Comics

You are currently browsing the archive for the Comics category.

Now there’ll be those folks whose response is: ‘Well, I don’t need you to tell me that all that stuff’s a failure, Mr Ruckley.  I’ve read some of it!’  To them I say: ‘That’s mean.’  But also: ‘You might be right, but I’m talking about something else anyway.’ And: ‘Thanks for calling me ‘Mr. Ruckley’, by the way. That’s unexpectedly and unnecessarily polite of you.’

I was re-reading bits of one of the most interesting comics ever published the other day.  It’s called Understanding Comics, and it’s by Scott McCloud.  It’s a book about comics in the form of a comic, and for those of us who like the comics medium, reading it can be a bit like having a light going on your head. It’s a textbook, a manifesto, a meditation, an analysis, a history.  It explains a lot of what makes comics remarkable and different, and a lot about how they work.  If you like comics and haven’t read it, I prescribe an immediate trip to the library or bookstore to see if you can get your hands on it.  It’s called Understanding Comics and it really can change the way you understand comics.

But that’s beside the point. There’s a lot of Understanding Comics that’s of relevance to any kind of creator, not just those making comics.  What struck me in particular was one statement in the book, and how I might spin it into something worth saying to aspiring writers:

Ask any writer or filmmaker or painter just how much of a given project truly represents what they envisioned it to be. You’ll hear twenty per cent … ten … five … few will claim more than thirty.

That right there is, I think, both profoundly right and perhaps just a wee bit wrong. I’ve written one or two short stories for which I’d probably claim a bit more than 30% accurate representation of what was in my head. You can argue about the merit of what was in my head, of course, but for better or worse what ended up on the page was at least halfway there. I’ve got a feeling there are not a few creators of one sort or another around who’d happily claim over 30% for their stuff.

But broadly speaking? Sure, writing fiction is a tremendously disappointing process. A lot of it is about trying to manage and minimise your own failure in conveying the visions, the ideas, the themes, the sheer wonder that’s sitting right there in your head. Any writer who has high aspirations for their output – I don’t mean financial aspirations, so much as those relating to craft, art or communication – should probably try to get their head around that fact.

Because it’s not a bad thing. It’s not actually about disappointment or failure. It’s just a recognition that all those involved in the creative arts are, in some sense, attempting the flat-out impossible. As Scott McCloud says:

Media convert thoughts into forms that can traverse the physical world and be re-converted by one or more senses back into thoughts.

That right there is a next to impossible ask. Information, sensation, precision, texture is all going to be lost in the process of converting intangible, unbounded mental processes in one unique mind into limited, defined words. It is next to impossible to create a full, precise, unambiguous verbal representation of the infinite complexity of what is happening in your head. And however much of it you do manage to get down on paper is then going to be re-converted into mind-stuff by the reader. Frankly, it’s a miracle we manage to make this whole thing work as well as we do.

None of us, except perhaps I suppose a theoretically possible but improbably lucky few, will ever achieve 100% successful transcription of the magnificence inside our heads. We will fail. In some part, we will fail every single time we sit down to write. I know I have. McCloud again:

The mastery of one’s medium is the degree to which that percentage can be increased, the degree to which the artist’s ideas survive the journey …

And that’s what I’ve got to offer for aspiring writers: You are going to fail. You will never quite reproduce the wonders in your head on the page. Failure is not something to fear, or get hung up about. It’s an inherent part of the process. Pretty much everybody else is failing as well, whether they admit it or not. Your mission (My mission!), should you choose to accept it, is to aspire to fail less. To narrow the margins between what’s inside your head and what’s on the page.

Chances are, you’ll never hit that 100% mark, but there’s a wonderful thing about writing (and, I assume all the other creative arts and crafts): the more you practise, the more you do it, the closer you get. Your percentage will increase, and all you have to do to make that happen is to keep writing, and to take seriously the business of trying to write better.

Believe me, every few ticks upward in that percentage don’t feel anything remotely like failure or disappointment. They feel like gradual, immensely satisfying, success.

P.S. Yes, this post too is a failure. It was brilliant when I first thought of it. One of the best blog posts ever. Not so much now, huh? But it’s fine. Onwards and upwards!

Tags: , ,

I am aware that this is the third Moving Pictures on a Friday post in a row, with no intervening more sensible content appearing on this here blog. Sorry about that. I plead business. Yes, that’s my excuse: business.

I think I can guarantee that some distinctly more substantial content will be along next week, but in the meantime here’s a short film I like quite a bit. Some people are jolly clever.

Malaria from Edson Oda on Vimeo.

Tags: , ,

Belatedly realised it’s been something close to an eternity since I offered an update here on what I’ve been talking about in my comics column over at SF Signal (though I can’t resist mentioning that if you follow me on Twitter, you’ll be more up to date).  So, since last we spoke of it:

I talked about the spectacularly good sf/fantasy epic-in-the-making Saga,

then I talked about the crazy, inspired mad scientist romp that is The Manhattan Projects,

then I talked about the Hellboy-related magnum opus B.P.R.D. Plague of Frogs.

All are speculative fiction of a pretty high order, and well worth a try even if you’re not a regular comics reader.  Especially Saga, which is not only immensely accessible but I predict is going to be drowning in awards in coming months.

As ever, the full extent of my comics-related rambling is preserved for (inflicted upon?) posterity in the Words and Pictures archive over there.

Since I was talking about a comic I stopped reading in my last post, seems only fair to balance that out with a pointer towards one I just started reading.  The good thing about this one is that if you’re so inclined you can read it – as I’ve started doing – entirely free of charge, in the form of a webcomic.

Skullkickers is a mildly bonkers, quite silly, quite violent fantasy comic following the adventures of two not especially bright but admirably determined mercenaries.  It’s pretty simple stuff, but it’s got plenty of energy and is a a diverting read.  Tongues are firmly planted in cheeks here, so I guess your level of enjoyment might vary depending on how in tune with the humour you are, but as with a great many webcomics (although this is technically a print comic adapted to the web), the more you read the more fun you’re likely to find it.

It’s written by Jim Zub and drawn mostly by Edwin Huang (with bits drawn by Chris Stevens, who’s the official ‘co-creator’ of the series).

As a side note, Jim Zub has a very good blog, which occasionally includes fascinatingly frank inside info on the inner workings and creative economics of the comics business.  That’s also where I found out about another graphic novel he’s got online – Makeshift Miracle – which I haven’t read yet so I’ve no idea if it’s good, but it does have absolutely lovely looking art by Shun Hong Chan.

Tags: , , , , ,

Because it’s too good at what it does, that’s why.

Most folks probably know The Walking Dead as a hit TV series chronicling the zombie apocalypse. I guess most of those most folks also know it was a comics series first, and not a few of them have probably read it.

I watched the first series of the TV show and haven’t been back for more, mainly because I just found it a little bit too slow and my time available for TV watching is pretty limited. (Best I can tell from secondhand reports, the second series was yet slower but the third has upped its game considerably – I stand to be corrected by anyone who’s actually watched all that stuff, though).

But I’ve doggedly read a whole heap of the comic series on which this is all based. Over the years, I’ve accumulated 12 trade paperbacks that collect the first 72 single issues; I’m still way behind, since issue #105 or so (?) is currently in the shops. But I don’t think I’ll be buying any more, and I’ve given the reasons why a good deal of thought. So much thought that I predict a lengthy post …

The bottom line is that I find it all too grim. Which might sound rich coming from the author of the Godless World trilogy, in which not a few readers detected a certain grimness. Generally, I don’t mind a bleak tone to my fiction, as either writer or reader, but The Walking Dead has a particular bleakness that I find almost uniquely stressful. I’d almost go so far as to say upsetting, in fact.

Why? Three reasons spring to mind.

1. As the series has gone on and on, patterns and thematic fixations have become apparent that have a cumulative effect to greatly darken the tone of the series. It’s in the nature of long-running serial fiction, to some extent; you have to keep upping the stakes and pushing the limits to achieve the same effect on the readers. Diminishing returns and all that.

In the case of The Walking Dead, the result is a cycle in which glimmers of hope and optimism appear, and are then brutally snuffed out as characters – and readers – learn that no, everything is in fact utterly  dreadful and no matter how bad things are, they can always get worse. More and more extremes of human suffering and cruelty are not only possible but inevitable.

It all ends up saying (to me, at any rate): Hope is illusory; humans are capable of limitless savagery and cruelty; and that savagery and cruelty is going to be consciously used to manipulate the reader’s emotions and engagement. Now, the first two of those statements may be true, and true or not they’re absolutely 100% reasonable and interesting subjects for fictional exploration, though they’re not necessarily a recipe for sustaining a pleasurable reading experience over the long term.

That last statement – about the authorial use of suffering in the context of reader engagement – is much more complicated, and something I feel more ambivalent about, which leads into …

2. The creators – Robert Kirkman and Charlie Adlard – are too good at what they do. My problem is that I’m increasingly uncomfortable with what they’re doing. With the creative choices being made. In fact, that’s a big part of the problem: at some point I became too aware that deliberate, conscious choices were being made, and that on some level I found them … distasteful, is the only word I can think of.

Much of what goes on in The Walking Dead is quite brilliant, as a display of serial comics writing. Kirkman’s use of cliffhangers, twists, reveals, reversals and so on puts much of the rest of the industry to shame.  For a long time, I was dazzled by the remarkable success of the series in creating layered, engaging characters the reader could care about. I still am, really. My problem came with the growing suspicion that the use to which that success was being put was the heightening of the disorientating trauma being inflicted on both those characters and the reader. By always choosing the darkest outcome, the most extreme manifestation of human suffering and cruelty; by making, in some way, the infliction of suffering not only part of the means but at the same time the point of all that effort put into securing reader engagement.

Early on, I thought The Walking Dead was an interesting and challenging exploration of how real people might behave in the face of an apocalypse. (I thought that because it was, and arguably still is).

But it has also come to feel – I’m specifically not saying that it necessarily is, just that it feels to me – like an exercise in the carefully designed physical and psychological torture of characters.  Not for the sake of any larger message or theme, because any such message or theme was fully and convincingly articulated earlier in the series, but for it’s own sake.  Pushing the limits further and further feels redundant.  Indulgent.  Turns out, me no like.  An ever increasing number of folk do like, though, and send that message to the creators unambiguously via the sales figures, so clearly I’m out of tune with a large chunk of readers.  Which is fine.  Tastes vary.  Case in point …

3. My tastes have changed. In part that’s probably just me getting older (boo hoo), but in larger part it’s definitely to do with becoming a parent a few years ago. That change in status abruptly and rather unexpectedly changed the way I respond to all kinds of things (shouldn’t be unexpected, and it wasn’t entirely, but nevertheless I wasn’t quite prepared for the all-pervasive ways in which it affected my emotional responses).

In this context, parenthood not only made me rather less enamoured of relentless bleakness in my fiction, but made me vastly more sensitive to, and uncomfortable with, reading about the suffering of children. And children suffer a whole lot in The Walking Dead. They kill and get killed. They undergo acute and extreme psychological trauma that has believably major effects on their behaviour and personalities. That believability is a big part of the problem for me; it’s a tribute to the quality of the writing (again) that it all feels just too plausibly real. It’s not fun, in other words, for the big softie I have become.

(This is the same reason, incidentally, why I have not either seen or read The Road movie or book. Both might be brilliant, and not nearly as stress-inducing as I fear, but the subject matter just doesn’t appeal.)

Oh, and a fourth, rather specific reason occurs to me.

4. Spoilers. I’m generally pretty unaffected by spoilers – I don’t go out of my way to avoid them. But The Walking Dead is conclusive proof that spoilers can have big effects, because a specific one pretty much triggered my final decision to stop reading the series.

It became obvious from even the most casual perusal of comics websites that the landmark 100th issue of the series, which came out late last year, features a peculiarly brutal, graphic and extreme scene. That in itself wasn’t a surprise (see above point about the need to keep upping the stakes to achieve the same effect); what was a surprise was the number of people I saw online – hardened, appreciative long-term readers of The Walking Dead – commenting on just how disturbing and distressing that scene was.

Which is what it was meant to be, of course, and given the considerable skills of the creators concerned I’m not surprised they delivered on that intent. But I was already uncomfortable with what I was reading in The Walking Dead, and with that pervasive intent itself, so knowing something like that was on the horizon became the straw that broke the camel’s back. I more or less literally thought to myself: ‘I’m not enjoying this any more, and it’s only going to get worse.  Therefore I should stop.’

So I’m done. At least until my heart hardens once more, and I re-acquire a stomach strong enough for what The Walking Dead is serving up.  Good luck to all those still enjoying the series.  I still think it’s a remarkable accomplishment, I understand its appeal and addictive qualities, and I genuinely think its success is deserved.  But it’s no longer for me.

Perversely, this might even prompt me to revisit the TV series, because I don’t for one second believe they can possibly push things as far, and into such staggeringly dark places, on the TV screens of America as the comic has gradually done.  It just might be that that kind of watered-down Walking Dead is what my palate needs these days.

Tags:

Nobody much likes Mondays, right?  Well, not most people anyway.

Here’s three little things from the internet that might entertain or interest you, to compensate for the fact that the next weekend is once again as far away as it’s ever going to get.

First, an audio short storyBullet in the Brain is by Tobias Wolff, and was published in The New Yorker.  In this podcast right here, it’s read and discussed.  It’s by some distance my favourite story out of those I listened to when going through my ‘listen to all The New Yorker‘s story podcasts’ phase a year or two ago.  Beautifully written, terrifically clever, yet really quite short and simple.  In fact, I might have to go listen to it again myself once I’m done with this post …

Second, a tumblr that made me smileDiana Prince’s Diary is a masterful little bit of whimsy.  Diana Prince is, for anyone who doesn’t know, Wonder Woman’s identity in mundane society.  Bridget Jones’ Diary is, for anyone who doesn’t know … well, everyone knows what Bridget Jones’ Diary is, right?  So, this tumblr is a melding of the two: Wonder Woman’s diary in the pitch-perfect tone and style of Bridget Jones.  V. funny.

And third, participatory democracy at its very best.  The Whitehouse has an official online petition system, whereby if enough people (currently 25,000) sign a petition the authorities are required to give a formal considered response to the request their citizens are making.  So, at the time of writing, just over 23,000 more signatures are required to force the US Government to reveal its position on the proposal to ‘Establish a new legal system of motorcycle-riding ‘Judges’ who serve as police, judge, jury and executioner all in one’.  Sounds like a plausible idea to me, though I can foresee one or two pitfalls.  Come to think of it, it sounds like a vaguely familiar idea …  Splendid.

(the Diana Prince tumblr via Comics Beat, the Judge Dredd petition via Bleeding Cool)

Tags: , , , , , ,

I did an interview/conversation thing, for SF Signal, with one of the UK’s most multi-talented writers of speculative fiction: Paul Cornell, who has at various times turned his hand to TV, novel and comic-writing with highly successful results.  He’s probably best-known for his involvement with the world of Dr Who, but he has a great many other strings to his bow, and it’s those other strings that the conversation’s about.  Head on over there to witness the discussion.

Tags:

It’s been a while since I mentioned here, on this bloggy thing, that when I want to mention comics I generally go elsewhere.  Specifically, I go to SF Signal and my Words and Pictures column there.

It’s been such a big while since it mentioned it, in fact, that in the intervening period four columns have emerged.  Several of them are – unusually for me – actually about superheroes, which a lot folk seem to assume comics are always about anyway:

Gotham Central and All-Star Superman (recentish high points in the comics careers of Batman and Superman)

Walking Dead (not about superheroes, that one, as you probably guessed)

Demon Knights (sort of a superhero comic, but really it’s a heroic/epic fantasy riffing on The Magnificent Seven)

Catwoman (who’s technically a supervillian, I suppose.  But not really.)

As ever, these and all previous instalments are available in the vault-like Words and Pictures archive.

Tags: , , , ,

Another couple of posts have gone up over at SF Signal since I last mentioned my comics-focused Words and Pictures column here:

First a look at a pleasingly bonkers, and satisfyingly concise, manga series by Nobuaki Tadano: 7 Billion Needles. It’s based on a 1950 sf story by Hal Clement, but is very much modern manga sf/horror of a cosmic sort.

Second, what I suspect is probably the most intricate, intimate sf comic currently being published in the US: the fascinating, unique and almost indescribable Finder, by Carla Speed McNeil.

As ever, the full extent of my waffling about comics can be found in the handy Word and Pictures archive.

Tags: , , ,

A couple of posts have gone up in my Words & Pictures column over at SF Signal in the last few weeks.

First, one on web/digital comics, talking about three free comics that are only a click or two away from your eyeballs: Abominable Charles Christopher, Lady Sabre and Valentine.

Second, one notionally about the Best Graphic Story nominations for the 2012 Hugo Awards, but mostly about the wondrous Locke & Key, than which there are not many better comics imho.

Tags: , , , ,

« Older entries