Raised by Functionaries

I was reading CLAMP’s Cardcaptor Sakura recently. It’s a series that my wife likes a lot, and Jason Thompson gives it high marks in his amazing guide to all things manga ever. So I wanted to like it…but it just didn’t really do it for me. I can certainly see part of the appeal; Clamp’s art is great; Sakura’s ever-changing round of preposterously frilly costumes is especially entertaining…especially since it brings up the much-neglected question, “Don’t those super-heroes ever get tired of wearing the same thing?” And I like the fact that everybody in the series seems to have a crush on everybody else, more or less regardless of gender or even age. Longing between teenage boys, between girls, or between an elementary school girl and her teacher are all viewed through the same bittersweet lens of romantic sighs and giant expressive eyeballs. You’ve got to love the gay utopia.

But overall, the storyline felt a bit flat for me. I think the problem is that, if I’m going to read a fantasy series about larger than life struggles between clashing mystical forces, the eldritch evils need to be impressively, um, eldritch and evil. Clamp is certainly visually up to the mystical pyrotechnics, but their chipper everyone-loves-everyone-else worldview has left them unable to deliver a villain of any sort. Instead, all Sakura’s tests are just that — arbitrary tests. Her enemy, Clow, isn’t a bad guy at all; he’s a mentor figure who keeps putting her in “dangerous” situations in order to help her realize her true potential. Admittedly, the protagonists are all school kids, but the plot is still disturbingly school-like — some supposedly all-knowing shit-head tormenting the protagonists with pointless exercises while all the time claiming its for their own good. At the end everybody hugs, but I would have been happier if they’d slapped Clow silly for deliberately wasting everyone’s time.

I’m probably just hopelessly jaded, but I much prefer my magical fairy tales for children to have some teeth. Childhood, much like adulthood, is rather scary, and it’s hard for me to cathart if my escapist material doesn’t at least nod at this actuality. C. S. Lewis’ “The Last Battle,” or John Christopher’s “The City of Gold and Lead,” Tolkein, Ursula K. Le Guin’s “A Wizard of Earthsea” are all suitably apocalyptic…but even just a touch of sincere menace, as in “Where the Wild Things Are” can go a long way. I read Dame Darcy’s “Frightful Fairy Tales” recently, and that gets it just about perfect — it really shows how fantasy and horror started in the same place, and still haven’t drifted that far apart. Darcy’s stories are knowing, and there is an ironic wink or two, but for the most part her tales are told straight. I think the most effective one is “Persimmion, in which a witch changes a young woman into a statue, which stands in the forest for many years, ignored and weathering, as the world around her changes. There’s a happy ending here, too, with true love winning the day after many, many years, but the joyous spring is given weight, conviction and depth by the painful winter. We like to think of childhood as a series of carefully managed stages, through which benevolent parental dictators guide their eagerly willing trainees. But I think Darcy’s closer to the truth in painting it as a series of painful and largely uncontrollable transformations, preceded or followed by long periods of frozen boredom and helplessness. And I’m not sure, ultimately, that the second version isn’t less cruel than the first. The witch who changes the girl into the statue has at least done her the honor of hating her honestly. In Cardcaptor Sakura, Clow’s lovingly duplicitous guidance seems to me indistinguishable from contempt. If you have to choose, it’s better to be raised by an ogre than by a God.

And, yeah, I like Darcy’s art better too. The two are actually quite comparable; Darcy’s art too is girly, filled with frills and flowers and mooning large-eyed ectomorphs. But she also has an otherworldly menace that Clamp quite deliberately eschews. In Clamp, all the characters look like plush toys; for Darcy, they look like plush toys wandering around in one of Edward Gorey’s dreams.

*****

Incidentally, Darcy contributed a piece to the Gay Utopia symposium I edited. The symposium also has a creepy shojo take on Little Red Riding Hood by Nishizaka Hiromi which I’d encourage you to check out.

Twenty Arms

In a post a while back, I mentioned that my four-year old son is obsessed with super-heroes. So he remains — though he has now moved on from Spider-Man to the Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Superman, Batman, and various costumed do-gooders of his own invention, including Twenty-Arms (his power is that he has twenty arms, and he can crush you), Stripe Man (he can control anything that has stripes), the Gray Lantern, the Orange-and-Brown Lantern, and Dr. Mysterious, with his Mysterious Cat (I think Dr. Mysterious is a villain, actually. Just in case you’re keeping track.)

Anyway, we’ve also moved on from the super-hero children’s books, thank god, and have been reading some actual comics. I got the first Essential Spider-Man collection, which is maybe a bit too old for him, but he likes looking at the pictures and can occasionally sit all the way through a whole story. I remembered these as being pretty good, and so they are. I don’t know that I quite think Ditko’s artwork is quite genius here, but it is clean and energetic, and he’s definitely got a flare for bizarre character designs (what is the deal with the Green Goblin carrying a purse, anyway.) Similarly, Stan Lee’s story-telling is just so hackneyed and goofy you’ve got to love it. Paraphrasing loosely:

Dr. Octopus: Spider-Man!

Spider-Man: Well I ain’t Albert Schweitzer!

Dr. Octopus: How dare you speak flippantly to me!

All the broken-hearted mooning and love quadrangles (Flash Thompson, Liz, Peter, Betty, and son on) is pretty great. And there are lots of nice touches — the Sandman actually gets captured at one point by a giant vacuum cleaner, and at another he’s stopped when the police sit on him. The comics are satisfying and entertaining. I definitely still have affection for them.

We’ve also been reading some of the old Gardner Fox JLA comics, though, and those are a different kettle of sludge. I don’t see anyway around them being just flat out bad. Yes, there is a spark of imagination there, and the deliriously aphasiac leaps of logic could, in another context, be exciting and diverting (see Fletcher Hanks’ comics, for example.) But it’s all delivered with such ineptly plodding storytelling that much of the joy is lost. Many of the stories are told through multiple narrative frames for no particular reason other than sheer poor planning — the JLA telling Snapper Carr about their first adventure for example — a move which effectively kills any suspense and makes the entire effort needlessly wordy. Snapper Carr himself is just a disaster — he’s a bored forty year old’s vision of what a ten year old imagines a hip 15 year old would be like, and as such is an unmitigated embarrassment to everyone involved. Maybe worst of all is the relentless effort to educate; Aquaman can’t swim onto the page without being accompanied by some wordy disquisition about the unique characteristics of the puffer fish.

I guess some folks might argue that it’s bad because it’s for kids — but, you know, there’s lots of great art for kids. There’s the Moomin books, for example, or Dr. Seuss, or Asterix, or Tin-Tin, or even Sandra Boynton, for that matter. And, actually, those first Siegel/Schuster Superman comics were better than this by a country mile; even the first Batman comics have a consistent pulpy atmosphere and a visual style that’s missing here. But this stuff is dreck. Maybe it’s the first effects of the whole shared-world meme; the people working on this stuff didn’t create many of these characters, and putting them together totally vitiates there whole reason for being in many cases. Wonder Woman is supposed to be a tripped out statement about female power; Batman’s supposed to be at least a bit noir, put them together and you’ve got — a bunch of suburban old farts in a wandering around cleaning their clubhouse while chatting about their past exploits. Blech. These just totally feel like hackwork by guys who couldn’t care less — like Hardy Boys books, only maybe worse. Anyway, nostalgia notwithstanding, it’s worth remembering I guess that super-hero comics have a long, rich tradition of sucking really, really hard. In case anyone had forgotten.

Gay Utopia Symposium Now Online

The Gay Utopia symposium that I’ve been working on for the last several months is now online here. Here’s some more info:

The Gay Utopia is an online symposium devoted to exploring that ideal realm in which gender, sexuality, and identity dissolve. It includes poetry, artwork, comics, personal essays, reviews, fiction, drama, slash, and more by Ursula K. Le Guin, Jennifer Baumgardner, Dame Darcy, Johnny Ryan, Ariel Schrag, Julia Serano, Michael Manning, Matt Thorn, Neil Whitacre, Edie Fake, and a host of other contributors.

The forum covers an enormous range of topics,from early animation to Restoration romance novels, from horror films to shojo manga, from the kinship structure of ferns to the relationship between men and trucks. Some highlights are:

–Scott Treleaven classic 1997 essay on an unusual use for the orgasm

–Tabico’s insect-sex-zombie apocalypse

–Paul Nudd’s vile recipes for chutney

— Kinukitty on why teenage girls need more manporn

–gay utopia questions answered by a Giant Squid.

Incidentally, this forum has a fair bit of explicit adult content. Please proceed with caution if that seems advisable.

In other words, the Gay Utopia has something for everyone. Please come by and check it out.

Ariel Schrag: Somewhat Forgotten, But Not Gone

In the mid-90s, I moved to Chicago, and for the first time in my life had access to comic stores that carried an extensive range of indie titles. Some of these comics were interesting, some mediocre, some frankly bad. But there were two creators who dazzled me. Chris Ware was one. The other was a high-school -age, autobio comic writer named Ariel Schrag.

Schrag’s artwork was about as far as possible from Ware’s dazzling technical proficiency. What she had going for her was simple: she was one of the best pure story-tellers I had ever read, in any medium. She had a perfect eye for detail, a lovely sense of structure, and her jokes were laugh-out-loud funny. Even more remarkable in an autobiographical writer, her work was neither solipsistic nor self-pitying. Instead, Schrag’s witing was strangely, and often painfully, objective. Gossip, crushes, teen angst — all were portrayed with gushing enthusiasm, but also with a level of detachment. As a result, Schrag’s books were open-ended; family, friends, acquaintances, and Schrag herself all come under the same cold (though not unsympathetic) scrutiny. For example, the emotional center of “Awkward,” Schrag’s first collection, is the intense (non-sexual, non-romantic) friendship between Schrag and an older student named Meg. The girls’ motivations are largely opaque to the reader, to each other, and to themselves, and the final low-key but traumatizing break-up is described not so much without blame, as without any indication that blame is even an option. The questions and emotions raised by the interaction aren’t turned into any kind of transcendent realization or epiphany — they just sit there, a heavy, unreconciled weight.

“Awkward” was pretty great, but Schrag’s later books were even better. As she went along, she moved into more and more demanding material: her parents’ divorce; a series of abusive relationships; her struggles with her sexual identity. By her last series, “Likewise”, which covered her senior year, Schrag had developed a claustrophobic interior focus. Both the comics’ language and art shifted and contracted vertiginously, depending on her emotional state. The story could be hysterically funny — as in her lengthy description of her inability to wear low-slung jeans. It could also be harrowing, as in a time-distorted, Kafkaesque encounter with her ex. But even as her material became more subjective, Schrag retained her clinical objectivity; the result is a kind of ruthless vivisection which begins with Schrag herself and extends to everything and everyone she encounters or cares about. If you haven’t read it, you’re missing out; it’s one of the great achievements of contemporary comics.

Or it would have been if she’d finished it. Unfortunately, issue #3 of 8 came out two years ago, and then…nothing. Schrag, who had graduated from college, moved on to other projects — most notably writing for the television drama “The L-word” — and her series was left in limbo. Schrag herself went from being criminally undervalued to virtually invisible. Even her publisher, Slave Labor, seemed to have forgotten about her; at least, I couldn’t find anyone there who would return my calls and tell me where she was. (UPDATE: In the comments to this post, Slave Labor’s Editor in Chief Jennifer de Guzman objects to this characterization, and provides some more details about the relationship between Schrag and SLG.)

Luckily, thanks to the miracle that is Google, I was able to track Schrag down anyway — and I was pleased to discover that she is, in fact, far from being done with comics. In fact, she just finished editing an anthology of strips about Middle School for Viking Children’s Books titled “Stuck in the Middle: 17 Comics from an Unpleasant Age.” It’s due for release in August 2007 and will feature new work by Gabrielle Bell, Dash Shaw, Lauren Weinstein, Ariel Bordeaux and Aaron Renier, as well as reprints by Dan Clowes and Joe Matt. Schrag also included two of her own strips — one, entitled “Shit,” salvaged from Megan Kelso’s ill-fated “Scheherezade.”

Even more welcome is the news that Schrag plans to finish “Likewise.” As she noted at the beginning of the published issues, the entire comic was drawn years ago — all she has left is the inking. When I spoke to her in late October, she said that she had finished about 200 pages out of 358 — so she could in theory put out issue #4 of the series now. But instead, Schrag has decided to finish the entire story and then publish it in book form. When this will happen is a little unclear, since she has to devote most of her time to other, paying projects. But “I have to finish it before I’m 30,” Schrag (who’s now 26) insisted. “That’s the time limit I’ve put on myself. Hopefully it’ll be done in the next two years, but it’ll absolutely be done before I’m 30.”

In the meantime, Schrag’s written a bunch of other comics. A few of these were collected in “Linens and Things,” a zine she self-published in 2003 — and she hopes to collect even more in a larger volume with the same title. “Some of [the strips] are strict autobiography,” she said, “and some are more experimental. But a lot of it is just being inspired to tell stories in a different way.” For example, some of the strips are told through the voice of her girlfriend, with Schrag herself as a supporting character. Another group of drawings was prompted by James Kochalka’s Sketchbook Diaries: Schrag did a comic a day for four months while she was studying abroad in Berlin.

The photocopied version of “Linens and Things” had a couple of fictional stories too, a significant switch for Schrag. In a 1999 interview for the website Sequential Tart, Schrag said that she was “totally disinterested” in fantasy. But her experience writing for the “L-word” has helped to change her mind. Now she finds fiction fascinating, in part because its sources are mysterious. In autobiography, you know pretty much where your stories are coming from, but “in fiction, you’ll let [an idea] come from somewhere you aren’t as conscious of, and then you’ll go back over it and say, huh, this relates to my life in this way, or I probably got this from that, and you can speculate,” she said.

The “L-Word” has also provided a sense of community. Television is a collaborative process; six or seven writers gather together, knock around ideas, talk some more, revise, and so forth. In contrast, Schrag said, “drawing comics is really lonely. That’s what wonderful about comics; it’s all yours, just you and the paper. But then I’m also young. I don’t want to live the life of the hidden away man in glasses hunched over a desk all the time.”

Schrag also found the discipline of writing for a larger audience interesting. “For ‘Likewise’ I was so inspired by *Ulysses,* I wanted to spend 50 pages of just riding on a bus and not talking to anyone and just thinking, or I wanted to have something which didn’t make sense, or only made sense to me and would hopefully make some sort of interesting sense to somebody else in their own life. And now on the ‘L-word’ I’ve gotten to experience the other side of creation, not that we’re catering to a certain kind of writing, but telling something for story effect..”

For all these reasons, Schrag’s eager to work on other television projects if the opportunity presents itself. And she’s also been moving forward on a feature-film version of Potential (the story of her junior year) — the script is written and director Rose Troche (Go Fish, The Safety of Objects) has signed on. Still, Schrag said, “I don’t feel that I’m moving away from comics. They’ll always be my heart. They’ll always be the way that I want to tell a story more than anything.” And she added, “I get the most inspired or I feel the most drive to do autobiographical stories; for me it’s this obsession with holding on to the past.” She still keeps a diary and hordes scraps of paper. “Whenever something happens, “ she said, “it flashes across my mind into comics form. I don’t always get to write all of those down, but the idea of turning those events into comics is really exciting to me. The fictional stuff is more sort of fun, but I don’t have the same compulsion to do it.”

While she’s committed to comics as a form, Schrag agreed that her presence in the comics scene has diminished considerably. In part, this is because her own interest has waned. “When I was a teenager, going to conventions and doing all that was so exciting to me, and all that attention that all the creepy old men paid to me was, y’know, gross, but appealing in its own way. And then at a certain point it just stopped being as exciting.”

Part of her disinterest in the comics scene, though, is because of its disinterest in her. “I never got the props I felt I really deserved,” she admitted. “It sometimes would annoy me when I would see people getting attention that I felt I should have gotten, or should get. But at the same time I feel I get that respect from other places.” She added that *The Comics Journal* itself had done little to acknowledge her work. “I just always had this vision that my movie would come out and they’d all come crawling back,” she laughed. “And I’d be like, ‘Too late. You should have liked me back when I was doing comics, not movies.’ But I guess that never happened.”

When asked if she thought that the lack of respect was because she was a woman, Schrag seemed annoyed but didn’t exactly disagree. “I don’t want to sit around and complain about being a woman or being gay, or whatever it is you’re supposed to be being oppressed for. You know, I think it goes both ways. I think that women in general don’t get as much respect [in comics]. I think some people hear about me and they pigeon-hole my work as being gay. But then again I probably wouldn’t have gotten the job on ‘The L-word’ if I weren’t gay. It’s not really worth agonizing or even wondering…the people who want to appreciate it can and will.

“Me and Gabrielle Bell get together and sometimes we just talk about how annoying it is that there’s all these young, indie boy cartoonists, and their comics are all style and no substance, and they just get so much attention, and it’s just like, why? It’s true more so in comics, more so than in other mediums. You’ll read people say about a woman cartoonist, ‘That’s in the style of Phoebe Gloeckner and Julie Doucet,’ and the woman cartoonist has nothing more in common with those cartoonists than anyone else, except that she’s a woman. Comics is still very much a man’s world. It’s so irritating to have to talk about that now. I mean if I’m talking to you, why should I have to talk about being a woman? It’s so unfortunate.”

Whatever her frustrations with the comics scene, Schrag was clear that she was still involved in it. “I may not go to all the conventions, but I still love comics. Stuff like Julie Doucet dropping out of comics really depresses me. And she’s got her own agenda in life, I’m not judging her, but it’s sad that she doesn’t do it. I wouldn’t want anybody to think that I’ve gone down a similar path.”

First published in The Comics Journal #282 from April 2007

*******
My review of the Touchstone Books reissue of Ariel Schrag’s books Awkward and Definition, is on the Comics Reporter website here.

Ariel Schrag has also contributed a piece to the Gay Utopia symposium I’m putting together. Other contributors will include Dame Darcy, Johnny Ryan, Lilli Carré, Ursula K. Le Guin, and a whole host of others. I’m hoping to post it in a couple of months; check back here for details.

Fetish of Media Empire

I have a review of Michael Manning and Patrick Conlon’s Tranceptor Series online over at the Reader now:

Extra bonus: Puritans run amok in the comments section!

For those who want more Manning, his website is here.

Manning has actually contributed a pretty terrific essay about Aubrey Beardsley to the Gay Utopia symposium I’m putting together. I’ll post some more info about that symposium in the coming weeks.

Fletcher Hanks

For a moment I forgot the title of this Fletcher Hanks book, and was convinced it was actually All your base are belong to us. That’s not right, of course — the real title of the book is I Shall Destroy All Civilized Planets! But the slip up isn’t exactly an accident either. He’s a lot like a mangled, mistranslated Internet catch-phrase; a lot of his appeal is the outsider-art one of being naive/incompetent in a surprising way.

The fetishization of outsider art is always a little uneasy. Outsider artists are, by definition, distant from centers of cultural power, and their kooky stories (insane, marginal, loopy) are often as important to their mystique as the art itself. So you end up with a lot of cultural elites patting themselves on the back because they get the genius of this artist and understand him in a way that normal people don’t. It’s a way for bourgeois hipsters (a redundancy, of course) to pretend that they’re actually more prole than the proles. It’s icky — and it’s certainly in full effect here. The book includes a final section by editor Paul Karasik which is, rather presumptiously, in comics form. Anyway, Karasik repeatedly points out that he recognizes the genius that is Hanks even though most people (Karasik’s mother, Hanks’ own son) do not. We also get the scanty biographical details which place Hanks firmly as an outsider — he was a mean drunk, a wife-beater, and a child-abuser, who died penniless. No quite Henry Darger, but it’ll do.

The thing is, you know, I’m a bourgeois hipster myself, and I do think Darger is brilliant. Hanks too, for that matter. His use of color alone is stunning: lots of solid contrasting areas of, bright, almost lurid tones; Lichtenstein or Warhol would eat their hearts out. Fantagraphics reproduces each shade lovingly, and the result is marvelous. The drawing is also distinctive and energetic; stiff stylized poses, weirdly bland faces for the heroes, exaggeratedly twisted features for the villains. Hanks is also amazingly imaginative, in that way that outsider art can be — making connections that are weird and lovely, in an aphasiac kind of way. In a typical story, a crime syndicate distributes an oxygen destroying ray so that it is beside every single important person in America. They set off the ray by remote control and everyone starts to suffocate. But Stardust the super-wizard sees they’re evil plotand appears in a flash. He destorys the radio outlet, finds the gang leader resonsible, and shoots a ray at him which makes his head grow large and his body shrink. Then he takes the bodiless headand take sit to the “space pocket of living death, where the headless headhunter dwells! He’s the hugest giant in the known universe!” Stardust throws the head into the space pocket, where it lands on the headhunter’s headless shoulders, and then sinks into its body. Stardust returns to earth, attracts all the remaining gangmembers to a central place, and uses his rays to turn them all into a single person. then he sends them off into space. The end.

This is the basic Hanks plot (more or less). The stories generally involve a hideous and unlikely plot (creating an enomrous tidal wave, or making earth and venus run into each other, or stopping the earth’s rotation so everyone will fly into space and the bad guys can have the planet to themselves (the bad guys hold themselves to the earth with chains, you see, so they won’t be affected.)) The omnipotent super-hero waits until some fairly large number of people have been killed, then swoops down and enacts a bizarre and gruesome multi-stage revenge.

Obviously this is all totally tripped out, and there are a bunch of testimonials from aging hippies — R. Crumb calling Hanks a “twisted dude,” Gary Panter referring to the strips as “magic jellybeans,” Kurt Vonnegut enthusastically praising it as a “major work of art.” Again, I don’t necessarily disagree, but there is a certain dissonance. I mean, not to state the obvious or anything, but these strips are really, really, really fascist. The super-hero genre in general — with its simple-minded emphasis on good vs. evil and revenge narratives — tends to be fairly pro-police-state, but Hanks goes above and beyond. The stories are all about the joys of imaginatively torturing bad guys to death. The balance of power is completely one-sided; the super-heroes can do anything. It’s a lot like the God-as-Superman-as-Asshole comics independently invented by Chris Ware and Johnny Ryan — except there isn’t any irony here, unless you bring your own. Authority here is all-seeing, and good is defined almost completely in terms of revenge and the exercise of power. It’s just a little weird to see a bunch of lefty, free-speech types falling over themselves to embrace a work of art which seems pretty clearly to be in favor of forced, inventive extermination of the riff raff. And maybe I’m making a leap here, but I’d bet that for Hanks that riff raff would include a certain number of high-brow lefty weirdos like Crumb, Panter, Vonnegut, et al.

Part of appreciating outsider art is, of course, being able to enjoy the crackpottery from a safe distance. You can enjoy a powerful belief system by appreciating it rather than actually, you know, believing in it — or even engaging with it. I’d certainly agree that Hanks is a great artist. Like many other great artists (Ezra Pound, Yeats, Kipling, Lawrence…) he’s also kind of a moral abomination. I think it’s maybe more respectful to point that out than it is to enthuse about his formal qualities and imagination (as Karasik does) without responding to the actual content of his work.

Nana #7-#8

I’ve reviewed various volumes of Ai Yazawa’s Nana before, so I thought I’d keep it up. (There are going to be spoilers, incidentally — be warned.)

I just read #7-8, and they seem to be something of a watershed for the series. The series has always followed on both Nana’s (Nana Komatsu, or Hachi, and Nana Osaki), who live together and have recently become close friends. Up to this point, though, Hachi has been the narrator and we’ve been more inside her head. In 8 though, Nana O starts to give the earnest (and somwhat irritating, I’m forced to admit) voice overs. More importantly, she starts to reveal more of herself. It’s been clear for awhile that Hachi has an enormous crush on Nana; she’s fascinated with her music, with her confidence, and with her general hipster vibe. Nana has always seemed very fond of Hachi, but it’s been leavened with a bit of condescension and amusement — certainly she hasn’t appeared to be infatuated. When she kissed Hachi earlier in the series, it was a way to freak her friend out, not an actual expression of borderline desire.

But in 7 and 8, the perspective shifts slightly, and the relationship between Hachi and Nana is subtly but definitely upended. As we get more inside Nana’s head, it becomes clear that her occasional coldness towards Hachi isn’t because she’s aloof, but because she’s shy. While Nana has a long-term boyfriend, and seems very capable of dealing with male friends, her intense reaction to Hachi has completely befuddled her. After a moment of toying with the idea, the book sets aside the suggestion that Nana’s emotions are sexual, but they are certainly possessive and seem in some ways to be more powerful than what she feels for her boyfriend. She rather desperately tries to set Hachi up with Nobu, who is Nana’s childhood friend and bandmate, because she hopes to keep Hachi in her circle permanently. When (and here’s the spoiler) Hachi spoils that by accidentally getting pregnant by another man named Takumi, Nana quietly but completely freaks out.

What’s particularly heart-tugging here is that, for all her sincere depth of emotion, Nana is (as she seems to fear) too wrapped up in her own anxieties and self-doubts to actually help Hachi — who, it seems quite possible, wouldn’t have been sleeping with Takumi if she hadn’t felt that things with Nana were quite so unrequited. And when she hears about Hachi’s pregnancy, Nana basically runs away. It’s up to Hachi’s friend Juno (little seen since the first volume) to provide advice and reassurance — which she does in one of the most amazing scenes in the series. Juno’s completely ruthless (“This is what you get for sleeping around and being carless! Do you understand that!”) but also loving and helpful, offering actual clarity and insight rather than bullshit platitudes. She, too, seems freaked out (“I can’t believe she’s having a baby…I’m so worried I could puke.”) But she puts her own shit aside for her friend. Nana can’t do that — which is heartbreaking, not just for Hachi, for for Nana as well.

The art is, as always, amazingly subtle; Juno’s stricken expression in particular just kills me, and the layout and design couldn’t be much better. This is the bestselling manga in Japan, and no wonder — it’s just about perfect.