JAMES STURM IN JOURNAL SEXPLOITATION SHOCKER!
Ha ha, no. Tim, you’re right: I can’t
[n]ame another autobiographical or semi-autobiographical cartoonist [other than Phoebe Gloeckner] who had a photo cover on the Journal.
However, I also cannot name another autobiographical or semi-autobiographical cartoonist who is now working primarily with photographs.
Now, this is just a guess, but my hunch is that these two phenomena are connected.
Her piece in Comics Journal’s Winter 2004 Special, her piece for my interview with her (originally intended for the A&F Quarterly and ultimately published here), her piece in L.A. Weekly, and yes, the comic of which the Journal’s cover is the first panel–all photoromances. That’s what I was getting at with my “pat and condescending” post of the other day–any Phoebe Gloeckner cover is going to feature an image of Phoebe Gloeckner (or at least her quasi-autobiographical manque, Minnie Goetze) as a function of her work, not her gender. This cover features a photo, as per her wishes, because her work lately is in photographs. As a wise man once wrote, ’nuff said. I mean, should she abandon photographs when putting the cover together, because it might remind someone of Mademoiselle? Who’s bringing baggage to the table now?
But hey, if you wanna work yourself into a high dudgeon about how “tone-deaf and easily misinterpreted” the image is, ignoring Gloeckner’s decades of examining the issues of feminism, femininity, sexism, sexuality, autobiography, self-image, and self-representation with an acuity unrivalled by pretty much anyone ever, and proceed to inisit you don’t mean to cause trouble but you still feel behooved to call a fellow out by name for trying to point out that there may be a simpler, slightly less preposterous explanation for the photo cover than “Phoebe’s gone Cosmo” and then go into a whole thing about how this fellow is a lockstep defender of the artist who can never truly know the world of the woman–well, in the words of Marc Bolan, “rock on, rock on, yeah.”