![]()  | 
    |
|  
         Opus 103: Opus 
          103 (October 31): CIVILIZATION'S LAST OUTPOST. In this season of electoral frenzy, have you ever wondered 
          why you never see on tv 
          any advertisements in which the makers of one product attack a rival 
          product? Just think: with all the different brands of toothpaste alone 
          out there, if toothpaste manufacturers got into the negative advertising 
          mode, what a bonanza it would be for tv. 
          Well, surprise: at one time in the dawn of television, as I understand 
          it, tv commercials did go negative. But 
          pretty soon, that stopped. The advertisers discovered that the consumer 
          believed everything he was told by the negative ads, and as a consequence, 
          he bought none of the competing products—none of the products 
          being negatively attacked, that is, because they were all inferior, 
          as advertised so persuasively by their competitors.             
          Our ever-lovin' politicians, on the 
          other hand, aren't, apparently, as canny as the manufacturing 
          moguls. They keep right on blasting away at their opponents with negative 
          ads. Their campaign strategists have convinced them that negative advertising 
          works. Naturally, it works: it works to put money into the pockets of 
          the advertising agencies that produce the negative ads.              
          But it also works to undermine public confidence in politicians 
          and the political process. Each of us has said, at one time or another 
          after viewing a spasm of competing negative campaign ads, "I don't 
          believe either of them."  One possible consequence of the rising 
          tide of negative political advertising is the steady decline in the 
          number of citizens that go to the polls. They don't vote, probably, 
          because they are convinced, partly as a result of the negative advertising, 
          that there's no point in voting: the self-serving dissembling and other 
          sorts of political chicanery will continue unabated no matter how they 
          vote. And the negative ads confirm the suspicion. In short, negative 
          advertising corrodes democracy.              
          I'm looking forward to the day when some bright young politician 
          realizes this and conducts his campaign accordingly—a negative 
          campaign, necessarily, but one in which the target is negative advertising, 
          attacking the practice on precisely these grounds: it corrupts and destroys 
          the democratic process. What a turn-around that would be. COMICS ON THE STANDS.  In 21 Down No. 2, we again have 
          on the cover a stunning painting of the leggy Mickey by Joe Jusko, but the interior art (perhaps by Jimmy Palmiotti, again, as I remarked in Opus 100, the credits 
          in this title are so cutely offered that it's impossible to tell who 
          is actually doing what; okay—I should know who Palmiotti 
          is and what he does, mostly, but let's pretend that I don't and that 
          I, like most of the civilized world, am coming upon this book with no 
          previous knowledge at all)—the interior art, as I say, is considerably 
          less expert. The shading of faces, in particular, gives the same individual 
          a different appearance in nearly every panel. But the storytelling is 
          just fine, again setting up with panache for the cliffhanger last page. 
          A third thread of narrative is laced into this issue as we meet Harmony 
          Peterson, a creature of such hypnotic beauty that people kill each other 
          to be near her. ... The Goon No. 1 introduces us to Eric Powell's 
          brute-force protagonist who goes around bashing people for no discernible 
          reason. The story, crammed with nonsensical ghoulish so-called humor, 
          is less a story than a simple progression of events and unexplained 
          situations, brimming with violence but headed in no direction I can 
          make out. It's a perfect example of the rhetorical persuasiveness of 
          the medium, which, so potent is the visual presence, can make you think 
          something is happening even when it isn't. The artwork, a deft blend 
          of Jack Kirby and Wally Wood, is the best thing here, enhanced throughout 
          by gray tones; but it's not enough.             
          Black Widow No. 3 by Greg Rucka 
          with art by Igor Kordey carries 
          the cover caution in screaming type: "Parental Advisory Explicit 
          Content." And it's a good thing, too. Herein, Yelena 
          "becomes" the Black Widow, passing her test by killing Petra. 
          Apart from this somewhat revolting development, there's a few pages of sick sex and lots of muddy artwork. 
          ... The Ballad of Utopia, Nos. 1-3, gives us another dose of 
          Mike Hoffman's skill with a brush in a meandering and disjointed 
          story by Barry Buchanan. Ostensibly, the protagonist of this 
          "Gothic" tale of the Old West is an "under-sheriff" 
          (a deputy? Why employ a British term?) named 
          Samuel David, and he's trying to sort out the killing of a stagecoach 
          station-keeper named Charlie Burnette, who 
          turns out, by the end of the first issue, to be a woman (and a shapely 
          naked one at that). A mysterious man in a top hat adorned with a cat 
          skull wanders through these pages but we're not sure, exactly, why. 
          The action is often not clearly depicted—that is, we don't know 
          what's happening despite Hoffman's pictures; and scenes change without 
          a clue to warn us. Hoffman, whose style strenuously suggests Frazetta, 
          is most persuasive when rendering female embonpoint, and his cover paintings 
          here, like those he executed for last year's Tigress Tales, are 
          deftly done. But the black-and-white interior art is uneven. Some pictures 
          are exquisitely achieved with copious delicate feathering; others seem 
          slap-dash. And in some, his fine lines are so fine they nearly disappear. 
          His women are always supple and graceful renditions, but the male anatomy 
          is sometimes stiff and unconvincing. Buchanan's forte, judging from 
          this wandering saga, is not plotting but dialogue. In search of authentic-sounding 
          Western argot, he invents numerous highly picturesque locutions, such 
          as: "Benton's Cross is a small dog-turd of a place that attracts all the wrong kinda flies"; and "Sheriff makes 
          Birdy [Johnson, the drunken stage driver] hoof it back to 
          town to sober him up. Bob prods him every time he slows down, so Birdy learns to walk and vomit at the same time. By the time 
          we reach town, we've left a pretty juicy trail." This sort of thing, 
          if combined with more Hoffman pictures of zaftig women, would make the 
          series worth buying.             
          Hawkman No. 7 is another Western, this one, 
          I gather (again, I'm coming in late and therefore in a perfect position 
          to assess the probable difficulties an entirely new reader might have), 
          inventing a 19th century origin for a 20th century hero. Although Rags 
          Morales on pencils and Timothy Truman on inks do a painstakingly 
          copious job drawing pictures, they cannot rescue James Robinson's 
          story, which includes, near the beginning, three pages of continuous 
          verbal exposition that no amount of camera movement can enliven, and, 
          at the end, a headlong dash to conclusion, so hastily reached that the 
          last page is crammed with captions alluding to events not shown (and 
          not, apparently, likely to be shown). The exposition covers nuances 
          in the situation that are never, in subsequent pages, developed: Robinson 
          dwells on the relationship between an accused murderer, an African-American, 
          and his supposed benefactor, whom he is presumed to have killed, but 
          this relationship, fraught with racial overtones, is never mentioned 
          again, nor does it seem to function in what's passing for plot. Hawkman, called Nighthawk here, meets a lady gunslinger, saves 
          her ass, goes to bed with her, and learns her name, Kate—in that 
          callous and casual order. Nighthawk later breaks the erroneously accused 
          murderer out of jail and is saved by Kate, and then the erstwhile murderer 
          promises to show them his master's "treasures," but the story, 
          having reached page 21, must conclude on the next page. So it does. 
          We never find out about the treasures. Much of the action in action 
          sequences is undecipherable: Morales shifts camera distance like a cinematographer, 
          hoping, by alternating mid-range and extreme close-up shots, to convey 
          some sense of the rapidity of events, but only confusion results. Confusion 
          and a sense of speed, admittedly, but the confusion baffles. 
          One panel gives us a tight close-up of a pistol going off, and the next 
          panel shows us a gunny grabbing his gut, suggesting he's been shot. 
          But it's not clear. The panel before the pistol close-up shows him training 
          his own pistol on Kate, but she's leaping up from a table and falling 
          back while firing her pistol, an image that dominates the panel to such 
          an extent that we overlook the guy behind her with his pistol out. The 
          book's concluding action sequence works somewhat better, 
          but, again, there are close-ups alternating with mid-range shots, a 
          maneuver that confuses rather than clarifies. Why the story dashed to 
          conclusion, I dunno. Is this the last in a 7-issue mini-series? Will there 
          be more, further issues that will develop the storylines hinted at in 
          the last page's captions? Was this intended to be a longer-running series 
          but got canceled? Who knows? And if you just picked this comic up from 
          the stands and had to make sense of it, you'd have a hard time.             
          Invasion of the Dumb Blondes No. 1 from ACG, however, 
          is not baffling at all. Dumb blondes galore, and lively, energetic pictures 
          by the ever-masterful Owen Fitzgerald (methinks), who, as an 
          animator, could convey the breezy sense of a bevy of comedic cuties 
          in perpetual motion (mouth or body, face or figure) better than anyone, 
          even Bob Oksner, who followed him on 
          Bob Hope, lo these many moons ago. The action is fast and furious—or, 
          rather, hilarious—and the gags silly, but you buy this one for 
          Fitzgerald, who limns Broadway Babes and a couple Moronica 
          stories, the rest of the book given over to stories of Bikini Luv, who may be drawn, here, by Oksner. 
          ... And Jim Mahfood's crisp style of 
          drawing and eclectic topical humor is on display in Stupid Comics 
          No. 1, a collection reprinting mostly one-page strips from various 
          places on sundry concerns of the latte set. Worth 
          your time and money. DRASTIC FUBARS. I've committed two of them recently. No. 1—When, in Opus 98, I mentioned 
          Alan Light's article on Bruce Springsteen in the August 5th issue 
          of The New Yorker, I assumed it was the same Alan Lighit that once publisheed the 
          Comics Buyer's Guide; but, turns out, it isn't that Alan Light 
          at all. That Alan Light, the CBG Alan Light, is still safe in 
          obscurity, not writing articles about rock stars for New York magazines.             
          No. 2—Lately, I found out that I was wrong about the reason 
          that the Muslim world hates the U.S.  
          Here's what I said (in Opus 98): (a) A somewhat steady dribble 
          of Bushwah over the last year has asserted, 
          sometimes in terms of the purest wonderment, that the terrorists "hate 
          our freedom." This utterance, like the claim that the American 
          voter approved the Bush League agenda by "electing" Dubya, is an over-simplification that verges on outright mendacity. 
          It is a non-explanation on a scale so colossal that only a simpleton 
          could aspire to it. That it is offered to the nation says more about 
          the Bush League's opinion of the voting public than it does about the 
          people who blather the statement. Why avoid the truth? Because the truth, or even an approximation of it, doesn't reflect 
          well upon the policies of the Bush League. (b) To the extent 
          that the Islamic world despises the U.S., it does so because it hates 
          change, and capitalism yoked to free enterprise is the very engine of 
          change. They hate capitalism because of the unrelenting exploitation 
          of human and natural resources that capitalism represents. They hate 
          capitalism because it is the embodiment of colonialism, the "all 
          for me and none for you" philosophy of rapacious entrepreneurial 
          enterprise. It seems too bad that the Bush League doesn't grasp this 
          simple fact because its foreign policy (the "you're either with 
          us or against us" and "our way is the only way" mantras) 
          is but another nuance of the same colonial attitude that earned us the 
          enmity of the Muslim world to begin with. And so we perpetuate the image 
          and attitude that cost us nearly 3,000 citizens and our pride on 9/11.             
          The so-called reasoning here consists, 
          it seems to me, of two parts, which I've tagged (a) and (b). Both remain 
          somewhat accurate but not entirely. Dubya's 
          "they hate our freedom" (a) is still a simpleton's explication, 
          but it's closer to being right than mine (b). I'm currently meandering 
          through Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great about America, and I found 
          this: "The West is a society based on freedom whereas Islam is 
          a society based on virtue." I think he's right, and if he is, our 
          differences seem nearly irreconcilable. To people to whom virtue is 
          the highest value, freedom represents licentiousness, an open invitation 
          to stray from proper behavior. To people for whom freedom is the highest 
          value, virtue represents unquestioning restraint, an inhibition that 
          interferes with the individual's presumed desire to develop his or her 
          potential to the fullest. Thus, when the Muslim world dubbed the U.S. 
          the "Great Satan," they were not speaking figuratively: instead, 
          the U.S. and the personal freedoms it stands for are the Great Temptation 
          for mankind, seducing everyone away from the straight, the narrow, the virtuous. In Islam, the "right way," the religious 
          way, has been discovered and ascertained; it needs no further elaboration. 
          In the West, the "right way" is still being debated in various 
          nuances, and while the debate goes forth, individuals are free to explore 
          their natures. Why don't we simply agree to disagree, D'Souza 
          asks. Because even the question embodies a liberal 
          attitude that the righteous cannot countenance.             
          Still, the danger lies in the absence of a healthy scepticism. 
          I remember a haunting fragment of a PBS radio interview shortly after 
          September 11. I don't remember the names of the people involved, but 
          one of them asked a rhetorical but potent question: What might have 
          happened on September 11 if even one of the suicide pilots had the slightest 
          doubt about the certainty of his going to Paradise immediately upon 
          impact with the building he was pointing towards?              
          Certitude, particularly moral certitude, is dangerous. It is 
          also nearly unavoidable in the human psyche, I suppose. Here between 
          shining seas, we have bred various certainties of our own, the "religious 
          right," for instance. So we are no more immune from the fanaticism 
          that animates Islamic fundamentalism than Muslims are. And the more 
          power the fanatics acquire (say, in the Justice Department of our government), 
          the more I tremble, particularly after September 11. But if we aspire 
          to wisdom, we must also view our certainties as tentative, way stations 
          on the path to knowledge rather than the destination itself.              
          Meanwhile, not to neglect the ostensible purpose of our gathering 
          here around the softly glowing tube we're peering into, we have Larry 
          Gonick's latest installment in his multi-volume 
          Cartoon History of the Universe (320 8x10" pages in black-and-white 
          paperback, $21.95). This one, Volume III, propitiously, takes the story 
          from "The Rise of Arabia to the Renaissance." In other words, 
          it delves, in Gonick's now familiar jocular 
          manner, into the origins and spread of Islam. Gonick says he had no idea, as he prepared this tome, that 
          it would reach the bookstores at a time that American interest in Muslim 
          history would be running so high. But he doubtless has no hesitation 
          about embracing the fortuitiousness of the 
          situation.             
          Like many others, I've lately browsed through several accounts 
          of the rise of Islam, and Gonick's is at least 
          as confused, which is to say as "accurate and conscientious," 
          as any of the others. Our unfamiliarity with Arabian names, and the 
          tendancy among Arabs to name everyone with 
          similar names, combines to breed a certain complexity in such narratives 
          as Gonick's, but he leaves us in no doubt, 
          and neither do most other accounts, that the initial spread of Islam 
          was accomplished as much by force as by sweet reason. The sword seems 
          natural to early Muslim proselytizing. Given this heritage, it should 
          not surprise us that fundamental Islam turns so readily to violence 
          to assuage its frustrations. Let us hope that the violence of the Christian 
          crusades of yore does not similarly infect the enterprises of the West 
          as it undertakes to redress the wrongs it perceives.             
          Gonick remains as sturdily irreverent as before. His comedy 
          sometimes resides in the narrative, in the jarring juxtapositioning 
          of facts that seem, today, hilariously contradictory; sometimes the 
          contradiction is revealed by the pictures that seem to deny the import 
          of the accompanying prose narrative; and sometimes, the humor resides 
          entirely in the pictorial content, sight gags or wise-ass remarks made 
          by his characters, who seem bent on puncturing the pomposity of history 
          itself by their very presence in the book. Gonick's 
          drawing, it seems to me, is somewhat more slapdash in this volume (and 
          in Volume II) than in the original comic book incarnation of his story, 
          but his sense of humor is, thankfully, intact. And so is his tact: he 
          thoughtfully refrains from depicting the Prophet, respecting Islam's 
          prohibitions against pictures of Mohammed.             
          Garry Trudeau says Gonick's book is 
          "brilliantly rendered and unexpectedly timely." He also asks 
          the burning question (and supplies a telling answer): "Will reading 
          an erudite, if flat-out hilarious, account of Middle 
          East history help us make sense of our current clash of cultures? 
          Let's put it this way: ignorance hasn't worked." I'll second the 
          motion.             
          As for the screed in (b), I think it's probably true, but it 
          is not so much about the Muslim world as it is about other fragments 
          of the planet, sometimes including Muslim societies, sometimes not. 
          And it's probably true that some Third World countries welcome Ameican 
          capitalism with its rapacious intentions as a shortcut to better living 
          for the citizenry; better living may not result, but capitalism and 
          its exploitation of natural resources seem full of promise nonetheless. 
           COMIC STRIP REPRINTS. High-Spirited Rose Is Rose (128 8.5x9-inch pages; paperback, $10.95) 
          is the sixth reprint collection of Pat Brady's warmly human, visually 
          inventive comic strip about young family: Rose is the wife and mother, 
          Jimbo is the husband and father, and Pasquale is their small 
          son (originally about two years old; now, a couple years older). "Pasquale 
          was my nickname when I was very young," Brady once explained. "My 
          father called me Pasquale for several years. I think it's Italian for 
          Patrick, but I've never been quite sure."             
          Most of the Rose reprints have been from Andrews McMeel, 
          as is this one. One, however—Rose Is Rose in Living Color, 
          a full-color compilation of Sunday strips—was published in 1999 
          by Rutledge Hill Press in Nashville. Like all its predecessors, High-Spirited 
          includes material produced expressly for this collection. Brady always 
          does more than simply pick strips to be reprinted. In this volume, he 
          conducts a sort of "Where's Waldo" exercise, hiding Pasquale's 
          guardian angel in a series of double-truck, four-side bleed illustrations 
          of crowd scenes. Pictures have always played a more than merely illustrative 
          role in Brady's strip.              
          Launched April 16, 1984, Rose Is Rose developed into one 
          of the most visually imaginative comic strips around. Comprehending 
          the humor depends upon understanding the pictures as well as the words. 
          In fact, many of the strips seem to be visual puzzles. The punchline 
          is the solution to the puzzle. I made this observation to Brady when 
          we talked several years ago: "I look at the pictures in the first 
          panels, and I say, Oh, what is this? And then—all of a sudden—the 
          last panel shows me what it is, explains it, and the explanation is 
          the punchline. Do you do this deliberately? 
          I suppose you must."             
          "Yes, I do," Brady said. "I've never heard it 
          expressed like you have, but I'm pleased to hear it.  
          I just think it makes it more interesting to try things like 
          that. It's another way of making the work as interesting as it can be. 
          It's definitely something that I do consciously. It's not one of the 
          first things that I think about, but as I'm toying with the idea, as 
          I do a thumbnail sketch, I'll see a possibility to add that dimension, 
          and if I can, I do it."             
          Brady gets most of his ideas from "active" daydreaming. 
          "I'll come into my studio in the morning," he said, "and 
          I'll have a cup of coffee, and I'll toy with words and phrases and I'll 
          doodle until something starts to emerge.  But for me it's very seldom that anything 
          will happen in my family life that can be translated into the comic 
          strip.  It's mostly a process 
          of day-dreaming."             
          I asked if the act of drawing itself ever produced ideas. For 
          many cartoonists, it does: "You start drawing the picture, and 
          as that is going on—a character takes shape, his personality, 
          already established, emerges, and an idea comes out, a joke or gag—"             
          Brady said he does that, too, but "more often than not, 
          the ideas will emerge from words rather than doodles.  
          I think Sparky [Charles Schulz of Peanuts fame] told me 
          that he gets his ideas from doodling.  
          And I do that.  But for me, it's mostly words."             
          I asked if there were specific things he did to stoke ideas—magazines 
          he reads, television he watches, current events?             
          He answered: "Often what I find works for me is to try to 
          think of something that will be visually interesting, that will look 
          visually exciting or pleasing. And then I try actually to write a strip—or 
          a joke—around it. A moonscape, for instance. 
          Ahh, it would be great if I could do a really 
          realistic moonscape, or space scene. Now what can I do with that? I 
          end up writing a joke to accommodate the art. I don't know if other 
          cartoonists do that. But it works for me."             
          And it results in one of the medium's most engaging graphic enterprises. 
          Anyone who wants to observe the visual heart of the art of cartooning 
          should watch Brady's work. And in this collection, the visuals are, 
          if anything, more energetic than ever. Visit www.ucomics.com/store 
          for information about other Rose books. NEW FROM ANDREWS MCMEEL. The most recent reprint titles from the comic strip reprint 
          capital of the universe: Your 
          Favorite—Crab Cakes! 
          (Crankshaft by Tom Batiuk and Chuck 
          Ayers), 128 8.5x9-inch paperback pages, $10.95; another visit with the 
          world's most cantankerous kind-hearted bus driver and cynical representative 
          of the "greatest" generation *FoxTrot: Assembled with Care (FoxTrot 
          by Bill Amend), 192 8.5x11-inch pages in paperback, $14.95; selections 
          from three other collections, Death by Field Trip, Encyclopedia Brown 
          and White, and His Code Name Was The Fox with Sundays in 
          color *Groovitude: A Get Fuzzy Treasury (Get Fuzzy by Darby Conley), 
          256 8.5x11-inch paperback pages, $14.95; combines the contents of the 
          two previous reprints of this increasingly popular strip, The Dog 
          Is Not a Toy and Fuzzy Logic, with the usual "Treasury" 
          gimmick, Sundays in full color *What 
          Now? Mutts VII 
          (Mutts by Patrick McDonnell), 128 8.5x9-inch paperback pages, 
          $10.95; another in the series reprinting the whimsical humor prompted 
          by a dog, Earl, and a cat, Mooch, and their occasional human escorts Night 
          of the Bilingual Telemarketers: Baldo Collection 
          No. 2 (Baldo 
          by Hector Cantu and Carlos Castellanos), 
          128 8.5x9-inch paperback pages, $10.95; the nation's only Latino entry 
          on the comics page, Baldo will soon 
          be animated by Univision Communications, the number one Spanish-language 
          broadcaster in the U.S. This volume includes the tribute to Gus Arriola's Gordo strip (which, I hasten with unseemly 
          speed to add, is the subject of a book of my own that you can find out 
          more about by clicking here). *SALE 
          BOOKS. These 
          books (the ones marked with an *asterisk) are hereby offered for sale 
          at the ridiculously low price of $5 each, plus shipping and handling 
          ($3 for the first, plus $1 for each additional title). E-mail me by 
          going to the very end of this section; I'll then give you ordering instructions 
          and hold your order for two weeks, pending receipt of your check.             
          Meanwhile, stay 'tooned. To find out about Harv's books, click here.  | 
    |
  
        send e-mail to R.C. Harvey Art of the Comic Book - Art of the Funnies - Accidental Ambassador Gordo - reviews - order form - Harv's Hindsights - main page  |