Hey, it’s nice to see I’m not the only interviewer to founder on the rocks of Gloeckner: On her blog, Phoebe recounts the venerable Gary Groth’s attempts to determine how “autobiographical” her comics are. Unlike a lot of the folks in the attached comment thread, I think this is a perfectly reasonable and understandable question to ask, all the more so because the events in what we’re presuming to have been Phoebe’s life are so dra/traumatic. And I do think male writers, European writers, whatever writers would and do get asked this same question quite often. (Look at J.T. LeRoy, for example. Hell, look at the frequency with which autobiographical impulses are attributed to J.R.R. Tolkien, for Pete’s sake.) I think that it’s Phoebe’s method of answering–“there is no truth”–that leaves journalists (vocational truth-seekers, whether they choose to think of themselves that way or no) coming back to this well so often. (That and the fact that, yes, there’s an extra element of interest in the fact that Phoebe’s comics are about a teenage girl doing drugs, having sex, et cetera. Purient interest plays a part–the “car wreck” factor, as I’ve called it. But I’m not sure this is so unreasonable a response to such strong (in all senses of the word) material.)
Fans of good Alan Moore comics rejoice: your Watchmen analysis roundup can be found here.
While we’re busy linking to other posts here on ADDTF, check out My review of Bill “Egon” Kartalopolous’s review of Craig Thompson’s Blankets.
Also on the point-counterpoint tip, Bill Sherman comes to bury Mark Millar’s The Unfunnies, while Alan David Doane comes to praise it. I haven’t read the book, so it’s tough to comment, but it seems clear that whether it’s good or not, it’s not exactly the groundbreaking, shocking explosion of comic-book complacency Millar makes it out to be, given that Robert Crumb, the Air Pirates et al were doing this stuff nearly forty years ago now. So the real question is this: Is Mark Millar a) completely ignorant of the history of underground comix, or indeed any comics that aren’t superhero fare; b) vaugely aware of their existence but content to ignore them for the purpose of selling this comic to an audience he’s fairly certain is completely unaware of them; c) fully familiar with them but ready and willing to bullshit his fans anyway? He appears to be a fundamentally decent guy, so my guess it’s either (a) or (b). Any other theories out there?
Also in that ADD post is a review of Paul Hornschemeier’s excellent Mother, Come Home. Alan has a tendency to oversell this book–I think it becomes a little too neat in the profundity of its tragedy by the end–but that’s really not much of a complaint: If a book’s going to stumble a bit, shouldn’t it do so by aiming big and not small? Quibbles aside, this is obviously a breakthrough book by a hugely talented artist with years and years ahead of him, and I recommend it highly. So, incidentally, does Time.com’s Andrew Arnold (link courtesy of Dirk Deppey.)
Back to Indy Magazine, you’ll find an interesting editorial-cum-mission-statement from editor Billy the K. Bill says he’ll be focusing on the medium of comics, as opposed to the machinations of the industry–the Direct Market, bookstore sales, the manga boom, et cetera. (Hey, I resemble that remark!–ed.) It comes off as a bit more dismissive of the comics blogosphere–not to mention capitalism (yes, oh woe is this Dartmouth graduate “crushed [him]self between [sic] the boot-heel of capitalism”)–than I’m comfortable with, but actual critical analysis of the art, not the business, would be a welcome thing on the web. (Witness the ecstatic reaction to Eve Tushnet’s Watchmen essay, for example.)
Speak of the Devil: Eve Tushnet–back to comicsblogging, with a vengeance!–reviews Brian Bendis’s killer Daredevil: Hardcore. As Eve notes, this is a tough, tough book to stop yourself buying in its monthly installments.
Chris Puzak breaks down the discounts at Wal-Mart’s online graphic-novel store. Any way you slice it, they’re pretty damn deep. This is good news for people like me who don’t exactly have a lot of disposable income to feed their trade paperback jones, but (as Tegan Gjovaag notes) probably bad news for comics retailers and people who don’t like gi-normous retail monstrosities coming in and devouring every market in sight.
Big Sunny D jumps on the Sleeper bandwagon, which Dirk Deppey promptly tries to run off the road. To me, Dirk’s complaint reads a little bit like “I would have enjoyed Chicago if it weren’t for the damn musical numbers,” but diff’rent strokes, etc.
Dirk also asks what the hell the big deal is about Mark Millar anyway. I’ve got some problems with the man’s work (see above), not to mention his online personal, but when Millar is at the top of his game, he brings a slick contemporary zeal to superheroics that’s nearly unmatched. If you ignore his tin ear for dialogue, his goofy politics, and his over-the-top pronouncements–sometimes a lot to ignore, I’ll admit–you’ll find, in Ultimate X-Men and The Ultimates at least, some of the giddiest, oomphiest, least intelligence-insulting superhero action comics of the past decade.
Finally, I think it’s worth noting how wrong the usually astute Paul O’Brien is about the most recent New X-Men storyline. As I put it the other day in my top-secret, spoiler-laden musings on said storyline, “Wow. This is the kind of geeky, idea-intensive frisson that the best, most highly-detailed SFF can engender. I love love love it. More more more!”