The Ganges material in Tucker Stone’s installment of Tom Spurgeon’s decade-in-review interview series is pretty great. I like all the attention he pays to how the mere size of the page Huizenga’s working with for the Ignatz format gives him latitude he doesn’t have in Or Else or Fight or Run–that’s a pretty terrific point, especially considering how much the Ganges comics depend on reproducing certain effects across the space of the page. Jesus, can you imagine “A Sunset” as appearing in Ganges rather than Or Else? Drooooool

But let’s face it, I came here to kvetch about Tucker’s latest hand-waving about the futility of making value judgments as critics. He responds to Tom Spurgeon’s (accurate) assessment of people who summarily dismiss non-genre comics as “ignorant” by more or less attacking the very idea that anyone should read anything but what they’re already reading, labeling those who’d argue otherwise “boring assholes.” It’s similar to how, during the SPX critcs roundtable, someone mentioned the critical discourse, and he equated it to people on YouTube calling each other cunts.

First of all it dodges Tom’s specific point, which is that it really is ignorant to dismiss comics like Ganges as boring out of hand. Yes, all criticism is subjective, everyone’s coming at everything from different places, but if you can’t say “Ganges isn’t boring,” there’s no point to writing about comics at all. “Comics culture,” as everyone from Wizard to the The Beat to the San Diego Comic Con to me understand it, is “comics plus genre work from other media,” which is an indication of how hard non-genre comics have to fight to gain a foothold. It’s big problem, and Tom’s not wrong for pointing it out.

Secondly, Tucker tries to back up his argument by reversing it, saying it’s just as stupid to harass big Anders Nilsen fans into reading Batman. But that’s a strawman. Can you find anyone (besides maybe Rob Clough and Domingos) who dismisses genre the way so many superhero fans do the reverse, so that you would even have to harass them? Gary Groth loves Jack Kirby, Art Spiegelman wrote a book about Jack Cole, Joe McCulloch has read every Garth Ennis Punisher comic, and Tom Spurgeon has waged years-long campaigns on behalf of the Luna Brothers and Lee/Kirby Thor. On the other hand it’s almost impossible to avoid best-of lists that don’t include anything further afield than Mark Waid’s Irredeemable. It’s a problem in one direction; it’s not a problem in the other direction.

I mean, if you met someone who only watched superhero movies, you’d think that was weird and dumb, and you’d be right, and saying so wouldn’t make you a boring asshole, it’d make you a person who was right. Moreover, saying so does not mean you’ve extrapolated that they’re some horrible CSI Miami-watching mouthbreather or anything else about “who they really are” or whatever. You’re just a critic, addressing what people are saying about specific comics, which is a valid thing for a critic to do.

Finally, Tucker’s coup de grace is the fact that most of the audience doesn’t really care about critics or critical approaches to what they enjoy reading anyway. But so what? Most of the people in the theater with us at Up in the Air yesterday have never read Pauline Kael. But criticism is not therefore an egomaniacal waste of time, any more than making art that most of the audience for that art form doesn’t really care about would be. Kevin Huizenga shouldn’t hang it up just because he’s not Jim Davis; similarly, we shouldn’t crumple up the idea of analyzing art and arguing for standards and throw it in the trash because many people would just rather read/watch/listen and then do something else.

This entry was posted on Sunday, January 3rd, 2010 at 11:48 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.