Rockin' around the blogosphere...

Getting back into the work groove after taking a few days off is rough. Coming back to blogging is no different (at least, to me - the rest of you make this shit look easy). Hell, just working on my own stuff is getting harder - I think I may have about four of the thirty portfolio pages I need for graduate school, so blogging may be light for the next month. I will say this, though - I just got Scott Pilgrim in the mail over the weekend, and add me to the many people who recommend this book. It's just gorgeous, fun and surprising, and I'll probably say something more about it at some point.

So, let's see what everyone else is saying (and, by "everyone else," I mean the three people I got to before I got lazy):

* BeaucoupKevin has some thoughts about some comics-related purchases, including the latest Comics Journal:

One note: it looks like the Journal's total circulation, according to their USPS statement of Ownership, Management, And Circulation is 5,000 copies. Is it just me or does that seem, well, paltry for a magazine that seems to think it's a Big Deal? I wonder what their circulation was during the 80s and 90s and how it was affected by their narrower, more elitist focus on "intellectual" comics.

I don't see the Journal's circulation as surprising. Generally, the more "highbrow" anything gets, the less popular it is. I'm guessing the best comparison would be Maxim and Esquire - magazines geared towards men, much as Wizard and The Comics Journal are geared towards comics. I stopped getting MediaWeek a while ago, but the last I saw, the more juvenile Maxim was gaining readers, and the less juvenile Esquire was losing them.

Forgetting, for a minute, the subject matter of TCJ, I'd still say it's a better investment of time for money than Wizard ever was. Wizard seems to be fifty percent ads, and forty-eight percent content talking about books advertised in the magazine. The Comics Journal, though... Someone can advertise with them and still be criticized heavily. Elitist or not, The Comics Journal provides more (and better written) content than most of its competitors, which makes me feel not so bad spending the $10 on it (though, of course, my wife thinks it still sells at $7).

* Ian Brill comes back strong. Definitely one of my new favorites (and not just because I tend to agree with everything he says), Brill takes a look at the subject of creator evolution:

I believe the worst thing a creative person can do is refuse to evolve. In the case of Future Comics, John Byrne and others we get creators who hit it big decades ago and apparently don’t feel they have to improve the skills they used in creating comics back then. To them and many of their fans the problem isn’t they fact they haven’t changed, the problem is the fact that the rest of the world has. One can imagine Mr. Layton sitting in his office bellowing “I am big! It’s the comics that got small!” If we were going by sales there is actually truth in that. Alas, if we were going to take a cold hard looking at the contracting world of comics the fact that there aren’t a lot of books like Iron Man #128 around would probably not be the biggest concern.

That Layton letter Dorian previously linked and replied to... Wow. I've got no words to describe that kind of head-in-the-sand-ism.

* David Welsh mentions a book I'm going to have to purchase: Manga: Sixty Years of Japanese Comics. I want to learn more about manga, and I want to read more manga. This seems like as good a primer as any.

Contest time again...

But not here. Go check out Marc Mason's Movie Poop Shoot, where he's promising to give away a bunch of comics.

I like Marc. Help him relieve his clutter conundrum. It'd be the altruistic thing to do, if you need to rationalize being a greedy bastard. Me, I don't, so if I do about it, it will be in the simple pursuit of ACQUIRING MORE STUFF.

Alright, it's official - holiday hiatus.

I'll be taking the next week or so to recuperate from work stress, hopefully work on my portfolio a bit, and other off-line activities.

But I'll read the rest of you who aren't as lazy as I am, particularly when I get frustrated with writing and revising, which should be approximately every seven minutes between Thursday and Sunday, by my estimates.

Also (and I will preface this by saying SHAMELESS HYPE ATTACK), I wrote the most boring column ever.

Of course, now that I said all this, I'll probably end up blogging at some point tomorrow, when I'll be working from 8:30AM to 11PM because of television sweeps...

While the wife's away...

the husband will answer some internet questions making the rounds, now that book week ended not with a bang, but a whimper.

Here's my response toSteven Grant's questions that are making their way around the blogosphere. I had forgotten about them, but Matt and David reminded me:

1) What's your favorite comic of 2004?

That's tough to peg. I've really enjoyed things like New Frontier, Plastic Man, We3 and Street Angel, but there's a big part of me that also wants to say the issue of Amazing Spider-Man that broke the heart of a million (well, that's a big wad of hyperbole) fanboys.

I'm going to go with the cop-out answer and say Same Difference and Other Stories. Yeah, it was published in 2003, but I didn't read it until 2004.

2) What's your favorite comics related moment?

Probably this past June's MoCCA Arts Festival. Being in a room filled with (for the most part) good comics, and with people who love (for the most part) good comics. Also, seeing old friends and meeting new ones there. Yeah, I'm that sappy.

3) What's the worst thing to happen in comics in 2004?

The level of discourse. Not that it was ever that great to begin with, but it just seems to have gone downhill.

4) What's your most fervid hope for comics in 2005?

That we'll see more comics that aren't completely derivative of other comics. That we'll have new creators who are inspired by things other than comics. Comics, generally speaking, really need some kind of shot in the arm. They need to stop living in the shadows of what's come before.

5) What aspect of comics in 2005 are you most looking forward to?

Hopefully, finding something new and exciting. There's a little optimism left in me somwhere.

6) What's your worst fear for comics in 2005?

That some nutjob will decide to make a name for his/herself at the expense of comics, and that Charles Brownstein's words will go unheeded. It's already starting, as we've seen lately (link courtesy of Kevin Melrose... credit where credit is due). Oddly, I don't fear that we'll see more shitty comics, because I have a feeling that's inevitable in any year.

Response from the SALMON DOUBTS winner!

Courtesy of Nate Atkinson, his thought on his shiny new copy of Salmon Doubts:

"I read Salmon Doubts the other night before bed. It had been a long day of writing for me and I was pretty tired, which was probably the right head-space to be in. The no hurry mood gave me time to really look at the art, which was excellent. I appreciated that the dialogue indexed the personality, since all the salmon looked the same. It reminded me of what Garth Ennis so often failed to do in his War Stories comics. Still, the dialogues seemed irrelevant, until that last page. Man, what a pay-off. Seeing an entire life unfold over “X” number of pages, then seeing it reduced to one without losing much in the way of information, but a lot in the way of affect… good stuff. Further, it strikes me as something you’d be hard pressed to do in another medium. Thanks for letting me in on this one."

HYPE: HYPE!

Come to me, my hypemonkey militia.

I can't beat home the point how much the hype in the comics industry annoys me at times. A while back, I did a column on hype that tried to explain what, in my opinion, is the right way to hype, and what is the wrong way to hype (I hope listing that old column doesn't count as hype, because that'd make me a hypocrite, wouldn't it?).

But, here are some of my biggest pet peeves with hype:

* Searching for a "recommend a comic thread and pimping your own comic. I've been seeing this a lot recently, and it's irritating - especially when the person looking for advice says "I'm not interested in _________," and the response is, "well, my book is ___________, but it's so good that you'll like it anyway!"

If you're going to do that, offer the guy a money back guarantee or something. That never blows back in your face.

* Sending out others to do your dirty work. People who only post about one comic ever make me suspicious. Surely there are people out there who really only like one comic, but I think it's safe to guess that those fans aren't the ones one will find on a message board. It strikes me as shady.

* Piggy-back rides are for children. Please, stop swinging on the nuts of people who you think can get you "in." Testicles were made for biological reasons, not because tire swings went out of vogue and no longer inspire bucolic images of lazy Sunday afternoons. No one likes a sycophant.

Yes, sometimes all the hype works, so people continue to do it. And not all hype is bad. At least, come out and do that "HYPE:" preface to what you're spreading. Try to be professional about it - run a spell check, don't knock someone else's work in trying to get yourself over, and field all criticism without malice.

Those are a few of mine. What are your hype-ish pet peeves?

If you've come looking for that football commercial...

You can find it at this link.

Now, back to books and comics and such, if I can squeeze some stuff in. Also, this blog will likely go on hiatus sometime between now and Thanksgiving. I forgot the holiday was next week, so I have to cram in a week and a half of work into four days time.

No spinning of the sigils!

I love Tom Spurgeon for this even-handed appraisal of CrossGen in light of glowing mainstream media comments on the failed company.

That is all.

BOOK WEEK: Books about other arts and entertainment media

David, why are we doing this? I'm torturing myself coming up with ideas!

Anyway, let me be frank - I'm a hedonist. As much as I try to be a good politically-minded lefty-left-left-leftist, I'm self-serving first and foremost (easy set up for Augie, I suppose). I thought about doing a list of some of my favorite books on history and politics, but I got bored halfway through that post and abandoned it. No, my big love is arts and entertainment. I'm greedy - I need a constant stream of information and stimuli to get me through my day (especially at work, which is why I waste so much time playing on the internet). I'm one of those geeks who needs to read about what it is I'm reading/watching/hearing, so it's natural that I look for books about things I enjoy.

What comic fan could go without having Give Our Regards To The Atomsmashers! (Sean Howe, editor) on his/her bookshelf? Well, most, I suppose, but that's besides the point - this book really does have something for everyone, from the unabashed superhero addict to the effete artcomix snob, and everyone in between. The only piece that didn't really jibe with me was Metzler's piece on how he had a crush on Terra from New Teen Titans and how she "betrayed" him, or something, which was full parallels between that and his first dealings with the opposite sex as an adolescent. I'm understandably smitten with Jonathan Lethem's bit on Kirby (let's just say I adore Lethem and leave it at that), but I enjoyed reading about comics I have no connection to whatsoever, like Alex Ross's Uncle Sam. Howe pulled together very different writers talking about very different comics and comics-related endeavors, but the work never seems disjointed - the juxtaposition of Dr. Strange, Tintin and Yummy Fur works well and comes across much better than single essays trying to sum up all comics have to offer in a shorter space.

Jack Cole and Plastic Man: Forms Stretched To Their Limits by Art Spiegelman and Chip Kidd... Ok. I’m cheating a bit here. One could easily read this book for the Police Comics reprints contained inside, but that reader would be missing out. What Jack Cole and Plastic Man lacks in text, it makes it up in sheer content. The text itself is fascinating, but the accompanying illustrations provide just as much to Spiegelman and Kidd’s study of Cole. Originally, Jack Cole and Plastic Man started out as a piece for The New Yorker (or was it the modified version in Playboy, or am I misremembering entirely?), which is where I first came across Cole. I came across Plastic Man, the character, at a much younger age, but never really gave him (or his creator) much thought. When I first read piece in The New Yorker, I had so tired of superhero comics (and comics in general) that the article only worked on me as a chronicle of a troubled artist. On that level, the book works well, but it works even better as a study of the man’s art. The illustrations provide as much insight into Cole’s work as the accompanying text, and the reprinted Police Comics stories are added bonuses that demonstrate points made in the text.

Nelson George's Hip Hop America and the already outdated Vibe History of Hip Hop are books I reread or flip through often, respectively. George's book doesn't go into the timeline-centered pop culture histories one often finds, but rather presents a series of essays on hip hop, ranging from the early "emerging markets" system of quasi-exploitation to hip hop in the marketing realm to the media's relationship with hip hop and back to why George fell in love with hip hop in the first place. If one wants to go beyond the mere history of hip hop, George's book is mandatory reading. The Vibe History of Hip Hop is by no means essential reading - it's primarily a scattershot look at the trends and artists of the genre presented like longer magazine articles. Still, it's coffee-table sized, so it's right next to The Smithsonian Book of Books and some others on my coffee table. Also, journalist and poet Greg Tate provides a tight, insightful conclusion that takes a look at where hip hop might be going that borders on precognition.

Also somewhat outdated is Spike, Mike, Slackers, & Dykes by John Pierson. Unlike other film-related books, this deals more with the author's experience with the subjects rather than their actual works, but it's written in a carefree, easily read style. Perhaps I find more in it than others, judging by the Amazon reviews, because I've spent the last three or so years working in the marketing/programming side of the television industry, so it hits some notes with which I'm familiar. What's nice about it - and the reason I picked it up in the first place - is the discussion on the early viewings and marketings of Spike Lee's films. I'm kind of a Spike Lee junkie, I must admit.

Phoebe Hoban's Basquiat: A Quick Killing In Art is as much about the artist as it is about his work (probably moreso, indeed), but it's fitting - Basquiat didn't just make art, he lived it (Christ, I can't believe I just typed that). What I mean to say is, a book just going over the technical aspects and aesthetics of his work would be far more dry than this book; the personal touches not only give insight into his work, but provide narrative strength to what might otherwise be a bland discussion of places and paintings. Also, if you're more of a movie person, I'd suggest renting Basquiat, which is one of my all-time favorite movies.

Taking a break from BOOK WEEK to vent...

So, much like any job, being a programming person for a television station has it's share of "idiot customers," (for more comics-centered occupational griping, see Dorian) but today's call has me pissed off.

Anyway, I suppose in the pre-game for last night's Monday Night Football, there was a "risque" commercial. The important bits of the message I received regarding the commercial:

"...that Terrell Owens, that football player for the Eagles, he was standing there in uniform and this young blonde girl, white girl standing there with just a towel wrapped around her trying to coax him not to go on the field, but to make a long story short. you may have seen the commercial or not, but then she drops her towel and then he takes a look and she jumps into his arms, and then the commercial goes off. We talked about the Janet Jackson thing concerning last year's Superbowl, but this one right here, I mean the tastelessness of this was probably shocking to anyone that probably seen it... I think that was very tasteless, especially since it's a family program..."

He made a point to say that this girl was white. Why emphasize that? I didn't see this commercial, but the guy makes a specific point of mentioning the race issue, so I'd guess that's what really offended him. Unlike the Janet Jackson thing, I don't believe there was any nipplage - if there was, I'd have received a lot more calls by this point - but this is somehow more offensive than aged and pierced boobies. I don't know who this Terrell Owens is, but a quick google search confirms that he is, well, you know...

black.

Or maybe I'm just touchy today. But if my hypothesis is correct, he's the kind of person that makes me want to vomit.

BOOK WEEK: Recursive loops, or something

I've got to say, I'm not a big fan of "genre fiction," for the most part. People get in discussions about George R. R. Martin, or whoever it was that was having his novels turned to comics by DBPro, and my eyes just... glaze over. It's not that there's inherently wrong with "genre fiction," which I keep tossing in quotes because I don't necessarily believe that a piece that deals with the tropes of any style/content/themes related to fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, romance or whatever should be dismissed with a stock critical response. Rather, I just don't have any specific interests that move me to find works with similar topics... I just "kinda like books," to get folksy. So I'm having trouble focusing on "themes" for this unofficial "book week" we've got going, so if some of my pairings come across as goofy or illogical, that's why.

So, today, "recursive loops," which probably isn't the right term for it, but I like the technobabble sound it makes. You know how when a microphone gets too close to a speaker, and makes that nasty-ass sound? That's kind of how I'm approaching this. These are some books that are about books or writers. Instead of just, you know, reading and responding to the books/poems/bodies of work that these books discuss, I get a kick out of reading the responses of others, and letting the "feedback" from my thoughts, the source material, and the book in question do its groovy dissonant thing.

Delirium: An Interpretation of Arthur Rimbaud by Jeremy Reed is not a book without it's flaws - Reed succumbs to self-importance at times, and the book really can't be called a "biography," because it's more of a fictional interpretation of what Reed has read about Rimbaud. That said, the prose itself is chaotic and beautiful, and the book includes some translations of Rimbaud I wasn't previously aware of, as well as some of Reed's poetry (there's the self-importance bit again). It's almost like reading a novel where Rimbaud is the flawed protagonist.

The Art of Shakespeares Sonnets by Helen Vendler has a perennial place in my bathroom. It's the perfect "potty reading" for the snobby-snob-snobs among us - Vendler provides each of Shakespeare's sonnets, and follows each with a short essay that deals with poetic form, place in Shakespeare's sonnet ouvre, historical context, recurring themes and images, and the figures in Shakespeares life that may or may not have inspired the sonnets themselves. Vendler provides a close, critical reading of the sonnets, but she writes in a way that's accessible to people who don't really care for reading critical studies for fun.

Of course, I have a big fascination with the works and writers of the '20s, so a book that I've read, but do not own: That Summer In Paris, by Morley Callaghan. I borrowed a well-worn copy of this from a professor during my undergraduate years, and just fell in love. Unlike Hemingway's A Moveable Feast, which recounts the same general time period, Callaghan doesn't misremember as much (which is a nice way of saying he doesn't lie as much as Hemingway does). The reader can trust Callaghan more than Hemingway, because Callaghan isn't trying to protect his persona. I should mention, though, that I still do love A Moveable Feast despite its flaws (particularly the passage - the truth of which probably can't be verified - where Fitzgerald complains to Hemingway that his penis is too small) because the prose itself is of merit, but Callaghan's book is really the stronger work, if only because it's more frank.

Also worth mentioning is Michael Olmert's Smithsonian Book of Books, which sits on my coffee table for easy browsing. The book traces the history of, well, books - books of all shapes and sizes, books that predate the printing press, illustrated manuscripts, the relationship between writers and printing... It's just a fun little collection of anecdotes, historical perspective and information for those fitting the strictest definition of the word "bibliophile."

BOOK WEEK: More voyeurism

Damn, but isn't David on a roll with this book week thing? So far, he's done mystery books, food books, and books from NPR.

I guess I should pick up the slack a little. One of my book-related obsessions is collections of correspondance. Again, this plays into the voyeurism I talked about a few days or weeks ago. There's a certain sense of prying that comes with reading letters that weren't necessarily intended for public consumption, which is part of the appeal. Also, letters tend to be more "from the cuff" than edited prose, so they have the appeal of imediacy - there's no lengthy editing process beyond what the writer intended.

One such collection, A Literate Passion, collects letters sent back and forth between Henry Miller and Anais Nin. Miller's letters have the same blend of rawness and tenderness that exists in his novels, and Nin's letters provide a slightly different insight from her more well-known diaries. Of all the collections of correspondance I've read, this one feels (to me, at least), the most invasive, but not in a bad way.

If A Literate Passion gives insight into a love affair, Life In Letters gives an insight into a man. The joy of this is reading Fitzgerald's letters to everyone - his editors, his family, his friends. While a collection of this scope lacks a focus in terms of subject matter, it does not lack intimacy. Really, this is an essential book for any fan of F. Scott Fitzgerald, or for a unique take on early 20th century American literature.

EDIT: In my haste to get this up, and with stuff going on at work, I forgot to mention another one: Jack Kerouac: Selected Letters: 1940-1956. I've got a weakness for "Beat Generation" works, but lets be honest - Kerouac, as a novelist, isn't that great a thing (my own personal exceptions being The Dharma Bums, Big Sur and The Subterraneans, which I think hold up better than On The Road). However, as a letter writer... The contents of this book are more often than not more interesting reading than his novels, and the letters to Kerouac (particularly from Neal Cassady) are just as interesting.

There are things to read other than comics, you know...

This week, posts by David P. Welsh and Tom the Dog have me in a book state of mind.

As I do with comics, where I often follow certain writers and artists for one reason or another, I tend to seek out certain authors to read, and I thought I'd share a few of them. I'm going to limit this just to 20th and 21st century works, for the sake of actually finishing this post. Even with that limitation, I'm still going to end up omitting a bunch of stuff.

David Sedaris:

I first found Sedaris through a copy of Barrel Fever in a remainder bin. I know most people are familiar with him from his readings on NPR, but at the time the only NPR station I got was Temple Public Radio, and only the late night jazz programming, because I was still young, and often bouncing from work to random bouts of youthful hedonism. I ended up reading this when I should have been working, making customers at the cafe wait until I got to a point where I felt I could take a break, which was often the end of an essay, to the customer's dismay. David's right - Sedaris is laugh-out-loud funny.

F. Scott Fitzgerald:

The Great Gatsby should go down as proof that editors are an often neglected but much needed aspect of publishing. A few years ago, I read Trimalchio, Fitzgerald's first draft of Gatsby, and it isn't half the novel that the final product is (in fact, I plan on using this comparisson somewhere down the line for a column or post or something). Don't thank Fitzgerald for the final copy - thank Max Perkins for taking a promising start and helping shape it into something worthwhile. Also of note is The Crack-Up, which collects some pieces Fitzgerald did for Esquire regarding his fall from grace. Also included in the collection are DVD-esque bonus features, including sections from Fitzgerald's notebooks. Also worthy of note are his short stories, collected in various editions (I recommend Flappers and Philosphers and Babylon Revisited, both good fluff).

Tobias Wolff:

Wolff drips verisimilitude. Even in a story that deals with abstractions like the flurry of neural recollection that happens in death ("Bullet In The Brain"), Wolff captures what it must be like, even though the reader (and the author, one should mention) couldn't verify with empirical evidence.

Thom Jones:

Thom Jones writes the way we think. Not the faux-realism of how we talk, like Bendis does (to the point where it stops being dialogue, in a strict sense), but in a way that just makes sense - some kind of permutation of stream-of-consciousness that abruptly skips and oscillates between ideas and experience instead of flowing. The only stories of his that I skip over when going through his collections are the ones centered on the recurring character "Ad Magic," which comes across as affected, in parts.

Because I'm lazy, I'm just going to list some others I like curling up with: T. S. Eliot, Saul Williams, David Lehman, Tom Robbins, Harold Pinter (I would be happy seeing a production of "The Dumbwaiter" once a week, and I'd probably never tire of it), John Ashbery, and a bunch more (there's that laziness kicking in again).

Troubles and tribulations in working with others...

Too good to pass up. I found this on a CBR thread focusing on hate mail sent to creators. It's not "hate mail," per se, but it's yet another example of comics-related stuff that irritates me. Now, I know Neil Kleid is another case of "you either hate or love him/his work," and he is a self-admitted shameless publicity whore, but I dig his general comics output. I'm guessing his almost-collaborator wouldn't be making comics I'd dig:

That fucking Neil Kleid dude emailed me yesterday stating that he found someone else to draw his retarded comic... glad I wasted time working on the dumb shit. I didn't want to do it anymore, anyway. I mean, c'mon... it's called "Bear Suits" for fuck's sake. I refuse to work on any comic that doesn't include skulls, ninja, demons, swords, or half naked vampires. The comic book industry is really really unrewarding, anyway. I make more at my current job than if I were drawing for Marvel, for christ's sake. That just dawned on me the other day. I don't need some lonely-ass hack cartoonist's approval or recommendation, and that's that.

Extreme Makeover: Comics Site Edition

Sadly, this version isn't hosted by Ty Pennington, who is one of the few guys my wife and I both agree is yummy. Broken Frontier just put up some new siding, and did some landscaping. I can't decide if it's a good thing or not - I really liked the color scheme they had going before, but the layout is much more user-friendly now. Let's see what we've got:

• Eliot Johnson is now reviewing for the site, providing reviews of quality comics such as Baraka and Black Magic in Morocco and No Dead Time. I hope this doesn't mean that Eliot's giving up blogging, but it's nice to see more comics getting reviewed outside the mainstream books and the books desperately aping mainstream tropes.

• JP Dorigo does a mock astrology thing for comics fans, and is remarkably on-point on me, at least (at least, as much as any astrology thing is accurate, meaning we find connections where we want to find them):

You find your starting to get bored with all the mainstream comics. The next time you go to the comic shop pick up something indie!

• Dave Lewis (Mortal Coils, some other things) debuts his new Library of Babble column by wondering why the Martian Manhunter isn't gay. It's actually more interesting than it sounds, and plays with ideas that might make the character into something more interesting, as opposed to the also-ran he's often considered:

J’onn hasn’t dabbled too much in interplanetary relationships, admittedly. In fact, regardless of his exposed rippling pectoral muscles, he has remained largely aloof and asexual (despite a sometime-interest in better understanding humanity as well as his fellow immigrant alien Superman has – Superman who has wed and presumably bedded, quite gently, the human Lois Lane). And, just as a string of failed relationships might be indicative, this isolation in itself might also be telling. The brotherhood of superheroism into which J’onn has been accepted is a dominantly heterosexual one – an aggressively heterosexual one, despite (or perhaps because of) the rippling muscles, skintight spandex, and minority of women. Unlike the orphaned Dark Knight or the Last Son of Krypton, J’onn has found no other family save this pantheon of do-gooders since his arrival to Earth.

However, I'm sure they could have thought of a better subheading than "n the first installment of his monthly column at BF, Dave Lewis gets controversial and ponders why J’onn J’onzz doesn't wear a pink costume." Because, you know, anyone not strictly heterosexual can be pared down to certain color palates and sartorial choices...

• MV Creations' Val Staples is starting a limited-run column giving advice to aspiring creators, warning:

Then there are some publishers that will never pay you. Keep your ears to the ground. There are a few publishers out there now who don't pay people, even if the book profits, because that profit is going back into their company... not your pocket. Just listen to what other creators say online and use common sense. It's not hard to find out which publishers to avoid, unless you just want your book out there and don't care about the money.

Considering that MV Creations books were put out through CrossGen for a time, that strikes me as a "lesson learned" type of comment... Aside from some common sense bits (one example: "So when you create something to publish, you better make damn sure it's awesome!"), it's an interesting overview, and I like that he's got the next set of columns planned out point-by-point, and that Staples plans to address the business side of self-publishing, which is often skipped over.


******

I'm going to go off on a tangent for a bit, though. There's nothing wrong with Staples' column, but the point of that column (and others like it - hell, CWN has done a few) is one of the things that get on my nerves regarding comics - there are times it seems that there are less "just fans" than there are "fans who really want to work in comics," which seems like an ass-backwards system to me. Sure, everyone dreams now and again to be gainfully employed doing something they care about, but those are usually pipe dreams and commuter fantasies. Perhaps it has something to do with the relative ease a comics fan can make a "connection" to a comics creator compared to most other forms of entertainment (which also leads to that terrible "starfucker" disorder one finds on creator-centric message boards). Everyone, it seems at times, has something s/he is trying to pitch or whatnot, and you'll see people hovering around each other hoping that one of them will be lucky enough to get "pulled up" from the "farm team" (I don't follow sports, so I may have fucked that analogy).

Or maybe it's just me, and I've been spending too much time on-line.

Voyeuristic fantasies...

Not in that way, of course - this is a family blog, or something. No, I'm talking of nothing as seedy as hiding in the neighbors bushes looking into windows like some cul-de-sac peeping tom - rather, I'm talking about Amazon wish lists.

I've got a bit of a compulsion regarding these - I can't help but look at them if someone has a link to them on their blog. I'm fascinated by seeing things others want. A while back, I blogged Graeme's wishlist around the time of his birthday, and planned on doing some kind of big wishlist link posting, but then, after talking with someone else, realized that everyone might not want their wishlists spread around the internet. But, there are other bloggers who have them listed, so if you're inclined to be a bit of a voyeur as well, check to see if there's a link to a wishlist, and check it out. Hell, I'll even throw mine out there, but strictly for mocking/commentary purposes - please, do not buy me anything. I got suckered into adding things to it this morning on the 1/10000000 chance that I win whatever promotion they have going now (the prize - a $50 gift certificate), which is why wishlists are on my brain again. If you do see something that you know to be awful, I'll remove it if our tastes seem to be aligned.

More good comics news (at least, to me)

Today at Comic Book Resources, Seth Jones talks to the four artists of Warren Ellis's Apparat line of comics. Now, I'm wishing I would have preordered on this, as I didn't pay attention to the hype as it was coming out. Silly, silly me. And, unlike most group/studio/whatever efforts, I have a deep appreciation for half of the artists involved, specifically Laurren McCubbin and Carla Speed McNeil. McNeil is illustrating Frank Ironwire, which finds its thematic lineage in crime-related pulp novels of yesteryear. Plus, it's got McNeil's art, which is always a plus. Also, McNeil's comment that it's "[f]unnier than panties with built-in butt-cheeks, if that's possible" only makes me want to buy it more.

Also, I'm going to have to add another superhero book to the mix, because I'm not going to pass up any Laurenn McCubbin work. McCubbin's work seems to have a polarizing effect on people, with no "it's ok" median reaction. I'm firmly in the "yay!" camp on McCubbin's work, though, and I've been meaning to do something on Rent Girl. McCubbin is handling the art for Quit City, and describes it as "a light-hearted romp through one woman's screwed up psyche. How do you stop being a superhero? How do you pick up where you left off? Ellis tells us, and sets stuff on fire. Because that is the kind of man he is."

A ray of hope!

Often, I end up thinking comic fans, by and large, are idiots. At least, the more vocal ones - the ones getting stiffies over Hal Jordan coming back, the ones that think "smoking hot chicks" are a gift to comic fans everywhere, the ones that buy multiple copies of issues in case they'll be "worth something" someday...

Every once in a while, though, I feel "a bump and heard an oh, beg your pardon / Suddenly I saw polka dots and moonbeams /All around a pug-nosed dream," to crib from Burke and Van Heusen. Today, that sunshine-and-happy-place comes courtesy from ADD's Five Questions with the guy he buys his comics from:

I remember one guy in his early twenties on a bike looking for a hot (at the time) issue of AMAZING SPIDER-MAN. He said he missed that issue, couldn’t find it anywhere and wanted to read how the story ended. I told him that we had it, but was a few dollars over the cover price. He didn’t care; we pulled it from the back issue bins where it was bagged and boarded. I handed it to him and he had a big smile on his face and said "at last!" After he bought it, I asked if he wanted a bag, he shook his head. He then proceeded to take the book out of the bag and board, and handed it back to me saying I could have it back. And then he did the unthinkable. He folded in half, put it in his back pocket, hopped on his bike and rode away. While some people in the store looked at this in disbelief, I just smiled, this dude was my hero. He didn’t care about condition or value; he just wanted to read the story.

Hooray for small miracles, wherever we may find them.

And yet another Joe joins the fray! When will it end!

Joe Rybant shares his Beautiful Noise with the world. I agree with Joe on so many things that it scares me, and he's one of the few people I've actually met in person and still liked.

And we wonder why so many comics are completely derivative?

Today, I read an interview with Arcana Studio members where the artists were asked what "historical" creators they admire most. Their responses:

Sean - Stan Lee has signed Kade #1 and it's on my wall along with a picture of him. I mean he is 'The Man'. I also love all projects created by Humberto Ramos …I think I really admire his energy and professionalism that he brings to any project. It's always incredible art and a GREAT story that is so unique. Jerry Siegel and Mark Millar are definitely very high up there as well.

I'd make the obvious Jerry Siegel-and-Mark Millar-in-the-same-sentence joke, but I'm tired. Still, Millar and Ramos "historical?" Lee, I get. Like him, hate him, have no opinion on him, whatever, but he has made a mark on comics in a way Ramos and Millar haven't yet. Siegel, obviously. However, Siegel seems like a name thrown in there to add some kind of historical perspective. But it's something, I suppose.

Mario - Todd Mcfarlane, Mike Mignola, Stan Lee, Erik Larsen. Why? Because these guys made awesome characters.

Again, if one strikes Stan Lee (and I think if you went to some random boy in a cornfield in the middle of Iowa, or somewhere, he'd tell you the best creator of all time is Stan Lee, because that's the name the non-comics types associate the medium with), that leaves... Todd McFarlane? Mike Mignola? Erik Larsen? Now, I'm not going to knock Mignola's talents, and Larsen can be fun... but historical? Well, at least we've bumped up "historical" to approximately twenty years, as opposed to ten.

Todd - I've been a fan of John Romita Jr.'s work for a lot of year. Way back in the 80's when his stuff still resembled his dads. I don't know if you'd consider that creative or not. I also really admire Ditka's work. I didn't really as a kid because I was a fan of the huge, muscular style that most artists were drawing in back then. However, I've grown to love the fact that he drew Spidey as a regular guy, which is what he was. So cool.

Hey, I love JR JR's work, so I won't knock that. But we're still in that time range (the 80's... not, you know, the '80s. Sorry - big, stupid pet peeve of mine). I've never really been a fan of Ditka, because I don't follow football. Yes, it's just a typo, but it's a telling one.

Please, comic creator peoples... read something other than "the new hotness." Fuck, read something other than comics, just so we can freshen up the same shitty rehashed concepts during the next round of "hey! he's like Batman, but he kills people! In, um... the year 2014!" or whatever.

Well, I've got to say something about it, don't I?

Yes, I admit it - I'm not the happiest camper today. But, after much hair-pulling and kitten-kicking, I've decided to "buck up, buttercup," and just get on with the next four years. My little burst of hope comes from the way it turned out: at the very least, we're not being subjected to months of recount hell and name-calling. So, hopefully, we can kick the crap out of this tower of Babel we're facing and learn to speak one another's language to find some common denominator.

However, I do have some fears on it. For one, voters in eleven states decided to approve of the notion that "marriage = one man + one woman, which really goes against my idealization of America. This, in fact, was probably my chief concern in the election, and it comes as a blow to my faith in the voters of this country. Religious reasons are fine and dandy, but I fear a future where people are forced to lead second-class lives because they don't adhere to what those in power feel is "morally proper." Rather, I'd like to see a nation governed on logic, reason and tolerance. This, more than any other issue, as brought a chill to my spine, and a lump in my throat. Also, if someone has non-religious rationalle for being opposed to letting two men or two women marry and live in peace, I'd really like to hear one that can't somehow be traced back to:

• gay sex is icky
• it's a sin
• it offends me

So, if you've got an explanation, I won't shout you down. Debate a little, maybe. But I am honestly curious - not curious in changing my own perspective, but understanding yours.

Oh, and yay, Gail Simone, for finding her own silver lining:

I admit this morning and last night, I was very disturbed by what I felt was a definite turn for the worse in American politics. But there are silver linings...

First, I've read what some of the new Republicans have to say--a couple are actually fiscal conservatives in deed, not just rhetoric. That could be a good thing. I also hope some of them are aware that only half the country supports them. We may have the next great politician in this group, the next great uniter. Who knows?

Second, a lot of apathetic people on both sides became activists. This is a positive thing for our country, no matter how it falls today.

Third, it's just possible that when the president starts thinking about his legacy, as his father did, as Reagan did, he may well start to enact legislation more like what he pushed early in his presidency, and less like the stuff towards the end. I believe there is a good man inside of George W, and I hope we see that man again soon. I'm not kidding myself, but I am hopeful.

I hope so too, Gail.

New fresh meat, kids.

Get ready to mock The Joe Rice Media Review before it mocks you.

Honestly, Joe Rice cracks my shit up. He did even before I met him at MoCCA. Since he hasn't posted any of his quick reviews yet, here's a sample of some of his comics-related thoughts found at Comic Book Resouces:

On Amazing Spider-Man:

On the cover of Amazing Spider-man, Spidey fights my favorite GI Joe, Snake Eyes. Ha ha, just kidding. It's Norman and Gwen's freak son. The humor in this book is so natural and well-done that you almost forget it's there. And it comes in at JUST the right moments. I think JMS will placate some of the freak-out fans with this issue, but not all of them. Mostly a lot of them really just want to be outraged because even in comics the perfect girl didn't sleep with the nerdy guy. Anyway, the plot's moving at a good clip and there's a breath-taking moment for Spidey and Sarah. Very nice.

On Green Lantern: Rebirth:

I thought I'd save the honor of reviewing Green Lantern: Rebirth for my good pal Kid Omega, who, if you don't know, is the biggest Hal Jordan fan I've ever known. He actually convinced me of how cool Hal was (well, with Darwyn Cooke helping). I've heard him verbalize his feelings on this book and I don't think I could do it justice. So hopefully later on tonight we'll have his input here. As for me, I tried reading it but couldn't get through the page after page of expository bullshit dialogue and over-rendered artwork. We'll let the Last Boy offer his opinion when he has the time.

On Plastic Man:

Plastic Man is so good that DC must not know it exists. Skewered in this issue: Lex as President, Identity Crisis (and how it dictates the DC line), George W. Bush, DC keeping Pete Ross white in the comics, AND we get some straight-up just damn funny stuff. "US OUT OF THE PHANTOM ZONE!" This stuff isn't just comic funny. It's actual funny!

But, hey, it gives me an excuse to update the blogroll with everyone else I've been meaning to add. So, yay, Joe.

In other various things around the internet:

• Revisiting his "Anti-Wizards" theme from Broken Frontier, Shawn Hoke looks at The Comics Interpreter. He's likes it more than I do, but I'm really biased towards The Comics Journal. I'm happy to see that Shawn notices some of the same problems I did with both publications, though, namely the design elements. My thoughts on the redesigned Comics Journal are still inchoate, but the core of my thoughts is that it's a step in the right direction, but more can be done. I don't want it to look like Wizard, but I wouldn't mind an even more design-oriented focus.

• Also at Comic World News, Review Editor Michael May discusses what works and what doesn't work for him in terms of review copy promotions.

• Before this turns into a CWN love-in, I have to say that snobby ol' me grew grumpy after learning that someone at the site thinks an Arcana-produced comic is pretty kick-ass, yo. Or something. I've yet to see anything from that studio that even borders on competence, but what do I know (well, I know what I like, but that's hardly objective. And I know I'd rather watch a very special Maury marathon than read a comic from them). You know, this "playing well with others" thing is a concept that has been, unfortunately, lost on me.

• Joe Casey interviews with Tom Spurgeon. It's kind of strange to see one of my favorite interviewers interviewed. Specifically, I liked Tom's insight on writing about superheroes well:

Superhero comics are really difficult subjects to write about critically because let’s face it: it’s very easy to write badly about them. They’re absorbing in a way that I think it becomes very easy to get lost in them. Once you get lost in any body of work like that, you risk having your perspective become distorted – your standards tend to become similar comics instead of more rigorous ones that apply to art in general. At the same time, you don’t want to come into a body of work so ignorant of how it works that you have no idea of what’s going on, the why and how things work. So that’s a difficult balance. Plus I think there’s a powerful nostalgic pull that comics have for a lot of people, I think many people write about comics as an entry point for writing comics which limits what they’re willing to say, and I feel there’s a general societal distrust for any kind of criticism at all. It’s a surprise anyone ever covers superhero comic books.

And they said all Journal reporters/staff members/readers/sycophants were snobby. But, seriously, good interview.

• A few days ago, David P. Welsh continues the talking-point of which current comics may receive "classic" status down the line. I'm having trouble wrapping my head around it. In some ways, I agree with Dave Fiore on the troubles of canonization. At the same time, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to assume that some works will easily turn out to be the best representation the medium has to offer for this era. I just need more time to think on it.

And that concludes today's link-blogging. If you still have time, and haven't yet, get out and vote.

Do reviews matter, Melrose asks...

And I answer (even though his comments thread cuts to the quick faster than I will):

Maybe.

In the article Kevin links to, some quotes can easily be taken out of context and applied to the comics realm, like this one:

Commercial and critical sensibilities often run counter. Critics tend to savor high-minded drama and artistic production, while the average male viewer might rate a movie for its explosion and babe factor.

Like others have said, it's almost necessary for a reviewer (in some cases) to look at books that will let readers share a common reference point. For example, I know Augie De Blieck's taste in comics and mine are almost completely antithetical, to the point where if he pans something, I may look around to see what others who seem to share my tastes are saying about it . Or, conversely, if Greg McElhatton piques my interest in something, I've got an 80% chance or so of digging it.

At this point, however, I'm so indoctrined in the whole comics "thing" that reviews, on the whole, have no effect on what I buy. Right now, I read reviews of books that I like, or reviews by people who I just like reading, for whatever reason. And therein, I think, is where the problem is born - my patterns can be so rigidly set that a review, positive or negative, has little effect on my buying habits.

As to reviewing books that generate a common reference between the reviewer and the reader... I'm of two minds on it. My more optimistic side rationalizes it with the hope that someone swinging through a site looking for something more popular may end up checking out some relatively undiscovered gem. Then again, I'm not a optimist as a rule, so that leads me to my gut reaction - in some cases, reviewers are in it for one thing. It's not about discussing the work, putting it in a frame of reference, or anything remotely related to engaging comics on a critical level. There are times it's not even the joy of fangasm, just spreading the love of comics from ISP to ISP.

No, I'm thinking it's sometimes about the hits.

Look at us - we've all got our little hit count tracker things on our blogs (or, at least, many of us do). And there are some among us who, I'm guessing, are doing it simply for the attention - I'm thinking back to the delinking of a political blog thing from a while back.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. It's not a judgment call - let he who is without sitemeter cast the first ping, or something. But sometimes, I just want something fucking more. So, thank you, Kevin, for your too sporadic reviews. Thank you, Greg and Johanna, that showing that taste can be both catholic and critical. Thank you, Steve and Rose, for pointing out things one doesn't often find in comics discussion. Thank you, Dave Fiore, because even though you don't exactly review individual comics, and even though I rarely agree with your stand on the issues, I simply adore your zeal, your passion, and your analytical eye. Thank you, Alan, not only for showing me the way back to good comics after I had been away, but for introducing "arctic shit-knife" into the lexicon, and for being willing to stand firm to your positions (even though I don't always agree with them). Thank you, Chris Butcher for looking not only to the comics out, but the comics yet to come, and for turning me on to new and exciting things.

Hell, thanks to anyone who can passionately write about comics without regressing to some kind of obsessive, aggressive, this-is-how-it-has-always-been-and-how-it-should-always-be in regards to certain golden calf characters. Thanks to those willing to leave their baggage at the door, or at least spruce it up before checking it with the flight crew. Thanks to reviewers who know better than to write, "well, if they'd just LET ME WRITE THE COMICS, I COULD MAKE THEM SOOOO MUCH BETTER YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE." Your passion is contagious, and I'm hoping to be infected again soon.

Time to put this Salmon to bed...

So, the polls are closed, or something, and since this is my dictatorship, this is one contest where there will be no recounts. So, without further fanfare, let's get to it, boppers.

Shane Bailey seemed pretty damned determined to win this contest - his entries accounted for 50% of all received by the deadline. Then again, I only received four entries, so it's not like Shane doesn't have a life. For his first entry, Shane sent something rather scary: a search engine dedicated to searching about fish. So, if you have any fish-related needs, I'm guessing Fishbase is the place to go. For his second entry, Shane sent in a story:

Used and Abused: A Fish Tale

Three fish swimming around in the Ocean, one is a Tuna named Charlie, one is a Blowfish named Sad Sack, and the last one is a Flounder named Rounder.

Sad Sack: Did you guys here Aquaman is even using Plankton now?

Charlie: Man, that's a new low even for him.

Rounder: King of the Seas, psshhhh. Yeah right. He calls us his people, but he doesn't really care. All he does is use us.

Sad Sack: Yeah no kidding. I used to be a proud blowfish and could scare off any animal coming my way. Now look at me...I'm all deflated. And it's all because of him.

(flashback)

Sad Sack: I was swimming along minding my own business when I saw him swim buy charging at a group of divers. Next thing I know I hear his voice in my head and I'm charging along with him straight at the divers. Me...I'm not a fighter...I'm a lover, but there I am charging away. Next thing I know I'm taking a harpoon meant for him and saving his life and I don't even know why.

(end flashback)

Sad Sack: I'm telling you I was mind controlled. That man is pure evil.

Charlie: That's a real sad story Sad Sack.

Rounder: Boo!

(Sad Sack tries to puff up, but goes flying off panel due to the hole in his side.)

Sad Sack: Very funny guys.

Rounder: I had a run in with Aquaman too.

(another flashback)

Rounder: I was with this school of fish heading to find something to eat when all of a sudden we turned and started charging at this big black helmet with red eyes. We just kept swimming into it over and over. Look at me. I lost a fin during the panic.

(end flashback)

Rounder: Now all I can do is swim in circles and I can't even see where I'm going since my eyes are on the wrong side.

Charlie: Did I ever tell you about the time I was caught?

Rounder: Nah, man. What happened?

(flashback)

Charlie: Well there was this huge net coming toward us so we all started screaming and swimming the other way as fast as we can. Then along comes this dumb ass dolphin and starts heading straight toward us wondering what all the commotion was. You know how curious they are, gets them into trouble all the time. Their as bad as humans. Anyway, the dolphin plows into us pushing most of us back into the net and we all get tangled up. The dolphin is screaming his head off calling for Aquaman to save him, so we all start joining in. Well, Aquaman shows up all right, but what does he do? He saves the dolphin and leaves us to fend for ourselves. The only reason I survived is that I landed on top of everyone else when they dumped us out and I was able to flop back into the sea. I lost most of my family that day.

(end flashback)

Sad Sack: That bastard.

(a Orange blur swims by)

Charlie: Shit, not again!

Still, for all his efforts, Shane's only the runner-up. But for such dedication, I'm going to send him something. What, I do not know yet. But I'll think of something.

Instead, a somewhat fresh copy of Salmon Doubts will be finding its way to Nate Atkinson, for embracing the goal of this contest in a way that I hadn't expected:

Here is a link to a website devoted to my favorite band, as led by a Mr. Pat Fish, AKA the Jazz Butcher. The site contains audio files galore, Since it is your intention to hip an audience to something special, I thought I'd do the same for you.

I listened to the music at the link, and I haven't decided if it's for me or not. But, I love being exposed to new things, and I love the sentiment behind the entry, so send me your snail mail address, Nate, and I'll get this thing off to you in the near future.

Also, time's running out on the Scott Pilgrim contest at Peiratikos, so get cracking on those. I still have to get cracking on mine...