.

I feel the same way.
I've read a few stories in which the art was bad enough to be distracting, but overall, I don't focus on it as much as the writing.
P. Craig Russell is the only artist I've ever specifically "followed"...

Writing, although I've seldom seen a story whose writing I appreciated that didn't also have art I liked. If the art's really ugly, extreme, or amateurish, the writing probably will be too.

Art for me. If the artist is great, I can admire admire a book even if the story is crap. A good story with lousy art is hard for me to get through.

Also, I think a great artist can trick you into thinking a story is good. JMS seemed like a genius when JR Jr. drawing his stories, but that book went downhill fast when Romita left. To a lesser extent, the same thing happened on Hulk.

gud riting is importent too me.

Same here.

If writing mattered that much to me, I wouldn't be bothering with superhero comics.

Art.

The raht'en.

You could say the same thing about the art.