I thank the all-star comment thread for sharing their thoughts and salute the great cartoonists who have done strips for the New York Times, and now we will close this thread and look forward to a glorious 2008.

I’d very respectfully disagree with you about Winsor McKay. Have you seen his “Rarebit Fiends” strips? Some of those are hysterically funny. The “So Many Splendid Sundays” Nemo book has some real guffaws in it.

Mind you it’s humor from nearly a century ago, but it holds up pretty well.

The connection between the two is pretty clear, as Larson continues the tradition of playing with the very nature of the reality of the strip, breaking the fourth wall (or is that the third wall for 2d rendering?) and generally madcap work.

That’s not only absurd, it’s not even a sentence.

You’re tap-dancing in this thread is really pretty funny. You wrote a petty piece about artists whose work is, frankly, of a far greater quality than yours. Are you entitled to that opinion, of course. Am I entitled to think you come across as shrill, unpleasant and crass, of course. Crying censor, quoting the dictionary at people, claiming other just aren’t ‘getting’ what you said, please. You sound no different than the typical internet troll spoiling for a fight.

As for elitism, that doesn’t even make sense. Do you even understand how much you sound like the very right-wing demagogues you rail against with reactions like that. People who criticize you get a a label slapped on them. You’re all liberals…I mean elitists.

I think it’s very entertaining to see so many smart and talented people (like the amazing COOP) come out swinging at your nonsense. You have every right to your opinion Ted. And we have every right to think you an ass for it.

Kim Thompson Says:
12/28/07 at 7:32 pm

In the spirit of holiday generosity I will not submit the suggestion that Shannon Wheeler belongs in this company to the detailed mocking it so richly deserves.

What other newspaper publishes art cartoonists regularly?! Unorthodx art cartoonists you see no where else? None! What papers published Sutton and Tomorrow? A bunch!

Its a special thing. Its not the Reuben Awards and its not who gets into Comics Heaven. Its a special thing for alt toons.

Indeed, as someone mentioned, Tom Tomorrow and the like are not graphic novelists. I have never even seen him tell a story. Those are political cartoonists for the most part, or comic strippers (?). The New York Times is getting storytellers, and likewise its getting storytellers who would appeal to thier readers, mainly ones of extremely quiet, way of life, New Yorkey, literary guys. The comic equivalent of a John Cheever or a J.D. Salinger.

As for superheroes and manga, the first one gets more play than it ever needed or deserved. If superheroes dropped off of the Earth right now, there would be still more material than one would know what to do with. Manga tends to be Japanese, and the closest thing we have to a truly great acclaimed Manga artist would be Scott O’Malley, and calling him that is short changing him.

I think the stories feel similar because there’s a tendency to lump all alt-cartoonists into one category, which is of course silly. It would be like lumping Frank Miller with Jeff Smith just because they both made superheroes. Mister Wonderful is poignant, but it never reaches the sadness of Chris Ware’s ‘Building Stories’.

Ted does have a point –Ted actually almost always does have a point until he gets carried away– that in terms of general tone the five stories so far map similar terrain in terms of emotion, pacing, etc. (An unkind person might use the word “mopey.”) I’m not sure if this is deliberate, or just luck of the draw as the editors picked their favorite cartoonists and had their work skew that way (Jaime’s story was unusually subdued, for instance)… although Jason’s “Low Moon,” which will follow Clowes in the Spring, is entirely different, and I’m sure Marjane Satrapi (who turned them down) would have been quite different as well.

In the spirit of holiday generosity I will not submit the suggestion that Shannon Wheeler belongs in this company to the detailed mocking it so richly deserves.

Incidentally, there is not a goddamn thing stopping the cartoonists Ted cites from working up a proposal and sending it to the NEW YORK TIMES SUNDAY MAGAZINE editor if they are so inclined, but my guess is that Ward Sutton and Tom Tomorrow’s reaction to this whole controversy is “huh?”

“And the way he equates all of the artists in the Times thus far: Ware, Clowes, Seth, Kelso, Hernandez, Clowes — has been silly. Those are six pretty different cartoonists”

Those are five, not six, you fucking pot head. Ted Rall wins!

Eric Reynolds Says:
12/27/07 at 6:18 pm

” he’s wrong and can go fuck himself.”

Ted, I’m sorry your daddy didn’t love you enough, and other cartoonists are more talented/successful/critically respected than you. Do yourself and the rest of the world a favor, get over it, and quit writing these embarrassing screeds.

While I wouldn’t argue the point the way Ted Rall does, I often wonder if the shine comics have at the moment will go away when people realize the stories told aren’t that interesting or inspiring. It reminds me of BR Meyers’ notorious essay in “Atlantic Monthly” a few years back about the stale, plot-less “literary fiction” that dominates bookstore shelves, while Tom Clancy and Stephen King eat up the bestseller lists. More genre fiction isn’t the answer, of course, but more compelling, gotta-find-out-what-happens-next storytelling is.

And beyond that, we also need comics storytelling that addresses our burning questions, that we can relate to, and that thrills in some way, like all the greatest works of literature do.

Although I’ve never read Craig Thompson’s “Blankets” I’ve heard from several different people that if the book were a regular prose novel it would have been standard, predictable, and not a bestseller. So what set it apart was the fact that it was a comic. Particularly, a comic that wasn’t pedestrian or juvenile as most mainstream readers expect comics to be. Like I said, that kind of shine can only last so long before people realize that there’s no substance underneath.

And before I get personally sniped myself, I should say that this criticism isn’t levied wholesale at the NYT Funny Pages comics. Seth’s contribution, for example, was firmly “literary fiction” but it made us look at what a life is worth, especially when it’s ending, and whether we are judged by our accomplishments or the people who remember us. Finely wrought stuff, with nary a self-deprecating unlucky-in-love loser in sight.

But Ted Rall’s reaction to the NYT section makes sense, especially when you see that most of whom they’ve published so far are those media darling comics artists who tend to always look inward rather than some of the others he mentions who try to reach out to all the rest of us.

I’m not exactly sure which way this sarcasm is aimed? Is it directed at people who can’t appreciate certain artistic work, or is it aimed at the prententious concept that “art” should be free to be boring and pointless?

Mike

Here’s the first part:

Well did you hear, there’s a natural order?
Those most deserving will end up with the most?
That the cream cannot help but always rise up to the top,

Well I say,… “Shit floats”.

Click here for the rest of the song lyrics:

http://www.lyricspy.com/167573/Jarvis_Cocker_lyrics/Running_The_World_lyrics.html

I couldn’t help but think of that when I read the “cream rises to the top” line.

All of which seems to fit into Rall’s definition of “crapulent lot”.

Mike

Can we get some sort of language police to ban the use of this phrase for the rest of time? I mean, has there been any other cliche to be more consistently refuted by reality than this? Especially when concerning something, like getting space in the New York Times or winning a Nobel Peace Prize or the one for Literature, where personal relationships and political/cultural agendas obviously play such a large role.

Mike

Boy (middle-age man) gets tricked and robbed by crack whore and is grateful for it; boy has angry imp who hovers over him while spouting cynical commentary; boy’s memories and fantasies are represented in three different drawing styles; boy gets in dramatic fist-fight with homeless man -