tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post2887504360650804284..comments2024-01-30T02:12:25.330-05:00Comments on Eddie Campbell: covers- BACCHUS #57/59Eddie Campbellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02492020671613766729noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-61947883220718866212007-06-17T15:53:00.000-05:002007-06-17T15:53:00.000-05:00HayleyNot at all :)I will say hi the next time.I m...Hayley<BR/><BR/>Not at all :)<BR/>I will say hi the next time.<BR/><BR/>I missed Richard Coyle, i hope he didn't leave a mess on Rians leg!Sean Azzopardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13692215996425046994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-7531824401865292302007-06-16T21:27:00.000-05:002007-06-16T21:27:00.000-05:00In the long comment above, at the end of the first...In the long comment above, at the end of the first paragraph after the second quote, for "The Fate of the Artist" read: "How to Be an Artist".<BR/><BR/>Also, I managed to misspell "inaccurate". Oops.<BR/><BR/>SFStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16524368948187746248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-13774692132298981012007-06-16T21:16:00.000-05:002007-06-16T21:16:00.000-05:00This is my current map of the word 'comics' and I ...<I>This is my current map of the word 'comics' and I find it useful. If you don't like it, make your own.</I><BR/><BR/>Surely this is <I>precisely</I> what McCloud did with his description (call it that, rather than a definition, if you like -- it makes little difference, I think). The only difference is that McCloud's description has been widely embraced by a whole lot of people, from people who like superhero comic books (which seems to be roughly the meaning to the genre that Lytol used, and that you seemed to accept) to those who like some to those who don't like any: his description was not only useful (at least, I and lots of others found it so) but it was actually <I>persuasive</I>. To a very large number of people.<BR/><BR/>Which brings us to...<BR/><BR/><I> And when you draw your own map, you may make some things closer neighbours than I have, but to your dismay you'll find that your map will not help you get there any quicker.</I><BR/><BR/>...which is basically an empirical question, I suppose, although not one that is easy to measure or get consensus on. I will simply note that I think, strongly, that you are dead wrong about this: that in particular McCloud's definition <I>has</I> in fact shaped the map. I don't know that it's allowed works to be published that wouldn't have been otherwise (although I'd suspect it, indirectly), but it has unquestionably gotten people to read works -- works that you would deny are comics -- that they would otherwise have read: works such as those that you listed in the end of <I>The Fate of the Artist</I>.<BR/><BR/>People who normally see panels and word balloons and go yuch, comics, will think twice when you point out that film is a medium, and the fact that they didn't like Spider Man 3 has nothing at all to say about whether or not they'll like some other movie. If you deny that they're comics, on the other hand, they might buy it in the case of, say, the Codex Seraphinius, pages 39 & 41 -- but they will simply laugh at you in the cases of Chris Ware and Alison Bechdel and, well, Eddie Campbell. (Certainly Alex and From Hell, even if not The Fate of the Artist.)<BR/><BR/>I know this is true because I've seen it happen with people I know. I know this is true because -- in a rather partial form, really, since I always liked comics, but still, there were elements of it -- it happened with me.<BR/><BR/>What will be the effect of insisting that comics are superhero comics? And that graphic novels are something else, or that heck with it, they're all books?<BR/><BR/>You might, <I>might</I>, get people to read Gemma Bovary and the Fate of the Artist on the grounds that they're illustrated books. But for the most part you'll convince people that they can safely throw the vast majority of graphic novels -- just list your favorites here -- in the trash.<BR/><BR/>This is all assuming that utility is the criteria, and "if you don't like it, make your own" is the standard. If we adopt something more like a representational theory of truth, and the standard is accuracy to the world, I also think McCloud's description is more accurate than yours.<BR/><BR/>Once, in grad school, I was taking a seminar on the Holocaust where we read Maus. I was pretty clearly the only one in the room who had ever read anything else with words and sequential images recently. There was a fair amount of confusion, at first, about why Spiegelman would use the comic-book genre to write about the Holocaust. When I pointed out, simply, that comics was a medium and not a genre -- first, they immediately got what I meant; second, the point was persuasive (in a sentence, without any talk of definitions) -- on hearing it, they thought, yeah, that's right; and, finally -- and most importantly -- they could <I>see the work more clearly</I>. They could stop wondering what on earth Spiegelman was doing and start looking at what he'd done. It was clarifying: it allowed the work to be seen more accurately, more richly.<BR/><BR/>...I've drifted off the point I wanted to make, which was simply that if "make your own" is the standard then, well, McCloud did, and he did so far more persuasively than most. I don't think his definition is the One True Definition of Comics. I do think it has great utility -- whereas calling comic books a genre has negative utility: it distorts what people see when they look at art, it distorts what people see when they look at cultural history and it distorts what art they're willing to look at.<BR/><BR/>Stephen Frug<BR/><BR/>PS: ...unless, and this belatedly occurs to me, this is all about the word: and you'd be happy if we simply used the term "sequential art" instead of "comics", like you seem happier using the word "description" rather than "definition". In which case I think it's silly -- and reflective of an innacurate picture of the relation between meaning, use and etymology, as well as of how fast and in what way words change -- but I don't care. Call it what you like.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16524368948187746248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-82145691649121575532007-06-16T08:09:00.000-05:002007-06-16T08:09:00.000-05:00Sean!Am I that frightening?Come say hello next tim...Sean!<BR/><BR/>Am I that frightening?<BR/><BR/>Come say hello next time. You wouldn't have interrupted anything. I was probably just on another of my 'computer lettering should be banned' rants.<BR/><BR/>Did you notice that Richard Coyle was there? He was very nearly doing obscene things to Rian Hughes' leg he was so excited. Who would've guessed he was a fan...<BR/><BR/>HHayley Campbellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16493916787628212228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-81961081574249775942007-06-15T18:34:00.000-05:002007-06-15T18:34:00.000-05:00I just thought i would mention that i saw Hayley a...I just thought i would mention that i saw Hayley at the ICA bar tonight. I was going to say hello, but then i thought it a bit stupid and stalkerish. So please apologise on my behalf, from the balding short man with glasses that gurned at her. I had a simmilar experience in Angouleme two years ago, when i walked into the irish pub and you and your wife was at the bar. I still feel pleased with myself that i didn't approach with the dreaded, i really like your work. I do , and this blog is cool, but, i would have been so ashamed.<BR/><BR/>Sean Azzopardi<BR/><BR/>phatcatz.org.ukSean Azzopardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13692215996425046994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1752841194995687278.post-35537767028241847502007-06-15T01:51:00.000-05:002007-06-15T01:51:00.000-05:00"you'll find that your map will not help you get t..."you'll find that your map will not help you get there any quicker."<BR/><BR/> Oh you are so right my dear Eddie, and for that matter, I don't know why you give the subject as much thought as you do. I've done so for the past year and the only conclusion I have come to, is that I should remove the entirety of those thoughts from my head and flush them down toilet. The only function they serve is to distract you from what you want to say with your art (and you know art well enough now that you can make it on faith in your own ability) and turn you into a technocrat. It was that kind of thinking that broke up the Beatles. Just kidding. If your stories suffers a flaw or two from working this way, all the better. Our best writers and artist most sincere works are flawed.Christopher Moonlighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16805942313835669938noreply@blogger.com