Sex Element: Just Because the Men Are Dead Doesn’t Mean that Cheesecake Has to Be

So, as I recently threatened, I did in fact purchase the first volume of Brian K. Vaughn’s Y:The Last Man. It was…okay. The overall concept is pretty entertaining: one day, all of a sudden, every creature with a Y chromosome on earth dies. All that’s left are women, a guy named Yorick, and his male monkey. The rest of the series chronicles the result of the half-apocaypse, and follows Yorick’s more or less picaresque adventures in the company of various allies, including a government agent known as 355.

As I said, the start of the series bops along effectively. Perhaps too effectively, overall. It quickly becomes clear why Vaughn has been tapped for televison; his plot is suspiciously,and, over time, remorselessly glib. In a high-concept sci-fi series like this, the trick is really to start with your one interesting idea and then try to unfold events as naturally as possible from there. For instance, in Hitoshi Iwaaki’s Parasyte, the single idea (weird parasites invade people’s bodies, take control, and start eating humans) results in seemingly endless pulp creativity. What if the parasytes took over a dog by mistake? What if they failed to control the head and only got an arm? What if two parasites settled in a single body? Can a parasyte controlled body have a human baby? What happens with that? What if the parasytes took over a whole town? And so forth — except for a couple hiccups (the hero’s mother coincidentally getting eaten by a parasite is a little strained) the storyline is built around the hero’s effort to deal with thoughtful variations on the basic concept.

Vaughn is interested in exploring his high-concept to some degree. And his answers about how man-death would effect the military, or the goverment, or sex, are fine as far as they go. But he can’t quite figure out how to turn them into a story…and so he falls back on a wearisome series of coincidences and cheap ironies. Yorick is talking to his girlfriend on the phone just as the plague hits…and she gets cut off just as he proposes! So we don’t know what she said, get it? Oh, yeah…and also, she’s in Australia! So to find her he’s got to go all the way across the earth! There’s plot for you! What are the chances, huh? And, of course, Yorick’s mom is a congressperson, so he’s able to get tied into all the government plot stuff…and then his sister happens to have been brainwashed by Amazon’s and now she’s trying to kill him! What are the chances that the one man left in the world would have a rapid man-killing sister, huh? Ain’t life odd? The grinding of the plot is just really audible…and things aren’t helped any by Vaughn’s willingness to toss out characterization at the faintest whiff of possible “conflict”. Yorick, for example, is portrayed as being something of a lefty — he even suggests he voted for Nader at one point. Yet, when confronted with a town full of prisoners who managed to get free (rather than starve to death in jail) he starts shouting at them that they haven’t paid their debt to society. The whole thing just seems hyperbolic and stupid and unnecessary. Just have faith in your story, man. It’s not a bad story. You don’t need to invent melodrama every other page.

All of which is to say that this reads like slick media product by a fairly smart creator whose undeniable intelligence is always fighting a losing battle against the overwhelming instinct to pander to every passing shoddy contrivance. It’s one of the many possible curses of professionalism; the knee-jerk impulse to deliver gets in the way of coherent or thoughtful storytelling.

So, what does this have to do with the sex element?

Well, while professionalism has many downsides, one of the things it almost always provides in television and movies is the sex element. Sure, this episode of Torchwood has been completely derailed by the writers apparently irresistable desire to end with a Very Tragic Death — but at least I spent the last hour or so looking at Naoko Mori, so I don’t feel like my time was completely wasted. Or, yes, Tomb Raider 2: The Cradle of Life was almost insupportably stupid, but I did see Angelina Jolie in a skin tight outfit. And, yes, there are smoking hot guys in Torchwood and Tomb Raider, too. Even if it fails in everything else, professional pulp will provide you with objects of prurient interest. It’s not always enough, but at least it’s something.

Y is certainly better than Tomb Raider, and it isn’t significantly worse than Torchwood. But Pia Guerra can’t draw sexy to save her life. This is, obviously, an offshoot of the fact that the art is basically crap to begin with. It’s standard mediocre mainstream fare; indifferent anatomy, blocky layouts, no sense of composition — just a stylistic nonentity. So what you’ve got here is a slick, mediagenic pulp script in which basically all the characters are women (except for one young twentysomething guy who seems like he’s supposed to be hot as well) and there is just nothing sexy to look at. Vaughn even throws in a gratuitous super-model at one point — and does she look hot? No, she looks blocky and awkward just like everyone else.

Photobucket
In the new future, even models will be poorly drawn. Copyright Brian K. Vaughn and Pia Guerra

What I’m saying is, if you got Jaime or Gilbert Hernandez to draw this series, the pages would be oozing sex and your eyes would be falling out of your skull and you’d feel like you’d gotten what you paid for when you paid for a goddamn slick pulp sci-fi story. Given that the Hernandez Brothers weren’t available, why wouldn’t you put somebody on this story who could deliver some very basic prurient interest?

There’s a simple answer to that question. The answer is that mainstream comics art is…well it’s not especially good. And one of the ways you can tell it’s not good is that it can’t even deliver professional cheesecake with any reliability (I just had a horrible flashback to that ridiculous Power Girl cover where her breasts seemed to be coming out of her stomach…never mind. We will not speak of it again.)

In a comment on his post, Tom said he liked looking at pictures of hot girls, but if pictures of hot girls disappeared from comics, he wouldn’t shed any tear. I certainly agree that you don’t necessarily need pictures of hot girls to have a good comic. Sometimes you don’ t even want pictures of hot girls (or guys, for that matter). But if you’re making slick, professional, genre product, and you don’t have the sex element…well, you haven’t done your job, and I feel justified in resenting it.

___________

A note about two possible objections:

First; yes, Pia Guerra is a woman. I don’t see that it makes much difference. Women and men in the female-drawn Nana are both hot, for example, because it’s a professional genre product, and that’s what you do in a professional genre product. And Guerra’s men aren’t especially cute either, as I noted.

Second; no, more prurience would not undermine Vaughn’s serious take on gender issues. This is because, while a group of crazed killer amazons spouting garbled Dworkin logic may be entertaining, it doesn’t really qualify as a serious take on gender issues. Sorry about that.

Update: I should have noted: this is part of a bloggy roundtable we’re doing on sex in comics. Tom started it off with this post on different ways in which there can be sex in comics and why he hates them all. Tom also posted his very skeptical take on Alan Moore’s Lost Girls. For my take on Lost Girls you’ve got to go back a bit, but I posted it here. And Miriam’s take in response to my post is here. And Miriam will add her own contribution to this forum tomorrow….

Update 2: Gah! Left out Naoko Mori’s name! Duh.

Update 3: Miriam’s post is now up here

The Monosyllable

Monosyllable — For most of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, this was the most common slang euphemism for one of the most dreaded of the four-letter words, i.e., cunt. ‘Mrs. Jewkes took a glass and drank [a toast to] the dear monosyllable. I don’t understand that word, but I believe it is baudy.’ (Henry Fielding, Shamela, 1761)”

—from Hugh Rawson, Dictionary of Euphemisms and Other Doubletalk

Lousy Things

One is Bosom Buddies. The show came and went in the early ’80 and had a reputation as being too cool for the room. I saw it once and the episode had a great line that encouraged me to think the show was ok. Decades later I rent the dvds and … oh boy. The title sequence is especially bad: music, winsome comedy shots, the lettering of the credits. So this is why people hate tv.

The show gave Tom Hanks his start, and I love Tom Hanks before he got too big for comedy. He;s good in the series; you can see why his career took off. Peter Scolari is ok. So is the lady playing their boss, and she gets a lot of airtime. The episodes I’ve seen all have at least one or two good lines. Yet these key elements are outbalanced by the sheer tonnage of crap presented by everything else in the program.
I say this as someone who likes tv and sitcoms.
The tv Mission: Impossible also looks pretty dire. I’ve seen just one episode so far, but boy. Peter Graves is the quintessence of dumb tv leading man. He has to start off each show by listening to that tape with the exposition (the “Your mission, if you choose to accept it” tape). He gets a look on his face like a dog trying to follow a conversation.

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.