03.28.09 - BELOVED WRITER, ME 

Since there will be no CAPE this year in Dallas, I'm going to Comicpalooza in Houston for Free Comic Book Day. I just mailed my artist alley application.

We have to write our own bios for the convention website. I tend to be a straight forward bio person: "David wrote this, this, and this. He won this award and this one. He teaches English and Creative Writing. He lives in Arlington with his daughter."

On guest section of their website, it's amusing to read inflated phrases like "critically acclaimed" (used three times), "is quickly developing into a comic creator worth watching," and "a writer to keep your eye on." All awards are "prestigious awards." All work is "distinctive." Someone is "famous for his stunning work" on whatever. One person's career is "amazing," and another person created "legendary" characters.

I think I'm going to be "beloved" in my bio. That sounds nice.


03.23.09 - IT'S A DALLAS THING 

It's that time again. Paul Milligan and I have our comic SOUVENIR OF DALLAS featured in the April 2009 issue of D Magazine. This one is titled "Lost in Victory Park." (click here)

The new D Magazine website now makes the print content more readily available. I recommend taking time to browse through and read some of the great writing. I particularly like:

The Spectacularly Incompetent Bonnie & Clyde by Jeff Guinn
Evangelical Bodybuilders Saved My Son's Soul by Tim Rogers
Don’t Bum Rush the Bushes: How not to get shot by the Secret Service and other tips for living with an ex-president by Trey Garrison

Yesterday, I emailed my editors about the June issue. If the topic is approved, it will be... interesting. More information coming soon.


03.19.09 - THIS WEEKEND IN COMIC-FRIENDLY DALLAS 

It's a good weekend for people who like comics.

First, Zeus Comics is having a 35% off Spring Break Madness sale through March 24th. This sale applies to all toys, statues, back issues, and graphic novels, basically everything except new release comics. These discounts are also available through their online store.

Second, on Friday, the DMA's Late Night Art Bytes session will focus on comic books and technology. It's an open mic event of sorts, a forum for tech savvy creators to share their work with peers and the community. Each presenter receives a few minutes to show their work and engage in a short question-and-answer session. The event coordinator Dan Langendorf invited me to share, along with Kristian Donaldson, Jake Ekiss, Matthew Warlick, and Vinh-Luan Luu. I don't know what I'm going to share yet. Maybe how it takes 1,000 emails to create ASTRONAUT DAD?

Dallas Museum of Art - Tech Lab, Center for Creative Connections
1717 N. Harwood St. Dallas, TX 75201
9:30 - 10:30 p.m
$10 General Admission (parking not included)

General admission is for the DMA's Late Night event (which includes Art Bytes). If you haven't been before, well worth it. However, I'd recommend not parking at the DMA. There's a parking garage nearby that is much cheaper. Or if you're willing to drive around to find a meter, and walk the few blocks, that would be the best way to go.

Third, on Saturday, Heroes4Heroes and ArtLoveMagic will host a night of live art and music at Poor David's Pub. Artists will have original art and prints for sale at the show. Featured artists will be Mitch Breitweiser (Captain America, Hulk, Fantastic Four) and Eric 'Ebas' Basaldua (Witchblade/Devi, Darkness, Tomb Raider).

Heroes4Heroes Live Art Show
Poor David's Pub
1313 South Lamar St., Dallas, Texas 75215
7:00pm - 11:00pm
$5 at the door (parking not included)

All money earned will benefit Heroes4Heroes, a non-profit organization that provides comics, DVDs, and other portable media to U.S. soldiers stationed around the world.


03.15.09 - ON THE OTHER HAND 

My last post didn't completely sit well with me. I read it, and read it again. Something felt off. I absolutely agree with everything I wrote, but the tone and my enthusiasm to defend my college degree was slightly misguided. Let me add two more ideas for balance:

(1) Like with relationships, writing requires hard work, but if it's only hard work, something is wrong. Study and develop your craft, but there is an element to writing that can't be studied or quantified. Look at Shakespeare. For hundreds of years, scholars have tried to pick apart Shakespeare to understand what made him so good. Genuine passion, wit, humor, drama, how do you quantify such things? There is a zen quality to people who master their craft, who love what they do. It can't be fully explained. To quote Kung Fu Panda: "There is no secret ingredient." Yes, I did reference Shakespeare and Kung Fu Panda in this paragraph. Bonus points.

(2) Love. "If you are going to dedicate your life to writing, then it should require a lifetime of work." It should also require a lifetime of love. I'm not afraid of that word. Couples dance around the word like it's an indictment on their better judgment. Love. Love. Love. Love. You shouldn't be afraid to love. You should write because you love it. There is no need to explain or justify that love. You love seeing the right combination of words, the right moment with a character or a decision he or she has to make. You love seeing a story move and take shape. A jealous love. A love that endures all things.

There you go. I'm completely fascinated, bi-polar, and nutty about the writing process.


03.14.09 - BEGIN WHERE MATISSE BEGAN 

A few nights ago, April and I were reading the most recent issue of American Artist magazine. On pages 58-59, we came across a section that resonated with both of us in our respective creative fields. Article by Daniel Grant on the work of Ben Aronson:
Although he was diligent about producing his own art on the side, Aronson had a hard time marketing his work. Galleries initially weren't interested and many university art departments turned him down for teaching positions. Traditional skills and traditional subjects were becoming more the exception than the rule at a growing number of art schools, replaced by an emphasis on theory and new media. "I think I was passed over because what I brought to the table was, in many cases, an indictment of what those schools' programs were about," Aronson observes.

"There were a lot of cutting-edge art happening, and students didn't want to hear that it was going to take years to learn how to draw. I hear aspiring painters say, 'I'm beginning where Matisse left off,' and I often suggest to them, 'Maybe you'd do well to begin where Matisse began.' There are fundamental things that don't change with style and time. I think it's important to rephrase the timeless and universal objectives of art using your own voice and style. You find students who went through an art-school experience that was more like recess -- and perhaps had a wonderful time but didn't really learn anything -- coming out of those programs with huge student loans and not even the basic training to take illustration jobs to help them pay back those loans. It has done a lot of art students a tremendous disservice."
I'm fortunate that in college I took a variety of writing classes. I learned technical writing, journalistic writing, and creative writing. I took classes in modern grammar and linguistics. I read the ELEMENTS OF STYLE (Strunk and White) and ON WRITING WELL (Zinsser) as if it were holy scripture. I had professors go line by line, terrorizing my work with a red pen. My department head told me I was taking too many writing classes. (He wanted me to add more literature to my degree plan.) When I started writing comics, I pursued it with the same care. The ghosts of my English professors scrutinized every script. It's not necessary to have a college degree to be a writer, but it still may take years to learn how to write. There are fundamentals, timeless and universal objectives. If you are going to dedicate your life to writing, then it should require a lifetime of work.

I'm certainly not where I want to be, still searching for my voice and continually in awe of other writers.


03.10.09 - WATCHMEN TALK ON FANBOY RADIO 

A new episode of Fanboy Radio is available (click here, #505).

Scott, Oliver, and I saw WATCHMEN, and we have opinions. Callers also have opinions. Opinions are flying everywhere. Listen for yourself. SPOILER HEAVY.


03.09.09 - STAPLE REPORT 

I need to say something about STAPLE. This past weekend, April and I packed the car and drove to Austin -- in part to celebrate April's birthday with some of her old cohorts, but also to participate in the 5th annual STAPLE! Independent Media Expo. I'm five for five. (previous reports: year one, year two, year three, year four) I asked April what I should comment on. She replied:
"You could say that Jeffrey Brown was there and your girlfriend has a crush on him? Because he is a beardy, self-deprecating Midwesterner? Your table was in a better location this year? There should be better promotion of the event? The djs at the Live Art event were awesome?"
Thanks April. I think. Okay, Jeffrey Brown. Apparently, my girlfriend has a crush on him. I should have seen it coming. Last year at STAPLE, I bought April a few Jeffrey Brown books. She read and enjoyed them. I've been trying to get April hooked on comics, and he seems to be her gateway drug. In keeping with tradition, I bought another (LITTLE THINGS) this year. Jeffrey signed it for her. He's a nice guy. We certainly need more super star indie/alternative/small press guests at STAPLE. James Kochalka, Scott Morse, Andy Runton, Matt Kindt, Derek Kirk Kim, Alex Robinson, Jamie S. Rich, Chynna Clugston, Christine Norrie, Brian Lee O'Malley, Hope Larson, Raina Telgemeier, Dave Roman -- where are you?

My table was in a good location, right across from Top Shelf. I also sold more books this year than ever before. I was a little worried, since I didn't have anything new, except for the mini-comic MINE ALL MINE. However, everything sold well, comics and graphic novels alike. I also handed out fliers to promote POPGUN VOL. 3. To anyone I met in Austin, if you're visiting my site for the first time, please post a comment and say "hello." Everyone was friendly. With table fees, gas, food expenses, etc. I have yet to break even, but with more people reading my work and a chance to share a table with Paul Milligan, I'm content.


In general, I'd give this year a big thumbs up. Of course, those who sit behind the booth always have opinions on how to make it better. Not that Uncle Staple is asking for my input, but I'll give it all the same. STAPLE needs more advertising. I'm sure those in charge would reply with "we're doing everything possible." Just like every person behind the steering wheel is convinced they are a good driver, every event organizer is convinced they've done "everything possible" with advertising. And yet, in Austin? An event like STAPLE should have three times as many attendees. Would a billboard make a difference? More posters? More postcards? A more active street team? A radio ad? A full page ad in the Austin Chronicle? Promotional coupons at Waterloo and Book People? With increased advertising costs, it pains me to say, they should charge about $5 more for next year's booths. The cost of admission has held steady at $5 for five years, it needs to be $10. That extra money should go directly to advertising. Maybe include a short film festival or a live band, and you've got something to justify the price increase. I have a great amount of respect for Uncle Staple. My advice is my own. Take it or leave it.

STAPLE has the best live art shows. This year was particularly fun. The hip hop group (name escapes me) was a nice addition. The DJ's were insanely good, even if it was a little loud for my aging ears. The Red 7 venue was great. As far as the art goes, some folks are better at these events than others. Artists like Jim Mahfood and Dave Crosland, with some style and personality, are particularly well suited for these events. Nick Derington, Kristian Donaldson, and Evan Bryce shined, but I may be biased.

Other reports on STAPLE:
Evan Bryce | Dead Squirrel Girl | Dylan Edwards | Allee | Jake Ekiss | Vinh-Luan Luu | Randy Lander

Photo sets:
frankturro | Vinh-Luan Luu | antihero comics | Nate Bramble | John Sitton | Toby Craig

Video:
TexasGeekTV


03.05.09 - OAK CLIFF PEOPLE AND WATCHMEN 

If you're not tired of WATCHMEN or me talking about Alan Moore, here's a discussion Josh Rose, the fellows at Boomstick Comics, and I participated in for Oak Cliff People newspaper: What is it About Watchmen?


It was a good conversation. Although, at times, I wish they didn't transcribe it word for word. Then you'd avoid quotable gems like this:

"There’s a weird sort of, like, power, like sexual power over the predator type of thing."

Really? Did I say that?


03.04.09 - IN DEFENSE OF ALAN MOORE 

Despite the subject line, Alan Moore doesn't need anyone to defend him. Moore speaks his own ideas and opinions clearly. Unlike Andy Warhol or Salvador Dali, there's little need to spend your time interpreting what he's all about. Moore is fairly what-you-see-is-what-you-get. However, last Friday, Paul Milligan and I got into a friendly debate/discussion/bar fight over recent statements made by Alan Moore. The argument could be broken down into basic point/counter point. Paul: "Alan Moore is a genius, but he's a douchebag." Me: "Alan Moore is a genius. He is not a douchebag."

The douchebag camp presents two bits of evidence (1) Alan Moore makes anti-American statements even though the American comic book industry helped launch his career. (2) Alan Moore willingly accepts Hollywood's money, then he continually complains about Hollywood.

The non-douchebag camp (me) offers this in response: (1) From interviews on Fanboy Radio, Indie Spinner Rack, and various ones throughout YouTube, he comes across as a kind-hearted, even fatherly, individual. (2) I really want to believe he's not a douchebag.

I'll admit the friendly debate did not go my way. It ended with me plugging my ears and saying, "La, la, la, I'm not listening. La, la, la" until Paul gave up. Now that I've had a few days to think on it, I'd like to elaborate.

Concerning the anti-American statement:
"And I wonder—perhaps this is being too simplistic, I don't know, but I wonder if the root of the emergence of the superhero in American culture might have something to do with a kind of an ingrained American reluctance to engage in confrontation without massive tactical superiority. I mean—does the term 7/7 mean anything to you at all?

During the 7/7 bombings over here, it was announced a couple days later that as soon as the first two trains had gone up, all of the American forces that were in London were recalled to safe distance outside the M24 orbital motorway. After a few days, when they realized that it was safe to go back into London, they realized also that it looked kind of bad, sort of rushing out of the capital at the first sign of any trouble when the main reason for the bombing was England's support of America in the Iraq war.

It does seem to me that massive tactical superiority might be a key to the superhero phenomenon. That, if it's a military situation, then you've got carpet bombing from altitude, which is kind of the equivalent of having come from Krypton as a baby and to have gained unusual strength and the ability to fly because of Earth's lesser gravity. I don't know, that may be a simplistic interpretation, but that's the way I tend to see superheroes today."
In another interview (cited here), he says...
"America has an inordinate fondness for the unfair fight. That’s why I believe guns are so popular in America – because you can ambush people, you can shoot them in the back, you can behave in a very cowardly fashion. Friendly fire, or as we call it everywhere else in the world, American fire."
Alan Moore admits his own understanding may be too simplistic, and he does have a legitimate complaint about the 7/7 bombings.

I'd be the first to point out that if we're digging through America's culture and history, we could just as easily point a finger at our paternal origins, the British Empire. Massive tactical superiority? (ahem) We learned it from watching you.

But this isn't really the point, I don't want to debate the cultural impact of our military history. The issue is Alan Moore's critique of America. But why focus on the statement he made to WIRED? What about the statement he made with Watchmen itself? Watchmen is one huge frickin' critique of America. Why should the interview make him a douchebag, but the comic book make him a genius? While we're at it, Huckleberry Finn is a critique of America, so is Grapes of Wrath, Crucible, and the Great Gatsby.

A critique doesn't automatically make him anti-American or a douchebag. It makes him a writer with an opinion. To dub him "anti-American" is too broad a stroke. Unless we can quote him as saying something a little more hostile, I see his statements as pretty standard from any politically-minded European.

What about his apparent hatred of American-based publisher DC? Is he showing douchebag levels of ingratitude? I'd say it's okay for him to hold a grudge. From always reliable Wikipedia:
Moore says he left DC in 1989 due to the language in his contracts for Watchmen and his V for Vendetta series with artist David Lloyd. Moore felt the reversion clauses were ultimately meaningless, because DC did not intend to let the publications go out of print. He told The New York Times in 2006, "I said, 'Fair enough,' [...] 'You have managed to successfully swindle me, and so I will never work for you again.'"
Of course, when Jim Lee sold Wildstorm to DC, Alan Moore was working for DC again whether he liked it or not.

To his credit, he loves Top Shelf.

I guess whenever someone achieves his level of acclaim we expect them to be so gosh darn grateful. All the time. Isn't that why people love the Oscars? To see successful people gush their humble appreciation for every single person who ever helped them along.

The Hollywood issue. The argument goes like this: if you directly or indirectly benefit from Hollywood, you have little room to complain. It's hypocritical. Here's a quote from Alan Moore:
"Originally I was content to just simply accept the money, that was offered when people had adapted my comic books into films. Eventually I decided to refuse to accept any of the money for the films, and to ask if my name could be taken off of them, so that I no longer had to endure the embarrasment of seeing my work travested in this manner. The first film that they made of my work was 'From Hell' Which was an adaptation of my 'Jack the Ripper' narrative... In which they replaced my gruff Dorset police constable with Johhny Depp's Absinthe-swigging dandy. The next film to be made from one of my books was the regrettable 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen'... Where the only resemblance it had to my book was a similar title. The most recent film that they have made of mine is apparently this new 'V for Vendetta' movie which was probably the final straw between me and Hollywood. They were written to be impossible to reproduce in terms of cinema, and so why not leave them simply as a comic in the way that they were intended to be. And if you are going to make them into films, please try to make them into better ones, than the ones I have been cursed with thus far." - From the BBC2 show The Culture Show (9 March 2006)
I don't know. I can sympathize with Moore. I have little interest in Hollywood. If I wanted to be part of the movie industry, I'd write a screenplay, but instead I write comic book scripts. Still, if a producer offered me money, I'd probably take it. From one standpoint, it can't take away from what I've done with the comic -- but then again, if it's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, it might feel like a slap in the face to have them ignore so much of the source material. These Hollywood types are always convinced they know how to best adapt a comic book or novel. In the case of a comic book writer, it's not just you turning down or accepting the option check from Hollywood. You have a publisher, and you have an artist -- both with gaping mouths, wanting to be fed. The pressure to say "yes" must be tremendous. He got his money. He requested his name be removed from the credits. If he wants to complain about a movie, why not? Just because you vote a guy into office, doesn't mean you have to agree with everything he does.

Is Alan Moore a douchebag? Maybe this blog did more to prove Paul's point than mine? ("La, la, la, not listening...") I call it THE LENNON FACTOR. John Lennon was a genius. He was quirky and outspoken. He had an awesome beard. He's also been accused of being a douchebag. However, in my heart of hearts, I think it's too easy to label him as such.

Paul, we may have to agree to disagree on this one, especially if you're right.


Blogger (atom | rss | archives)
Comments by: Echo | Art by: Dave Crosland





© 2003-2010
back | top