| |
|
So I finally got round to reading this. It's strange that for a book so thick, I felt it ended up feeling a little thin.
Working my way through the book, I felt as if I was constantly waiting for what it had to say - what point was it getting to? - and in the end there wasn't really much there other than "it is like this. this is what it is like. like this" and so on. I think I would have been endlessly frustrated by it if I'd got it as single issues...
I appreciate the deliberate-ness of it all, and presenting this sort of thing from narrow and singular perspectives. But I couldn't help but feel like I was constantly waiting for something, what was the point, y'know? (Which I concede, may well be the point). But for me, I felt like Burns enthusiasm for his own idea constantly outweighed the interesting things that could be done with it, and consequently gets the reader beaten over the head with repetition.
But all this sounds as if I really hated it, which isn't the case at all. I just mean to say, I can totally see where sleaze is coming from with this. There's a lot I like about this book, and the way it goes about saying it what it has to say feels very reminescent of the types of genre's its drawing from.
The art is almost intensely meticulous. Lines that look too sharp to have been drawn by hand.
"Somehow he has managed to capture the essential electricity of comic-book pop-art iconography, dragging it from the clutches of Fine Art back to the service of his perfect, precise-but-elusive narratives in a way that is both universal in its instant appeal and deeply personal."
This quote seems to make perfect sense with regard to the art, and the story as a whole. Kind of like if you took an ambiguous Pettibon panel and blew it up to a whole story. That feels key to the whole thing, to me. You could have any one panel blown up, and it could hint at a whole bunch of things, and pretty much work on it's own.
Although personally I have problems with this deliberate and chunky style a little. It all feels very split, with the narrative at points isolated from what is being depicted. I prefer my comics to... build a little more. By which I mean panel after panel after panel hits you, the image gets bigger in yr mind. The connections between them all. I didn't feel like this was in evidence here.
The layouts are so laboured (although at times beautiful) that I feel this sort of effect is negated, in a sense. It's all there, but it's so strict. It hits in chunks rather than growing in to something massive. It's not always like this, there are moments near the end where it feels like everything is coming together, and I think some of the narration is very nice. It's got a nice clear style.
I'm not a fan of the letters, I have to admit. And I think that's a strong problem in this sort of disconnect. I felt at times distracted by them, rather than them being an organic and natural part of the art. It just doesn't flow for me. (Although I did appreciate the moment of wandering through the woods on a bad trip).
I admit some of these problems are personal, and related to what I expect and enjoy in my comics. I've got a lot of respect for this work, and the clear intent behind it. Just at times that very deliberate nature, the strictness behind what the author wants, is a bit at odds with what I like to see in comics. |
|
|
