It came to me in a dream

image1733245168.jpgEddie Campbell’s How to be an artist may be my favorite. Comic. Evah.

He mixes veiled biography and anecdote with a tongue in cheek, future tense second-person narrative mocking how-to manuals, riddled with aphorisms:

“Everybody will be full of unfulfillable promise in the cheery winesodden Friday afternoon of your life when you feel an unbearable nostalgia for events less than a day after they happen. You just see if I’m not wrong, Alex MacGarry. Just see if the Monday morning of your life don’t arrive like a broken elevator.”

(Alec MacGarry being the artist’s alter ego, to whom the instructions are directed)

If it weren’t enough that Campbell is a master of his craft, a razor-sharp critic of the comics medium, and a satyrically inspired autobiographer, his first-hand descriptions of the British comics scene of the 80′s would alone be worth twice the book’s weight in India ink.

“… guys with one eye on the coolometer and myopic guys, dilletantes, pretenders, complete wankers, sweethearts, boy geniuses. They’ll all traffic past you,” and more in-depth portrayals of the people closest to Campbell, er, MacGarry.

Also: the “Bam! Sock! Pow! Comics aren’t for kids anymore!” of the mid- to late 80′s –

“Batman. Well, of course, the whole plot has already gone to fuck as you can see right there. But it’s too late. It’s in the hands of the PR yuppies.”

- and the mess that remains the graphic novel -

“It’s a misnomer, of course, but the so is ‘comic book’ [...] The term will embody the arrival of an idea; a serious intent will be brought into the common comic and remain as a trend through the last quarter of the twentieth century, perhaps further.”

You will need to read this book, at least fifty times. In the end you may have to actually buy it.

In the meantime, Campbell is equally witty and contentious on his blog, Fate of the Artist.

You have been properly instructed, now go be an artist.

Naruto, you rascal, you!

Right, I think I’m getting into the routine of blogging, but that may be premature. I’m really just forcing myself to type up whatever comes to mind, hoping vainly that it will have some meaning to my readers.

So what say you we try and introduce some purpose to it? A bit ambitious, you say?

I’m not sure if I’m reading Dirk Deppey’s ¡Journalista! right, maybe there’s a layer of apprehension that’s not coming across in print. On Jan 26th he writes in a brief note:

[Publishing] BookScan’s top-20 graphic novels of 2008
Link:
ICv2

Three weren’t manga, eleven weren’t Naruto.

See, to my mind the term “graphic novel” signifies a story, not a book (or “retail unit”). Naruto is one story (graphic novel or not) spread across some fourty books. Speaking from that perspective, Naruto should figure once on a list like that. Same for any other serialized narrative; floppy comic, hardbound, European, Japanese, American …

And maybe that’s exactly what Deppey is getting at.

But that’s not the point, is it? The mere presence of Naruto (nine times!) on a list like that shows that it is entirely sales-based; there is no attempt at qualitative judgment. The point is that my definition of “graphic novel” is hopelessly outdated – a puritan, connoisseur distinction that lost any meaning about five minutes after Will Eisner popularized it.

The precise moment would be when the phrase was thrown across the advertising department of a larger comics publisher (I don’t know if the culprit is Marvel or DC but, since DC at least has the better track history in terms of targeting a matureR audience, my money is on the Whorehouse That Stan Built). From then onward, it became a tag to be hung on any old comic, or collection of comics, with a cardboard cover and a flat spine.

It doesn’t matter about the term, really. It was bound to be diluted at some point, and the purist definition actually made a comeback for a while just when media interest peaked, can’t moan about that (much as I’d like to). But the term is/was a heading for some kind of artistic vision, a willingness to align oneself with regular novelists, and I find that part missing in the “non-floppy” sense of “graphic novel”.

I’m not saying that comic book professionals, or “graphic novelists”, aren’t aware of the implication of etymology here. But the potential readers are more likely to hear Marvel’s hype than, say, Eddie Campbell’s, and think that graphic novels as such are just their daddy’s comics in a prettier package. Potential readers, and potential budding creators, then lost to superhero drivel.

But before I pitch my doomsayer tone too highly, I’d like to jump in the defence of Naruto. Sure, it’s no novel-like epic, more like a graphic martial-arts soap opera, but from my experience a) engaging and funny as hell and b) on a whole other artistic level than most of the shônen manga around. I am judging from the part of the Naruto I’ve read, the first ten volumes or so. For all I know the story may have made a nosedive since then.

See? Content comes easy from a small RSS clipping.

Del.icio.us : , , , , , , ,
Technorati : , , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , , ,

The unhospitable landscapes of comicology

I have a load of newsfeeds that seem to just amass unread posts. They are from sites that deal in comics academia, the stuff I’d really prefer to read. Only, once the post-count starts growing, the task of catching up appears unsurmountable.
I want to give a tip of the hat (to let the bad conscience out) to Neil Cohn, Derik Badman at Comixtalk, Matthias Wivel and the industrious Eddie Campbell, adding my sincere apologies for not being able to follow their internet work closer than I do.