Indie Comics vs. Google Trends Showdown

The index to the Indie Comics vs. Context roundtable is here.
____________

We had some fun playing with google trends and indie comics in the comments of this post, so I thought I’d fiddle with it some more.

Garfield vs. Spiegelman. Brutal.

Garfield vs. Penny Arcade. Closer than I’d thought.

Fantagraphics vs. Comic-Con. Also a bit unexpected.

Chris Ware vs. The Hernandez Bros.

Chris Ware vs. R. Crumb.

Alice Munro vs. Alison Bechdel.

Craig Thompson vs. Anthony Trollope

Marjane Satrapi vs. Chris Ware

Matt Groening vs. the Simpsons
 
All right, that’s enough. Play along in comments if you’d like, though.
 

Utilitarian Review 10/12/13

On HU

Featured Archive Post: James Romberger on Alex Toth’s late horror comics.

Pam Grier is too cool to write an interesting memoir.

I argue that nobody should care who wrote the Jack Kirby/Stan Lee collaborations because the writing isn’t any good.

Ng Suat Tong on Satoshi Kon’s mediocre Tropic of the Sea.

We started our Indie Comics vs. Context death match roundtable. See our handy index here.

RM Rhodes on Hipster Hitler and American Captain — old icons in new context.

Bert Stabler on how Matt Groening improved the Simpsons by disappearing.

Jacob Canfield reviewed The Graphic Textbook and found it wanting.
 
Utilitarians Everywhere

At Salon I argue that if you want good advice on writing you should ask a hack.

I wrote a fun piece at Splice about various versions of Bonnie Raitt’s schmaltz standard I Can’t Make You Love Me

At the Atlantic I talk about:

—Miley Cyrus, Jeff Koons, and the goal of pop artificiality.

—a documentary about the first independent television station in Afghanistan.
 
Other Links

Laura Hudson interviews Eva Orner on her documentary The Network, about the first independent TV station in Afghanistan.

James Romberger on Jack Kirby’s In The Days of the Mob.

Zack Beauchamp on how racism caused the shutdown.
 

tolo1

Indie Comics vs. Context Death Match Index

This is the index for the Indie Comics vs. Context roundtable. Posts will be added in order as they appear.
 
Noah Berlatsky, Introduction (Why indie comics? Why context? Why now?)

RM Rhodes, “Old Icons, New Context” (on Hipster Hitler and American Captain)

Bert Stabler “Groening Minus Groening”

Jacob Canfield, “Leave Those Kids Alone: The Graphic Textbook Reviewed”

Noah Berlatsky, “Indie Comics vs. Google Trends Showdown”

Music Sharing Post: Indie Comics Edition

Kailyn Kent, “How Can You Hate a Fan?”

Noah Berlatsky, “Gender Spring, Gender Break” (on Johnny Ryan)

Charles Reece, “The Feminist Phantasmagoria of Fukitor”

Qiana Whitted, “Race and the Risks of Kiddie Garbage Cartooning”

Owen A, “New Indie Comics in Context”

Where Are the Posts on Female Indie Comics Creators?

Where Are the Posts by Female Indie Comics Creators?

Noah Berlatsky, “Can a Coke Bottle Be an Indie Comic?”

Picture 1

Google trends graph showing searches for Michael Deforge vs. searches for Beyonce

 

Undisputed Title to a Hill of Dung

The Comics Journal has an extensive piece up by Robert Steibel in which he looks at two pages of original art from Fantastic Four #61 and argues exhaustively, passionately, and convincingly that Jack Kirby was responsible for most of the ideas and plot. There’s a divisive and extended back and forth in comments as well.

Here’s the two pages.

1-650x1022

22-650x992

Those images are a lot of fun to look at; as with any art by Kirby, there’s a lot of energy, and it kind of only improves things that you can’t really figure out what’s going on in the draft form. Andrei Molotiu has talked about how Kirby can be viewed as an abstract artist, and I think that makes sense especially in these original pages. You can even see Kirby almost working to turn his characters into abstraction, with all the smoke and mist and debris and Kirby krackle covering everything, turning individuals into forms. Reed opening that negative zone is almost a way to breach the wall between form and nothing, with Kirby and everyone else rooting for the gloriously meaningless nothing.

And everyone is rooting for the nothing over the narrative because the narrative is incredibly stupid. Steibel talks about how “wonderfully creative” it is to have the Sandman freezing and turning into chemicals etc. etc. — but come on. It’s not “wonderfully creative” unless you’re standards for wonderfully creative are amazingly lax. I mean, just to stick with work for children, is the writing and plotting wonderfully creative by the standards of this?
 
nemo4
 
Or this?
asterix-in-switzerland-page

Or, if you want to compare fight sequences, with this?
 

 
All of those have wit and grace; the action mischievously escalates (in Nemo and Asterix) or ping pongs elegantly back and forth (in the Princess Bride). There are beats and timing built into the development, like that lovely moment where Asterix freezes and looks at something off panel before the crazed descent begins. There are winking hidden easter eggs, as when the tiny horse bucks in time to the giant bed in the Nemo page. There’s a use of visual action and dialogue to create characterization all through the Princess Bride. In comparison,the Kirby pages are just ponderous blaring; people screaming about how they’re trying really hard and are going to do something spectacular, over and over. There’s a super battle and yelling and things flying around, but there’s not any particular wit or style or even through line to the narrative. There’s just fight, setback, solution to setback, more chaos. It’s puerile, and mostly unreadable, even for two pages, even when you’re just looking at notes and don’t have to drag yourself through all the speech bubbles.

And yet, people are angrily, violently arguing over decades about who wrote this. Steibel thinks he’s doing Jack Kirby some sort of favor by declaring that the credit for the writing should virtually all go to Kirby. He even lists all the story elements/ideas to show that most of them belonged to Kirby — inadvertently demonstrating that the narrative is basically just a series of stuff happening without any real coherence or guiding vision. And, yes, okay, Steibel convinced me — Kirby is responsible for this incredibly stupid story as well as for the bizarre and interesting art.

Maybe, possibly, the reason that the Marvel method worked, the reason that the artist could make the story and Lee could just bubble it in, the reason that there’s so much uncertainty about who did what, is because the attention to story-telling and narrative was, on everybody’s part, incredibly half-assed. The only interesting thing in those comics is Kirby’s drawing, and they are most interesting, I am convinced, when you see them as formal exercises rather than as narrative.The death match over whether Lee wrote the thing or Kirby wrote the thing — it’s like arguing over who’s responsible for composing a spam email. It just always amazes me that anyone can manage to make themselves care.

The Boring Life of Pam Grier

This first ran in Splice Today.
_____________

You’d think Pam Grier’s life would make for a fascinating memoir. Raised working class and rural, subjected to racial discrimination throughout her childhood and raped twice, she nonetheless, through sheer determination, smarts, and astonishing good looks, managed to carve out a career as an actor. Her iconic presence in some of the most successful and influential blaxploitation films made her perhaps the screen’s first female action hero. And along the way to semi-stardom, she dated luminaries like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Freddie Prinze, and Richard Pryor, survived breast-cancer, and hobnobbed, it seems, with everyone who was anyone, from Sammy Davis Jr. to Fellini.

So, like I said, there seems to be a lot worth reading about there. And Foxy: My Life in Three Acts certainly is affecting in parts. As the father of a six-year-old, I found Grier’s account of being raped at that age actually nauseating. Less somberly, Grier’s discussion of one of her visit’s to the gynecologist has to be one of the top gossip anecdotes of the year so far. In her account, Grier explains that the doctor discovered “cocaine residue around the cervix and in the vagina” and asked Grier if her lover was putting cocaine on his penis. “ Grier responds, “That’s a possibility…. You know, I am dating Richard Pryor.”

Then she admits to the doctor that during oral sex her lips and tongue go numb because, apparently, Richard Pryor did so much coke that it made his semen an opiate.

And yet, despite such moments of interest, the memoir overall is surprisingly flat. Anecdotes are dutifully hauled out — here’s Grier with her church choir at ground zero of the Watts riots; here she is singing with a drunk John Lennon. But the memoir stays on the surface; you get little sense of Grier’s inner life, ideas, or passions. Her discussions of racial and sexual prejudice are for the most part innocuous boilerplate. There are some hints that she has ambivalent feelings about the exploitive elements in her early roles, but those issues are never really explored. She’s politely reverent towards most of the stars she comes across, from Paul Newman to Tim Burton.

Part of the failure here is no doubt the fault of co-writer Andrea Cagan, whose prose never rises above competent. But the main problem is Grier’s personality. In a couple of places in the book Grier notes that she’s a “private” person — which is, like much in the memoir, a significant understatement. Grier is not merely private; she is fiercely, even remorselessly, adamant about protecting her personal boundaries. When one of her first serious romantic interests, the sexy, talented, wealthy, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, tells her he loves her and asks her to become a Muslim so he can marry her, she takes her time…thinks about it…and finally says no. When the sexy, talented, wealthy, but frighteningly coked-up Richard Pryor wants a serious relationship with her, she takes her time…thinks about it…and eventually walks. In 1977, Freddie Prinze — with whom she’d broken up two years previously — called her to say that he had bought a gun, was thinking of using it on himself, and needed her to come help him. Though she was staying only a few blocks away from his hotel, she refused to go see him. Three days later he committed suicide. Grier notes that she was “heartbroken” and, for a while, guilty, but ultimately concludes “I wanted to save his soul, but I knew that only he could help himself, and he hadn’t really wanted to.”

My point here isn’t to condemn Grier for callousness — on the contrary, all the decisions above seem absolutely reasonable. Abdul-Jabbar, while possessed of many fine qualities, seems to have been a controlling asshole. Similarly, Richard Pryor was, clearly, one of the most catastrophic train wrecks of the decade, if not the century. And even the phone call from Freddie Prinze — your ex with a megacocaine problem calls you up to tell you he’s got a gun and is feeling paranoid, please come over? I don’t think you can be faulted for saying, “you know what? No.”

A U.S.A. Today blurb on the back of Foxy declares “Pam Grier is a survivor.” When you read that, you think of her fierce characters in Coffy or Foxy Brown — fighters who took on incredible odds and beat the system. The thing is, though, in real life, survivors aren’t like that. If you take on incredible odds, you usually lose. Somebody who is going to survive has to pick her battles very carefully — and realize that usually, the best defense is actually just defense. Again and again throughout the memoir, Grier protects her safety and sanity not by embracing violence or revenge, but by refusing to do so. When she is date-raped at 18, she doesn’t tell her family because she fears that if she did, her male relatives would kill her attacker and end up in jail. As an adult, when her cousin and best friend, dying of cancer, asks Grier to read out-loud in church a manifesto attacking her abusive husband, Grier refuses. “I couldn’t open so many wounds and deal with the aftermath,” Grier writes. “I refused to be the one to read the letter and stir the pot — a decision I regret to this day.”

Again, I’m not judging — these are incredibly difficult choices, made under extreme duress, and I don’t think anyone but Grier is in a position to decide whether she did the right thing, or whether there was even a right thing to do. The point, though, is that in most every instance, Grier’s instinct is to avoid stirring the pot — and stirring the pot is exactly what you want to do in a book like this. The most successful celebrity memoirs — such as Jenna Jameson’s riveting and surprisingly insightful 2004 How to Make Love Like a Pornstar — are shameless both in their self-revelation and in their skewering of others. Pam Grier, despite all those exploitation films, doesn’t appear to have a shameless bone in her body. The qualities that allowed her to get where she did — her reserve, her poise, her dignity — are the very things that make Foxy so underwhelming. Still, even though as a reader I was disappointed, I can’t really find it in me to wish that the memoir was better If you have to choose one or the other, after all, a successful human being is surely preferable to a successful book.
 

6a00d8341c630a53ef0133ecdfe71b970b-800wi