Odd Superhero Dream

I slept a lot this weekend and had crowded dreams, very tedious dreams with a lot of detail. One involved a superhero comic about some girl taking on the identity of Dr. Moonlight or whatever you call the Batman knockoff Alan Moore devised for Supreme. At the same time, Batman existed in the same comic. A passage by a wiseguy comic book critic was read aloud and it made the daring proposition that the Batman family “could be considered a mutant, dry-land offshoot of Aquaman.” Then the dream moved on to an episode about the American Revolution taking place somewhere that wasn’t America.

The Sex Element, part 1 (b): The Problem with Lost Girls

To continue our blog’s sex theme

Man, Lost Girls really sucked. It crapped. It was terrible. All right, the coloring was fantastic. But imagine reading the thing as a pile of black-and-white xeroxes. That’s what I had to do, since the book costs a ton and Top Shelf would have needed a bank loan to send out review copies. So nothing stood between me and Melinda Gebbie’s draftsmanship, a style that makes everyone look like a combination of pie plate and trombone. Worse, nothing stood between me and the script. I like Alan Moore; in fact I admire him. But Lost Girls is dumb as hell and won’t shut up.


Having slogged thru the pile, I summed up my thoughts in a review that Noah has asked me to reprint here.  All right, I’m game. Lost Girls convinced me that pornography is so dumb that attempts at intelligent pornography — Moore’s avowed goal — are bound to produce lump-headed parodies of thought. The problem with my theory is that it’s based on one example. Possibly The Story of O is not dumb, or those books by that de Sade person, or even some of that googly-eyed pervy shit from Japan that people profess to like (though the works’ kindergarten feel should give right-minded citizens pause). Well, whatever. I saw The Lover and that was okay, a bit of a weak pulse but the film wasn’t really stupid or anything. Still, if you took out the sex scenes you’d have a work so slight it could be wrapped in a handkerchief. Maybe the book is better.
Two great phrases sum up the pornographic experience. I found the first one in a Village Voice review of some bare-tit movie version of Lady Chatterley’s Lover. This is so long ago that people didn’t have VCRs. The lady who wrote the review said that in the row ahead of her was some joker in a raincoat, or maybe he had a newspaper in his lap; I forget. All thru the film’s build-up, with the costumes and the green scenery and maybe a vintage car, he kept saying, “All right already, all right already.” He wanted to get down to business.
Phrase number two is from an Eric Bogosian routine. A slob recalls a bachelor party and the porn tape that was playing: “So they’re doing it, they’re doing it, they’re doing it.”
The Lover is an “all right already” film. Lost Girls is quintessential “doing it, doing it, doing it” with a heavy topping of “Oh God, please shut up.” 
One more phrase is particular to Moore-generated porn, and it’s the title of the review.
Hey-Yoh!  
  If you couldn’t write a masterpiece, then you couldn’t write Lost Girls. But Lost Girls is no masterpiece. Alan Moore reports that he once spent a week or so believing that cherubs were the reason for the universe; the next thing he knew, his hallway was painted solid with cherubs and he couldn’t figure out why. Lost Girls is kind of like that but on a bigger scale. It’s a wrong turn.

         As genres go, porn makes superhero comics look good. Both are built around spasms of activity that apparently can’t be left out of the action. You have to have fight scenes, you have to have sex scenes. But at least the fight scenes come with some motivation. The man wants to rob the jewelry store, or the man is mad because he was imprisoned in the Parallax Zone. The maid who jumps the bellboy in Book II of Lost Girls doesn’t have a particular reason. The bellboy has less than a reason to respond, since just a couple of minutes ago he came while fooling around with one of the guests. Still, he and the maid go at it. Getting through Lost Girls is like reading three volumes about people who eat fried chicken and don’t care about anything else. No matter what, they’re going to eat fried chicken, and they’re going to do it with a chummy Rotarian air that sounds like nothing on earth: “Monsieur Rougeur’s narrations and his member are both very nice indeed. Could you read us another tale like that, perhaps? Oooh. Ooh, yes . . .”

            You have heard there’s shocking stuff in Lost Girls, pedophilia and bestiality and incest. Indeed there is, plenty. From interviews, it appears Moore decided to carry his Lost Girls experiment right to the limit. If he was going to do pornography, he was going to do real pornography, not some polite literary substitute. He tells us that real porn is meant to be “transgressive” and set loose fantasies that can never be acted upon, fantasies from the core of our being. To know ourselves is to know them too. So you start with freeing the psyche and you wind up with a girl jerking off a horse. (“It felt sorta like peach-skin.”) Moore believes in expanding the consciousness, so he believes in consciousness-expanding porn. And in some distant sense a girl jerking off a horse does amount to a freer psyche, because it’s an unthinkable idea slapped down in front of you. But I don’t feel freer after experiencing the idea. I feel like something I care about is being misrepresented. If sex means getting a horse to come, or doing an eight-year-old, or having everybody in the family fuck each other, then all right, I’ll find some other interest. The scenes just mentioned come in the third volume because Lost Girls is organized to represent the way we all first discover sex and come to terms with it. The book builds to a frenzy because sex is a powerful and disturbing force, and to fully experience it means learning that it can pull us in scary directions. Fair enough in theory. The problem is that one person’s fantasy dragged from the primal core is another person’s bizarre turnoff. Lost Girl’s concluding frenzy involves genitals, but for me it doesn’t involve sex. Instead of believing that Moore has something fundamental to say about everybody’s shared experience, I feel like he’s speaking a language only he understands.  

            The more particular a desire gets, the more ridiculous it gets. Some of the ones shown here are very particular, but there’s no comedy a la Robert Crumb, no recognition that our personalities, right down in their central recesses, can be kind of absurd. If it’s central, it’s serious. In fact it’s sublime. Moore treats the erotic imagination the way a cargo cult treats Charlie Chaplin: the damn thing gets worshipped. He wasn’t like this with superheroes. Maybe the difference is that fight scenes, though crucial to superhero comics, aren’t really the point of the genre, whereas sex scenes are the whole reason pornography exists. At any rate Moore’s superhero work played with genre requirements, sometimes gave them the slip. Whereas his pornography accepts full-on the central, dumb necessities of the genre. Moore figures he can improve on standard porn by means of better art, highbrow themes, happier-looking women. But he’s willing to be as stupid as pornography requires, to pretend that writing about sex means writing about people engaged in great chain-fucks, and to pretend that these chain-fucks don’t violate laws of common sense and probability.

            Being serious about something dumb does bad things to the sense of humor. In Lost Girls  Moore’s playfulness gains about twenty pounds. It thuds, and the result is a recurring “Hey-yoh!” effect. He (exasperated): “Please, Dorothy. You make it hard for me.” She: “Oh, I’ll make it hard, all right.” The nifty echoes Moore likes to bounce between caption and picture no longer seem so debonair.“Having to start at the bottom,” “All that spit and polish” — okay, now guess what goes with them.

            The book is derived from three (four, really) children’s classics: The Wizard of Oz, Peter Pan, and the Alice books. All of them belong to the great harvest of Victorian-Edwardian fantasy texts that fed pop culture for so long. Even people who haven’t read the books know the characters and the key events. That’s what attracted Moore to the three of them — their exposure. He has things to tell us about our fundamental selves, and books with well-known characters provide a fast route to fundamentality. But does he like the books? Does he care about them? Nothing worthwhile in the originals manages to show up in Moore’s derivative. He gathers a selection of tourist-level surface details and works out little nods and allusions to them, and that’s pretty much it. Dorothy’s Emerald City parallel: “Outside, with the gaslight, the sky over New York looked green, sorta.” Or young Alice goes at it with her lover, Mrs. Redman, while Mr. Redman sleeps. If he wakes up, they’re sunk! Which is not very much like Alice watching the Red King. If  the Red King wakes up, his dream is over and maybe Alice will disappear because possibly she is what he’s dreaming about. The first situation is melodrama, the second is Lewis Carroll. If you start out with the Red King and end up with Mr. Redman, you know you’re doing something wrong.

            Taking porn seriously seems to involve putting a crimp in the brain. But having committed his error, Moore devotes all his superhuman resources to it. Lost Girls goes on for 320 carefully planned and executed pages. It isn’t just the equivalent of seeing someone you admire hit a false note and make a fool of himself, as everyone does at some moment or another. It’s like watching him hold the false note. It’s like watching him put on a stupid, would-be funny voice to tell a story that bombs and then hold that voice for the entire rest of the day. Meanwhile, in some ways, his noble mind is marching along quite well. Because many of Moore’s old knacks don’t desert him here. I’m no expert on how an English businessman of nine decades ago would sound, and an Austrian military officer who likes ladies shoes is totally beyond me. But Moore somehow makes them sound right, even under dire circumstances (“it is a passion for me. I . . . huhhh . . . I hope I . . . have not startled you . . .”). I don’t know much about the pornography of Colette or Pierre Louys, but apparently Moore can mount their wild styles and create excerpts that at least resemble nothing else on earth (“Mother was rudely alerted to my presence by the arcing squirt of sperm which crossed the room to splash against her cheek, dangling snot-like from one earlobe like a pendant pearl”). I do know about purple prose, and Moore still produces the only strain in existence that’s worth reading (“My right hand mapped thunderstorms of static on the silk of Miss Gale’s knee”).

            Melinda Gebbie’s art is hard to size up because the book was sent to reviewers as a set of black-and-white photocopies. She drew most of the pages with layers of colored pencil; from what I remember of the chapters  Kitchen Sink published, the effect is beautiful and gives the work a lot of its body. Of course black and white doesn’t keep her Aubrey Beardsley pastiche from coming through, and it’s lovely. Perhaps best of all, Lost Girls’  panel sequencing shows Moore hasn’t lost his juggling arm.  If you want to see chapters told entirely through reflections in a mirror on a dresser, or see fully-clothed characters unwittingly produce a sex scene by means of their shadows, or watch many small moving bits of plot, language, and symbol chime together like a three-volume cuckoo clock, then Lost Girls won’t entirely disappoint you. Moore can’t help being brilliant. But being brilliant never stopped anyone from acting like an idiot.

Damn you Mark Waid! You’re…

a really nice guy, apparently. I had a big online trollfest with Waid a while back, and as a result I’ve noticed his name more thoroughly when it pops up online. And as a result I’ve been forced to notice that he seems to be one of the more friendly people in the industry, especially as regards new creators. He wrote a forward for a book of advice for young creators edited by a long lost friend of mine (Brian Saner-Lamkin), for one thing. And in the Brian K. Vaughn interview in TCj, Vaughn spends a paragraph or so talking about how great Waid was to him when he was starting in the industry (can’t find the exact quote right now, but it’s in there somewhere.)

So there you go. Put this together with the Kim Deitch incident and one starts to wonder if one will ever regain the moral high ground…. Maybe I should go after John Byrne?

The Sex Element, part 1

We’re doing another series of themed posts, this one about sex and comics. Decades ago Peter Cook did a funny routine about a coal miner who wanted to be a novelist but whose novel got turned down “because it lacked the sex element.” I’ve always loved that phrase.

I can list seven sorts of comics that involve the sex element.

1)  European works that involve fancy drawing and some kind of non-sex draw, such as satirical future fantasyscapes where women in strapless gowns have television sets for heads. This is the Heavy Metal category. The result of the sex element is that everything else in the work gets skipped.
2)  European works that involve fancy drawing and no sort of non-sex draw. This is the Milo Manara category. The result of the sex element is that the reader spends 20 minutes rooted to one spot at Jim Hanley’s Universe and wonders if anyone notices.
3)  Self-revelatory works where the artist gets down to the inner recesses of his being and finds the usual sort of crap we keep there. I guess Crumb is the big example. The sex element in these works might or might not strike you as sexy; it doesn’t have to in order to get its job done. Whereas in the first two categories it does.
4)  Works about daily life that show people having sex because that’s what people do. Alison Bechdel, Alex Robinson, Terry Laban. Robinson’s Box Office Poison has one of the most effective sex scenes in comics, but the scene is not sexy. It just gets across the experience. A problem with these works is that you can feel like the author is demonstrating a point: See how mature and adult I am? 
5)  Tijuana Bibles. I’ve never seen one of those. (UPDATE:  But Matthew J. Brady says you can find them here.)
6)  Japanese pervy stuff. The kindergarten aspect of these works is very offputting.
7)  Lost Girls. Man, did that suck. For one thing, the artwork made everything look like copulating trombones. For another, Alan Moore can be very, very silly. He wanted to do intellectual pornography, which is right up there with wallpaper you can hum or toothpaste that rhymes. Also, his idea of what constitutes an idea can be awfully generous, not to say lax. 

Comics of the Future…Today!

Best American Comics 2053
Edited by Philoctetes Crumb, Jr.

Yes, it’s still got the same title, even though the Galacticon/Cylon Confederacy officially conquered the planet five years ago. I guess it’s a nostalgia thing? Or a political statement? Because nothing says, “Fight the power” like fourth-generation underground comics royalty editing a boring fucking anthology, I guess.

So what do we got here anyway? Hip, Viagra-addled eightysomethings whinging about their artificial nether-prosthetics? Check. Ivan Brunetti with a raw, tasteless strip about how he’s sorry he can’t kill himself now that he’s transplanted his brain into an invulnerable titanium computer? Yep. Some Frank Miller clone (yes, literally ) writing the newly public-domain Jimmy Corrigan as a two-fisted Wolverine knock-off (“I’m the most complexly ambivalent at what I do…but what I do isn’t very nice”)? You betcha. (Actually, that last one is pretty funny. I knew the orphaned works law would be good for something.)

Naturally, there’s still no manga coverage. At least, though, the venerable series has finally, finally, finally decided to acknowledge the existence of Psycomics. Guru McCloud himself is represented with an excerpt from his latest: Defibrilating Comics. With the new lasex surgery laws, his icon doesn’t have glasses, and it’s hair is white — and, of course, it appears on the inside of your eyeballs. But never fear, it’s still blocky and ugly and it still won’t shut up! “Gosh, gee, the brain stem is just another medium to deliver the ever expanding, ever inventive world that is comics and I’m going to show you all of its wonderful potential by standing stock still and nattering on and on just as if I’m one of those hideous nanotisements from the twenties! Ain’t progress grand!”

As has been the case since the early forties when the remnants of the big two merged, there’s one entry devoted to the latest DC/Marvel crossover kerfuffle. The average super-hero reader is, of course – well, actually, there are only two of them. They are both 98 and male and have been reading comics for approximately 90 years a piece. Apparently what they want are comics entirely about Hulk rape. “Hulk rape Thing! Hulk rape Ms. Marvel! Hulk rape Dr. Light! Hulk rape Jughead!” That’s all this strip is; 35 pages of Hulk rape. I think that makes it sound maybe more interesting than it is, though. Because while Hulk is raping the text is mostly devoted to a lot of explication about how the heroes are the greatest heroes ever, and then they’re still the greatest heroes ever and aren’t the Justice League of Avengers the best? Then in the middle Hal Jordan explains why Bruce Wayne isn’t Green Lantern, which has to do with Superman being depowered and eating Galactus (hopefully not in a sexual way. Ugh.) And Sue Dibny is resurrected as Caspar the friendly Ghost III. Or maybe she’s actually the Phantom Girl or something; there was a mini-series they were all telling me to read over at Occasional Superheroine because, you know, it featured a woman, but…well, I didn’t. Sorry. Anyway, as it turns out, Hulk can’t rape you if you’re incorporeal, so that’s a plus.

I know, I know…the Beat’s gonna be on my case for not being sufficiently nice. And I have to admit, it’s not all downside. Sure, the content in Best American Comics 2053 is wretched. But at least you can’t actually buy it anywhere. Thank God for the ongoing economic contraction and the horrific, systematic destruction of our civilization. No race that produces crap like this deserves to live, anyway. All Hail the Cylons!

imaginary comics, part 3: “portnoy’s complaint”

I guess it’s not surprising that Philip Roth is the latest literary darling to jump on the trend of adapting his work to comic-book form. Perhaps inspired by David Mazzucchelli and Paul Karasik’s City of Glass or Asaf Hanuka’s Pizzeria Kamikaze, or in a bid to seem relevant amongst younger Jews-about-town like Michael Chabon and Jonathan Lethem, Roth has commissioned a graphic novel of his 1969 opus Portnoy’s Complaint.

What is surprising is his choice of artist. Rather than R. Crumb or Art Spiegelman, artists with similar enshrined statuses in their fields and somewhat Rothy down-and-dirty semi-confessional aesthetics, he tapped prince of the pretty-boys Craig Thompson.

Portnoy’s Complaint the graphic novel is a fairly slim volume (it was apparently drawn right before Thompson began the final pages for Habibi) coming out next year from Houghton Mifflin. I was of course able to get a galley due to my mad connections in the jewy/comicky/academic world.

Thompson’s drawing style fits the narrative seamlessly sometimes; his swoopy expressionism sets off the various flashbacks well, and the scenes set in the psychologist’s office show Alexander Portnoy (Good Bye Chunky Rice style) adrift on his couch in a swirling sea, while Spielvogel looms like an impassive, wooden dock. Thompson also has had a lot of practice conveying acute shame on pious young boys, which make the bar mitzvah lesson scenes and the liver masturbation scene even more tortured and memorable than in prose.

But in the adult flashbacks, there’s a real tension between the approaches of the two authors’ literary personas: Roth the great misogynist and Thompson the rapturous girl-worshipper. Despite a lot of similarities one can draw between Thompson’s oeuvre and Portnoy (flashbacks, childhood trauma as a key to adult dysfunction, outsized sexual longing), I got to wondering if Roth chose Thompson for the book just to watch him squirm.

The squirm of the artist is practically palpable in the oral sex scenes (man do I wish I was allowed to scan and post those). And when portraying the shallow, illiterate supermodel lust/hate object known as the Monkey, Thompson, without veering from the text, makes her a lot more human than Alexander can see (maybe as a working class small-town Midwestern boy himself, Thompson identified with her more than the protagonist).

Sometimes Thompson goes too far in trying to pretty everything up; the Portnoys mostly seem like nice, vaguely ethnic people rather than the “Jewish joke” Roth described them as. But the mis-fit of Thompson and Portnoy makes a really fascinating text and counter-text (or second text) interplay. Thompson foregrounds the fight that is often overlooked in the text, by embodying with his art style the Nice Jewish Boy masking the Dirty Jew-boy inside.

It’s a bit rocky in places, but I think it’s my favourite Roth creation, and just might be my favourite Thompson creation as well. You should look out for it.