Apparently so. This is almost embarrassing, though at least we’re safe from the ghost of Fredric Wertham.
In our cred’s defense, I don’t think this blog-rating thing can read cartoons. That should have gotten us a PG at least.
(Via some stupid online dating site.)
I want to quickly apologize for linking to that incredibly lame video last night. (I’ve since deleted the post, but here‘s what I linked to, if you’re really curious.) When I found the video, I kind of muttered “ha ha” to myself in a monotone, and posted it without even thinking. Then I forgot all about it.
But at 4:30 this morning, I dreamed that I received an e-mail with the opening line (heard by me in a God-like voiceover), “Don’t start posting that kind of crap.” I woke up with a start, and couldn’t get back to sleep until I’d pulled down the post. Because the voice was right, and I don’t know why I ever linked to the video in the first place, other than a misguided attempt to put new content up here at least semi-regularly. I wasn’t even amused by it myself, and barely made it through watching the whole thing. I sometimes think bloggers do little besides trading links to things that don’t really interest anybody, including themselves, and everyone just kind of agrees to pretend that they’re half-way entertained, in a vain attempt to keep away the realization that we’re all slowly wasting our lives. I don’t want to contribute to that any more than I have to, so I’ll try to be a little more selective in the future.
The only aspect of that video of any real interest is the banal and obvious point that many in the comics community are able to fixate on particular characters, themes, and tropes to a possibly unhealthy degree. (Did you see that site Abhay Khosla found the other day? [Via Deppey.] That’s it to a tee.) I sometimes don’t know whether to pity or envy people who can do that. It must be kind of comforting to wake up and know, This is what matters to me. This is why I am here. I need to collect Wonder Woman merchandise. Or, I like looking at pictures of superheroes holding women in their arms. Of course, the downside is that you might alienate yourself from ninety-five percent of your fellow humans, but maybe it’s worth it, just to have that sense of purpose.
All right, Dan’s in France, and I haven’t read any comics that have inspired me to write in what seems like forever. Which means it’s half-assed quiz time. My high-school German is extremely rusty. Have any of you ever heard of this book? Because if this description is correct (“a pseudo-art-historical treatise on the paintings found in the backgrounds of Donald Duck comics”), then I am curious.
In other Euro news, many of you are probably already aware of it, but I’ve really been enjoying the Danish metabunker blog. The long interviews with rappers and the like I mostly skip, but Matthias Wivel writes very intelligently about comics.
Sometimes I think the much-respected Jog tends to write at greater length than he really needs to, but he’s still the best, most reliable, and easily the hardest working regular online comics critic I’ve encountered.
He is also, inexplicably, one of the very few who even try to understand where Paper Rad is coming from, and he’s just delivered a sharp review of their latest.
There are many wonderful sites on the Internet where the casual or serious fan can enjoyably explore the world of comics, but for every standout example of sanity, there are ten or more online locales that no one should visit unaware, and that greatly offend the TRUE AND KINDLY SPIRIT OF COMICS.
Comic book veterans will be familiar with most of the following destinations already, but as a public service for our less knowledgeable readers, and with apologies to Dante Alighieri, we offer this guide to the nether regions of the comics blogosphere. We call it:
THE NINE CIRCLES OF COMICS INTERNET HELL
Um, this is all meant in good fun, of course.
CIRCLE THE FIRST. LIMBO
Here is the final destination of the honorable pagans, excellent and admirable comics bloggers whose only sin lies in their worship of false gods (i.e., crappy comics). Bully, Mike Sterling of Progressive Ruin, and David Campbell of Dave’s Long Box are only three of the more prominent members of this dignified and respectable but misguided group.
CIRCLE THE SECOND. THE LUSTFUL
The denizens of this circle can be found in many places, and they frequently haunt the less-traveled reaches of eBay .
CIRCLE THE THIRD. THE GLUTTONOUS
To be fair, I am not really familiar with the contents of this blog, but the writer does claim to buy upwards of 100 comics a month, and frankly, he’s asking for it.
CIRCLE THE FOURTH. THE GREEDY
CIRCLE THE FIFTH. THE WRATHFUL
Probably the most common of sins in the world of comics fandom, the overly angry and vengeful can be found almost everywhere. Honorable pagan Graeme McMillan has since moved on to greener pastures, but the archives of his defunct Fanboy Rampage still catalog many of the most egregious offenders from past days.
CIRCLE THE SIXTH. THE HERETICS
Dave Sim is the obvious choice here, but other than an unreasonably high admiration for the art and influence of Neal Adams, his heresies are mostly confined to matters unrelated to comics proper. So, even though he probably doesn’t deserve the attention, I direct you to this guy.
CIRCLE THE SEVENTH. THE VIOLENT
One of the most dangerous destinations on the internet, populated almost entirely by vandals, blasphemers, and the suicidal, COMICON.com’s The Gutters has carved out a sure and safe berth in the seventh circle of Hell.
CIRCLE THE EIGHTH. THE FRAUDULENT
Flatterers, panderers, false prophets, and would-be seducers abound in the eighth circle, effortlessly presided over by John Byrne. There are many lowlights.
CIRCLE THE NINTH. THE TREASONOUS
For attacking anyone with the temerity to question the critical wisdom of middlebrow thumbsucker Time magazine (a publication that previously gave us this less-than-astute pick as worst of the year, lest we forget). For burning his “Comics Elitist Fan Club membership card”, a clearer sign of treason than anyone has the right to ask for. (And on that holiest of days, Christmas, no less!) For, less than a week later, excommunicating a fellow blogger from the ranks of the “insanely interesting”, merely for jokingly (obviously) poking fun at an established figure. Most of all, for apparently believing that a book or genre’s financial success is proof of its artistic worth, and entitles it to be exempt from all criticism (at least as long as it sits well on his hobbyhorse). For knowing better. In the ninth circle of comics internet hell, ladies and gentlemen, I give you Dirk.
(Please allow me, as the aforelinked Jacob Covey once did, to affix a 😉 emoticon here, and also to inform all readers that this is commonly accepted as an indicator of facetious intent.)
DISCLAIMER: These views do not necessarily reflect those of Dan, Frank, any other contributor to Comics Comics, or even myself. Complaints should be directed elsewhere.
From John Kricfalusi.
[UPDATE: Damn slow RSS readers! Apparently Eric Reynolds beat me to this by hours, but I honestly had no idea! He always beats me…]
I know a lot of Comics Comics readers have already seen Marc Singer’s recent part-right, part-way-off-base review of MOME, because I recognize the names of a lot of the commenters there, but if you haven’t seen it yet, the post itself and the comments that follow are pretty interesting.
Via Jog — who, by the way, somewhat recently wrote one of the more insightful reviews of Cold Heat (drawn, as you probably know, by CC editor-at-large Frank Santoro) I’ve yet seen.
Speaking of Frank, judging by their Website, Copacetic has only a few copies of his ’90s masterpiece Storeyville left, and I believe they’re the only place where you can still purchase it. So this may be your last chance if you want to get your hands on Storeyville in its original format.
Finally, and via Tom Spurgeon, a Steve Gerber anecdote from Marvel’s Tom Brevoort. [UPDATE: Gerber has responded.]
As mentioned earlier, new Comics Comics issues should be available through Diamond starting in February, but a few prescient stores have gotten their hands on copies early. If you can’t wait for your fix, go visit them. They are all excellent boutiques, and very deserving of your money and patronage.
THE COMICS COMICS FIVE
(in alphabetical order)
1. Big Brain Comics, in Minneapolis
2. Domy, in Houston
3. Family, in Los Angeles (& don’t miss co-proprietor Sammy Harkham‘s terrific related blog)
4. Jim Hanley’s Universe, in Manhattan
5. Rocketship, in Brooklyn
P.S. It’s possible we’ve missed a few stores, so if you work at a location stocking Comics Comics or if you spot an issue somewhere, drop us a line, and we’ll keep a running honor roll. In the meantime, these are the five greatest stores in North America.
Well, my fave comics of ’06 list caused a little tizzy in web-land. And Dirk got kind of annoyed. All because of my flippant remark about Fun Home. My remark was just that: flippant; and not really meant as a substantive criticism (obviously), but rather as an example of a disagreement with the PW list. That said, I don’t really have much to add: I found the narrative devices in Fun Home to be rather forced and the cartooning too often stiff and inexpressive. Most of all, it just seemed overstuffed and not really in control of the medium. Mostly, it just doesn’t interest me enough as a book to write any further about it. It’s not a terrible book, just kinda mediocre.
I don’t agree with Dirk that my not liking it represents some kind of comics-elitist (something I’m certainly not–though I’d like to see a list of qualifications) reaction against mass popularity. I totally understand why it has wider appeal than Kim Deitch’s work (which is vastly more successful as art)–ummmm, that’s the way world works. I’m not surprised at all, nor do I expend any energy being annoyed at it. Culture is what it is and the most we can do is to work for and promote and write about the things we believe in and hope for the best.
And further, contra-Dirk I don’t make my aesthetic judgments based on the relative popularity of a work or what “scene” it emerges from. Who cares about that stuff? I might have at age 14 but certainly not now. I judge things based on their relative successes as art, and that’s it. So that’s pretty much my response. I didn’t like the book that much, but anything else–scenes, cred, popularity and all that other foolishness is besides the point.
First, yes, another review of Comics Comics (the magazine) is in, this time from the redoubtable Tom Spurgeon at the Comics Reporter. (Is that the right way to use “redoubtable”?) Read it here:
Second, it has come to my attention that many (two) of our readers have been asking whether or not our magazine’s content might be made available here on our site. It pleases me to announce that a crack team is currently working on the related technological problems, and some time in the near future you’ll be able to read the amazing Comics Comics features and stories you’ve only heard about right here online.
Third, (and here you readers are privy to confidential business discussions) Dan, I think you’re worried too much about whether or not the comics we talk about here are “mainstream” or not. I don’t know whether that term even means anything any more, for one thing. Also, as you say, great “underground” comics don’t come out every day, and we don’t want to cannibalize pieces that potentially might work better in our magazine. In my opinion, we should just write about anything comics-related that we think is interesting, and forget about everything else. As I’m sure you’d agree, we just don’t want to become a typical comics blog, reviewing all of the week’s releases. Other sites already do that, and probably make a better job of it than we would, anyway. This blog is intended only to fool readers into thinking that the magazine might be worth picking up, or more importantly, considering it as a venue for advertising. (NB: we have very reasonable rates.)
Fourth, for those of you wondering about our publication schedule here, Dan and I both hope to contribute two or so posts each week. Right now, other PictureBox publication demands mean that Dan probably will not be posting quite that often, at least until things die down. In any case, at least three out of five weekdays should feature new content.
Filler ends here.
