BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Blankets and comics criticism

 
 
some guy
23:14 / 06.10.03
I've just read the Nth message board post raving about Blankets and it finally pushed me over the edge. The book is a string of dull cliches that barely tells a coherent story. Where's the climax? Where are the changes endured by the protagonist? If "Craig" isn't meant to be the author, where is the exploration of the child abuse? The guilt over the brother? The meaninful exploration of faith? Where is the graphic innovation? Where is the slightest hint of originality?

If Blankets was released in any other media, we'd be yawning at having seen it all before, and better. But release it in comics form and you can't duck fast enough to avoid the critical ejaculate. Is the state of comics criticism that bad? Are we merely witnessing a reaction to the dominance of superhero books, resulting in all books without spandex receiving a "free pass" when it comes to criticism? Are our community's critical faculties bound by an inverse relationship with the size of any given book?

Or is Blankets actually a masterpiece worthy of the adoration? Why?
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
23:48 / 06.10.03
Wait. Is that the new one from the Chunky Rice guy?

Well, then. It's gotta be good.

Honestly, I haven't read it yet. Mostly because of the whole $30 thing. I'm sure that if it's as bad as you say, The Comics Journal will tear it a new one.
 
 
some guy
00:03 / 07.10.03
I don't know that it's bad so much as painfully average for mainstream fiction. But then, I didn't see the appeal of Goodbye, Chunky Rice either, so maybe I'm the wrong audience...
 
 
The Falcon
00:25 / 07.10.03
I thought Goodbye, Chunky Rice was pretty twee. So did Ellis, but he likes this'n.
 
 
Eskay Doss
00:41 / 07.10.03
I liked "BLANKETS".

I liked the way it was told. I liked the panel layouts & creative flow, the effective play between cartoony and more realistic drawing styles, and the superb word+ image combos that say more than either alone.

Perhaps it is getting so much praise becuse it makes wonderful use of the tricks and tools that only comic books can use to tell the (yes, rather cliche) story. It wouldn't work as a movie or tv show (actually, it would be pretty awful), and it shouldn't work. But it does work as a comic book (or "graphic novel" if you prefer). I think most comics are produced as storyboards for film or television without anyone ever really considering the strengths of the medium. Thompson doesn't just consider those strengths, he makes great use of them. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND this book to anyone interested in comic book storytelling.
 
 
some guy
01:23 / 07.10.03
No -Girl ... how many examples can you cite in Blankets of Thompson showing the strengths of the medium in those several hundred pages? I can think of just two or three, and at least one of those could easily have been done in a film.
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
01:35 / 07.10.03
Comics Criticism is whole hog in the shitter. We've got some fantastic reviewers, Paul O'Brien, the woefully missed A.K., to name a few, but when the best snob-free analyses of comics are coming in book reviews of The Fortress Of Solitude in The Believer, well, you have to wonder what the fuck is wrong.

Well, it's simple. There's no arena for it. Who's going to publish my nigh-book length critical appraisal of Grant's run on New X-Men? We've got plenty of easily digestable Annotated Guides and Companions, but these are not criticism. TCJ wouldn't touch it because, a) it's too long, and b) well, duh. There's no Paris Review for comics. And we're surprised no one takes us seriously? Honestly, I'm in the middle of Riot At Xavier's and I'll put these four issues against anything out there. The death of the Double Q is so gorgeously written and felt. The silent panel with QQ in the shadows: devastating. Why does no one want to treat this like the fucking literature it is? You can't just say it's literature. It's never worked that way. You have to treat as such. And the internet doesn't really count. Message boards are the sea shores of the thinking world. Tides of opinion come in minute by minute and, while it's fantastic for debate and mental calesthenics, no one would ever dare publish a message board log. Or if they did, no one would pay money to read it.

I think Lethem's TFOS may end up playing a key role. It's destined to be huge, inevitably made into a movie starring Chris Rock and Jason Biggs, and there's a thick and literate core of Comics Appreciation built in. And not the stuck up TCJ kind. It's the kind that people like Grant so tirelessly work to promote in their comics. An appreciation of the wonder and potential of the medium and a respect of its ridiculous power. It just might have the power to crush that Nick-Hornby-fed attitude that, "Hey, Yuppies! No, no, no, turn away from that Comic Store, come here. These are the only five comic books you ever need to read." Check out the TFOS site (Google it, you. It's not like I wrote the url on the back of my hand.). It's got two or three of the best essays on comics I've read in decades.

As far as Blankets goes, No-Girl is right. It's art with words. It's more like narrative paintings than the kind of literature that Chris Ware knocks out, but it's something that can only be done in comics. How do you, in prose, have the same effect of the page where she paints over the picture Craig painted on the wall? Impossible.

Anyway. I gotta get back to my NXM thesis. By the time I'm done, I bet I can get it into, like, The Paris Review and shit. Comics, all comics, will be that respected.

Maybe?

Come on, Phoenix, come on. Make that shit happen.
 
 
some guy
01:46 / 07.10.03
It's art with words. It's more like narrative paintings than the kind of literature that Chris Ware knocks out, but it's something that can only be done in comics.

It's hundreds of pages of tedium. Isn't it fair to ask that the narrative support the "art" in a book this size? Is it enough to have two or three interesting-but-not-original visual effects? I mean, specifically, what's in Blankets to earn the critical response? I'm really seeing this book as a naked emperor - and I don't mean to single it out; it's just a symptom.

How do you, in prose, have the same effect of the page where she paints over the picture Craig painted on the wall? Impossible.

You can do it on television and nobody would blink. Why do we rave about it here?
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
01:49 / 07.10.03
Sorry, LL. You can not make your entire TV screen crumple in on one sliver of an image that you knew used to be there. Panels and the gutters implicit in their use create their own narrative rules and the breaking of said rules can not be replicated in other media without a hammer and a healthy insurance policy.
 
 
Eskay Uno
01:58 / 07.10.03
New X meN is indeed worthy! Bastard critics.

As for Blankets, I agree with No-Girl. No way this could work as a movie. Man, that laugh-at-loud-hilarious pissing fight between the two young brothers would NEVER be approved!

And LL: Thompson uses the strengths of the medium on every blasted page! It's how the ENTIRE story flows, from panel to panel, feeling to feeling. Sure some scenes could work on screen, but THE WHOLE would be shite. As a comic it's cool and deserves praise. Worked for me at least. Let's see you get this riled up about New X-Men and help Benjamin Birdie with his cause!
 
 
The Falcon
02:30 / 07.10.03
Fortess of Solitude.

This is really good. Cheers, BB.
 
 
AlanDavidDoane
05:56 / 07.10.03
"Who's going to publish my nigh-book length critical appraisal of Grant's run on New X-Men?"

Welcome to the Internet, where you can publish it YOURSELF.

ADD
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
10:38 / 07.10.03
Alan,

Like I said, I'm sure I could do that, no problem. In fact, there's nothing stopping me. I've got Dreamweaver, Spell Check, and a url. "Publishing" it on a website, however, wouldn't make a dent in a) the prevailing attitudes of the general public or b) the overall state of comics criticism.

And you've got to be all too aware of this. You're didn't shut down the Galaxy because it got too popular, because it made too many strides in the name of comics being taken seriously, did you? Wasn't it more because it's nearly impossible to maintain something that costs money in direct proportion to the amount of people who use it (bandwith, et al) but that said people refuse, as a whole, to pay money for?

Just one of the many quaint wrinkles of internet publishing that make it nearly impossible for anyone to take the criticism that appears on it seriously. All those fantastic Lethem articles were previously published in places like The New Yorker and Harper's and The Times. Where is that kind of magazine for comics?

A hypothetical: I leave one copy of this fictional magazine of literate comics criticism on my table at my local po-mo coffee shop. I also go to NYU's Bobst Library and reset every single computer in the first floor computer lab to www.ninthart.com. Which one is going to get read more?
 
 
some guy
11:36 / 07.10.03
You can not make your entire TV screen crumple in on one sliver of an image that you knew used to be there. Panels and the gutters implicit in their use create their own narrative rules and the breaking of said rules can not be replicated in other media without a hammer and a healthy insurance policy.

Sorry - we still slam The Matrix even though it looks nice and offers a few technical tricks. The story in Blankets is ... well, let's just say it would be cliche to call it hackneyed. I would think Blankets' narrative would be decimated in a critical examination, and if that's the case, I really don't see the book as a masterpiece of the medium.

And the paint effect is a bad TV wipe.

No way this could work as a movie.

It would work; it would just be very dull. We can probably count the number of effects exclusive to the comics medium on one hand - the book is not about the visual technique.

Thompson uses the strengths of the medium on every blasted page!

I daresay the book has more than 400 pages where the "strengths of the medium" are absent and it's nothing more than storyboards.

But I don't want this to focus on Blankets. I'm much more interested in whether non-superhero books get a softer reception from industry "critics" and whether that's deserved in itself. Does expansion of the medium to new genres justify celebrating work that would be considered merely competent in other media? Is there a page count influence on critical acclaim?
 
 
AlanDavidDoane
12:37 / 07.10.03
"You're didn't shut down the Galaxy because it got too popular, because it made too many strides in the name of comics being taken seriously, did you? Wasn't it more because it's nearly impossible to maintain something that costs money in direct proportion to the amount of people who use it (bandwith, et al) but that said people refuse, as a whole, to pay money for?"

That was a factor, certainly -- but not the only one. And the diaspora of good Galaxy writers to other sites (Rob Vollmar, Chris Allen, Marc Mason, Chris Ryall, and others) has absolutely improved the state of comics criticism, in my opinion. There IS good comics criticism being written, and it is being received, processed and absorbed into the culture, but obviously at a time when few people are reading ANYTHING, never mind comics, the overall impact is minimal and is likely to remain so.

ADD
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
13:31 / 07.10.03
LL,

I think there's definitely a soft hand given to whatever comics reviewers have decided, whether it be because of page count or an Jules Feiffer quote on the back cover, to be this season's "Authentic Comic Literature" awardee. It's the same thing in film. Everyone's decided that Lost In Translation is this season's relevatory masterpiece, completely ignoring that it's two fantastic performances held together with expensive, aimless ("I'm leaving Friday." "Oh, I didn't tell you? I made the decision to stay past Friday two days ago."), and pitifully boring thread. However, that doesn't change the fact that Blankets is fucking gorgeous and people need to respect it on those terms. I don't think it deserves the kind of acclaim that Jimmy Corrigan received, no do I believe it will get it, at least in literary circles. I think people could do a lot worse than Blankets, though. And I think judging something on merits like "This wouldn't stand up to scrutiny if there were no drawings and it was just a prose story" is just thoroughly wrongheaded. He didn't submit the story to Ploughshares, he had Top Shelf publish it. Interesting story, though. When I saw Craig at MOCCA this year, art speigelman happened to stop by and they got to talking. art made it quite clear that Craig could have easily got it published by a mainstream book publisher. So, there's that.

Alan,

Yes, there are fantastic writers about comics on the internet, and whether or not their work would be published in a mainstream market is neither here nor there. However; please, please, please don't rely on that hoary old "Nobody Reads Anymore" chestnut to make your point. It didn't work the last 9,876,543 times someone used it, and it's not going to work now.

The reason that the impact is minimal is because it's being published on the internet (general public interest slipping [see failures: Slate, Word]) on sites about comics (GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST LEVEL CRITICAL! WARNING! WARNING!). Print still matters. Hell, I'd be happy with a Comics section in The New Yorker, equivalent with their Movie section. You can even get Spike Jonze to do illustrations for it the way they got Tomine to do illustrations for Film Reviews.
 
 
houdini
19:11 / 07.10.03

I haven't read Blankets yet, but I felt pretty much the same way about Beg The Question. (Which got a very good review on Ninth Art a while back.) All that that book really had that you couldn't've done on Friends was a bit more graphic sex, and given the art style that wasn't much of an incentive for me....

I am annoyed by this, because I think there are some really genuinely amazing works of "real mainstream" comics out there (or whatever you want to call them). I reckon Jason Lutes' Jar Of Fools is one of them, Charles Burns' Black Hole is one of them, Seth's It's A Good Life If You Don't Weaken and Chester Brown's I Never Liked You both score with me.... But there does seem to be this "Indy Comic of the Season" factor going on at the moment and it's usually stuff that leaves me pretty cold.

Come to that, I liked Goodbye Chunky Rice pretty well. Yeah, it was open to charges of being twee, but I thought it just managed to keep itself together and avoid falling into the big whirlpool of cliche it created for itself. I can see why other people thought it went down though. For my money jason evokes the same feeling, only much better, with Ssssshhh! (sp?) and Hey, Wait.

A big problem for comics criticism that I see is that there's only one real vehichle for serious criticism - the Comics Journal. And I think they're too mired in elitism and too compromised by their praise of in-house stuff (oh frabjuous Fantagraphics!) to be much of a torchbearer. That and it's simply deadly dull.
 
 
Yotsuba & Benjamin!
19:27 / 07.10.03
Exactly, Houdini. I'm kind of glad that TCJ is so ponderously dull, simply because it illustrates my point so well. That kind of intellectual inbreeding can only result in droll garbage, and thank goodness.

Jason. Jason, Jason, Jason. LL? Read some Jason. He's someone we can all agree on. He's an extravagantly talented storyteller, tip-top artist, and he tells fantastic weird Carver/O'Connor/Aimee Bender stories about dogs and rabbits. They will rip out your heart and eat it.
 
 
Krug
00:06 / 08.10.03
Haven't read Blankets either but I'm very fond of Goodbye Chunky Rice.

Jason Lutes is God.
 
 
The Falcon
00:08 / 08.10.03
Actually, I was going to mention NinthArt (and Savant, if that still works) as non-snobby, literate review/essay sites.
 
 
dlotemp
00:30 / 08.10.03
A couple thoughts -

1) For those interested in published critical thoughts on comics, I recommend researching the University of Mississippi Press. It's been publishing comic book theory since the early 1990s. I'll be honest and admit that I don't know what they have available in their current catalog but they did support the nacent field of comic theory and criticism. Some interesting stuff there.

2) RE: whether some comics are given the soft hand -
I'll agree to a certain extent. IMHO - I thought JIMMY CORRIGAN was a brilliant piece of comics literature - just look at some of those gorgeous layouts and design. Ware's pacing is glacial but exact and deliberate. Was it boring though and depressing? I thought so. I once gushed about the book to a roomful of libraries and all of them openly wondered why they would ever bother with such a downer.

Did I give JIMMY CORRIGAN a soft hand? I guess the real question is can a work of art be considered worthwhile if it contains serious flaws? JIMMY CORRIGAN is a fantastic visual piece with wonderful direction. The dialogue is relatively bland and the subject matter is depressing. I dont' think those flaws break a work but it certainly reduces audience interest.

I haven't read BLANKETS but I did read GOODBYE, CHUCKY RICE. I thought the art was nice; loved the bold, confident black lines. I also thought it was very poetic in a way that only comics can do. While linear, the narrative jumps back and forth between characters who the reader have to take symbols of some sort. I mean...what kind of world has humans and mice interacting in normal conversation? obviously, the book is telling us that these characters are representing conditions and not reality. so placing these characters into the odd situations are meant to induce emotional resoance, if not literal, logical connections. By the time I finished GOODBYE, CHUCKY RICE, I was left with a feeling that this guy has got talent. And that GOODBYE was certainly worthy of attention since it was able to present a poetic narrative that, I felt, played fair with the reader. Did I completely understand it - No. But some of those images still haunt me.

Is BLANKETS berefit of this level of storytelling?


PS - I have to agree about Jason Lutes. I wish BERLIN was finished and available in TPB because I think it will blow away audiences, both comics and mainstream.
 
 
houdini
14:51 / 08.10.03
The first volume of Berlin is available in a trade. It's not complete, of course, but it's still a very satisfying book.

Looking back at my last post, I think I was maybe a little harsh to Chunky Rice. Twee or no, I personally had a very strong emotional response to it and I agree that it's just intrinsically obvious that the "characters" are cyphers for emotional states. It's really a very fragile work in that you have to buy into it and appreciate that what you're seeing is sock puppets acting out a much more human drama in microcosm. I definitely found it effective.

For those who're interested, Jess Lemon (the fiction-suit reviewer at The Pulse) has a thought-provoking review of Blankets here.
 
 
houdini
16:59 / 08.10.03

Hey, thanks to whichever mod fixed that link for me. I don't really have the tags down for the 'lith. Should I just use regular HTML tags (as is the case with Italics, etc) or is there some kind of pseudotagging for links, etc?
 
 
sleazenation
22:54 / 08.10.03
hmmmm i guessing a lot of this is tied up in what each of us preceives literature to be - oftimes people use it to refer to an authodox canon, others use it to refer to what they consider good or worthy.

Personally I find terms such as literature it be a bit unhelpful in comics since comics are not purely wordbased and should therefore not simply limit themselves to the critical tools associated with just words.

As a side issue I'd say that the paucity of bespoke accademic journals for comics is probably a pretty good thing. It means that as yet there is still no clearly established canon for comics, nor an authority to issue such a cannon (there is only really a load of comics which have recieved critical acclaim).

And besides, In the Accademic press there are, as Dotemp mentions, a variety of existing disperate academic works already in existance and more coming all the time (and heres a big shout out to university of california press with the 2 vol David Kunzle work on the origins of comic which hales from the mid 70s, i believe).


but to digresss for a moment
For me a lot of what Dlotemp classifies as 'weaknesses' in Jimmy Corrigan are just elements that further reinforce various expository and plot points in the book. Yes the dialogue is often stilted, but its supposed to be - it helps demonstrate is how strained and awkward and isolated pretty much eveyone feels in the narrative. Yes its a depressing story. So the Three Sisters. Comics need not be uplifting (nor indeed perfect) to be worthy of study...
 
 
Krug
23:19 / 08.10.03
<>

Well said.
 
 
Krug
23:22 / 08.10.03
Christ.

That should've been up there.

//Comics need not be uplifting (nor indeed perfect) to be worthy of study... //
 
 
dlotemp
01:21 / 09.10.03
sleazenation -

I have to apologize and agree with your comment that what I believed were weaknesses "are just elements that further reinforce various expository and plot points in the book." You're correct and I made a mistake. Those are not weaknesses in the book itself. Perhaps they can be considered barriers to some readers who aren't prepared to digest the emotional content. Just because someone is afraid of blood doesn't mean the human form is flawed. Mea Culpa.

I think you raise a good point about what each of us considers literature, but perhaps the PULSE review really hits the head on the nail by essentially calling BLANKETS a self-indulgent piece of sequential narrative. IS THAT CONSIDERED LITERATURE?

Again, I haven't read BLANKETS so I must recuse my comments from addressing it directly. That said, yes - sometimes self-indulgence can be good Art or perhaps we should use Steven Grant's term logo-visual narrative. Arguements have been made that all of Jack Keroauc's books are self-indulgent but good arguements have been made that some of them are great literature. I think the best self-indulgent writing is the kind that goes so far inward that the reader and writer come full circle and discover that they're talking about universal concepts, or issues that all are dealing with.

Is BLANKETS to myopic?
 
 
CameronStewart
04:20 / 09.10.03
Speaking purely as an artist I have to say that Blankets is one of the most beautifully drawn books I've seen in a very long while. Reading it fired up my drawing engines like nothing else I've read recently.

While I can understand that the story is hardly earth-shatteringly significant or original, I did enjoy it, and I think it's a bit much to suggest that it doesn't use the narrative strengths of the medium.

That's as detailed a critique as I can give right now, as I'm off to bed!
 
 
The Falcon
04:26 / 09.10.03
I'm kind of anti-funny talking animals stories. Chunky Rice is hardly unique in this.
 
 
houdini
14:37 / 09.10.03

Well, I really don't care if comics are "literature". I just care if they're any good.

I will say that I think almost all art is flawed. You can find points to improve on in Chaucer, Joyce, Picasso, the Rolling Stones, whatever. I regularly hang out at a local bookstore run by a very belligerent and fiercely intelligent lady and we have great fun with me talking up the good points of writers I like (Mailer, Pynchon, whomever) and her telling me why they're terrible hacks. She rarely offers a criticism I don't accept but that doesn't spoil my enjoyment of 'The Naked And The Dead' or 'The Crying Of Lot 49'.

And it's the same deal with comics. I could offer a laundry list of things that are wrong with The Invisibles, say, but it's still one of my favourite comics of all time.

I think my trouble with the TCJ reviews is that they often focus purely on generating very arch criticism, and at some point I feel that dead horses are being flogged. What is proved by finding every unbecoming (but valid) thing that we can say about a comic? Not much, IMO.

For what it's worth, I think the reviews on NinthArt, which are written for readers not for theorists, are pretty good. They seem much less rigid in their thinking and focussed on that core question: "Is this any good".

Which, when I've read Blankets, I'll have my own opinion on....
 
  
Add Your Reply