My Best Writing From 2014

Earlier this week I listed some of the highlights of the year here at HU. So I thought here I’d list some of my favorite pieces from this year that were written for places other than the blog. They’re in no particular order.

On why James Baldwin’s essay The Devil Finds Work is the best piece of film criticism ever.

On Grant Morrison’s Doom Patrol and superheroes against fascism.

On Eliot Rodgers, virginity, and masculinity. This was maybe the most popular thing I wrote this year.

Tressie McMillan Cottom, one of my favorite contemporary writers, talked to me about hick hop and race in country music.

I interviewed Feminista Jones about black women and street harassment.

On “Kiss Me, Stupid” and fantasizing about infidelity.

On Bella as a superhero and love as a superpower.

On my Nemesis, Jill Lepore (and being scooped on my Wonder Woman book.)

On how people have difficulty separating film and reality.

On the intersecting stigma towards black women and sex workers.

On why Dead Poets’ Society is an authoritarian blight.

On the one thing every writer needs to succeed.

On fetishizing the male gaze in the videos of Nicki Minaj and Lana Del Rey.

On the greatest male country singer.

On superheroes with disabilities.

On The Wire as melodrama.

On how Octavia Butler reworks Gone With the Wind.

On gay manga and fetishizing the male body.

On how the U.S. manufactures Muslim terrorists.
 

610_baldwin_intro

Year In Review—2014

Hey, it’s the new year. As I do once every 365 days or so about this time, I thought I’d provide links to some of the highlights from the last year on HU. This is in roughly chronological order, and I tried not to think about it too hard; so if I missed one of your favorites, feel free to link it in comments.

As always, thanks to all of our readers, writers, and commenters for giving your time and energy to HU. Hope you’ll all stick around for 2015!
 

iamb034-200x300

Samantha Meier wrote a series of post on women in underground comics.

Isaac Butler wrote about the inequity of unpaid theater internships, looking particularly at the Flea theater.

Brannon Costello for PencilPanelPage on Christopher Priest’s Black Panther vs. Jack Kirby’s Black Panther.

We had a bunch of posts where people weighed in on the worst movie ever, the most overrated sci-fi and like matters.

Emily Thomas on new trends in video game text adventures.

A roundtable on Bloom County

Kailyn Kent did a series of posts on wine in cinema.

Brian Cremins on Walt Kelly and racism.

Sean Michael Robinson on how not to make a graphic novel.

Patrick Carland explodes into green goo of hate while reading Zen Pencils.

I wrote about romance as criticism and criticism as romance, focusing on the work of Kathleen Gilles Seidel. This may be my favorite thing I wrote all year, fwiw.

Ng Suat Tong on Nijigahara Holograph.

Michael A. Johnson on the ethics of war photography and representation.

Sarah Shoker on fantasy economics and why nerds really like stuff.

Robert Stanley Martin with a massive history of the legal wrangling between Steve Gerber and Marvel over Howard the Duck.

Tom Gill wraps up his series of extensive posts on the work of Yoshiharu Tsuge.

We did a roundtable on the work of Octavia Butler. The post by Alexis Pauline Gumbs is pretty amazing.

I interviewed Kate Pollack about violence in The Boys.

A translation of the classic French superhero comics Atomas, by Alex Buchet, with introduction by Chris Gavaler.

Osvaldo Oyola on Spider-Man’s changing identity (sometimes he’s Doc Ock.)

Vom Marlowe with an intro to Tony/Steve fanfic.

PencilPanelPage did a roundtable on Groensteen and page layout.

Ben Saunders with an anniversary appreciation of Keith Moon.

Roy T. Cook wonders if Spider-Woman was harmed in the making of that Milo Manera cover.

Stacey Donovan, YA author, on becoming a writer.

Kim O’Connor on the response to male vs. female autobio comics.

Kristian Williams on Red Dawn as critique of imperialism.

A massive roundtable on The Best Band No One Has Ever Heard Of. Everything from Rahawa Haile on the music of Eritrea to Dana Schechter on French psychfolk weirdos Natural Snow Building.

Qiana Whitted on how comics represent Ferguson.

Cathy G. Johnson on dynamics of abuse in Michael Dawson’s “Overcompensating.”

Michael Carson on Nightcrawler and war movies.

Adrielle Mitchell on Paul Klee as a comics artist.

An interview with James Romberger and Marguerite Van Cook on their graphic memoir The Late Child and Other Animals.

“A woman who falls from grace is seen as fair game”: An Interview with Marguerite Van Cook and James Romberger

As longtime blog readers know, both Marguerite Van Cook and James Romberger have been regular writers for HU over the years. They’re also both comics creators, together and separately, perhaps best known for their collaboration with David Wojnarowicz on the graphic novel Seven Miles a Second. Their most recent project is The Late Child and Other Animals, a graphic memoir written and colored by Marguerite and drawn by James. I interviewed them by email about their book and their work.
________

Noah:Marguerite, my understanding is that you’ve worked on comics projects as a colorist and artist, but haven’t done much writing. Is that right?

Marguerite: In fact, I’ve been writing all my life. Early on I worked for the now defunct Sounds Magazine reviewing bands. One of the first things James and I did together was a comic that I wrote and co-conceptualized with him called Ground Zero. It was a semi- autobiographical sci-fi piece that ran between 1984 until, much less frequently, now.

Axel Alonzo actually included a piece in the vertigo/DC anthology title Heartthrobs, which was a poem I wrote, James did the pencils and inks and I colored it.

James: Marguerite has written prose, poetry, stage plays, screenplays, memoirs, essays, articles, reviews and interviews. She has won a major prize for her poetry. Before I met her, she wrote critically for the East Village Eye even before we began the Ground Zero strips together in that paper. The strip was also deliberately placed in many different sorts of publications as possible: tabloid newspapers, slick magazines, literary and comics zines, art publications, trade paperback anthologies and websites. Eventually all of the Ground Zero strips will be collected into a book which must have quite an unusual format, to accommodate the different methods of printing in black and white and color and varying page sizes that they are originally done for. We already have more than enough of them for a collection, we just need to fill in some parts of the narrative to make it all flow.

Noah: Does working on art help prepare you for writing? And I guess I’m curious as to how writing a comic is different? Are they completely separate skills?
 

5e95bed4b5ccd196b9db9dcbf19e7766

 
Marguerite: I can’t really answer that since I have always done both simultaneously. I think one needs to have something one wants to convey, even if one is not sure what that is when one begins. The creative impulse has no definable source as far a I can tell. I do get pleasure from the physicality of writing, a pen on paper, the calligraphic marks on the page; I enjoy the private experience of putting paint on a surface, the feel of it. Those are personal moments, but art, or writing, needs a viewer, or a reader to participate in the work. The arts are mediums of exchange, even if only in the dream of the ideal reader, in the fantasy of someone who will take the work in, who read thinking of the intimacy of their engagement with the writer/ artist. The exchange is very highly charged, I can say for example that I love so and so’s work. I feel that he or she understood me, their invisible reader, although we’ve never met, nor ever will.

Noah: I know you two have worked together on other projects over the years. What are the positive aspects to collaborating with your spouse? Are there downsides? And how does the collaboration work in practice…do you critique each other’s work as you go? Are you both involved every step, or is it more separated?

Marguerite: Our working method depends on the project. We each do our jobs. I wrote The Late Child and Other Animals as a memoir in the first place. James asked to adapt it, which he did. Since he knew that I would color it, he left space for me in certain passages, in other passages where a noir genre approach seemed right, he inked more heavily. We try not to disturb each other’s process. On the other hand, Ground Zero was produced very collaboratively; because we were interested in producing a comic that was self-referential, structurally challenging and set out to break or manipulate as many of the existing codes as possible, we worked together closely. Incidentally, your use of the term “spouse” made me laugh. It sounds like something you might shoot and serve up on a hunting weekend—okay, rhymes with “grouse”–which means also to complain. I think we are quite resistant to classification; my life has been negatively affected by social constructions, which James gets.

James: I read the stories that make up The Late Child and Other Animals when Marguerite first wrote them while we were at Columbia, and she was privy to every step of my working, first on the thumbnailed adaptation and then drawing the actual black and white pages—and I saw every page as she colored it. I knew Marguerite’s mother and I have spent enough time in Portsmouth and France that I was able to draw her and those places with some assurance—and then, I did purposefully draw the book to allow for color. I knew Marguerite would add back in a high degree of intimacy and knowledge of place and time and emotional resonance with her color, and that she certainly did.

I prefer to work closely with whoever I am collaborating with. I worked closely with David Wojnarowicz and Marguerite on 7 Miles a Second, with Crosby and Tom Kaczynski on Post York, with Josh Simmons on our Oily Comics minicomic “Daddy.” The only place I wasn’t able to collaborate properly with my partners was when I worked for DC Comics, because their policy is to keep the writers and artists separated by the editors. Their end product reflects that distance. But yes, Marguerite and I have a long history of working together. We’ve done paintings, drawings, prints and installations together. We’ve played in bands together and we’ve written songs together. We’ve made films together.

Noah: I was wondering particularly I guess about the section where the hearing committee turns into birds, and you actually see them turn into birds in the comic. Was that something in the original script? Was that James’ idea? Did you arrive at it together? It just seems like a really lovely use of comics to move back and forth between reality and metaphor or fantasy.
 

Screen Shot 2014-12-25 at 12.03.27 PM

 
Marguerite: It was in the It was in the prose that I wrote. My mother told me she thought she was walking sideways at times and she spoke about how close she came to losing her faculties because of the stress. I imagined how that would actually appear and tried to convey her difficulty in the text. As for writing about something as monstrous as the tribunal, to me these men were the embodiment of the inhuman, though I didn’t want to make them monsters and give them that much power. Of course, the English Crown owns the huge ravens at the Tower of London, which have been present for many executions over the centuries, but crows might be representative of a lesser type of civil servant. On the other hand, I wanted to introduce something visual that would express my mother’s inner state in an interesting way.

James: The surreal “bird court” certainly lent itself to comics handling. And Marguerite had written the stories in the first place with an eye towards a certain type of expansive, I’d even say cinematic visual scale.

Noah:The book is a memoir in a lot of ways, but there are also some moments that diverge from first person memoir — most notably in the early sections, about Marguerite’s mother, and in the section about the attempted sexual assault, where you shift into the mind of the assailant, and it becomes almost a suspense genre piece for a couple of pages. Why did you decide to do that, or why did you feel it was important for the story to do that?
 

Screen Shot 2014-12-25 at 12.05.23 PM

 
Marguerite: My mother had a life that was both ordinary and extraordinary. I felt it was impossible to talk about my story without revealing all the secrets I’d been forced to keep of our mutual history. I think the problem of social stigma is still ongoing. One still sees plot lines in films and TV, in novels, certainly in talk shows that revolve around the shame of a child born out of wedlock. Women’s sexual practices are constantly under scrutiny and judgments pronounced. The English canon is loaded with these kinds of stories. A woman who falls from grace is seen as fair game, I was the progeny of such a union and as such stigmatized. I’ll probably write more about it at some point, but for now it was tremendously hard to revisit those traumas. I know my mother’s experiences as, because when I was a child her trauma would come back to her on a daily basis and she would repeat it to me. I think it would be safe to say she did not have PSTD, because it never stopped. The torment was ongoing. I had to lie to protect us.

As a child in this position, I was forced to jump into others’ minds. It seemed natural to do it here. Besides, everything I have the man say, he said to me. I suppose I did a sort of profiling job on him, based on his clothes, his accent and demeanor. I wanted to expose the reader to him for longer than the brief time he was actually trying to abduct me. As for it being noir, the place and the time fit that genre. Those were the films that were playing on TV in the sixties, those and spy stories. Even as a child, I was particularly interested in spy stories, because the spies lied in the service of the greater good and had to resist torture to keep their secrets. I identified with the secret keeping. It cost me dearly. In the end, I was telling a story that wasn’t boring when it was happening and I tried to convey that terror.

For a while, I thought that I would lose something of myself when I put things on paper, but I haven’t. Sometimes the remembered sensation of pain is the only thing that connects us to people we cared about. That is certainly the case with my mother.

Noah: The book is a coming-of-age story in a lot of ways, which these days positions it at least somewhat in relation to YA stories. I wondered in that sense who you saw as the audience for this? Is it mostly adults looking back at childhood experiences? Or do you think kids might read and enjoy this as well?

James: I think that the “coming of age” label is an oversimplification; the passages dealing with the experiences of Marguerite’s mother are as significant as the ones dealing with Marguerite’s childhood. And just because a book deals with children does not automatically make it a young adult book. I feel certain that the explicit nature of the pedophile’s thoughts and behavior in “Nature Lessons” makes it so that the book is clearly directed to adults.
 

Screen Shot 2014-12-25 at 12.08.20 PM

 
Marguerite: If one thinks of Nights of Cabiria as a coming of age story, then my story of betrayals is a sort coming of age story. I’m glad to be alive, at times I wasn’t. These stories happen to end in my teens, but that is purely happenstance. I don’t really think of this as being for kids. I hope this will draw attention to the ongoing stigma attached to unmarried mothers. I hope the quality of the book makes it accessible to everybody. I hope that someone who is feeling alone and unseen, can connect with themselves through connecting with the book and know that I am writing to them as I write to myself. Perhaps, it might speak to some young person.

Finally, just to say that I love the way James handled my text. Everything looks right, the places, the people, things that I had in my head, all of it. He has a unique ability to see through another’s eyes. I think his work is accessible to almost anyone.

Steven Spielberg: Five Minute Hate

220px-Steven_Spielberg_Cannes_2013_3Apparently the film Selma was unable to use text from Martin Luther King’s speeches in part because Steven Spielberg is squatting on the rights for a potential King biography. It sounds like the fault is really more with the King family than with Spielberg, but what the hey; any excuse is a good excuse to cast aspersions on America’s (and the world’s) crappiest filmmaker.

So, with that in mind, I thought I’d provide a round-up of my posts on Spielberg from here and there. In no particular order:

On the crappiness of Raiders of the Lost Ark

On the crappiness of The Tintin film.

On the crappiness of Minority Report.

On the crappiness of Lincoln and Amistad.

I think that’s it, more or less. I hate Schindler’s List probably more than any other film ever, but for that reason I’ve avoided revisiting it to write about it.

Utilitarian Review 12/27/14

B5ulEsjCAAAZ1Ui

 
Wonder Woman News

Emily Ballaine had a nice review of my book thinking about comics as art and bondage vs. feminism.

Official release date is January 14, but I think the books are starting to be available online and in bookstores. If you get a copy, please consider writing a review for Amazon, Goodreads, B&N, or wherever it’s convenient. Thanks!
 
On HU

Featured Archive Post: Bert Stabler on St. Paul, feminism, and equality.

My 15 best albums of the year.

Me on why Little Nemo benefits by being in the public domain.

Shonté Daniels on Lindsay Lohan and the price of fame (in an app.)

Chris Gavaler on the DNA evidence for the existence of Middle Earth.

Me on Justice League United’s awfulness.

A Wonder Woman postcard for the holidays.

Adrielle Mitchell on Paul Klee as a comics artist.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At the Atlantic I argued in favor of outrage.

At Ravishly I wrote about:

— Cecilia Grant’s lovely historical Christmas romance A Christmas Gone Perfectly Wrong.

— how I keep telling my son Santa doesn’t exist and he won’t believe me.

At Splice Today

—I wrote about making a best of list that doesn’t look like me.

—I wished Nicki Minaj would make a great album already.
 
Other Links

Osvaldo Oyola on OMAC for president.

Geoffrey Bunn’s seminal autobiographical essay about William Marston is online.

Christie Marston on problems with Jill Lepore’s research on William Marston.

Tauriq Moosa on why he writes about diversity in games.

Jeet Heer on TNR, Andrew Sullivan, and race science.

Noah Gittell on Selma an white savior narratives.

2001: A Superhero Odyssey

hotel-monolith

 
A couple weeks back I wrote a piece at the Atlantic where I talked about the way that big budget sci-fi isn’t interested in talking about the future. Instead, it seems to have blurred with super-hero films, in which progress is always already a current dream of power. Rather than a better society somewhere to come, we imagine an atemporal, ongoing empowerment. The future isn’t so much a possibility as a superpower itself; a technology which fundamentally changes nothing except our sense of our own awesomeness.

The best example of this probably isn’t actually current Hollywood, but Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. The novel covers vast swathes of time, not to rethink society, but to reinscribe that society from the dimmest past to the furthest reaches of time. Man-apes are led (like the name says) by men; the biggest, manliest man-apes are also the smartest man-apes, and the Cold War starts in the infinite past and never ends. Ursula K. Le Guin was writing about a world of single-gendered hermaphrodites, but for Clarke the women of the future are still mostly stewardesses, and the men are mostly bland bureaucrats; everyman David Bowman has the intense inner life of a stereotyped actuary. Space is a vivid, enormous landscape bestrode by tepid functionaries. The scene where Bowman finds a typical hotel room on the far side of the galaxy is meant to be trippy and unnerving, but it also, unintentionally, sums up the novel’s fundamental mundanity.

The energy of 2001 has nothing to do with reimagining the future or for that matter the present. Instead, it’s a superhero comic; the exciting bit, the wonder and the imagination, is all about turning that pallid Peter Parker into a superdude. And the superpower on offer, the transformative oomph, is literally progress, in the form of evolution. At the beginning of the novel, Moon-Walker the man-ape is pushed into being human by an alien obelisk; at the end of the novel, David Bowman is pushed into being more than human by yet another one of the same. The novel itself is essentially an origin story for man, man-ape and David Bowman. Aliens — some outside, wiser, smarter, something — reaches through the veil of space and time to shape past, present, and future into a superpowered unity of progress. Humanity is affected by, and is effectively itself, a New Age deity. There is no new fate or new possibility; just the current, satisfying knowledge of ongoing genetic potential. Nothing changes except apotheosis. Humankind will meet itself in the future, newborn and with space baby powers.

H.G. Wells in The Time Machine saw evolution as a blind, frightening master; time, in his story, does not care about humans, who it twists into dumb, hunted forms, and breaks meaninglessly upon eternity. Clarke, though, gives evolution a purpose; rather than Darwin’s blind watchmaker, you get a watchmaker with a cheery grin, ensuring that Mind prospers and Man, ultimately, triumphs over the millenia. There couldn’t be a much clearer demonstration that the purpose of the superhero is to defy time. Yes Superman never ages ‚ but more importantly Superman, on that rocketship, drags the future back to the present. The star baby plants tomorrow in today, by imagining perfection as timeless truth, unfolding now. We’re already superior, always have been, and always will be; mutants evolving before our own eyes. 2001 saw a future in which progress is neverending — and when progress is neverending, there can be no change.