And I was wrong. Again.
And here I was thinking I couldn't be surprised anymore. From an interview with Grant Morrison at PopImage:
It's interesting to me to see many people who have no need to work in comics express an interest only to receive a bad response from publishers. For years we've been name-dropping Rushkoff here at PopImage and I know Marvel has contacts for the likes of Quentin Tarantino, and M. Night Shyamalan 'cause we gave it to them. Hell, Noam Chomsky is doing his first ever comics work soon and it's not for either of the big two.
That's a question, or part of one. With emphasis added to the bit that caught my attention. Ok, not so much caught as grabbed by by the ankle and dangled upside-down waiting for loose change to fall out.
Haven't been paying much attention to this stuff -- found the Morrison interview at Thought Balloons, following a link from the dead and I should remove the link Journalista.
Not the Big Two, so. . . Archie? Image?
Avatar?
I'm not sure which of those possibilities is more disturbing.
Update: You know, an actual answer from the interview might be a nice thing to include.
'Sigil' as a word is out of date. All this magic stuff needs new terminology because it's not what people are being told it is at all. It's not all this wearying symbolic misdirection that's being dragged up from the Victorian Age, when no-one was allowed to talk plainly and everything was in coy poetic code. The world's at a crisis point and it's time to stop bullshitting around with Qabalah and Thelema and Chaos and Information and all the rest of the metaphoric smoke and mirrors designed to make the rubes think magicians are 'special' people with special powers. It's not like that. Everyone does magic all the time in different ways. 'Life' plus 'significance' = magic.
That's from a different page, but I'm confident you'll be reading the entire thing. Meaning you'll have to backtrack, as I linked a few pages in.
Because I'm flaky cool like that.