Friday, February 27, 2009

Brunetti's Covers

A beautiful Ivan Brunetti cover titled "Ecosystems" appears on the current issue of The New Yorker (3/2/09). This one's loaded with details, so you really need to see it up close.

His art also graces the cover of the current volume of Ecotone:


[I think this illustration first appeared in an issue of Brunetti's comic Schizo. . .]

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Coming Not So Very Soon

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Thursday, February 26, 2009

For Ted May

The above is a panel from Dr. Solar, Man of the Atom #23:

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Monday, February 23, 2009

video

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Smart Robots


Two of the comics I got last week [ Dr. Solar, Man of the Atom #9 and Tom Gauld's The Wise Robot Will Answer Your Question Now] feature computer-robots that look a little alike. Here's some of the attractive title lettering of the Solar story:

...click here to read the rest of this post...

A day late and a . . .

"Strange Romantic Customs." From another recent purchase, Hi-School Romance Date Book #2, January 1963.

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

On the newsstand...







The Commemorative Inaugural Edition of Newsweek has a full-page illustration of our new president Barack Obama by Daniel Clowes. Should be available on the newsstands through March.





...click here to read the rest of this post...

Totally Looks Like


...click here to read the rest of this post...

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Peanuts Time


_______________________________________________


The above strip belongs to a curious -- to me at least -- subset of Peanuts strips. The majority of Schulz’s comics take place at a single location: a stonewall, living room, baseball diamond. . . . But some, like this one, have a different background for every panel.

This creates an interpretive quandary. Typically we interpret the approximate duration of a given comic sequence by comparing it to reality: roughly how long, for example, would a cartoon conversation/monologue take if it occurred in the real world? The flow of the dialogue above suggests a fairly quick passage of time. Yet the shifting locations can imply something very different: Charlie Brown takes long pauses between each line of dialogue as he moves to a new 'location.' (Why do comic book characters talk to themselves far more so than most of us do?) Or else Schulz leaves much of Charlie Brown’s in-between-panel dialogue un-narrated. It’s interesting to imagine him walking from place to place -- from panel to panel -- meditating on these ideas about punishment and the inevitability of his own disciplining. (In so many strips the only actions are walking and/or talking -- and the walking here is implied, not shown.)

We could also consider the backgrounds as decorative; they do not necessarily imply any real time gaps between panels. They are a way for Schulz to create visual interest (and to keep himself interested in the drawing) when the gag doesn’t depend on the images in the way that other Peanuts strips do. When I read strips like the above with students and ask them about time duration, they almost always do not consider the backgrounds; if they notice them at all on a first reading, they read them as decoration with no narrative implications. In a sense, they pay attention to the words and not the pictures. And this approach is fine; it can be justified by the nature of this monologue (or in some of the strips below, the conversation); each of Charlie Brown’s observations follows quickly from the one before it.

I think this kind of strip, which is more prevalent in the earlier decades of Peanuts, shows that a form of reading that emphasizes a fairly literal connection between time in comics and time in the real world overlooks some of what makes comics strange. Time in a seemingly simply strip like this one can be meaningfully interpreted in two contradictory ways, both of which make equal sense. Sometimes a conversation in a film will employ a similar series of background shifts, but the ‘weight of reality’ pushes us toward an interpretation that acknowledges some amount of un-narrated time; after all, it takes people time to move from place to place. But cartoon characters can do whatever they, and perhaps their authors, want.


The third panel above does something that's unusual for Schulz -- it's rare that the main characters occupy such a small portion of the panel.


This pulling back of the 'camera' highlights the shift in tone; here Charlie Brown gets philosophical and perhaps even somber, framed by a dense (for Peanuts at least) natural backdrop. Yet in the last panel he looks happy that he has adopted an attitude that might appear pessimistic to us: we can only briefly delay the realization that things are rotten, tricking ourselves into a few moments of joy. (Or is this attitude actually optimistic?) In this panel, the particular background setting selected for this dialogue seems to have a meaning that is neither strictly narrative nor decorative; rather it symbolically amplifies the emotional content of the dialogue. {It's a haunting image, yet it's easy to overlook - we have been trained to read comic strips so quickly.}

Here are three more strips; the first uses shifting backgrounds, the others don't (at first, the third might seem to, but each panel is connected by the same sloping ground in the background).


...click here to read the rest of this post...

Put a Donk On It

...click here to read the rest of this post...

Years Ago

Eight years ago today, the Daniel Clowes Bibliography went online

...click here to read the rest of this post...