Posts Tagged ‘Frank Santoro’

Various Business


by

Friday, January 18, 2008


Read Comments (7)

1. I was just beginning to wonder why Eric Reynolds and the Fantagraphics gang weren’t putting up any new posts on the FLOG! blog, and now I know: it’s because they switched their online location. Bookmark it here.

2. An anonymous commenter to our last post pointed out a pretty interesting new interview with Bill Sienkiewicz.

3. Another (!) interview with Frank, this time including a glimpse into PictureBox:

Part One

Part Two

[Not that it matters, but I edited this to change the order of the items; it seemed weird to put so much video up top.]

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

BJ and FS at Picbox HQ


by

Thursday, January 17, 2008


Read Comment (1)

Labels: , ,

More More More


by

Thursday, January 17, 2008


Read Comments (5)

Frank’s energy these days is starting to make the rest of us here at Comics Comics look bad, so I’m kind of pissed at him, but if you want more of Frank on art and comics (including Storeyville and Cold Heat), Chris Mautner has just posted the second part of his interview with him today. Frank’s really on fire in this one.

(And here’s part one if you missed it.)

Labels: , , ,

The Diving Bell


by

Saturday, January 12, 2008


Read Comments (3)

I’ve heard a lot of cartoonists talking about this dilemma: in order to find all the strength within one to summon up the images needed for the comic, to maintain all the focus and attention to detail necessary, to have an editor’s eye + guiding hand, to be the objective reader who keeps the narrative whole, the artist then suffers the atrophying of other “occular” abilities.

I only draw the landscapes + figures I need for the story. The demands of the story are what engulfs me, so that my waking moments are spent shape-shifting into a camera, a projector. I’m an editing machine that plays my comic on an endless loop for months.

Yet when I’m walking along the Braddock trail with Gretchen and I spy those stacked mills + houses above, I furiously look at EVERYTHING and it inevitably leads me to draw other things, new things that have no place in the narrative other than it is my life, my story — and if I don’t record it here, her, now, it’ll be left on the cutting room floor.

Labels: ,

Here Here


by

Thursday, January 3, 2008


Read Comment (1)


Numerous Comics Comics contributors have wound up on Top 10 lists, and here‘s an unusually nice mention of project close to Frank’s inky heart: the Cold Heat Special, co-created by Jon Vermilyea.

Labels: , ,

Comics Reporter Update


by

Wednesday, December 26, 2007


Read Comments (2)

From Tom Spurgeon:

“I’m happy to report there’s nothing weird about the site going down, and I’m flattered anyone would notice. It just went down about 10 AM on Sunday and the server people (after an hour on the phone) say it will take them a few days to fix it. It’s the kind of nothing-you-can-do-about-it meltdown that I guess happens every now and then. I will say it was a bit more tolerable when this happened when we were renting space from that guy in Malibu who hosted sites on equipment his garage than it is now, when we’re paying YAHOO money to do this.

“This really screws up the momentum of the holiday interview series, for which I apologize. Frank’s interview was posted on Sunday but was only up for two hours or so, Chris Pitzer was suhttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifpposed to go out Monday, I was going to give away 50 boxes of comics on Christmas, and Francoise Mouly is supposed to be up today. Not to mention the seven already completed pieces that no one can access right now, or the 11 interviews yet to come that I’m unable to finish work on, a few of which may now be crowded out.

“My impulse is to re-run the interviews at the top of blog, and there’s really no other day to run a comics giveaway that targets the more devoted readers, so that’s probably out. When the site goes live again, a bunch of half-finished work will go up for a couple of minutes or hours that I will fix the second I can get to it. I hope you’ll afford me a few minutes to clean things up.

“I’m really, really sorry about this. I know from the e-mails that I receive that a few people were appreciative of new content during the holiday slowdown. I’m really uncomfortable talking about the writing on comics I do or am going to do or how hard or how easy it is as opposed to just shutting up and doing the writing, so hopefully CR goes up soon and we can get back to seven days a week content and I don’t ever have to talk about this stuff again.

“PS — I’d still love to hear from anyone who has a birthdate they’d like me to recognize on the site: tomATcomicsreporterDOTcom.”

UPDATE: Tom explains the situation as of January 2 here.

UPDATE II: The site’s back up! Go, read.

Labels: , ,

Frank Santoro interview


by

Sunday, December 23, 2007


Read Comments (6)

The mighty Tom Spurgeon interviewed me for Comics Reporter. It’s a pretty awesome interview and covers ground not discussed in the equally awesome Inkstuds radio interview I did recently. Please check it out here.

To the right is an old Sirk zine of mine from ’93.

Labels: , , ,

The Effort


by

Saturday, December 15, 2007


Read Comments (6)

I enjoyed Rich Kreiner’s review of Comics Comics. It was, as Tim noted, too kind. So this isn’t an argument, thank heavens. In a long parenthetical thought, Kreiner wonders about our criteria for coverage, and also about our seeming fascination with the fact of something existing, as though the effort alone was enough to qualify our interest. I can’t speak for Tim or Frank, but, as for me, well, Kreiner might be on to something.

Sometimes I see things so sublime or so ridiculous that I have to just wonder about them. It’s not that I like them, per se. I don’t like Dave Sim’s Collected Letters, but what drives a cartoonist to undertake such a project is interesting to me because (a) Sim is clearly a man with his own vision and (b) he’s a hugely important cartoonist, no matter what you might think of the quality of his work. And, on the other hand, there are artists like like Steve Gerber or Michael Golden, both beloved Comics Comics figures.

Let me digress for a moment: During the most recent SPX, me, Frank, and Tim went out to dinner with a large group that included Gary Groth, Gilbert Hernandez and Bill Griffith. Gary ribbed us about Steve Gerber, etc., and Frank, in a moment of comics euphoria confessed his love of Michael Golden’s work to the entire table. I don’t think Bill even knew who we were talking about, and Gary seemed duly horrified, while Gilbert smiled beatifically, as if to say, “I love that this guy loves Golden, but I’m not saying a word”. I mean, Gary’s fought for sophistication in comics for 30 years, and now he has to listen to three knuckleheads talk about Golden and Gerber. Oy vey. See, all three of us were formed, in a sense, by The Comics Journal, and to an extent, by Groth’s own sensibility as a publisher and editor. But we also came up at a time when we didn’t (and still don’t) have to choose between art and hackwork. We can like both, and enjoy both on their own merits, precisely because Gary won the battle for sophistication and seriousness. His efforts have allowed us to sit back a bit and examine the things that got passed over, shunted aside or simply spit at. That means that Frank can talk about Michael Golden because he’s fascinated by his figuration in the context of action comics. Frank wouldn’t, at least, not sober, make a case for Golden as an artist in the same way he does for Gilbert. But then again, he did just post about Nexus. I guess what I’m saying is that a central tenant of Comics Comics is a kind of enjoyment of something within its context. Steve Gerber is an interesting comic book writer. That is enough to make him worth examining for us. And, he, like Golden, like Rude, et al, is someone who has willingly labored in a field with few rewards and a lot of creative restrictions. Those “rules” that these guys bump up against make for an interesting friction and can produce, accidentally or intentionally, interesting work. And part of is also that, to an extent, we take the greatness of someone like Dan Clowes for granted. He’s been written about, been hashed over. For us, it’s perhaps more fun to dig through a body of work that has yet to be poured over, and to find artists whose visions carried them into strange places under odd restrictions.

So, Rich Kreiner, yes, we, or at least I, sometimes like things just because they exist in an odd space, and occupy a strange little niche. And while I’ve never been a proponent of confusing effort with merit (i.e. the praise for something like Persepolis is primarily because people were impressed enough that a comic could be about Iran that they ignored how slight the actual content was), sometimes noting the effort is worthwhile. And I thank Kreiner for making the effort to write about us. Now if we can just make enough time to do that next issue….

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

For Your Listening Pleasure


by

Thursday, December 13, 2007


Read Comments (4)

I haven’t had a chance to listen to this yet, but I can not wait.

Resident genius and co-blogger Frank Santoro was interviewed for this week’s episode of Inkstuds. You haven’t heard someone talking about comics until you’ve heard Frank talk about comics.

Download the excitement here.

Labels: , ,

pan-Narrative


by

Sunday, October 28, 2007


Read Comments (14)

Comics Comics reader Brian Nicholson made a comment about my SPX post which got me thinking. Brian took note that the same words I used to describe the “new” mini-comics at SPX — “long on craft and short on narrative” — could also be used to describe some of my own comics like Chimera and Incanto. He also wrote that “not being at SPX this year, I just associated the type of new comics you’re talking about with some Souther Salazar comics, like Please Don’t Give Up“, and added that “maybe people were selling some pretty fucking out there comics that are nothing like the work I’m using as a reference point.”

Souther’s work is, I think, a little tame next to some of the pulsating color zines I saw at SPX. And I always found Souther’s work pretty narrative-based, even at its most dense and notebook-like. Chimera and Incanto are also, to me, totally narrative. And they too are pretty tame next to a lot of this “new” work I’m loosely describing.

One of the amazingly beautiful “out there” comics I bought at SPX was PANRAY by Raymond Sohn and Panayiotis Terzis. It is a remarkable, mountain-climbing achievement in terms of drawing, color, printing, and presentation. Like some spectral black-and-white silent movie that is interrupted by searing color patterns and abstractions, the book goes in and out of focus, organically and structurally. It’s beautiful. How do I even begin to describe it? And that’s what I want to get at or at least try to approach: a new way in which to discuss the purely visual elements of comics. There’s often too much emphasis on reading a comic like a novel when really it should be discussed like a painting or a sculpture. Far from dismissing these “out there” comics in my original post, I found myself simply hoping to discuss them and appreciate them better, and to do that I think a broader approach has to be encouraged, towards a less conservative definition of comics.

What I was looking for, or at least curious to find at this SPX, was something of both. I lament the fact that narrative comics, of all types, but specifically strong character-driven stories that are also beautifully drawn like, oh, Gilbert Hernandez’s Speak of the Devil unfortunately don’t seem to exist, or at least not in the embryonic form of new, well-executed mini-comics. That particular example might be a lot to ask — but where is the experimentation and growth in straight-ahead narrative alt mini-comics? Most straight-ahead narrative small press comics (read black-and-white autobio/cutesy big-head) don’t have a quarter of the energy and enthusiasm that the “nonobjective”, “abstract” mini comics have.

I was looking for a little of both and that combo was in short supply. There were, for the most part, silk-screened color out-there “art comics” and black-and-white variations on the same type of alternative mini-comic you’ve seen many times before. The “art” stuff looked and felt fresh. Yet they are, generally, not wholly engaging in comics language or structure. (However loose and arty Chimera and Incanto may be, they are rigorously structured to unfold as a comic narrative.) The “arty” minis from SPX are more interested, it seems, in image-making. And that’s awesome. But as a comics fan who reads a lot of older “mainstream” stuff, I would like to see “literary,” straight-ahead alternative comics-makers take a page from the “art” comics play book and try to adopt different approaches towards storytelling and narrative. And vice versa. I think the “new” crafty mini-comics took a lot of Fort Thunder to heart visually but don’t truck in the same “narrative strategies” as BC, CF, BJ, BR, LG and MB — who all tell stories, however visually challenging or stunning they may be.

And let me say this — I’ve always felt that all comics are inherently narrative because of the form that the book takes. For that matter a single image, an abstract painting, for example, is often narrative. Jackson Pollock‘s paintings are narrative — you can follow him, the story of him working by the lassos of color — and the same is true even with the color field abstractionists like Frankenthaler. It’s just a broader range, a greater bandwidth for inventing narrative.

Using this definition, PANRAY is narrative, too. It has characters that appear to repeat, settings where they interact, and even occasional panel structures. It is a miraculously hewn jewel of a comic. Do I lament that there are no obvious narrator type characters to guide me through the book like a Maggie or Hopey? Not at all.

I simply see this end of the comics spectrum flowering at a lightning-fast rate, absorbing SO much and spitting it back, drawing their asses off year after year. But, and I’m really overgeneralizing here, on the other side of mini-comics world is the umpteenth generation of the Ware/Clowes school, who seem to stay firmly planted in straightforward narrative, “literary” comics. With a few exceptions, nothing’s really changed here in 15 years, kinda like superhero comics. There are very few inventive, straight-ahead narrative “alternative” comics for my taste. I think Kevin Huizenga and Dan Zettwoch are the heirs to this evolving school. They both made (and continue to make) beautiful mini-comics that grew easily into their “professional” work.

But I don’t see work of that par so often these days. Most new minis in this school over the last few years are standard fare. The drawing and production values are weak, and the stories are usually slice o’ life snoozers. If I were to name names I probably couldn’t, because nothing from this camp stood out to me at this SPX. Generally, they make black-and-white minis with maybe a color card stock cover. I’ve talked to a lot of kids who do “alternative” comics, who read mostly “alternative” comics, and who know next to nothing about the history of comics before 1999 (or the history of art). They have this weird attitude towards “art” comics. I see them come up to the PictureBox table and literally sneer at the work displayed. They would be doing themselves a huge favor if they could get over their ingrained distrust for the more “arty” aspect of comics.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,