TCJ Top 100
Arthur van Kruining
so I'll do it for them (and add a few comments).
<HYPE>
THE TOP 100 COMICS OF THE CENTURY
As selected by the editorial board of THE COMICS JOURNAL
Fantagraphics Books is proud to present a very special issue of The
Comics Journal. For those unfamiliar, The Comics Journal has been the
most respected source for literary criticism of the comic book and
comic strip medium for 23 years, since its founding by Fantagraphics
Books President Gary Groth in 1976. This "Top 100" list - inspired in
part by similar end-of-the-century lists prepared for film and
literature - is an effort to raise awareness of the artform of comics
and spark a national dialogue to ensure that the great works in comics
are not lost to history. It includes only English-language works
published this century - the magazine's primary realm of interest -
be they newspaper strips, comic books, graphic novels, editorial
cartoons, or even caricatures.
"Very few art forms have as polluted a sense of history as comics,"
writes Comics Journal Executive Editor Tom Spurgeon in his
introduction to the feature. "When the past is lauded, it is for its
contribution to the present-day project or icon rather than the works
themselves. Moreover, the typical way of accessing the art form is
through items of complete disposability: the daily newspaper, or the
monthly serial comic book_ This list is a call for an uncompromising
re-examination of the comics medium in terms of its best works.
"We also hope that this list will foster a larger process, whereby art
is consistently and thoroughly examined and re-examined_ for as long
as there are works to consider," added Spurgeon.
This special issue of the Journal also includes lists from top
cartoonists such as R. Crumb and Jules Feiffer assessing their
favorite comics of the century. Special features include lists from
regular Journal columnists on their particular areas of interest:
mainstream comic books, newspaper comic strips and European translation
projects are all covered.
THE COMICS JOURNAL's "TOP 100 COMICS of the CENTURY"
#210 ; Street date: March 24, 1999 ; $7.95; $10.95 in Canada ; 152
pages ; UPC: 0 74470 74114 5 ; Available at comic book specialty
stores everywhere and selected newsstands
Featuring an original cover by Seth, creator of It's a Good Life if
You Don't Weaken and Palookaville (Drawn & Quarterly Publications)
The Comics Journal's Top 100 Comics of the Century
1) Krazy Kat by George Herriman
2) Peanuts by Charles Schulz
3) Pogo by Walt Kelly
4) Maus by Art Spiegelman
5) Little Nemo in Slumberland by Winsor McCay
6) Feiffer by Jules Feiffer
7) Donald Duck by Carl Barks
8) Mad by Harvey Kurtzman & various
9) Binky Brown Meets the Holy Virgin Mary by Justin Greene
10) The Weirdo stories of R. Crumb
11) Thimble Theatre by E.C. Segar
12) EC's "New Trend" war comics by Harvey Kurtzman & various
13) Wigwam Bam by Jaime Hernandez
14) Blood of Palomar by Gilbert Hernandez
15) The Spirit by Will Eisner
16) RAW, edited by Art Spiegelman & Francoise Mouly
17) The ACME Novelty Library by Chris Ware
18) Polly & Her Pals by Cliff Sterret
19) The sketchbooks of R. Crumb
20) Uncle Scrooge by Carl Barks
21) The New Yorker cartoons of Peter Arno
22) The Death of Speedy Ort=EDz by Jaime Hernandez
23) Terry and the Pirates by Milton Caniff
24) Flies on the Ceiling by Jaime Hernandez
25) Wash Tubbs by Roy Crane
26) The Jungle Book by Harvey Kurtzman
27) Palestine by Joe Sacco
28) The "Mishkin" saga by Kim Deitch
29) Gasoline Alley by Frank King
30) Fantastic Four by Jack Kirby & Stan Lee
31) Poison River by Gilbert Hernandez
32) Plastic Man by Jack Cole
33) Dick Tracy by Chester Gould
34) The theatrical caricatures of Al Hirschfeld
35) The Amazing Spider-Man by Steve Ditko & Stan Lee
36) Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson
37) Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau
38) The autobiographical comics from Yummy Fur by Chester Brown
39) The editorial cartoons of Pat Oliphant
40) The Kinder-Kids by Lyonel Feininger
41) From Hell by Alan Moore & Eddie Campbell
42) Ghost World by Daniel Clowes
43) Amphigorey by Edward Gorey
44) Idiots Abroad by Gilbert Shelton & Paul Mavrides
45) Paul Auster's City of Glass by Paul Karasik & David Mazzacchelli
46) Cages by Dave McKean
47) The "Buddy Bradley" saga by Peter Bagge
48) The cartoons of James Thurber
49) Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud
50) Tantrum by Jules Feiffer
51) The "Alec" stories of Eddie Campbell
52) It's a Good Life if You Don't Weaken by Seth
53) The editorial cartoons of Herblock
54) EC's "New Trend" horror comics by Al Feldstein & various
55) The "Frank" stories by Jim Woodring
56) Julius Knipl, Real Estate Photographer by Ben Katchor
57) A Contract with God by Will Eisner
58) The New Yorker cartoons of Charles Addams
59) Little Lulu by John Stanley
60) Alley Oop by V.T. Hamlin
61) American Splendor #1-10 by Harvey Pekar with various
62) Little Orphan Annie by Harold Gray
63) Hey Look! by Harvey Kurtzman
64) Goodman Beaver by Harvey Kurtzman & Bill Elder
65) Bringing Up Father by George McManus
66) Zippy the Pinhead by Bill Griffith
67) The Passport by Saul Steinberg
68) Barnaby by Crockett Johnson
69) God's Man by Lynd Ward
70) Jimbo by Gary Panter
71) The Book of Jim by Jim Woodring
72) The short stories in Rubber Blanket by David Mazzucchelli
73) The Cartoon History of the Universe by Larry Gonick
74) Ernie Pook's Comeek by Lynda Barry
75) Black Hole by Charles Burns
76) "Master Race" by Bernie Krigstein & Al Feldstein
77) Li'l Abner by Al Capp
78) Sugar and Spike by Sheldon Mayer
79) Captain Marvel by C.C. Beck
80) Zap by Crumb & various
81) The "Lily" Stories by Debbie Drechsler
82) "Caricature" by Daniel Clowes
83) V for Vendetta by Alan Moore & David Lloyd
84) Why I Hate Saturn by Kyle Baker
85) The "Willie and Joe" cartoons of Bill Mauldin
86) Stuck Rubber Baby by Howard Cruse
87) The New Yorker cartoons of George Price
88) Jack Kirby's "Fourth World" comics
89) The autobiographical comics of Spain Rodriguez
90) Mr. Punch by Neil Gaiman & Dave McKean
91) Watchmen by Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons
92) "Pictopia" by Alan Moore & Don Simpson
93) Dennis the Menace by Hank Ketcham
94) Space Hawk by Basil Wolverton
95) Los Tejanos by Jack Jackson
96) Dirty Plotte by Julie Doucet
97) The Hannah Story by Carol Tyler
98) Barney Google by Billy De Beck
99) The Bungle Family by George Tuthill
100) Prince Valiant by Hal Foster
</HYPE>
Highly educational nonsense, these type of lists. I love 'em! Especially
if they're not too predictable, like this one. It already got me to
order a copy of _Bill Mauldin's Army_. (That is *the* Mauldin book,
right? Correct me if I'm wrong, or tell me if there are other books by
him that are equally or even more indispensable.)
The inclusion of non-sequential art makes little sense to me. (Perhaps
they were used to give the list some sort of respectability with regard
to non-comic readers?) Anyway, these works take the place of perfectly
good and wonderful comics like _The Juggler of Our Lady_ and _Sherlocko
the Monk_. Boooo! But also a bit of HURRAH!, because I still have much
to discover about the world of cartoons, so it's helpful that some are
in there. Still, it would have been better if there was a separate Top
100 for cartoons and caricatures, which, BTW, should mention actual book
collections, instead of the way too generic 'The New Yorker cartoons
of..." (as if the same person's Collier's cartoons are crap!). It would
also help me (and the hundreds of thousands like me) to focus my
searches and purchases. Now I have to find out which George Price book
to go after first...
Anyone care to tell me more about _Innocents Abroad_? Is it a GN? (I
won't get the new _TCJ_ in at least 4 weeks, so I can't look it up.)
Anyone familiar with Thurber's _The Last Flower_? It's supposed to be 'a
parable in pictures', but... is it *comics*? That's what I'd like to
know.
Of the Top 100 list my prime candidates for a Grass Roots Reprint are:
99) The Bungle Family by George Tuthill
There's a Hyperion book, but it only covers the first year, and I assume
that the best was still to come. Alas, Hyperion didn't get around to
publishing any second volumes of its reprint line, leaving many comics
lovers with a near unquenchable thirst for more. Come to think of it,
why isn't _Connie_ on the list? I'd remove Moore/Simpson's _Pictopia_
(which should be in the Forgettable Meta-comics Top 100) and insert
Frank Godwin's delightful _Connie_.
79) Captain Marvel by C.C. Beck
Unless there's already a good collection out there? Is there?
78) Sugar and Spike by Sheldon Mayer
AFAIK DC re-issued only the tantalisingly good _Sugar and Spike #99_(?).
A good, fat collection is much needed. In B/W if needs be.
68) Barnaby by Crockett Johnson
The Henry Holt books and the Ballantine reprints are getting scarcer by
the minute. It's time for a version integrale.
29) Gasoline Alley by Frank King
The most important classic never to be adequately reprinted? Probably.
_Slim Jim_ may be another candidate for this title, but I've seen to
little of it.
11) Thimble Theatre by E.C. Segar
Those first two volumes again... PLUS: _Sappo_!!
That's enough for now.
Proost,
Arthur.
Jim Murdoch
>I understand that our FBI friends are too shy to post this themselves,
>so I'll do it for them (and add a few comments).
>
>79) Captain Marvel by C.C. Beck
>
>Unless there's already a good collection out there? Is there?
Hmm. Shazam Archives from DC reprints the early comics. I think Bud
Plant still has copies of the Monster Society of Evil collection. Was
there a DC hardback in the 70's?
Jim
Comic Madness
Unkinder and Ungentler in 99
Tom Spurgeon
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Martin Wisse
wrote:
>Anyone care to tell me more about _Innocents Abroad_? Is it a GN? (I
^^^^^^^^
That's Idiots.
>won't get the new _TCJ_ in at least 4 weeks, so I can't look it up.)
Idiots abroad is a Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers story: drug crazed
hippy humour, but *good* drug crazed hippy humour.
Martin Wisse
Mark Rosenfelder
Arthur van Kruining <arth...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>I understand that our FBI friends are too shy to post this themselves,
>so I'll do it for them (and add a few comments).
>
><HYPE>
> THE TOP 100 COMICS OF THE CENTURY
Does anyone ever look at these lists and post saying how much they agree
with every choice?
In a few ways this list is simply perverse; in other areas I simply
disagree.
1. I agree with Arthur on the strangeness of including *some* cartoons.
It comes out to about 10 artists... did the compilers really think this
could do justice to the (sub-)genre? It also rather comes off as if the
compilers read nothing but the New Yorker, the NYT, and the Village Voice.
It would have been better to make this a separate column, as for European
comics. And by the way, if you're going to include George Price, you'd
might as well credit the New Yorker editors who wrote most of his
captions.
2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers. One of the
sole serious uses of such lists is to point out comics and artists that
deserve more acclaim. So 3 opportunities to do so have been passed up,
in order to underline what's been well known for 17 years: the TCJ loves
los Bros. Much the same could be said for including 5 Kurtzmans, 3
Crumbs, 2 Clowes and 2 Woodrings.
3. The most inconscionable omission: Dave Sim. Dennis the Menace was
rated higher?? To an extent it may be part of the bias against living
storytellers exhibited by the list; but Sim has expanded the boundaries of
the medium more than many an experimentalist. It's hard not to suspect
that the reason behind such blindness is personal animosity.
4. The most provincial omission: Alison Bechdel. Did we really need "Hey
Look!" over her? Again, I can't imagine a serious critical reason for
passing her over; it's most likely a matter of unfamiliarity. But the
compilers *should* be familiar with her... what do we pay them for?
And now on to matters of taste.
5. Poor Duncan will be chagrined to find funny animal comics in 4 of the
top 7 positions.
6. More omissions, of varying importance: Gus Arriola, Jeff Smith, Walt
Holcombe, Lynn Johnston, Roberta Gregory, Carol Lay, Jason Lutes, Raymond
Briggs.
7. If individual works are to be listed, as they fitfully are, I'd plug
McKay's Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend-- not as visually brilliant as Nemo,
but more mature in subject matter and funnier.
8. Though I'm as sick of superhero comics as the next RACA-er, a few more
nods to what's still the biggest part of the comic book industry would
reduce the list's snobbishness. The series that gave me the most pleasure
at the time were Claremont & Byrne's X-Men and Simonson's Thor; and I
found Miller's Dark Knight books impressive though nasty.
9. When non-English works are omitted, it's a bit grandiose to title the
list "The top 100 comics of the century".
(I also wonder how much the list would differ if it were for the milennium
instead. Not much, if it's still restricted to English, I suspect.)
Tom Spurgeon
I don't have anything to say about your differences in opinion; everyone
has a personal list better than the final group list, according to their
own views. I will say that everyone who contributed is aware of the work
of Alison Bechdel. She received some votes. I know people feel very
strongly about her work, but I find it hard to believe you can't imagine
anyone having a critical objection to her work. Tim Barela also received a
couple of votes.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
James Cassels
> 8. Though I'm as sick of superhero comics as the next RACA-er, a few more
> nods to what's still the biggest part of the comic book industry would
> reduce the list's snobbishness. The series that gave me the most pleasure
> at the time were Claremont & Byrne's X-Men and Simonson's Thor; and I
> found Miller's Dark Knight books impressive though nasty.
>
Well, it's a big chunk of the American comic industry, as for the rest of the
world let's proceed to point #9.
>
> 9. When non-English works are omitted, it's a bit grandiose to title the
> list "The top 100 comics of the century".
>
Grandiose is too light a word. Hows about arrogant? Prejudiced? Not including
non-english works border on criminal (I just heard Osamu Tezuka roll over in
his grave).
Slink43809
Mute
A few random thoughts...
Donald Duck by Barks above Uncle Scrooge by Barks?
What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
I agree with all the quibbles about Beto and Jaime geting so many
places for different chunks of the same two series...and to a slight
degree with the panel cartoon quibbles; mainly because of Hirschfeld,
though.
Conversely, I don't know if the story about Sook-Yin being so
wonderful she climbed over the ever-so-metaphorical walls Chester
built around himself, or the one where he bites his neighbour's hand,
really stand up against The Playboy or Fuck.
I like Buddy Bradley's life not being bound by title, too.
I'm very glad that Alec is on the list.
Obvious omissions:
Cerebus, as everyone says.
Something by Raymond Briggs- if not Gentleman Jim, at least When The
Wind Blows.
Bryan Talbot- if not Luther Arkwright, at least The Tale Of One Bad
Rat.
The last two highlight a real problem with the classification: they
should have just gone ahead and made it American comics; "published in
English" is far too broad for the list that resulted. For one thing,
it includes translation, and I don't remember seeing Tintin or Asterix
on the list..but mainly, there's a lot of British work that's just
plain ignored.
If only there was good enough Australian work (Alec notwithstanding)
to have even been considered....Footrot Flats would have made it onto
my 100 list, though. Just to co-opt Kiwi talent again. It's okay, my
family's from there...
Arthur wanted reprints:
>78) Sugar and Spike by Sheldon Mayer
>AFAIK DC re-issued only the tantalisingly good _Sugar and Spike #99_(?).
>A good, fat collection is much needed. In B/W if needs be.
And S&S #99 wasn't even a reprint, but the first and only American
printing of that stuff.
>11) Thimble Theatre by E.C. Segar
>Those first two volumes again... PLUS: _Sappo_!!
Anything by Segar.
-Mute.
________________________
Eggiest
Jarret Cooper
> Does anyone ever look at these lists and post saying how much they agree
> with every choice?
Conversely, is anyone ever able to appreciate these lists (and I'd group
this one with the AFI's film list and [whoever's] 100 novels) for what
they are, rather than get all pissy and self-righteous because of
perceived "arrogance"? Why is any attempt at critical consensus so
threatening to people?
> 2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers.
More absurd than treating them like one person?
> 3. The most inconscionable omission: Dave Sim. Dennis the Menace was
> rated higher?? To an extent it may be part of the bias against living
> storytellers exhibited by the list; but Sim has expanded the boundaries of
> the medium more than many an experimentalist. It's hard not to suspect
> that the reason behind such blindness is personal animosity.
Yeah, not to sound like a Sim disciple (or apologist, as it's bound to
be perceived), but COME ON. I was genuinely surprised by this. I'm
sure Dave wasn't...
j
c
--
Jarret Cooper
Audio DSP Engineer / PC Development
Arboretum Systems, Inc.
Duncan
James Cassels wrote:
> Mark Rosenfelder wrote:
>
> > 8. Though I'm as sick of superhero comics as the next RACA-er, a few more
> > nods to what's still the biggest part of the comic book industry would
> > reduce the list's snobbishness. The series that gave me the most pleasure
> > at the time were Claremont & Byrne's X-Men and Simonson's Thor; and I
> > found Miller's Dark Knight books impressive though nasty.
> >
>
> Well, it's a big chunk of the American comic industry, as for the rest of the
> world let's proceed to point #9.
>
> >
> > 9. When non-English works are omitted, it's a bit grandiose to title the
> > list "The top 100 comics of the century".
> >
>
> Grandiose is too light a word. Hows about arrogant? Prejudiced?
I think "worthless" is the word you're looking for.
Duncan
THE TOP 100 COMICS OF THE CENTURY
As selected by the editorial board of THE COMICS JOURNAL
[SNIP TCJ puff]
[SNIP Tom’s intro]
Intro cont: “This list is a call for an uncompromising
re-examination of the comics medium in terms of its best works.
"We also hope that this list will foster a larger process, whereby art
is consistently and thoroughly examined and re-examined_ for as long
as there are works to consider," added Spurgeon.
Let’s hope so. Let’s hope the list is unpredictable - even controversial.
Let’s hope it’s the last thing a cynical person would expect from TCJ,
namely a list full of Fantagraphics reprints and interchangeable Hernandez
Bros. stories, with barely anything published outside the of the San
Francisco-Seattle axis, let alone the USA.
[SNIP]
Sigh....
Highly educational nonsense, these type of lists. I love 'em!
Me too. I LOVE lists.
Especially
if they're not too predictable, like this one.
Yeah, that’s satire, right Arthur?
[SNIP]
The inclusion of non-sequential art makes little sense to me.
Me neither. Shoul’ve been a seperate list.
[SNIP interesting points & questions from Arthur]
OK, the list:
I don’t know where to start with this. There’s a lot here - maybe up to a
third - that I’m not familiar with which makes it impossible to be entirely
fair. Anyone’s first impression must be this list is ludicrously
Americanocentic. It’s as if the artform doesn’t exist anywhere else. If you
wanted to put together a 100 Best Books list would you leave out Tolstoy,
Flaubert, Dickens...? Would you leave Bergman, Bertolucci, Godard... out of
a list of the 100 Best Movies? Sorry Tom, but it looks to me like you’ve
gone about as far as Fantagraphics’ back catalogue to research this thing.
If, as Arthur says (I think), single panel cartoons are included (I can’t
really tell) then the situation is even worse. Was their a seperate list
for non-English stuff? If so, why? Plenty of classic European and Japanese
etc. comics have been translated. Where’s Barefoot Gen? Or Adolf? Where’s
Moebius, Druillet, Tardi, Brecheter, Giardano, Christian, Bilal, Manara,
Pratt, Cosey, Vellenkoop, Sampayo & wotsit - to name just the popular ones.
But even as an English-only list there are some very weird omissions and
inclusions. First of all, why are entire anthologies chosen in some cases
but only individual stories in others? There’s far too much Los Bros.
Hernandez (quelle suprise); there are no Defective Stories (Burns). Correct
me if I’m wrong (and crossing over genres as much as poss.) but there’s no
Ho Che Anderson; there’s no Dennis Eichorn; there’s no Dave Sim; there’s no
Bryan Talbot (unforgivable); there’s no Dean Motter; there’s no Ed Brubaker
(ridiculous); there’s no Al Williamson; there’s no ‘Anton Dreck’
(whaaaatt?); there’s no Steve Bissette; there’s no Peter Kuper; there’s no
Phil Hester; there’s no Martin Rowson; there’s no Frank Miller; there’s no
Dave Cooper; there’s no Howard Chaykin; there’s no Dave Sch...you know who;
there’s no P Craig Russell; there’s no Jason Lutes; there’s no Alex Toth;
there’s no David Collier; there’s no John Bergin; there’s no Bob Fingerman;
there’s no Melinda Gebbe; there’s no Veitch and Irons; there’s no Matt
Groenig; there’s no Joe Matt; there’s no Rick Veitch; there’s no Frank
Stack; there’s no Richard Corben (not to everyone’s taste, I know); there’s
no Hunt Emerson (ditto, including mine). The guy who does Optic Nerve isn’t
there; there’s no Jon Muth; there’s no Ted McKeever; there’s no Morrison &
Yeowell; there’s no Milligan & McCarthey; there’s no James Kolchka; there’s
no Steve Bell; there’s no Richard Sala; there’s no Pander Bros; there’s no
Paul Pope; there’s no Michael Ziulli; there’s no Rick Geary; there’s no
Matt Howarth; there’s no Trina Robbins; there’s no Michael Allred or Bernie
Mireault; there’s no Mary Fleener; there’s no Mark Schultz; there’s no Mack
White; there’s no Donna Barr (huh?). You wouldn’t need to include *all* of
these, obviously. But some... There’s no S Clay Wilson either, for Christ’s
sake. The whole of Zap is listed, despite the fact that half of it doesn’t
stand up any more (if it ever did) and even Crumb had only one real classic
in there (My Troubles...). What made Zap great was Spain Rodriguez and S
Clay Wilson: so where *is* the sicko? On the other hand, I’d agree about
the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
the early issues.
Some of the best American Splendour stories came in the later issues - in
particular, the last one published. So why list just 1-10? (Would it have
anything to do with Crumb’s contribution, or lack of, since?) V For
Vendetta is listed but Jamie Delano for one has written two stories, and a
third is about to be published, which are both more entertaining and more
incisive about contemporary politics. And why not Big Numbers? (Not that
Moore isn’t over-represented.)
The best thing about Idiots Abroad is the prologue (which - I think it’s
that one - contains the single greatest panel in comics, imo) but the story
itself was crippled by the writers’ unwillingness to keep up their liberal
attitude to sex and drugs: one of the earlier stories would have been a
better choice.
Superheroes: Lee and Kirby’s FF; Lee and Ditko’s SpiderMan. That’s OK. What
about Lee and Ditko’s Dr Strange? Kirby’s Fourth World should have just
been The Forever People. I’m sure Neal Adam’s Batman is there really, I
just can’t find it. Roy Thomas and Barry Smith’s Conan should have been
there, if only for inspiring a decade’s worth of sword & sorcery comics.
Either that or they should have been throttled. Likewise - though it pains
me to say it - Jim Starlin’s Warlock.
I’m not sure about Julie Doucet, but I guess that’s a subjective thing.
There’s plenty of stuff that could’ve been forgotten but thankfully wasn’t:
Wolverton’s Spacehawk comes to mind.
Personally, any time I see Moore’s Pictopia and Clowes’s Caricature in a
list like this I get suspicious. Pictopia is a good story about the malign
influence of recent superhero comics: first person to post the length of
time it took Moore to sign up with Image after writing it gets a copy of
Spawn no.8 (if I feel like it). I suspect Caricature appeals to all comic
artists who presumably see themselves in the central character. It’s a good
story but far from Clowes’ best: it isn’t resolved properly (but then a lot
of Clowes’s stories aren’t. There was a better story on the theme published
in Zero Zero no.15.)
And it’s a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations. Having said
that, if the list was remade with a properly wide scope, with the
over-represented creators’ work trimmed a little, I’d guess a good 40%-plus
would survive.
One result of a list like this, because it covers the whole century, is
that a whole C20th history of comics is invented by default, one that is
utterly subjective in what it includes and excludes but which can easily be
taken as gospel. Given the enormous effect that non-Americans have had on
the comic industry that would be a huge mistake.
Still, despite all that I’m glad they made the effort.
Tom Spurgeon
I'm not going to argue people just disagreeing with the list.
I do want to address one complaint, though.
The scope of the list is North American-published English-language comics
because that is the main area of focus of the magazine, and that is
essentially what was done with the other lists of this type. The Journal
has a long history of exhorting the virtues of work from all over the
world -- we're publishing 10 pages on Lat and David B. in issue #211. But
for this list we decided to stay within our area of relative "expertise"
rather than try and discern the merits of work we don't experience in
their native tongues, or in some case have never really seen. (Except for
John Lent, who sees everything.)
The press release title is misleading; much less so the title of the
feature in the magazine, and even less so the introduction that precedes
it.
We're going to do some follow-up with this issue with various columnists
and guest writers (an article on the best of British comics, as opposed to
British works being published through American sources, is in the works,
for example).
My hope that the list will be a conversation starter about the entirety of
the medium as it has existed in America this century. I think we lose
ourselves waiting for the new comics stack sometimes, and forget how much
great work has been published if you take a step back and widen your
perspective.
I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
Besides, everyone tells us we never do anything that's pro-comics.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Duncan
Tom Spurgeon wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughts, Duncan and the rest.
>
> I'm not going to argue people just disagreeing with the list.
Excuse me being snotty. Just doing my job, ma'am.
>
>
> I do want to address one complaint, though.
>
> The scope of the list is North American-published English-language comics
> because that is the main area of focus of the magazine, and that is
> essentially what was done with the other lists of this type. The Journal
> has a long history of exhorting the virtues of work from all over the
> world -- we're publishing 10 pages on Lat and David B. in issue #211. But
> for this list we decided to stay within our area of relative "expertise"
> rather than try and discern the merits of work we don't experience in
> their native tongues, or in some case have never really seen. (Except for
> John Lent, who sees everything.)
Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
>
>
> The press release title is misleading; much less so the title of the
> feature in the magazine, and even less so the introduction that precedes
> it.
>
> We're going to do some follow-up with this issue with various columnists
> and guest writers (an article on the best of British comics, as opposed to
> British works being published through American sources, is in the works,
> for example).
Cool. That should take up half a page then... :-)
>
>
> My hope that the list will be a conversation starter about the entirety of
> the medium as it has existed in America this century. I think we lose
> ourselves waiting for the new comics stack sometimes, and forget how much
> great work has been published if you take a step back and widen your
> perspective.
>
> I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
Absolutely.
Actually, I may have misunderstood it. I thought it was simply a '100 best'
list, I didn't think it was a countdown. That'd explain the number of
Hernandez stories but it also makes for more confusion: how do you compare
individual stories (like Caricature) with a series of stories (like the
Weirdo Crumbs) with graphic novels (like Maus) with anthologies (like Zap or
RAW) with syndicated strips (like Peanuts) with single panel cartoons... etc.
etc.
And if it *is* a countdown that means you've got Krazy Kat, Peanuts, Pogo and
Little Nemo in the top five. Now I'm a big fan of both Krazy Kat (honest!)
and Little Nemo. I'm not so familiar with Pogo and I can't stand Peanuts
(although I used to like it when I was Linus's age). But is this list really
saying that these four comics are more enjoyable to sit down and read on a
wet Sunday afternoon when the football's been called off and the missus is at
her mother's and you've nothing better to do than, say, Robert Crumb Talks
The Blues or Like A Velvet Glove Cast In Iron or Adventures Of Luther
Arkwright or Wendy Whitebread, Undercover Slut or whatever your particular
poison is? Shurely shome mishtake...
>
>
> Besides, everyone tells us we never do anything that's pro-comics.
Not me guv. I wuz somewhere else at the time...
Duncan
Mark Rosenfelder wrote:
> > THE TOP 100 COMICS OF THE CENTURY
>
> Does anyone ever look at these lists and post saying how much they agree
> with every choice?
Oh yes... (or rather, no...)
>
>
> In a few ways this list is simply perverse; in other areas I simply
> disagree.
>
> 1. I agree with Arthur on the strangeness of including *some* cartoons.
> It comes out to about 10 artists... did the compilers really think this
> could do justice to the (sub-)genre? It also rather comes off as if the
> compilers read nothing but the New Yorker, the NYT, and the Village Voice.
> It would have been better to make this a separate column, as for European
> comics.
I agree, although do you mean there *was* a seperate European list or
should've been? Only Tom seemed to imply that there wasn't on the grounds (my
interpretation) of not wanting to include translations which is
understandable, I guess, but still a mistake (aren't Tardi and Vellenkoop
bilingual? The L'Officiers and the Pander Bros.are...)
> And by the way, if you're going to include George Price, you'd
> might as well credit the New Yorker editors who wrote most of his
> captions.
...one of the names I didn't recognise.
>
>
> 2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers. One of the
> sole serious uses of such lists is to point out comics and artists that
> deserve more acclaim. So 3 opportunities to do so have been passed up,
> in order to underline what's been well known for 17 years: the TCJ loves
> los Bros. Much the same could be said for including 5 Kurtzmans, 3
> Crumbs, 2 Clowes and 2 Woodrings.
Here here! (Pass the port, there's a good chap... to the left, dammit...!)
>
>
> 3. The most inconscionable omission: Dave Sim.
Hmmmmmm. Yeah, you're probably right...
> Dennis the Menace was
> rated higher??
It's not even the original... And *that* wasn't as good as Baxendale's Bash
Street Kids. You might as well include Captain Kremmen...
> To an extent it may be part of the bias against living
> storytellers exhibited by the list; but Sim has expanded the boundaries of
> the medium more than many an experimentalist. It's hard not to suspect
> that the reason behind such blindness is personal animosity.
It might've helped if the names of the judges had been revealed. Maybe they
will be...
>
>
> 4. The most provincial omission: Alison Bechdel. Did we really need "Hey
> Look!" over her? Again, I can't imagine a serious critical reason for
> passing her over; it's most likely a matter of unfamiliarity. But the
> compilers *should* be familiar with her...
I'm not. Who is she? The best thing about this list is that it throws up a
bunch of people I don't know...
> what do we pay them for?
Dunno about you but I pay them for full body massage followed by- sorry, who
are we talking about?
>
>
> And now on to matters of taste.
>
> 5. Poor Duncan will be chagrined to find funny animal comics in 4 of the
> top 7 positions.
Chagrined? I'm practically chewing the carpet, matey... Nah, actually I dig
Krazy Kat; I'm pretty sure I should like Feiffer; I like Maus of course (with
or without black dogs). I know who Pogo is but I'm not familiar with the
scripts - I think I'd hate it. Donald Duck? Feh... So yeah, you're mostly
right. Maus aside, are these really supposed to be a better read than, I
don't know, The Chuckling Whatsit or Black Kiss or whatever? I think not...
>
>
> 6. More omissions, of varying importance: Gus Arriola,
Who?
> Jeff Smith,
Yes!
> Walt Holcombe, Lynn Johnston,
Who? Whom?
> Roberta Gregory, Carol Lay, Jason Lutes, Raymond Briggs.
Hmmmm... OK; Dunno, maybe; Yeah; Yes.
>
>
> 7. If individual works are to be listed, as they fitfully are, I'd plug
> McKay's Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend-- not as visually brilliant as Nemo,
> but more mature in subject matter and funnier.
Could be. Some are good.
>
>
> 8. Though I'm as sick of superhero comics as the next RACA-er, a few more
> nods to what's still the biggest part of the comic book industry would
> reduce the list's snobbishness. The series that gave me the most pleasure
> at the time were Claremont & Byrne's X-Men
Never liked it, though Claremont isn't a bad writer.
> and Simonson's Thor;
I didn't even like Kirby's...
> and I found Miller's Dark Knight books impressive though nasty.
I don't think he's done anything better since, really.
>
>
> 9. When non-English works are omitted, it's a bit grandiose to title the
> list "The top 100 comics of the century".
Well, yeah. It's also a wee bit West Coast *and* with strange historical jump
cuts. Plenty of pre-war, then jump the 50s and early 60s bar one EC, two
Marvels - where was Neal Adams?) to the (nearly) Crumb-only undergrounds -
one Shelton; Zippy instead of Griffith's Observatory: understandable but not
the best choice, imo - then straight on to Fantagraphics-dominated (poss.
understandably) alt. scene - too much Hernandez as said - but I'm repeating
myself. Also missing: El Tel La Ban, Billy-Bob Sienkiewicz, Ennis/Mcrea, Guy
Colewell and...
>
>
> (I also wonder how much the list would differ if it were for the milennium
> instead. Not much, if it's still restricted to English, I suspect.)
Not much. You mean Hogarth etc.?
Still, I'm glad they did it. I LOVE lists...
Arthur van Kruining
> Me too. I LOVE lists.
>
> Especially
> if they're not too predictable, like this one.
>
> Yeah, that's satire, right Arthur?
I've never been more serious in my life! Everybody is complaining that
the list doesn't match their preferences, which is pretty silly. Make
your own list, if you don't like it. Why not compile a rac.alt top 100?
(I'm sure _Cerebus_ will make it.) There's also the tendency to replace
personal taste with "oh, this comic is *important* so I guess it should
be on the list", which is equally silly, IMO. The TCJ Top 100 is merely
a reflection of a couple of very comics-savvy people's taste, and should
be judged as such.
This whole thing should be taken a *little* more lightly.
OTOH, while I don't take the list entirely serious, I do think it has
tremendous value for neophytes. I would have jumped for joy if I had
come across such a list eight years ago, when I started getting serious
about comics. This top 100 may not list all the very best comics
available, they ain't the worst either. I don't think that any of these
choices will disappoint a new reader to the point that he or she will
give up on the medium. For these people this list can serve as an
excellent starting point. Although the inclusion of cartoons and
caricatures might give off a wrong signal; namely, that there are not
enough good 'real' comics to make up a top 100...
> I don't know where to start with this. There's a lot here - maybe up to a
> third - that I'm not familiar with which makes it impossible to be entirely
> fair. Anyone's first impression must be this list is ludicrously
> Americanocentic.
Well, it says in the intro that the list was to consist English-language
works only. I understand there will be a separate Euro list. Alas, no
manga list, I think. Of course the header of the press release is
misleading, but that's because it's a press release and it's no use
getting into specifics for the likes of _Newsweek_(?) et al.
Even more interesting to me would be the individual lists. I'd love to
see the Euro lists of, for instance, art spiegelman, Francoise Mouly
and, most of all, Etienne Robial.
BTW, if you're interested in finding out about the best (available) Euro
comics, you can always order _La Bédétheque Idéale_ from the Musée de la
bande dessinée. The 1998-1999 edition is just out. Of course this book
is doesn't escape the woes of canonization, but like TCJ's list it can
be very useful.
> But even as an English-only list there are some very weird omissions and
> inclusions. First of all, why are entire anthologies chosen in some cases
> but only individual stories in others? There's far too much Los Bros.
> Hernandez (quelle suprise); there are no Defective Stories (Burns). Correct
> me if I'm wrong (and crossing over genres as much as poss.) but there's no
> Ho Che Anderson; there's no Dennis Eichorn; there's no Dave Sim; there's no
> Bryan Talbot (unforgivable); there's no Dean Motter; there's no Ed Brubaker
> (ridiculous); there's no Al Williamson; there's no Anton Dreck'
> (whaaaatt?); there's no Steve Bissette; there's no Peter Kuper; there's no
> Phil Hester; there's no Martin Rowson; there's no Frank Miller; there's no
> Dave Cooper; there's no Howard Chaykin; there's no Dave Sch...you know who;
> there's no P Craig Russell; there's no Jason Lutes; there's no Alex Toth;
> there's no David Collier; there's no John Bergin; there's no Bob Fingerman;
> there's no Melinda Gebbe; there's no Veitch and Irons; there's no Matt
> Groenig; there's no Joe Matt; there's no Rick Veitch; there's no Frank
> Stack; there's no Richard Corben (not to everyone's taste, I know); there's
> no Hunt Emerson (ditto, including mine). The guy who does Optic Nerve isn't
> there; there's no Jon Muth; there's no Ted McKeever; there's no Morrison &
> Yeowell; there's no Milligan & McCarthey; there's no James Kolchka; there's
> no Steve Bell; there's no Richard Sala; there's no Pander Bros; there's no
> Paul Pope; there's no Michael Ziulli; there's no Rick Geary; there's no
> Matt Howarth; there's no Trina Robbins; there's no Michael Allred or Bernie
> Mireault; there's no Mary Fleener; there's no Mark Schultz; there's no Mack
> White; there's no Donna Barr (huh?).
They're all bubbling under.
And for good reason, because most of them are OK at best. I mean, John
J. Muth?!! A piece of crap like _[Something] of an Abandoned City_ alone
should disqualify him for a top 1.000.000 spot! Talbot made maybe one OK
book, while I can name at least a dozen newspaper cartoonists who
produced stellar work for *decades*. Your Talbots, Motters, Andersons,
Hesters and Drecks are insignificant specks compared to the likes of
Sidney Smith, Raeburn van Buren, Gus Arriola, Otto Soglow, Gustave
Verbeek, etquitecetera.
But you're right about one thing, Hunt Emerson should have been in
there. One of the holy cows could easily have been sacrificed for him.
(_Wig Wam Bam_ for example.)
> And it's a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
No, it's at #36. Which proves that you are wrong!
> One result of a list like this, because it covers the whole century, is
> that a whole C20th history of comics is invented by default, one that is
> utterly subjective in what it includes and excludes but which can easily be
> taken as gospel.
I doubt it. The cognoscenti take it with a grain of salt, and while the
neophytes may take it seriously, once they've digested the actual books,
they're ready and able to spread their wings in the beautiful world of
comics, and before you know it they will have a top 100 of their own.
Proost,
Arthur.
Tom Spurgeon
<dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
> Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
> translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
> published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
But even though I've had a job reading comics for the last four years, I'm
not even barely qualified to take even a first shot at engaging the world
comics scene. On top of that, I know from reading stuff in translation and
then struggling through the French (Trondheim, Baru) that you're really in
danger of a false appraisal of work based on translation.
> Cool. That should take up half a page then... :-)
You're more pessimistic than I am. I think it will make a pretty good
small-to-medium article. Remember, our definition of comics is broad
enough that you get a lot of the great comics-art illustrators.
> > My hope that the list will be a conversation starter about the entirety of
> > the medium as it has existed in America this century. I think we lose
> > ourselves waiting for the new comics stack sometimes, and forget how much
> > great work has been published if you take a step back and widen your
> > perspective.
> >
> > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
>
> Absolutely.
Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
> Actually, I may have misunderstood it. I thought it was simply a '100 best'
> list, I didn't think it was a countdown. That'd explain the number of
> Hernandez stories but it also makes for more confusion: how do you compare
> individual stories (like Caricature) with a series of stories (like the
> Weirdo Crumbs) with graphic novels (like Maus) with anthologies (like Zap or
> RAW) with syndicated strips (like Peanuts) with single panel cartoons... etc.
> etc.
Two ways. We're using the broad definition of comics we've always used in
the Journal's coverage: "print works created from comics art." Second,
part of what we're engaging is "What is a comics 'work'" working from the
initial impressions of the participants and then examining it.
> And if it *is* a countdown that means you've got Krazy Kat, Peanuts, Pogo and
> Little Nemo in the top five. Now I'm a big fan of both Krazy Kat (honest!)
> and Little Nemo. I'm not so familiar with Pogo and I can't stand Peanuts
> (although I used to like it when I was Linus's age). But is this list really
> saying that these four comics are more enjoyable to sit down and read on a
> wet Sunday afternoon when the football's been called off and the missus is at
> her mother's and you've nothing better to do than, say, Robert Crumb Talks
> The Blues or Like A Velvet Glove Cast In Iron or Adventures Of Luther
> Arkwright or Wendy Whitebread, Undercover Slut or whatever your particular
> poison is? Shurely shome mishtake...
It's uncanny, but "What book is most enjoyable to sit down and read on a
wet Sunday afternoon when the football's been called off and the missus is
at her mother's?" is _exactly_ what our initial letter said.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Tom Spurgeon
One small point: the list doesn't skip the '50s at all. We have three runs
of ECs, Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts, and Barks.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Duncan
Arthur van Kruining wrote:
> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Me too. I LOVE lists.
> >
> > Especially
> > if they're not too predictable, like this one.
> >
> > Yeah, that's satire, right Arthur?
>
> I've never been more serious in my life!
It seemed halfway predictable to me. I think I'm used to the TCJ take on things.
> Everybody is complaining that
> the list doesn't match their preferences, which is pretty silly. Make
> your own list, if you don't like it. Why not compile a rac.alt top 100?
> (I'm sure _Cerebus_ will make it.) There's also the tendency to replace
> personal taste with "oh, this comic is *important* so I guess it should
> be on the list", which is equally silly, IMO. The TCJ Top 100 is merely
> a reflection of a couple of very comics-savvy people's taste, and should
> be judged as such.
It's the best list of its type I've seen and well worth taking seriously because
the people who compiled it obviously know what they're talking about. But yeah,
I don't go along with the premises they've used (see Tom's reply below) and -
like every single person who reads it - I don't agree with the choice. But
that's to be expected and besides, I'm comparitively ignorant: there's about two
dozen people on it I've never heard of.
>
>
> This whole thing should be taken a *little* more lightly.
Um... probably.
>
>
> OTOH, while I don't take the list entirely serious, I do think it has
> tremendous value for neophytes. I would have jumped for joy if I had
> come across such a list eight years ago, when I started getting serious
> about comics. This top 100 may not list all the very best comics
> available, they ain't the worst either. I don't think that any of these
> choices will disappoint a new reader to the point that he or she will
> give up on the medium. For these people this list can serve as an
> excellent starting point. Although the inclusion of cartoons and
> caricatures might give off a wrong signal; namely, that there are not
> enough good 'real' comics to make up a top 100...
It's of even more value when all the arguments, alternative lists, questioning
of choices etc. etc. are added on. Like I said, because this list covers the
whole century it tells a history of comics, a history which is subjective.
There's no hard and fast rule which says that the likes of Modesty Blaise, say,
and all those old high adventure strips should be left out. This is the 'alt.'
history. "American History Alt.", even.
>
>
> > I don't know where to start with this. There's a lot here - maybe up to a
> > third - that I'm not familiar with which makes it impossible to be entirely
> > fair. Anyone's first impression must be this list is ludicrously
> > Americanocentic.
>
> Well, it says in the intro that the list was to consist English-language
> works only. I understand there will be a separate Euro list. Alas, no
> manga list, I think.
Fair enough, although translation problems aside, I don't see the value in
separating them by nation.
> Of course the header of the press release is
> misleading, but that's because it's a press release and it's no use
> getting into specifics for the likes of _Newsweek_(?) et al.
>
> Even more interesting to me would be the individual lists. I'd love to
> see the Euro lists of, for instance, art spiegelman, Francoise Mouly
> and, most of all, Etienne Robial.
Yes.
>
>
> BTW, if you're interested in finding out about the best (available) Euro
> comics, you can always order _La Bédétheque Idéale_ from the Musée de la
> bande dessinée. The 1998-1999 edition is just out. Of course this book
> is doesn't escape the woes of canonization, but like TCJ's list it can
> be very useful.
Yeah, I read French like a schoolkid, Arthur. It'd take me a week to get through
the intro.
Oh, OK.
>
>
> And for good reason, because most of them are OK at best. I mean, John
> J. Muth?!! A piece of crap like _[Something] of an Abandoned City_ alone
> should disqualify him for a top 1.000.000 spot! Talbot made maybe one OK
> book, while I can name at least a dozen newspaper cartoonists who
> produced stellar work for *decades*. Your Talbots, Motters, Andersons,
> Hesters and Drecks are insignificant specks compared to the likes of
> Sidney Smith, Raeburn van Buren, Gus Arriola, Otto Soglow, Gustave
> Verbeek, etquitecetera.
I dare say you're right. Since I've never heard of any of the people you mention
(have they been translated?) I've no way of knowing. I mentioned a lot of those
people not so much because they're the best writers or artists but because they
either played a part in a particular country's comics history or because they
were in at the beginning of a new - or new version of an old - genre. Talbot and
Motter, for instance, although I'd disagree with you about Talbot anyway. Who's
the Anderson I mentioned? Hester you're probably right but I liked Freaks Amour.
Dreck just makes me laugh.
>
>
> But you're right about one thing, Hunt Emerson should have been in
> there. One of the holy cows could easily have been sacrificed for him.
> (_Wig Wam Bam_ for example.)
>
> > And it's a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
>
> No, it's at #36. Which proves that you are wrong!
No it doesn't, it proves the compilers - most people, probably - don't agree
with me. That's OK.
>
>
> > One result of a list like this, because it covers the whole century, is
> > that a whole C20th history of comics is invented by default, one that is
> > utterly subjective in what it includes and excludes but which can easily be
> > taken as gospel.
>
> I doubt it. The cognoscenti take it with a grain of salt, and while the
> neophytes may take it seriously, once they've digested the actual books,
> they're ready and able to spread their wings in the beautiful world of
> comics, and before you know it they will have a top 100 of their own.
Ah, yes. Mind you, there are a lot of names in there which would be on
*everyone's* list: I guess that's why we bitch so much about the others.
Anyway, I'd like to know about those guys you mentioned. What are they published
in?
Duncan
Tom Spurgeon wrote:
> Hi, Duncan:
>
> One small point: the list doesn't skip the '50s at all. We have three runs
> of ECs, Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts, and Barks.
My mistake: one among many. Shows what I know about these guys. Although I
did mean the time they started: weren't Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts and Barks
around pre-War?
Duncan
Tom Spurgeon wrote:
> In article <36F6527C...@airstream.co.uk>, Duncan
> <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
> > translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
> > published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
>
> Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
> excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
> regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
I'll look forward to it. My knowledge of non-English language European/S American
comics more or less ends with the late-80s changes at Heavy Metal, plus the
Catalan/NBM translations (about the same era anyway), plus whatever's turned up in
Prime Cuts, Drawn & Quarterly and the few one-offs that get through the net like
Thomas Ott. I'd love to get a better idea of what's out there - I'd love to see a
shitload more translations.Pretty much the same goes for manga. I'm hip to most of
the sci-fi and yakuza stuff that got translated in the wake of Akira but most of
what Viz publishes now leaves me cold (Dragonball. Ugh). Hong Kong and Indian
comics, for instance, I know almost nothing about.
So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
> But even though I've had a job reading comics for the last four years, I'm
> not even barely qualified to take even a first shot at engaging the world
> comics scene. On top of that, I know from reading stuff in translation and
> then struggling through the French (Trondheim, Baru) that you're really in
> danger of a false appraisal of work based on translation.
That's true but then the best translations are done in collaboration with an
English-language writer who'll puts in his/her own dialogue. That way you almost
have a whole new comic which can be appraised in its own right.
>
>
>
> > Cool. That should take up half a page then... :-)
>
> You're more pessimistic than I am. I think it will make a pretty good
> small-to-medium article. Remember, our definition of comics is broad
> enough that you get a lot of the great comics-art illustrators.
Fancy dropping a few names there, Tom?
>
>
> > > My hope that the list will be a conversation starter about the entirety of
> > > the medium as it has existed in America this century. I think we lose
> > > ourselves waiting for the new comics stack sometimes, and forget how much
> > > great work has been published if you take a step back and widen your
> > > perspective.
> > >
> > > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
> >
> > Absolutely.
>
> Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
> the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
...and no Ty Templeton. Amazing.
>
>
> > Actually, I may have misunderstood it. I thought it was simply a '100 best'
> > list, I didn't think it was a countdown. That'd explain the number of
> > Hernandez stories but it also makes for more confusion: how do you compare
> > individual stories (like Caricature) with a series of stories (like the
> > Weirdo Crumbs) with graphic novels (like Maus) with anthologies (like Zap or
> > RAW) with syndicated strips (like Peanuts) with single panel cartoons... etc.
> > etc.
>
> Two ways. We're using the broad definition of comics we've always used in
> the Journal's coverage: "print works created from comics art." Second,
> part of what we're engaging is "What is a comics 'work'" working from the
> initial impressions of the participants and then examining it.
OK, I can go along with the definition but you do end up with a sort of hybrid
comics history (Little Nemo etc.) and favourite stories (Pictographia etc.) which,
I dunno, doesn't seem to quite hang together to me. Maybe three seperate ists
would've been needed... (Most Important, Best Title/Series, Best Individual
Story).
>
>
> > And if it *is* a countdown that means you've got Krazy Kat, Peanuts, Pogo and
> > Little Nemo in the top five. Now I'm a big fan of both Krazy Kat (honest!)
> > and Little Nemo. I'm not so familiar with Pogo and I can't stand Peanuts
> > (although I used to like it when I was Linus's age). But is this list really
> > saying that these four comics are more enjoyable to sit down and read on a
> > wet Sunday afternoon when the football's been called off and the missus is at
> > her mother's and you've nothing better to do than, say, Robert Crumb Talks
> > The Blues or Like A Velvet Glove Cast In Iron or Adventures Of Luther
> > Arkwright or Wendy Whitebread, Undercover Slut or whatever your particular
> > poison is? Shurely shome mishtake...
>
> It's uncanny, but "What book is most enjoyable to sit down and read on a
> wet Sunday afternoon when the football's been called off and the missus is
> at her mother's?" is _exactly_ what our initial letter said.
No kidding. The entire comics-reading Western world does the same thing. I wonder
if they say the same things to their mums...
>
Arthur van Kruining
> Still, I'm glad they did it. I LOVE lists...
Here's another one. It's an old (1987), strange and French top 50, but
at least it's a mix of Euro and Americano, and it doesn't list
illustrators.
La bande dessinée
-----------------
... en 49 livres (you have to add the 50th book yourself)
* Bicot président de club - Martin Branner (1920)
This is _Winnie Winkle_, a American comic more popular in Europe and
especially France.
* La bête est morte! la guerre mondiale chez les animaux - E.F. Calvo
(1944)
Calvo was *the* funny animal artist in France, and this is his most
impressive book. Would be in my personal top 50 as well.
* Les Trafiquants de la mer Rouge - Charlier/Hubinon (1966)
A _Buck Danny_ adventure. I thought this was good, until I read _Steve
Canyon_. Rip-off down to the logo. But a very entertaining rip-off.
Enjoyable even when football isn't called off.
* Les Mille et Une Nuits - Richard Corben (1979)
Here's your precious Corben, Duncan. Happy now? :) Is the English
original still available? Is it any good? Please enlighten.
* Spirit: Qui a tué Cox Robin? - Will Eisner (1987)
BTW, the dates refer to the year of publication in France.
* Mandrake - Lee Falk et Phil Davis (1934)
And sometimes they don't. Unless Futuropolis was already in business
during the 1930s. _Mandrake_ didn't make the TCJ list, did it? Well,
it's certainly better than anything by John *J.* Muth.
* Barbarella - Jean-Claude Forest (1962)
Not my choice for best Forest. I rate _Ici-même_ and the 'Jonque
Fantôme' book much higher. The latter might even end up in my top 20.
Yes, it's *that* good!
* Prince Vaillant - Hal Foster (1940)
At least 50 notches higher than in TCJ's list, which is how it should
be. Top 10 material, IMHO.
* Les Naufragés du temps - Gillon/Forest (1974)
I.e., the first four volumes of this 10 vol. SF series. The others are
not as good.
* Route vers l'enfer - Goosens (1986)
This should please Scott Gilbert. :)
* La Rubrique-à-brac - Marcel Gotlib (1970)
Way too wordy for my taste.
* Dick Tracy - Chester Gould (1931)
Rated about as high here as in TCJ's list.
* Le Roi des Zôtres - Michel Greg (1977)
An _Achille Talon_ episode. Classic Euro humor series that won't
translate very well into English, I'm afraid.
* Cocco Bill - Benito Jacovitti (1975)
Great salami western.
* Jean Valhardi, détective - Joseph Jijé (1945)
Not familiar with this...
* Pim Pam Poum - Harold Knerr
French title of _The Katzenjammer Kids_.
* Les Pionier de l'espérance - Lecureux/Poïvet (1945)
Superior adventure series. Poïvet's drawing skills match those of the
great Alex Raymond. Magnifique!
* La Cité des eaux mouvantes - Mézières/Christin (1970)
A spatio-temporal adventure of _Valerian_. A few _Valerian_ books have
been translated into English, I believe. Check them out, they're fun.
* Alack Sinner, flic ou privé - Munoz/Sampayo (1983)
Also en anglais.
* Le Chien des Basketville - Pétillon (1979)
Excellent, wild and absurd book.
* Flash Gordon - Alex Raymond
Superior adventure series. Raymond's drawing skills match those of the
great Raymond Poïvet. Magnifique!
* Popeye - Elzie Crisler Segar (1929)
Cet anti-héros laid, borgne et antipathique a réussi à faire ingurguter
des tonnes d'épinards à des générations de jeunes fans...
* Bob et Bobette, Le Fantôme espagnol - Willy Vandersteen (1952)
Good choice. This is one of my fave Bob et Bobette stories as well.
* Un max de Mad (1952)
_Mad_.
On to the top 25.
... en 25 livres
* Les Frustrés - Claire Bretecher (1975)
* Le Grand Duduche - Cabu (1967)
Also very wordy. That's the main reason why I haven't read it yet.
* Blueberry, La Mine de l'Allemand perdu - Charlier/Giraud (1972)
Mojo's English translation should still be available...
* Fritz the Cat - Robert Crumb (1972)
Bad choice of Crumb. Baaaad choice.
* Les Pieds nickelés arrivent - Louis Forton (1908-1927)
Never seen it, I only know the Pellos version.
* Le Petit Cirque - Fred (1973)
"Absurde d'un poésie cruelle, absurde d'un monde irréel et insolite qui
suscite une étrange nostalgie." Superfine book. Every home should have
one. Would be in my personal top 25 as well.
* Krazy Kat - George Herriman (1911)
Didn't make the top 10 here!
* Coeurs de sable - Loustal/Paringaud
Well, this is certainly not a bad book, but ranking it as high as _Krazy
Kat_ seriously hurts this list's credibility.
* La Ballade de la mer salée - Hugo Pratt (1975)
Also available in English. Get it now!
* Snoopy écrivain - Charles M. Schulz (1950)
"Snoopy le chien philosophe, Charlie Brown l'éternel perdant, Linus le
surdoué inquiet, Schroeder le musicien égocentrique forment les
_Peanuts_. Leur dialogues n'ont cessé à travers des millions de 'strips'
de donner un sens à la vie, essentiellement avec des point de
suspension.."
* Félix le chat - Pat Sullivan (1923)
High-ranked thanks to an excellent Horay collection.
* L'Art moderne - Joost Swarte (1980)
Holland spreekt een woordje mee!
"L'apotheose de la ligne clair, l'humour subversif en sus."
* Adèle et la bête - Jacques Tardi (1976)
Not nearly the best Tardi, IMO.
* Surboum sur 4 roues - Maurice Tillieux (1961)
Who'd've thunk this was as good as _Krazy Kat_?! I wouldn't. And, of
course, it isn't, but it's good nostalgic fun anyhow.
* Tragique destins - Vuillemin (1985)
*Not* the apotheosis of the ligne clair.
And now it's time to wake up the horn section, because here is the top
ten!!
* Terry et les pirates - Milton Caniff (1934)
* Mickey et lîle volante - Walt Disney (1937)
* Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
* Astérix et Cléopatre - Goscinny/Uderzo (1934)
One of my favorites as well. Although it's damn hard to choose from such
a consistenlty brilliant series.
* Le Lotus bleu - Hergé (1934)
I always thought _The Blue Lotus_ was one of the lesser Tintins. I
prefer _Tintin in Tibet_.
* Blake et Mortimer, Le mystère de la grande pyramide - E.P. Jacobs
(1954-1955)
* Little Nemo - Winsor McCay (1905)
May be my own no. 1.
* Lucky Luke, Le Pied-Tendre - Morris/Goscinny (1968)
Buy the recent English _LL_ translations before it's too late!! My
favourite is _Ma Dalton_, I think.
* Vive les femmes - Jean Marc Reiser (1978)
And last, but not least...
* Zig et Puce - Alain Saint-Ogan (1925)
Soooo... let's see... what works do we find in both lists...
Pivot TCJ
----- ---
Terry and the Pirates - Milton Caniff top 10 23
Little Nemo - Winsor McCay top 10 5
Krazy Kat - George Herriman top 25 1
Peanuts - Charles Schulz top 25 2
The Spirit - Will Eisner top 49 15
Prince Valiant - Hal Foster top 49 100
Dick Tracy - Chester Gould top 49 33
Popeye - E.C. Segar top 49 11
Mad - Kurtzman and friends top 49 8
If you take average scores for Pivot's 'top x' entries, the combined
result would be as follows:
1. Little Nemo - Winsor McCay (5.5 + 5 = 10.5)
2. Krazy Kat - George Herriman (18 + 1 = 19)
3. Peanuts - Charles Schulz (18 + 2 = 20)
4. Terry and the Pirates - Milton Caniff (5.5 + 23 = 28.5)
5. Mad - Kurtzman and friends (37.5 + 8 = 45.5)
6. Popeye - E.C. Segar (37.5 + 11 = 48.5)
7. The Spirit - Will Eisner (37.5 + 15 = 52.5)
8. Dick Tracy - Chester Gould (37.5 + 33 = 70.5)
9. Prince Valiant - Hal Foster (37.5 + 100 = 137.5)
And, of course, the big question is: why isn't Alison Bechdel on this
list?!
Proost,
Arthur.
Kevin J. Maroney
>What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
Aren't the _Weirdo_ stories both more coherent and obviously
autobiographical than Crumb's earlier work? While he's always featured
himself prominently in his work, before the _Weirdo_ stories his
stories tended to be phantasmogoria rather than autobiography. (I
would say that it's obvious that his collaborations with Pekar
reshaped his work significantly.)
> Something by Raymond Briggs- if not Gentleman Jim, at least When The
>Wind Blows.
>
> Bryan Talbot- if not Luther Arkwright, at least The Tale Of One Bad
>Rat.
Two excellent choices. I've mentioned recently that I found _Luther
Arkwright_ to be brilliant and it's also unmistakably influential.
> The last two highlight a real problem with the classification: they
>should have just gone ahead and made it American comics; "published in
>English" is far too broad for the list that resulted. For one thing,
>it includes translation, and I don't remember seeing Tintin or Asterix
>on the list..but mainly, there's a lot of British work that's just
>plain ignored.
What on the list was translated?
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
"Love doesn't have a point. Love *is* the point."--Alan Moore
Duncan
Arthur van Kruining wrote:
> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Still, I'm glad they did it. I LOVE lists...
>
> Here's another one. It's an old (1987), strange and French top 50, but
> at least it's a mix of Euro and Americano, and it doesn't list
> illustrators.
Cool.
>
>
> La bande dessinée
> -----------------
>
> ... en 49 livres (you have to add the 50th book yourself)
>
> * Bicot président de club - Martin Branner (1920)
>
> This is _Winnie Winkle_, a American comic more popular in Europe and
> especially France.
>
> * La bête est morte! la guerre mondiale chez les animaux - E.F. Calvo
> (1944)
>
> Calvo was *the* funny animal artist in France, and this is his most
> impressive book.
I bet I'd just love it.
> Would be in my personal top 50 as well.
>
> * Les Trafiquants de la mer Rouge - Charlier/Hubinon (1966)
>
> A _Buck Danny_ adventure. I thought this was good, until I read _Steve
> Canyon_. Rip-off down to the logo. But a very entertaining rip-off.
> Enjoyable even when football isn't called off.
>
> * Les Mille et Une Nuits - Richard Corben (1979)
>
> Here's your precious Corben, Duncan. Happy now? :) Is the English
> original still available? Is it any good? Please enlighten.
1001 Nights. Sounds like the 1001 New Tales Of Sinbad (or whatever). The
series originally ran in Heavy Metal, poss. written by Jan Strnad. Or Bruce
Jones. Or Simon Revelstroke. I'm pretty sure you'd hate him Arthur. He does
bog standard occult fantasy with big dollops of fleshy sexuality everywhere
which he keeps trying to cover up (so that he doesn't have to keep putting
Mature Reader labels everywhere) but which keeps just breaking through.
Actually, I don't like him *that* much it's just that there's something
about his artwork which fascinates me (he does try out computer effects a
lot, usually with lousy results) and mainly that he's been around since
forever (30 years actually. Since the beginning of Slow Death) which means
a great deal of what happens in fantasy comics now (eg Vertigo) has often
as not been done already by him.
>
>
> * Spirit: Qui a tué Cox Robin? - Will Eisner (1987)
>
> BTW, the dates refer to the year of publication in France.
>
> * Mandrake - Lee Falk et Phil Davis (1934)
>
> And sometimes they don't. Unless Futuropolis was already in business
> during the 1930s. _Mandrake_ didn't make the TCJ list, did it? Well,
> it's certainly better than anything by John *J.* Muth.
Alright already. I was thinking of M, anyway, not Mythology Of An Abandoned
City. Yes it's pretentios twaddle but it's (sort of) original pretentious
twaddle.
Didn't Lee Falk do the Phantom as well?
>
>
> * Barbarella - Jean-Claude Forest (1962)
>
> Not my choice for best Forest. I rate _Ici-même_ and the 'Jonque
> Fantôme' book much higher. The latter might even end up in my top 20.
> Yes, it's *that* good!
I don't know but Barbarella was a bit of a cult book here until recently.
>
>
> * Prince Vaillant - Hal Foster (1940)
>
> At least 50 notches higher than in TCJ's list, which is how it should
> be. Top 10 material, IMHO.
Certainly could've been higher in the TCJ list...
>
>
> * Les Naufragés du temps - Gillon/Forest (1974)
>
> I.e., the first four volumes of this 10 vol. SF series. The others are
> not as good.
>
> * Route vers l'enfer - Goosens (1986)
>
> This should please Scott Gilbert. :)
>
> * La Rubrique-à-brac - Marcel Gotlib (1970)
>
> Way too wordy for my taste.
>
> * Dick Tracy - Chester Gould (1931)
>
> Rated about as high here as in TCJ's list.
>
> * Le Roi des Zôtres - Michel Greg (1977)
>
> An _Achille Talon_ episode. Classic Euro humor series that won't
> translate very well into English, I'm afraid.
>
> * Cocco Bill - Benito Jacovitti (1975)
>
> Great salami western.
>
> * Jean Valhardi, détective - Joseph Jijé (1945)
>
> Not familiar with this...
>
> * Pim Pam Poum - Harold Knerr
>
> French title of _The Katzenjammer Kids_.
>
> * Les Pionier de l'espérance - Lecureux/Poïvet (1945)
>
> Superior adventure series. Poïvet's drawing skills match those of the
> great Alex Raymond. Magnifique!
>
> * La Cité des eaux mouvantes - Mézières/Christin (1970)
>
> A spatio-temporal adventure of _Valerian_. A few _Valerian_ books have
> been translated into English, I believe. Check them out, they're fun.
That isn't Pierre Christian is it? Surely not...
>
>
> * Alack Sinner, flic ou privé - Munoz/Sampayo (1983)
>
> Also en anglais.
Fuckinell. One I've read at last.
>
>
> * Le Chien des Basketville - Pétillon (1979)
>
> Excellent, wild and absurd book.
>
> * Flash Gordon - Alex Raymond
>
> Superior adventure series. Raymond's drawing skills match those of the
> great Raymond Poïvet. Magnifique!
>
> * Popeye - Elzie Crisler Segar (1929)
>
> Cet anti-héros laid, borgne et antipathique a réussi à faire ingurguter
> des tonnes d'épinards à des générations de jeunes fans...
Alright, alright...
>
>
> * Bob et Bobette, Le Fantôme espagnol - Willy Vandersteen (1952)
>
> Good choice. This is one of my fave Bob et Bobette stories as well.
>
> * Un max de Mad (1952)
>
> _Mad_.
>
> On to the top 25.
>
> ... en 25 livres
>
> * Les Frustrés - Claire Bretecher (1975)
>
> * Le Grand Duduche - Cabu (1967)
>
> Also very wordy. That's the main reason why I haven't read it yet.
>
> * Blueberry, La Mine de l'Allemand perdu - Charlier/Giraud (1972)
>
> Mojo's English translation should still be available...
That's the story only available on Mojo is it? No it's not, Lost Dutchman's
Mine (only doesn't that translate as Lost German's Mine?) Whatever, that's
in colour in the Epic series...
>
>
> * Fritz the Cat - Robert Crumb (1972)
>
> Bad choice of Crumb. Baaaad choice.
No kidding. Makes you wonder just why the French are being so nice to
him...
>
>
> * Les Pieds nickelés arrivent - Louis Forton (1908-1927)
>
> Never seen it, I only know the Pellos version.
>
> * Le Petit Cirque - Fred (1973)
>
> "Absurde d'un poésie cruelle, absurde d'un monde irréel et insolite qui
> suscite une étrange nostalgie." Superfine book. Every home should have
> one. Would be in my personal top 25 as well.
Not... critters, is it?
>
>
> * Krazy Kat - George Herriman (1911)
>
> Didn't make the top 10 here!
>
> * Coeurs de sable - Loustal/Paringaud
>
> Well, this is certainly not a bad book, but ranking it as high as _Krazy
> Kat_ seriously hurts this list's credibility.
This has been translated. Love Shots is it? I know that's not a literal
trans. (Hearts Of Sable - doesn't make sense). It's on Catalan, anyway.
I've got it, I think, and I didn't think it *that* good.
>
>
> * La Ballade de la mer salée - Hugo Pratt (1975)
>
> Also available in English. Get it now!
Ballad Of The Salt Sea. Yeah, I gots it, I gots it. One of the two big
versions here (the other's The Celts). Rest are on NBM. This is also the
one currently being reissued as a comic (also NBM).
>
>
> * Snoopy écrivain - Charles M. Schulz (1950)
>
> "Snoopy le chien philosophe, Charlie Brown l'éternel perdant, Linus le
> surdoué inquiet, Schroeder le musicien égocentrique forment les
> _Peanuts_.
Lemme see... Snoopy the philosopher dog, Charlie Brown the eternal lost
child, Linus the [unquiet soul is that?], Schroeder the egocentric
musician...
Typical over-intellectualising. Snoopy's a beagle, not a "philosopher dog".
> Leur dialogues n'ont cessé à travers des millions de 'strips'
> de donner un sens à la vie, essentiellement avec des point de
> suspension.."
It has to be in any exhaustive list but that don't mean I gots to read it,
no sirree...
>
>
> * Félix le chat - Pat Sullivan (1923)
>
> High-ranked thanks to an excellent Horay collection.
>
> * L'Art moderne - Joost Swarte (1980)
>
> Holland spreekt een woordje mee!
That's had a trans. He's done something more well known than that though,
hasn't he?
>
>
> "L'apotheose de la ligne clair, l'humour subversif en sus."
"The apotheosis of the 'clear line' (style), the humour is subversive [en
sus?]" Those crazy Dutch guys... :-)
>
>
> * Adèle et la bête - Jacques Tardi (1976)
>
> Not nearly the best Tardi, IMO.
No. The first though? Dark Horse published it, I think.
>
>
> * Surboum sur 4 roues - Maurice Tillieux (1961)
>
> Who'd've thunk this was as good as _Krazy Kat_?! I wouldn't. And, of
> course, it isn't, but it's good nostalgic fun anyhow.
>
> * Tragique destins - Vuillemin (1985)
>
> *Not* the apotheosis of the ligne clair.
I'll take your word for it...
>
>
> And now it's time to wake up the horn section, because here is the top
> ten!!
>
> * Terry et les pirates - Milton Caniff (1934)
Uh-huh
>
>
> * Mickey et lîle volante - Walt Disney (1937)
Oh, puh-lease...
>
>
> * Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
>
> Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
> world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
Critters right?
>
>
> * Astérix et Cléopatre - Goscinny/Uderzo (1934)
>
> One of my favorites as well. Although it's damn hard to choose from such
> a consistenlty brilliant series.
I like Asterix, I guess. Bit of an institution, though (understatement).The
movie bombed, didn't it?
>
>
> * Le Lotus bleu - Hergé (1934)
>
> I always thought _The Blue Lotus_ was one of the lesser Tintins. I
> prefer _Tintin in Tibet_.
And if there's Asterix there must be TinTin...
>
>
> * Blake et Mortimer, Le mystère de la grande pyramide - E.P. Jacobs
> (1954-1955)
...not to mention Blake & Mortimer. Actually, this is the only one of the
first three (? Time Trap & Mystery of Atlantis) not translated (Comcat).
>
>
> * Little Nemo - Winsor McCay (1905)
>
> May be my own no. 1.
If we're only allowed early stuff at no.1, then yeah. Me too.
>
>
> * Lucky Luke, Le Pied-Tendre - Morris/Goscinny (1968)
>
> Buy the recent English _LL_ translations before it's too late!! My
> favourite is _Ma Dalton_, I think.
No chance of finding it now.
>
>
> * Vive les femmes - Jean Marc Reiser (1978)
>
> And last, but not least...
>
> * Zig et Puce - Alain Saint-Ogan (1925)
Never 'eard of either of 'em.
Not one single British comic in the list. Compile a list of books in France
- not a single British one. Compile a list of movies - not a single British
one. We just love each other.
Actually, I'm suprised there's no sci-fi in there. No Cosey either. On the
other hand, why *that* Tardi, why not Roack Killer, say. Which magazine did
you say this was done for Arthur?
>
>
> Soooo... let's see... what works do we find in both lists...
>
> Pivot TCJ
> ----- ---
> Terry and the Pirates - Milton Caniff top 10 23
> Little Nemo - Winsor McCay top 10 5
> Krazy Kat - George Herriman top 25 1
> Peanuts - Charles Schulz top 25 2
> The Spirit - Will Eisner top 49 15
> Prince Valiant - Hal Foster top 49 100
> Dick Tracy - Chester Gould top 49 33
> Popeye - E.C. Segar top 49 11
> Mad - Kurtzman and friends top 49 8
>
> If you take average scores for Pivot's 'top x' entries, the combined
> result would be as follows:
>
> 1. Little Nemo - Winsor McCay (5.5 + 5 = 10.5)
> 2. Krazy Kat - George Herriman (18 + 1 = 19)
> 3. Peanuts - Charles Schulz (18 + 2 = 20)
> 4. Terry and the Pirates - Milton Caniff (5.5 + 23 = 28.5)
> 5. Mad - Kurtzman and friends (37.5 + 8 = 45.5)
> 6. Popeye - E.C. Segar (37.5 + 11 = 48.5)
> 7. The Spirit - Will Eisner (37.5 + 15 = 52.5)
> 8. Dick Tracy - Chester Gould (37.5 + 33 = 70.5)
> 9. Prince Valiant - Hal Foster (37.5 + 100 = 137.5)
And there we have, I guess, the bona fide nine classic English language
comics. Add on Asterix and Tin Tin, take out Mad (since it isn't a strip
but an anthology of sorts) and there you have the ten classic Western
comics.
(Except for all the others, of course.)
>
>
> And, of course, the big question is: why isn't Alison Bechdel on this
> list?!
Beats the hell out of me. Why aren't they voting for more recent American
stuff? This is an awfully conservative list, isn't it? Very interesting
though. Cheers.
Duncan
Duncan wrote:
> Arthur van Kruining wrote:
>
>
> > Here's another one. It's an old (1987), strange and French top 50
>
> Why aren't they voting for more recent American
> stuff?
Sorry 'bout that...
Duncan
Kevin J. Maroney wrote:
>
>
> What on the list was translated?
>
Dunno. Some of Julie Doucet's early comics were in French weren't they?
Otherwise...?
Tom Spurgeon
>> small-to-medium article. Remember, our definition of comics is broad
>> enough that you get a lot of the great comics-art illustrators.
>Fancy dropping a few names there, Tom?
Steadman and Gilliam pop to mind. I made a list at one point...
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
NYSteve11
writes:
>Correct
>me if I’m wrong (and crossing over genres as much as poss.) but there’s no
>Ho Che Anderson; there’s no Dennis Eichorn; there’s no Dave Sim; there’s no
>Bryan Talbot (unforgivable); there’s no Dean Motter; there’s no Ed Brubaker
>(ridiculous); there’s no Al Williamson; there’s no ‘Anton Dreck’
>(whaaaatt?); there’s no Steve Bissette; there’s no Peter Kuper; there’s no
>Phil Hester; there’s no Martin Rowson; there’s no Frank Miller; there’s no
>Dave Cooper; there’s no Howard Chaykin; there’s no Dave Sch...you know who;
>there’s no P Craig Russell; there’s no Jason Lutes; there’s no Alex Toth;
>there’s no David Collier; there’s no John Bergin; there’s no Bob Fingerman;
>there’s no Melinda Gebbe; there’s no Veitch and Irons; there’s no Matt
>Groenig; there’s no Joe Matt; there’s no Rick Veitch; there’s no Frank
>Stack; there’s no Richard Corben (not to everyone’s taste, I know); there’s
>no Hunt Emerson (ditto, including mine). The guy who does Optic Nerve isn’t
>there; there’s no Jon Muth; there’s no Ted McKeever; there’s no Morrison &
>Yeowell; there’s no Milligan & McCarthey; there’s no James Kolchka; there’s
>no Steve Bell; there’s no Richard Sala; there’s no Pander Bros; there’s no
>Paul Pope; there’s no Michael Ziulli; there’s no Rick Geary; there’s no
>Matt Howarth; there’s no Trina Robbins; there’s no Michael Allred or Bernie
>Mireault; there’s no Mary Fleener; there’s no Mark Schultz; there’s no Mack
>White; there’s no Donna Barr (huh?). You wouldn’t need to include *all* of
>these, obviously. But some...
All tied for 101st.
Go figger.
Steve Wacker
NYSteve11
>My hope that the list will be a conversation starter about the entirety of
>the medium as it has existed in America this century.
Then well done. At least here on usenet.
Strangely people in my office seem severly unaffected "shocking" list. I
brought up Sim's omission to my supervisor and he threw hot Yuuban in my face
and gave me some envelopes to lick.
Where's the anger over "Cerebus" vs. "For Better Or Worse"!?!?!?!?!
What about Atari Force!?!?!?!
Damn you.
> I think we lose
>ourselves waiting for the new comics stack sometimes, and forget how much
>great work has been published if you take a step back and widen your
>perspective.
Maybe. Some people just REALLY love Superman, though.
Steve Wacker
uber alles
Kevin J. Maroney
>Idiots abroad is a Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers story: drug crazed
>hippy humour, but *good* drug crazed hippy humour.
It's far from my favorite _Freak Brothers_. I think my favorite is the
issue where they move out to the country (is that #5?). It was Gilbert
Shelton's first forray into a full-length (i.e., 20+ page) narrative,
and it holds together very well. Also, the collection of strips where
the Brothers are evicted and split up was about as funny as the
undergrounds ever got, which is to say, very funny indeed.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Tom Spurgeon
> A few random thoughts...
>
> Donald Duck by Barks above Uncle Scrooge by Barks?
You probably are thinking about content of stories rather than what
stories appeared in the Donald Duck run.
>What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
They all appeared in Weirdo?
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Kevin J. Maroney
All of the _Dirty Plotte_ material I've seen was in a mixture of
French and English, mostly English. Perhaps she did publish some of it
in French first, but the comics themselves are North American,
English-language originals produced for the NorthAm market.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
Mark Rosenfelder
Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>Mark Rosenfelder wrote:
>> It would have been better to make this a separate column, as for European
>> comics.
>
>I agree, although do you mean there *was* a seperate European list or
>should've been? Only Tom seemed to imply that there wasn't on the grounds (my
>interpretation) of not wanting to include translations which is
>understandable, I guess, but still a mistake (aren't Tardi and Vellenkoop
>bilingual? The L'Officiers and the Pander Bros.are...)
The presss release mentions that some of the columnists included their
own lists; one was European translations. It'd be nice to have just a
Euro comics list, but Arthur's list is a good start on that. :)
>> And by the way, if you're going to include George Price, you'd
>> might as well credit the New Yorker editors who wrote most of his
>> captions.
>
>...one of the names I didn't recognise.
Notable for his weird blocky drawing style... if you've seen New Yorker
cartoons much you'd recognize him. No idea why he was chosen over, say,
John Held or George Booth.
>> Dennis the Menace was
>> rated higher??
>
>It's not even the original... And *that* wasn't as good as Baxendale's Bash
>Street Kids. You might as well include Captain Kremmen...
Just to make sure-- you're thinking of the American or the British
Dennis the Menace? They're completely different strips. The American
one is the one in the list.
>> 4. The most provincial omission: Alison Bechdel. Did we really need "Hey
>> Look!" over her? Again, I can't imagine a serious critical reason for
>> passing her over; it's most likely a matter of unfamiliarity. But the
>> compilers *should* be familiar with her...
>
>I'm not. Who is she? The best thing about this list is that it throws up a
>bunch of people I don't know...
Does "Dykes to Watch Out For". Your local gay & lesbian bookstore is
sure to have them. Just barge right in and ask.
>> And now on to matters of taste.
>>
>> 5. Poor Duncan will be chagrined to find funny animal comics in 4 of the
>> top 7 positions.
>
>Chagrined? I'm practically chewing the carpet, matey... Nah, actually I dig
>Krazy Kat; I'm pretty sure I should like Feiffer; I like Maus of course (with
>or without black dogs). I know who Pogo is but I'm not familiar with the
>scripts - I think I'd hate it. Donald Duck? Feh... So yeah, you're mostly
>right. Maus aside, are these really supposed to be a better read than, I
>don't know, The Chuckling Whatsit or Black Kiss or whatever? I think not...
Feiffer isn't funny animals. Krazy Kat isn't for everyone; but as you do
like it you might well like Pogo as well. Though perhaps the dialect and
political references won't travel well-- you may find it as baffling as
Tank Girl often is for me. Is it better than The Chuckling Whatsit? Yes.
>> 6. More omissions, of varying importance: Gus Arriola,
>Who?
Author of Gordo. You'd hate it-- it has critters. Some people swear by
it, though.
>> Walt Holcombe, Lynn Johnston,
>Who? Whom?
Holcombe did "The King of Persia", which is eccentric and charming, and
"Poot", which is the same only a little less so. :) Lynn Johnston does
"For Better of For Worse", which IMHO is the best of the domestic comedy
newspaper strips. The TCJ doesn't seem to like these unless their authors
are dead.
Mark Rosenfelder
Jarret Cooper <jar...@sirius.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone ever look at these lists and post saying how much they agree
>> with every choice?
>
>this one with the AFI's film list and [whoever's] 100 novels) for what
>they are, rather than get all pissy and self-righteous because of
>perceived "arrogance"? Why is any attempt at critical consensus so
>threatening to people?
Perhaps because there can be no such thing?
As someone else said, the original list is interesting; the list plus
people's reactions to it is even more so.
>> 2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers.
>
>More absurd than treating them like one person?
5 - 3 = 2.
>> 3. The most inconscionable omission: Dave Sim. Dennis the Menace was
>> rated higher?? To an extent it may be part of the bias against living
>> storytellers exhibited by the list; but Sim has expanded the boundaries of
>> the medium more than many an experimentalist. It's hard not to suspect
>> that the reason behind such blindness is personal animosity.
>
>Yeah, not to sound like a Sim disciple (or apologist, as it's bound to
>be perceived), but COME ON. I was genuinely surprised by this. I'm
>sure Dave wasn't...
Not to mention poor Gerhard. :)
David Tallan
wrote:
I don't know about Barks (more's the pity) But Feiffer, Pogo and
Peanuts were definitely not pre-War (unless you mean the Vietnam War).
I'm not sure but I think Peanuts may have started in 1954, for
example.
Respectfully,
David Tallan (dta...@interlog.com)
Read the first issue of GALAXION for FREE at:
http://www.interlog.com/~dtallan/galaxion/
Mark Rosenfelder
Arthur van Kruining <arth...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Here's another one. It's an old (1987), strange and French top 50, but
>at least it's a mix of Euro and Americano, and it doesn't list
>illustrators.
Neat. Thanks for posting it (and the TCJ list too). I'm making notes for
my next trip abroad...
>* Bicot président de club - Martin Branner (1920)
>
>This is _Winnie Winkle_, a American comic more popular in Europe and
>especially France.
Wow, why? I have to admit I've only read the later years of this.
>* Les Mille et Une Nuits - Richard Corben (1979)
>
>Here's your precious Corben, Duncan. Happy now? :) Is the English
>original still available? Is it any good? Please enlighten.
I like Corben too-- good low-rent adventure with unbelievably lurid
colors. I think you have to look for him in the used comix bins.
>* La Rubrique-à-brac - Marcel Gotlib (1970)
>
>Way too wordy for my taste.
I loved the first volume-- the others fall off, IMHO. But then I love
Kurtzman's Mad, too. I have a soft spot for Gai-Luron, too.
>* Le Roi des Zôtres - Michel Greg (1977)
>
>An _Achille Talon_ episode. Classic Euro humor series that won't
>translate very well into English, I'm afraid.
I can't imagine it would. Although it's actually being adapted as an
animated series called "Walter Melon".
>* La Cité des eaux mouvantes - Mézières/Christin (1970)
>
>A spatio-temporal adventure of _Valerian_. A few _Valerian_ books have
>been translated into English, I believe. Check them out, they're fun.
Seconded! I think 4 have appeared in English... good luck finding 'em.
>* Popeye - Elzie Crisler Segar (1929)
>
>Cet anti-héros laid, borgne et antipathique a réussi à faire ingurguter
>des tonnes d'épinards à des générations de jeunes fans...
For the benefit of furriners: "This ugly, one-eyed, antipathetic anti-hero
managed to make generatons of young fans swallow tons of spinach."
>* Les Frustrés - Claire Bretecher (1975)
One volume has appeared in English (that I know of).
>* Le Petit Cirque - Fred (1973)
>
>"Absurde d'un poésie cruelle, absurde d'un monde irréel et insolite qui
>suscite une étrange nostalgie." Superfine book. Every home should have
>one. Would be in my personal top 25 as well.
"Absurd with a cruel poetry, a surreal and unique world which evokes a
strange nostalgia."
Is this part of Philemon, or a separate story? I've just read one of his,
"L'histoire du corbac aux baskets", which is sort of a cross between Kafka
and Krazy Kat.
>* Snoopy écrivain - Charles M. Schulz (1950)
>
>"Snoopy le chien philosophe, Charlie Brown l'éternel perdant, Linus le
>surdoué inquiet, Schroeder le musicien égocentrique forment les
>_Peanuts_. Leur dialogues n'ont cessé à travers des millions de 'strips'
>de donner un sens à la vie, essentiellement avec des point de
>suspension.."
"Snoopy the philosophical dog, Charlie Brown the eternal loser, Linus the
troubled genius, and Schroeder the egotistical musician make up Peanuts.
Their dialogs have not, over millions of strips, stopped [trying to] make
sense of life, essentially with ellipses."
What about Lucy??
>* L'Art moderne - Joost Swarte (1980)
>
>Holland spreekt een woordje mee!
Why just that one?
>"L'apotheose de la ligne clair, l'humour subversif en sus."
"The apotheosis of the clear line [a la Herge]; plus subversive humor."
And a glorious sense of style.
>* Tragique destins - Vuillemin (1985)
>
>*Not* the apotheosis of the ligne clair.
La ligne moutonnee? I've just seen his "Sales blagues", which are amusing
but hardly top 25 material.
>* Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
>
>Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
>world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
One of those series, like Valerian, that should succeed here but doesn't.
>* Astérix et Cléopatre - Goscinny/Uderzo (1934)
>
>One of my favorites as well. Although it's damn hard to choose from such
>a consistenlty brilliant series.
This one is great; my personal fave is Asterix chez les Bretons.
>* Le Lotus bleu - Hergé (1934)
>
>I always thought _The Blue Lotus_ was one of the lesser Tintins. I
>prefer _Tintin in Tibet_.
Perhaps they chose _Lotus_ because it marks a sea change in Herge toward
greater documentation and sensitivity.
>* Blake et Mortimer, Le mystère de la grande pyramide - E.P. Jacobs
>(1954-1955)
Some of these I think you have to have read when you're 14 or less...
>And, of course, the big question is: why isn't Alison Bechdel on this
>list?!
I don't know if I'd put her on a worldwide Top 50. Ralf Konig, yes.
I'm a bit surprised at no Crepax.
Who would appear if the list were compiled today? I'd add Bilal,
Bourgeon, Schuiten & Peeters. Trondheim, perhaps? And since Argentina is
in Europe, at least in its own mind, Quino's Mafalda.
Todd VerBeek
>>> 4. The most provincial omission: Alison Bechdel. Did we really need "Hey
>>> Look!" over her? Again, I can't imagine a serious critical reason for
>>> passing her over; it's most likely a matter of unfamiliarity. But the
>>> compilers *should* be familiar with her...
>Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>>I'm not. Who is she? The best thing about this list is that it throws up a
>>bunch of people I don't know...
My pal Mark Rosenfelder said:
>Does "Dykes to Watch Out For". Your local gay & lesbian bookstore is
>sure to have them. Just barge right in and ask.
It's also carried in lots of alernative weekly newspapers.
>>> Lynn Johnston,
>> Whom?
>... Lynn Johnston does
>"For Better of For Worse", which IMHO is the best of the domestic comedy
>newspaper strips.
One of the things that's notable about "For Better..." (aside from the
overall quality of the writing) is that Johnston works in the tradition of
"Gasoline Alley", featuring her characters being born, growing up, growing
old, and dying, more or less in keeping with the calendar. I can't get
over what a =man= Michael has become, and it seems like only yesterday
when they were trying to decide what to name April. And despite the
ongoing stories, she still manages to make each 3-panel strip stand on its
own (unlike, say, "Mary Worth").
Cheers, Todd
Mark Rosenfelder
Tom Spurgeon <t...@tcj.com> wrote:
>Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
>excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
>regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
>not even barely qualified to take even a first shot at engaging the world
>comics scene. On top of that, I know from reading stuff in translation and
>then struggling through the French (Trondheim, Baru) that you're really in
>danger of a false appraisal of work based on translation.
Ooh, are you saying Kim Thompson isn't a good translator? :) (I've only
looked at a couple pages of the English version-- it seemed better done
than most.)
While we've got you on the line, if Fantagraphics is going to give
Trondheim another go, may I push _Donjon_ rather than another Lapinot?
I think it'd appeal to a much larger segment of the comics audience.
Martin Wisse
wrote:
>mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl (Martin Wisse) wrote:
>
>>Idiots abroad is a Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers story: drug crazed
>>hippy humour, but *good* drug crazed hippy humour.
>
>It's far from my favorite _Freak Brothers_. I think my favorite is the
>issue where they move out to the country (is that #5?). It was Gilbert
>Shelton's first forray into a full-length (i.e., 20+ page) narrative,
>and it holds together very well. Also, the collection of strips where
>the Brothers are evicted and split up was about as funny as the
>undergrounds ever got, which is to say, very funny indeed.
Nah, the best issue was "the Freak Brothers come down", which turend into a
photo strip when they became clean.
Martin Wisse
Martin Wisse
>
>
>Arthur van Kruining wrote:
>
>> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > Still, I'm glad they did it. I LOVE lists...
>>
>> Here's another one. It's an old (1987), strange and French top 50, but
>> at least it's a mix of Euro and Americano, and it doesn't list
>> illustrators.
>
>Cool.
>
>> * Le Roi des Zôtres - Michel Greg (1977)
>>
>> An _Achille Talon_ episode. Classic Euro humor series that won't
>> translate very well into English, I'm afraid.
But why even the French would think this is good enough for a top fifty
entry, i really don't know.
>> * La Cité des eaux mouvantes - Mézières/Christin (1970)
>>
>> A spatio-temporal adventure of _Valerian_. A few _Valerian_ books have
>> been translated into English, I believe. Check them out, they're fun.
>
>That isn't Pierre Christian is it? Surely not...
It is. I believe Valerian was his breakthrough strip. Great stuff.
>> * Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
>>
>> Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
>> world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
>
>Critters right?
Nope. Just the finest and most anarchistic humour strip ever produced.
It's about an office boy named Gaston Lagaffe, (unimaginably translated asGomer
Goof by Kimp Thompson) who works in the Brussels headquarters of Dupuis,
and drives his bosses, including Fantasio of Franquin's other classic strip
completely round the bend with his inventions culinairy and other experiments
ansd his menagerie of cats, seagulls and goldfish.
(Wheh)
Martin Wisse
Jarret Cooper
David Tallan wrote:
>
> I don't know about Barks (more's the pity) But Feiffer, Pogo and
> Peanuts were definitely not pre-War (unless you mean the Vietnam War).
> I'm not sure but I think Peanuts may have started in 1954, for
> example.
The strip "Feiffer" (or "Sick, Sick, Sick" as it was first known) began
in 1956. Peanuts debuted October 2, 1950. Pogo started in comic books
at the end of 1942; the comic strip began in 1948 and was syndicated in
1949. I don't know from Barks.
j
c
--
Jarret Cooper
Audio DSP Engineer / PC Development
Arboretum Systems, Inc.
ronan
Have to agree with Mute here. I enjoy the Uncle $crooge stories better than
the earlier DD, but I certainly think either or both qualify Barks for his
high position on "the list." The $crooge stories have a pointed political
content, as well as a more nuanced narrative exposition than the early Donald
stories. but what do I know, I have just come to Barks, having finished
reading the Carl Barks Library only in the last few months. Ducks lovers are
probably even more determinate in what period, or group of stories, Barks was
at his best.
Crumb, on the other hand... Tom's answer, "they all appeared in Weirdo," is
both correct and unsatisfying. I think one of the real important aspect of
Crumb's Weirdo stories is the crucial connection his continuing
(auto)biographical narratives make between the underground and 80's
alternatives. Distinct in both style (his crosshatching becomes neuroticly
meticulous) and tone (more pessimism, less euphoric LSD-ity hippie shit,
left-eco-feminism-popcult are references not primary subject) from both his
Zap work and the solo titles of 70-74, I think the "Weirdo" designation for
Crumb's list placement makes an interesting choice. now there's a vote
tabulation I would be very interested to know.
ronan
ronan
<massively wack shit snipped. duncan IS da bomb>
> One result of a list like this, because it covers the whole century, is
> that a whole C20th history of comics is invented by default, one that is
> utterly subjective in what it includes and excludes but which can easily be
> taken as gospel. Given the enormous effect that non-Americans have had on
> the comic industry that would be a huge mistake.
>
> Still, despite all that I’m glad they made the effort.
me too. don't idealize the list, idealize the list. whose gospel? aren't
gospel texts those most up for grabs for the "correct" and "proper"
interpretation? those inventions "by default" is the history of that whole
C20th comics reception: popular, critical, material. how can a list printed in
a journal in late 1999 capture it all? well Tom gave it a specific and well
defined shot, made it a collaborative process, and came up with a bonafide
hit, generating more serious discusssion about comics (inclusion/exclusion,
which stories, etc) than any other thread, message, missive, or press release
since I can remember. also, the strength of the excluded comics, and their
irreducible plurality, proves the strength and diversity of the medium over
the span of the C20th.
a nice parting shot Tom. Bravo.
ronan
Arthur van Kruining
[I wrote:]
> > * La bête est morte! la guerre mondiale chez les animaux - E.F. Calvo
> > (1944)
> >
> > Calvo was *the* funny animal artist in France, and this is his most
> > impressive book.
>
> I bet I'd just love it.
Yes. Because you don't really get a Calvo book for its story, but for
the beautiful pictures. In 'La bête' those pictures are *staggeringly*
beautiful. Think of it as the _Fantasia_ of comics.
Calvo's _Les Aventures de Rosalie_ is equally indispensable.
> > * Les Mille et Une Nuits - Richard Corben (1979)
> >
> > Here's your precious Corben, Duncan. Happy now? :) Is the English
> > original still available? Is it any good? Please enlighten.
>
> 1001 Nights. Sounds like the 1001 New Tales Of Sinbad (or whatever). The
> series originally ran in Heavy Metal, poss. written by Jan Strnad. Or Bruce
> Jones. Or Simon Revelstroke. I'm pretty sure you'd hate him Arthur.
Not really. His work may be tacky, but at least it's original, and I
like that technicolor dream-like ambiance. If only he was as obsessed
with telling good stories as he seems to be with the female physique.
> > * Mandrake - Lee Falk et Phil Davis (1934)
> >
> > And sometimes they don't. Unless Futuropolis was already in business
> > during the 1930s. _Mandrake_ didn't make the TCJ list, did it? Well,
> > it's certainly better than anything by John *J.* Muth.
>
> Alright already. I was thinking of M, anyway, not Mythology Of An Abandoned
> City. Yes it's pretentios twaddle but it's (sort of) original pretentious
> twaddle.
Haven't read _M_. Probably because I don't think much can be added to
Fritz Lang's film. It *is* an adaptation of that movie, isn't it?
> Didn't Lee Falk do the Phantom as well?
Yep. He passed away last week...
> > * Barbarella - Jean-Claude Forest (1962)
>
> I don't know but Barbarella was a bit of a cult book here until recently.
No doubt because of the cult movie adaptation. In the US it was
published by Grove Press no less. I think that the publisher, Eric
Losfeld, aimed for a succès de scandale à la _Histoire d'O_. Apart form
the movie it spawned similar libertine fantasy comics like _Jodelle_,
_Epoxy_ and _Saga de Xam_ which were also quite successful.
> > * La Cité des eaux mouvantes - Mézières/Christin (1970)
> >
> > A spatio-temporal adventure of _Valerian_. A few _Valerian_ books have
> > been translated into English, I believe. Check them out, they're fun.
>
> That isn't Pierre Christian is it? Surely not...
It's the Pierre Christin who also worked with Bilal and Tardi. A couple
of those Bilal/Christin books wouldn't look bad in a comics top 100. As
a matter of fact _Partie de Chasse_ and _Les Phalanges de l'ordre noir_
are mentioned in _La Bédétheque Idéale_. (The latter was translated into
English. Mile High Comics has a copy on auction every now and then.)
> > * Fritz the Cat - Robert Crumb (1972)
> >
> > Bad choice of Crumb. Baaaad choice.
>
> No kidding. Makes you wonder just why the French are being so nice to
> him...
I think that by '87 not all that much Crumb had been translated into
French. Apart from _Fritz the Cat_ maybe only that 30x40 Futuropolis
book. Strange...
> > * Le Petit Cirque - Fred (1973)
> >
> > "Absurde d'un poésie cruelle, absurde d'un monde irréel et insolite qui
> > suscite une étrange nostalgie." Superfine book. Every home should have
> > one. Would be in my personal top 25 as well.
>
> Not... critters, is it?
No! Are you familiar with _The Robber's Symphony_? _Le Petit Cirque_ has
that movie's magic 'sepiambiance'. Like the title says the book is about
a small circus. It's basically a man (not unlike Anthony Quinn in _La
Strada_, his wife and their child (in whom we slowly but certainly
recognize a little Philemon, who went on to star in Fred's inimitable
series, um, _Philemon_, which will have a place in my all-time top ten
no matter what mood I'm in) who have strange little adventures as they
drive their wagon through a surreal world. A must-have. And it doesn't
have much text, so you'd hardly need to grab for your dictionary. Order
it now at http://www.furetdunord.fr/
> > * Coeurs de sable - Loustal/Paringaud
> >
> > Well, this is certainly not a bad book, but ranking it as high as _Krazy
> > Kat_ seriously hurts this list's credibility.
>
> This has been translated. Love Shots is it? I know that's not a literal
> trans. (Hearts Of Sable - doesn't make sense). It's on Catalan, anyway.
> I've got it, I think, and I didn't think it *that* good.
It isn't. But the pictures are very pretty and that's what Loustal is
about.
> > * L'Art moderne - Joost Swarte (1980)
> >
> > Holland spreekt een woordje mee!
>
> That's had a trans. He's done something more well known than that though,
> hasn't he?
Perhaps you mean the _Coton + Piston_ series? You should also look for
the _Passi-Messa_ books, they're excellent.
> > * Adèle et la bête - Jacques Tardi (1976)
> >
> > Not nearly the best Tardi, IMO.
>
> No. The first though?
The first in the _Adèle_ series, but not his first book. That's _Rumeurs
sur le Rouergue_, an eco-political thing written by Pierre Christin. Not
bad, but not very good either.
> > * Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
> >
> > Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
> > world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
>
> Critters right?
NO! Although it has some of the best drawn animals in comics... _Gaston
Lagaffe_ is the Euro child of two great American comics: George Baker's
_Sad Sack_ and Bill Holman's _Smokey Stover_ (which wouldn't have been
out of place in the TCJ 100).
> I like Asterix, I guess. Bit of an institution, though (understatement).The
> movie bombed, didn't it?
Probably. But the animation movies from the 70s are well worth watching.
> > May be my own no. 1.
>
> If we're only allowed early stuff at no.1, then yeah. Me too.
What would be your no.1 if we're also allowed recent stuff? Don't say it
changes every minute. That's so inproductive.
> > * Lucky Luke, Le Pied-Tendre - Morris/Goscinny (1968)
> >
> > Buy the recent English _LL_ translations before it's too late!! My
> > favourite is _Ma Dalton_, I think.
>
> No chance of finding it now.
Yes chance. IIRC this very book was solicited only a few months ago.
I've seen the publisher in rec.arts.comics.european.
> > * Vive les femmes - Jean Marc Reiser (1978)
> >
> > And last, but not least...
> >
> > * Zig et Puce - Alain Saint-Ogan (1925)
>
> Never 'eard of either of 'em.
I've talked about Saint-Ogan in this newsgroup. About him being such an
influence on Hergé and all. Reiser's a genius. I got all his books when
I hardly read a word of French. (I should really read them again and
find out what they are about.) Ferocious stuff. Wild, anarchist, black
black humor and at the same time strangely moralistic and moving. You'd
love it.
> Not one single British comic in the list.
Well... E.P. Jacobs was extremely anglophile. At least that's something,
isn't it? :)
> Actually, I'm suprised there's no sci-fi in there.
Eh? _Barbarella_, _Les Naufragés du temps_, _Les Pionniers de
l'espérance_, _La Cité des eaux mouvantes_ and _Flash Gordon_. That's
10% of the list!
> No Cosey either.
Odd omission indeed. So is that of F'Murr, Chaland, Peeters/Schuiten,
Breccia, Hislaire and many others.
> On the
> other hand, why *that* Tardi, why not Roack Killer, say.
They don't say. My fave Tardis remain _Ici-même_ and _120, rue de la
gare_.
> Which magazine did
> you say this was done for Arthur?
It was a chapter from a book called _La Bibliothèque Ideale_. Each of
the fifty chapters lists the best 50 books in a particular category. Two
comics are mentioned in the book but not in the comics section. Jacques
Martin's _Le Fils de Spartacus_ is listed in the chapter called
'L'Antiquité', alongside the works of Nietzsche, Euripides, Plato and
Aristophanes (the playwright, not the cartoonist). Mattotti's _Fires_
got a place among the best books about war.
> > If you take average scores for Pivot's 'top x' entries, the combined
> > result would be as follows:
> >
> > 1. Little Nemo - Winsor McCay (5.5 + 5 = 10.5)
> > 2. Krazy Kat - George Herriman (18 + 1 = 19)
> > 3. Peanuts - Charles Schulz (18 + 2 = 20)
> > 4. Terry and the Pirates - Milton Caniff (5.5 + 23 = 28.5)
> > 5. Mad - Kurtzman and friends (37.5 + 8 = 45.5)
> > 6. Popeye - E.C. Segar (37.5 + 11 = 48.5)
> > 7. The Spirit - Will Eisner (37.5 + 15 = 52.5)
> > 8. Dick Tracy - Chester Gould (37.5 + 33 = 70.5)
> > 9. Prince Valiant - Hal Foster (37.5 + 100 = 137.5)
>
> And there we have, I guess, the bona fide nine classic English language
> comics.
Most notable absentee: Al Capp's _Li'l Abner_.
> Why aren't they voting for more recent American stuff?
Because the list was compiled in 1987. They could hardly put _Floyd
Farland_ in there, could they?
> This is an awfully conservative list, isn't it?
Well, it's compiled by Bernard Pivot and his team. For people whose
prime interest is in literature (for years Pivot was the charismatic
presenter of a literary TV show called _Apostrophes_) the choices are
still reasonably sound.
_La Bédéthéque Idéale_, which is a non-Pivot spin-off of the Pivot book,
lists a great deal of recent and more experimental stuff, but they don't
rank the books numerologically...
Proost,
Arthur.
Pang Peow Yeong
wrote:
>So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
>of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
>
Lat is probably the biggest name in Southeast Asian cartooning. He's
Malaysian and has produced a few humour strips taking a dig at life in
Malaysia as well as his semi-autobiographical "Kampung Boy" and "Town
Boy". Highly recommended!
Peow Yeong
If the people we love are stolen from us, the way to have them live on is to never stop loving them. Buildings burn. People die. But real love lives forever.
~ Sarah "The Crow" ~
Todd VerBeek
>>> One small point: the list doesn't skip the '50s at all. We have three runs
>>> of ECs, Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts, and Barks.
>On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 16:30:14 +0000, Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>>My mistake: one among many. Shows what I know about these guys. Although I
>>did mean the time they started: weren't Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts and Barks
>>around pre-War?
My pal David Tallan said:
>I don't know about Barks (more's the pity) But Feiffer, Pogo and
>Peanuts were definitely not pre-War (unless you mean the Vietnam War).
Or the Falklands. {smile}
>I'm not sure but I think Peanuts may have started in 1954, for example.
I don't know the dates from memory, but I did a "history of comics"
calendar as a school design project recently, and picked two or three key
series/characters to represent each decade. "Pogo" was in the 1940's
slot, so it may have been "War-era", but not "pre-War". "Peanuts" was one
of my picks for the 1950's, and I remember specifically picking an early
sample (first appearance of Snoopy) to go in that slot. Plus, "pre-War"
was 60 or more years ago... Sparky Schulz has been drawing Good Ol'
Charlie Brown for a long time, but not =that= long.
Anyway, as long as TCJ is listing the cognoscenti consensus, and various
folks are offering rebuttals, why not I? Here's a run-down of the rest of
what I selected for my project. Each month was assigned a standard
decade: January was the 1890's, February the 1900's, etc. My main goal
was to capture what was most significant or unique in the comics of each
decade, not necessarily the "best". My picks were motivated by my own
biases, what I was familiar with, what images I could get my hands on, and
what worked in the visual design. The credits I gave were the ones I
thought most appropriate based on the info I had.
1890's (Jan) The Yellow Kid by R.F.Outcault
The Katzenjammer Kids by Rudolph Dirks
1900's (Feb) Little Nemo in Slumberland by Winsor McKay
Mutt and Jeff by Bud Fisher
1910's (Mar) Krazy Kat by George Herriman
Bringing Up Father by George McManus
1920's (Apr) Popeye by E.C.Segar
Little Orphan Annie by Harold Gray
Tintin by Herge
1930's (May) Superman by Jerry Siegel & Joe Schuster
Batman by Bob Kane & Bill Finger
Prince Valiant by Hal Foster
1940's (Jun) Pogo by Walt Kelly
Veronica, Archie, & Betty by Bob Montana
Captain America by Joe Simon & Jack Kirby
1950's (Jul) Mad Magazine by Harvey Kurtzman & the Usual Gang of Idiots
The Crypt-Keeper from Willaim M. Gaines' EC Comics
Peanuts by Charles Schulz
1960's (Aug) Spider-Man by Stan Lee & Steve Ditko
The Fantastic Four by Stan Lee & Jack Kirby
Mr. Natural by Robert Crumb
1970's (Sep) A Contract with God by Will Eisner
Swamp Thing by Len Wein & Bernie Wrightson
Sgt. Rock [I never did find a suitable byline for him]
1980's (Oct) Watchmen by Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons
Maus by Art Spiegelman
Cerebus by Dave Sim
1990's (Nov) Spawn by Todd McFarlane
Bone by Jeff Smith
2000's (Dec) My Obsession with Chess by Scott McCloud
Icarus by Todd VerBeek [working title]
Yeah, I included a work of my own, even though it's still only in the
plotting stage. But it will be done by 2009, so it fits the specified
timeframe and it'll certainly capture the flavour of the decade for =me=.
Besides, aren't I allowed to have some fun with my art homework? {smile}
As for the rest, I hope the reasons I chose them will be fairly clear.
Let me know if they're not. If there are any glaring oversights... well,
um... I =wanted= to include them, but didn't have space. {smile}
Seriously, there were some hard choices, and the list of what I left out
is much longer than what I included.
Cheers, Todd
Douglas Wolk
Omissions from the list that didn't surprise me but that I woulda put
pretty high up: _Big Numbers_ and _Through The Habitrails_.
Omission from the list that _really_ surprised me and that I woulda put
_very_ high up: _Cerebus_. And from the number of other people who've
mentioned it as a serious omission, I'm curious, Tom: were there arguments
against it? and what were they?
I can see having a beef with Dave Sim's politics, but I think for sheer
craft, versatility, scope of vision and power to see it through, there are
very, very few cartoonists in his league.
--
Douglas Wolk dbc...@panix.com
"A slave who dies of natural causes will not balance two dead flies on the scale of eternity." --Eldridge Cleaver
ClckwrkO
"Morty the Dog" by Steve Willis
Mute
>>> 2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers.
>>
>>More absurd than treating them like one person?
>5 - 3 = 2.
There are actually at least three Hernandez Bros...
-Mute.
________________________
Mute
>mute...@hotmail.com (Mute) wrote:
>>What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
>Aren't the _Weirdo_ stories both more coherent and obviously
>autobiographical than Crumb's earlier work?
But weren't things like When The Niggers Take Over and some of the
Psychopathia Sexualis stuff in Weirdo, too? I don't know whether to
allow you coherent or not...I think he just keeps improving as he
goes, myself, so that would be the reason for any specific advance in
coherence. Your snipped point about working with Pekar is relevant
too, I suppose.
>> The last two highlight a real problem with the classification: they
>>should have just gone ahead and made it American comics; "published in
>>English" is far too broad for the list that resulted. For one thing,
>>it includes translation, and I don't remember seeing Tintin or Asterix
>>on the list..but mainly, there's a lot of British work that's just
>>plain ignored.
>What on the list was translated?
I meant that the phrase "published in English" allows for the
interpretation that it includes translated work, so they *could* have
had translated work but didn't. I was probably only paraphrasing
anyway; ignore me.
-Mute.
________________________
Mute
>In article <36f5...@news3.us.ibm.net>, mute...@hotmail.com (Mute) wrote:
>> A few random thoughts...
>>
>> Donald Duck by Barks above Uncle Scrooge by Barks?
>You probably are thinking about content of stories rather than what
>stories appeared in the Donald Duck run.
Well, I probably am, having read a bewildering array of Australian
reprints, US imports and whatever it was that my cousins had a
cupboard full of that I read when I spent a week in bed with pneumonia
in New Zealand when I was eight.
Are they all Huey/Dewey/Louie and/or Uncle Scrooge stuff regardless
of cover title?
>>What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
>They all appeared in Weirdo?
I still don't buy it. Why weren't the covers included, then?
I guess that my disagreement with both of these turned out to be the
same. And is shared by the five slots for L&R stuff by Beto and Jaime,
instead of two. I just think that distinct works, rather than the
cover title of one particular venue of a story's publication, should
be the determiner.
-Mute.
________________________
Mute
> On the other hand, I’d agree about
>the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
>the early issues.
Okay, I recant my quibbles about "Crumb's Weirdo stories"- the
voting was right!
>Superheroes: Lee and Kirby’s FF; Lee and Ditko’s SpiderMan. That’s OK. What
>about Lee and Ditko’s Dr Strange? Kirby’s Fourth World should have just
>been The Forever People. I’m sure Neal Adam’s Batman is there really, I
>just can’t find it. Roy Thomas and Barry Smith’s Conan should have been
>there, if only for inspiring a decade’s worth of sword & sorcery comics.
>Either that or they should have been throttled. Likewise - though it pains
>me to say it - Jim Starlin’s Warlock.
You're an old man. You smell funny.
>Personally, any time I see Moore’s Pictopia and Clowes’s Caricature in a
>list like this I get suspicious. Pictopia is a good story about the malign
>influence of recent superhero comics: first person to post the length of
>time it took Moore to sign up with Image after writing it gets a copy of
>Spawn no.8 (if I feel like it).
Six years. Spank you very much.
>And it’s a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
Oh, come on! Last week you didn't even know that Hobbes is
imaginary! Calvin & Hobbes is *the* shit.
>Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
>too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
>Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
>face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
>makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations.
Aye. Wish he wasn't waiting until 2001 for the next one.
-Mute.
________________________
Al Wesolowsky
:On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 19:58:10 GMT, kmar...@crossover.com (Kevin J. Maroney)
:wrote:
:
:>mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl (Martin Wisse) wrote:
:>
:>>Idiots abroad is a Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers story: drug crazed
:>>hippy humour, but *good* drug crazed hippy humour.
:>
:>It's far from my favorite _Freak Brothers_. I think my favorite is the
:>issue where they move out to the country (is that #5?). It was Gilbert
:>Shelton's first forray into a full-length (i.e., 20+ page) narrative,
:Nah, the best issue was "the Freak Brothers come down", which turend into a
:photo strip when they became clean.
That was good, as they became aware of their squalid surroundings.
For me, the best FFFB story and art was when Fat Freddie got the
munchies and, armed with a cleaver, pursued his roomies into the
grocery store.
"I'm Groucho Marx Jr., and we're about to start filming 'Candid Camera' in
this store."
The funniest single panel of all was during Freddie's dream about a "Wild
Bunch" shootout intended to spring Country Cowfreak from jail. The panel
shows the Hirsute Trio, dressed in long coats (to hide their guns)
striding in through the glass doors of the jail lobby. The two on the ends
make good their dramatic entrance, swinging back the doors, while Freddie
has chosen the middle "door," which is a plate-glass window. Thunmk!
Remember, my children, "Dope will get you through times of no money better
than money will get you through times of no dope."
--
Al B. Wesolowsky o Unlike J. W. Hardin, my foolish moves
a...@crsa.bu.edu o have been many.
Boston University o ---Michael Murphey
Estelle Souche
On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Duncan wrote:
> So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've
> never heard of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim,
> though.)
There's a site about David B. (in French) at:
By the way, on the same site there also are some pages about
Lewis Trondheim:
and Jochen Gerner:
http://www.kkn.com/jochen-gerner/
Estelle Souche
Mute
>> > Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
>> > translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
>> > published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
>>
>> Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
>> excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
>> regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
>I'll look forward to it.
If only Tom was going to still be there to send you the freebie he
promised...
>So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
>of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
I've never heard of David B. either, but I have two Lat books. He's
Malaysian, not European...
>> > > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
>> >
>> > Absolutely.
>>
>> Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
>> the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
>...and no Ty Templeton. Amazing.
Ty only talks about his own comics anyway...
-Mute.
________________________
Duncan
Mute wrote:
> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> > Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
> >> > translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
> >> > published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
> >>
> >> Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
> >> excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
> >> regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
>
> >I'll look forward to it.
>
> If only Tom was going to still be there to send you the freebie he
> promised...
My crying days are over. I'm stronger now...
>
>
> >So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
> >of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
>
> I've never heard of David B. either, but I have two Lat books. He's
> Malaysian, not European...
He's not the guy who got banned recently is he?
>
>
> >> > > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
> >> >
> >> > Absolutely.
> >>
> >> Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
> >> the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
>
> >...and no Ty Templeton. Amazing.
>
> Ty only talks about his own comics anyway...
I thought he only talked about his disgusting habits. But he does it so
intelligently...
>
Fred Sullivan
X>Omission from the list that _really_ surprised me and that I woulda put
X>_very_ high up: _Cerebus_. And from the number of other people who've
X>mentioned it as a serious omission,
X>I can see having a beef with Dave Sim's politics, but I think for sheer
X>craft, versatility, scope of vision and power to see it through, there are
X>very, very few cartoonists in his league.
Its not about politics, its about Gary Groth and his rather petty feuds.
The journal has always been an extension of gary groth and if gary groth
is feuding with someone, the journal as a whole is going to come down
on them and their work.
Its best to understand that on the inside, the journal operates like a
cult. Each member, when asked, will talk up the freedom they have. But
behind closed doors, its something else. Thus all the little sniping
and all the negative reviews that people feuding with gary groth are just
coincidence.
The feud isn't about Dave Sim's politics. It started because Sim dared
to question how necessary a publisher (like Groth) is to an artist.
In Gary's mind, a publisher is supposed to find/cultivate/control artists
like cows on a farm. Groth went off the deep end based on just the issue
being raised at all.
And in the end, thats always been the problem with the journal acting as any
kind of good review platform for comics. As long as the journal editorial
and publishing policy are an extension of Gary Groth without any tolerance
or independence for views that contradict him from staff or contributors,
the journal will never be more than a fanboy publication. And make no mistake,
gary groth has always been the worst sort of fanboy. Part of the reason
the journal reads as it does is that he is endlessly trying to compensate
for what he was before 1978 (which in case nobody knows was the worst
imaginable geek superhero fanboy often seen drooling all over Jim Steranko's
ankles).
Duncan
Mute wrote:
> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, I’d agree about
> >the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
> >the early issues.
>
> Okay, I recant my quibbles about "Crumb's Weirdo stories"- the
> voting was right!
Wozzat mean? You mean you actually... *like* that stuff? Nah. It just can't
be...
>
>
> >Superheroes: Lee and Kirby’s FF; Lee and Ditko’s SpiderMan. That’s OK. What
> >about Lee and Ditko’s Dr Strange? Kirby’s Fourth World should have just
> >been The Forever People. I’m sure Neal Adam’s Batman is there really, I
> >just can’t find it. Roy Thomas and Barry Smith’s Conan should have been
> >there, if only for inspiring a decade’s worth of sword & sorcery comics.
> >Either that or they should have been throttled. Likewise - though it pains
> >me to say it - Jim Starlin’s Warlock.
>
> You're an old man. You smell funny.
I tell ya, first thing you notice when you start picking up sexual diseases -
sorry, I didn't mean to say that ...when you start picking up 70s/early 80s
indie comics is just how much the people involved are indebted to Starlin.
Including Dave Sim, I might add (see Star*Reach if you don't believe me). And
Chaykin. And Michael Gilbert etc. etc.
>
>
> >Personally, any time I see Moore’s Pictopia and Clowes’s Caricature in a
> >list like this I get suspicious. Pictopia is a good story about the malign
> >influence of recent superhero comics: first person to post the length of
> >time it took Moore to sign up with Image after writing it gets a copy of
> >Spawn no.8 (if I feel like it).
>
> Six years. Spank you very much.
Six years to lose all credibility whatsoever and become just another hack.
Sounds about right. (Or am I overstating the case?)
>
>
> >And it’s a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
>
> Oh, come on! Last week you didn't even know that Hobbes is
> imaginary! Calvin & Hobbes is *the* shit.
Did too! Oh, all right. It, er... slipped my mind. That's the trouble with
these syndicated strips, they all blur into one. Saying someone's artistic
output over ten years is shite is just stupid and I take it back. Obviously,
the guy is a talented artist and a good writer. He's also fatally (for me)
compromised by being a popular newspaper cartoonist - his popularity, like most
of them, depends on him turning out happy endings and patronising resolutions
to his stories (not always, but often enough). I read a few pages of Yukon Ho
the other day (having read a few pages I'm qualified to give everyone the
benefit my opinions about anything, of course) and story after story started
off with Calvin saying something intelligent or weird or perceptive or whatever
and end with his parents patting him on the head and saying (words to the
effect of) "isn't he a cute little boy?" Thus anything slightly uncomfortable
or thought-provoking or, God help us, dangerous brought up by the strip can be
quietly put back to bed with Calvin; the bourgeoise can rest easy, the
revolution is postponned for another week etc. etc. This is the reason, imo,
that Gary Groth (I think it was) was wrong in saying in that TCJ debate that
'alternative' comics could be as popular as the likes of C&H. You couldn't
syndicate Love & Rockets, say, in a mainstream newspapers without a dose of
self-censorship from Los. Bros. This mis also the reason for the prevalence of
critters and cute kids, of course...
I said all this to one of my local comicshop owners this morning, who loves
Calvin & Hobbes, and he said I didn't like that sort of thing because I hadn't
grown out of all those high adventure, bloodsoaked horror and sword & sorcery
yarns I enjoyed in my youth. So I took out my mighty broadsword, Gutspewer,
from the back of my loincloth and with one titanic stroke I split his body from
shoulder to groin, wrenched back the sword in an arc of glitttering crimson
etc. etc. etc.
>
>
> >Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
> >too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
> >Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
> >face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
> >makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations.
>
> Aye. Wish he wasn't waiting until 2001 for the next one.
I was being snotty. It's an interesting list. I think it could've done with a
couple of sub-divisions as I said before.
Duncan
Estelle Souche wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Duncan wrote:
>
> > So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've
> > never heard of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim,
> > though.)
>
> There's a site about David B. (in French) at:
>
> http://www.kkn.com/davidb/
>
> By the way, on the same site there also are some pages about
> Lewis Trondheim:
>
> http://www.kkn.com/lewis/
>
> and Jochen Gerner:
>
> http://www.kkn.com/jochen-gerner/
>
> Estelle Souche
[Mr Burns voice] Estelle Souche, hey?
Mute
>> >> > Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
>> >> > translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
>> >> > published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
>> >> excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
>> >> regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
>>
>> >I'll look forward to it.
>>
>> If only Tom was going to still be there to send you the freebie he
>> promised...
>My crying days are over. I'm stronger now...
I heard that you were ashamed to begin with..
>> >So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
>> >of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
>>
>> I've never heard of David B. either, but I have two Lat books. He's
>> Malaysian, not European...
>He's not the guy who got banned recently is he?
By who?
>> >> > > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
>> >> >
>> >> > Absolutely.
>> >>
>> >> Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
>> >> the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
>>
>> >...and no Ty Templeton. Amazing.
>>
>> Ty only talks about his own comics anyway...
>I thought he only talked about his disgusting habits. But he does it so
>intelligently...
He also fights elegantly with Omar on rac.dcu, the little
prankster.
-Mute.
________________________
Duncan
Todd VerBeek wrote:
> >>Tom Spurgeon wrote:
> >>> One small point: the list doesn't skip the '50s at all. We have three runs
> >>> of ECs, Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts, and Barks.
>
> >On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 16:30:14 +0000, Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
> >>My mistake: one among many. Shows what I know about these guys. Although I
> >>did mean the time they started: weren't Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts and Barks
> >>around pre-War?
>
> My pal David Tallan said:
> >I don't know about Barks (more's the pity) But Feiffer, Pogo and
> >Peanuts were definitely not pre-War (unless you mean the Vietnam War).
>
> Or the Falklands. {smile}
War Of The Roses, actually.
>
>
> >I'm not sure but I think Peanuts may have started in 1954, for example.
>
> I don't know the dates from memory, but I did a "history of comics"
> calendar as a school design project recently, and picked two or three key
> series/characters to represent each decade. "Pogo" was in the 1940's
> slot, so it may have been "War-era", but not "pre-War". "Peanuts" was one
> of my picks for the 1950's, and I remember specifically picking an early
> sample (first appearance of Snoopy) to go in that slot. Plus, "pre-War"
> was 60 or more years ago... Sparky Schulz has been drawing Good Ol'
> Charlie Brown for a long time, but not =that= long.
You mean Snoopy never *did* fight the Red Barron? My illusions are shattered once
again...
>
>
> Anyway, as long as TCJ is listing the cognoscenti consensus, and various
> folks are offering rebuttals, why not I?
Ummmmm... Nope. No reason...
[Mr Burns voice] Todd VerBeek, hey?
Immediate reaction:
This is - partly - a better way of making a list like this. ie you need one list
covering the history of comics, like this, and another covering the best - or
most enjoyable etc. - individual stories or series. While it may be possible to
mix single panel cartoons, short strips and comics, mixing them up into two types
of list confuses the intention.
Good that you've added:
Mutt & Jeff
Little Orphan Annie
(Free comic for the first person to post who did Little Annie Amphetamine)
Superman by Jerry Siegel & Joe Schuster & Batman by Bob Kane & Bill Finger
(I figured the TCJ list was deliberately missing out Golden Age superheroes
for some reason. If not these then Neal Adams' Batman & Curt Swan's Soops
would've been favourite.)
Watchmen
(Not an addition as such, but I'm glad you picked that over V For Vendetta or
Miracle Man.)
Bone
(Yeah, I'm suprised TCJ passed on this - didn't they? It's a wonderful,
life-affirming strip... )
[Go on. Say something mutey... I know you wanna...]
Bad that you missed:
Asterix
(You can't have TinTin without Asterix.)
Heavy Metal
(see below)
Moebius
Akira
(Or any manga - none available?)
Bad that you added:
Captain America by Joe Simon & Jack Kirby
(Unnecessary, surely?)
Mr. Natural by Robert Crumb
(Hmmmm. Really difficult to pick just one Crumb but I'd've thought TCJ were
right on this with the Weirdo strips. Maybe you could've gone for the Knockabout
books - Talks The Blues, My Trouble... & America.)
Swamp Thing by Len Wein & Bernie Wrightson
(I know what you mean but House Of Mysteries/Secrets & Witching Hour were the
original ones and besides, if you want to include Swampy then Alan Moore's run
(Saga Of... 20 -64) is the more 'important' in that it kicked off that whole
clever-dick dark fantasy DC rewrite thang that's deep down in among the roots of
Vertigo - and to some extent Image, Acclaim, even Marvel etc.)
Sgt. Rock [I never did find a suitable byline for him]
Gotta assume this was a personal favourite of yours Todd (I know you did the
list a while back) 'cos I'm sure with hindsight you wouldn't include it. Even if
you wanted a mainstream war series I'd've gone for Unknown Soldier, but it's also
taking the place of the Freak Brothers and Cerebus - I know you've got it in the
80s but it should be here, mainly because *that's* what makes it such an
'important' comic but also partly because of the BWS Conan homage at the
beginning. In fact, there was a boom in Sword&Sorcery and fantasy comics in the
late 70s/early 80s and I'm amazed you've left out Heavy Metal, since this was the
main access English-speakers had to European comics.)
Not a bad list, though. Not bad at all. Taking a risk choosing the Scott McCloud
- there's a pretty good chance that strips like that will be overtaken by
technology - but one worth taking. This Todd VerBeek chap: name rings a bell -
any good is he?
Mute
>Mute wrote:
>> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > On the other hand, I’d agree about
>> >the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
>> >the early issues.
>>
>> Okay, I recant my quibbles about "Crumb's Weirdo stories"- the
>> voting was right!
>Wozzat mean? You mean you actually... *like* that stuff? Nah. It just can't
>be...
Zwigoff was the photographer on most, you know?
>> >Superheroes: Lee and Kirby’s FF; Lee and Ditko’s SpiderMan. That’s OK. What
>> >about Lee and Ditko’s Dr Strange? Kirby’s Fourth World should have just
>> >been The Forever People. I’m sure Neal Adam’s Batman is there really, I
>> >just can’t find it. Roy Thomas and Barry Smith’s Conan should have been
>> >there, if only for inspiring a decade’s worth of sword & sorcery comics.
>> >Either that or they should have been throttled. Likewise - though it pains
>> >me to say it - Jim Starlin’s Warlock.
>>
>> You're an old man. You smell funny.
>I tell ya, first thing you notice when you start picking up sexual diseases -
>sorry, I didn't mean to say that ...when you start picking up 70s/early 80s
>indie comics is just how much the people involved are indebted to Starlin.
>Including Dave Sim, I might add (see Star*Reach if you don't believe me).
I know that already..
>And Chaykin.
VERY early Chaykin...
> And Michael Gilbert etc. etc.
No.
>> >Personally, any time I see Moore’s Pictopia and Clowes’s Caricature in a
>> >list like this I get suspicious. Pictopia is a good story about the malign
>> >influence of recent superhero comics: first person to post the length of
>> >time it took Moore to sign up with Image after writing it gets a copy of
>> >Spawn no.8 (if I feel like it).
>>
>> Six years. Spank you very much.
>Six years to lose all credibility whatsoever and become just another hack.
>Sounds about right. (Or am I overstating the case?)
Yes.
>> >And it’s a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
>>
>> Oh, come on! Last week you didn't even know that Hobbes is
>> imaginary! Calvin & Hobbes is *the* shit.
All this below: it's 5am, damnit. I can't think clealry enough to
argue...
>Did too! Oh, all right. It, er... slipped my mind. That's the trouble with
>these syndicated strips, they all blur into one. Saying someone's artistic
>output over ten years is shite is just stupid and I take it back. Obviously,
>the guy is a talented artist and a good writer. He's also fatally (for me)
>compromised by being a popular newspaper cartoonist -
So popular that he could get away with doing everything that his
edoitirs said he couldn't.
>his popularity, like most
>of them, depends on him turning out happy endings and patronising resolutions
>to his stories (not always, but often enough). I read a few pages of Yukon Ho
>the other day (having read a few pages I'm qualified to give everyone the
>benefit my opinions about anything, of course) and story after story started
>off with Calvin saying something intelligent or weird or perceptive or whatever
>and end with his parents patting him on the head and saying (words to the
>effect of) "isn't he a cute little boy?" Thus anything slightly uncomfortable
>or thought-provoking or, God help us, dangerous brought up by the strip can be
>quietly put back to bed with Calvin; the bourgeoise can rest easy, the
>revolution is postponned for another week etc. etc.
BAD misreading of the strip.
>This is the reason, imo,
>that Gary Groth (I think it was) was wrong in saying in that TCJ debate that
>'alternative' comics could be as popular as the likes of C&H. You couldn't
>syndicate Love & Rockets, say, in a mainstream newspapers without a dose of
>self-censorship from Los. Bros. This mis also the reason for the prevalence of
>critters and cute kids, of course...
I'm tired. Fuck you! So there.
>I said all this to one of my local comicshop owners this morning, who loves
>Calvin & Hobbes, and he said I didn't like that sort of thing because I hadn't
>grown out of all those high adventure, bloodsoaked horror and sword & sorcery
>yarns I enjoyed in my youth. So I took out my mighty broadsword, Gutspewer,
>from the back of my loincloth and with one titanic stroke I split his body from
>shoulder to groin, wrenched back the sword in an arc of glitttering crimson
>etc. etc. etc.
You know you're not meant to pull out that "mighty broadsword" in
shops anymore, let alone start spraying arcs of fluid around...
>> >Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
>> >too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
>> >Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
>> >face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
>> >makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations.
>>
>> Aye. Wish he wasn't waiting until 2001 for the next one.
>I was being snotty. It's an interesting list. I think it could've done with a
>couple of sub-divisions as I said before.
Valid snottiness. Some of the classifications are just wonky...
-Mute.
________________________
Duncan
ronan wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>
> <massively wack shit snipped. duncan IS da bomb>
Ronan, when was it exactly you decided to stop speaking English? This isn't
something you've picked up from your students is it? Next thing you know you'll
be listening to that ghastly "beat" music and wearing "flares"...
Where's he going then? Got himself a proper job, has he? I should bloody well
hope so. And he can get himself a proper haircut while he's at it.
I don't know. Young people today etc. etc. etc.
[Just kidding Tom. Good luck with whatever it is you're doing...]
Duncan
Mute wrote:
> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Fair enough when dealing with recent stuff - hardly any of it ever gets
> >> >> > translated. But there's plenty out there - including stuff Fantagraphics have
> >> >> > published, like those Tardis in Prime Cuts.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, and we're more familiar than most with world comics. I'm very
> >> >> excited to profile Lat and David B. in #211; Lat in particular is a
> >> >> regional treasure arguably similar in impact to a Tezuka, Kirby or Barks.
> >>
> >> >I'll look forward to it.
> >>
> >> If only Tom was going to still be there to send you the freebie he
> >> promised...
>
> >My crying days are over. I'm stronger now...
>
> I heard that you were ashamed to begin with..
Ashamed. Then nauseous. Then strangely happy. Then ashamed again... What the hell are we
talking about?
>
>
> >> >So the more Euro comics that get published in English the better. I've never heard
> >> >of David B. and Lat (I *have* heard of Eric B. and Rakim, though.)
> >>
> >> I've never heard of David B. either, but I have two Lat books. He's
> >> Malaysian, not European...
>
> >He's not the guy who got banned recently is he?
>
> By who?
By the Malaysian government. Or possibly a newspaper in Malaysia or a nearby state came
under pressure - Singapore, maybe? I've got a feeling he might be.
>
>
> >> >> > > I also hope it will sharpen the discussion on certain controversial works.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Absolutely.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, I hope so. I've already read more intelligent posts _on comics_ in
> >> >> the public newsgroups this week than I have in about two years preceding.
> >>
> >> >...and no Ty Templeton. Amazing.
> >>
> >> Ty only talks about his own comics anyway...
>
> >I thought he only talked about his disgusting habits. But he does it so
> >intelligently...
>
> He also fights elegantly with Omar on rac.dcu, the little
> prankster.
I can't think of a bigger waste of time but as long as he's happy... Mind you, Omar
cracked what I thought wasa very funny gag several months ago...
>
Tom Spurgeon
Look, I'm going to go stand on the corner of 75th and Roosevelt. Can
someone pick me up and get me away from this place? I'll say I'm going for
coffee...
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
P.S. -- I didn't intend to write "/TCJ". GET OUT OF MY HEAD!
Duncan
Tom Spurgeon wrote:
> What can I say? Fred's reasoned, fact-filled arguments have won me over.
> Look, I'm going to go stand on the corner of 75th and Roosevelt. Can
> someone pick me up and get me away from this place? I'll say I'm going for
> coffee...
Are you sure someone hasn't TOLD you to say that, Tom?
>
Mark Rosenfelder
Tom Spurgeon <t...@tcj.com> wrote:
>I don't have anything to say about your differences in opinion; everyone
>has a personal list better than the final group list, according to their
>own views. I will say that everyone who contributed is aware of the work
>of Alison Bechdel. She received some votes. I know people feel very
>strongly about her work, but I find it hard to believe you can't imagine
>anyone having a critical objection to her work.
You can find folks who'll make critical objections to, oh let's say Calvin
& Hobbes or Carl Barks. The question was whether any are strong enough to
warrant preferring Hank Ketcham to her.
(There goes my chances of ever writing for TCJ, I suppose. :)
>Tim Barela also received a couple of votes.
Hmmf... gay comics bland enough to give to your grandmother.
Duncan
Mute wrote:
> >> Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On the other hand, I’d agree about
> >> >the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
> >> >the early issues.
> >>
> >> Okay, I recant my quibbles about "Crumb's Weirdo stories"- the
> >> voting was right!
>
> >Wozzat mean? You mean you actually... *like* that stuff? Nah. It just can't
> >be...
>
> Zwigoff was the photographer on most, you know?
No, I didn't know. That's nice. I think whoever did it would have a hard job not
ending up with a lot of cheesy snaps of some skinny geezer climbing over a group of
bemused-looking women. I just hope they got paid, is all.
> > the people involved are indebted to Starlin.
> >Including Dave Sim, I might add (see Star*Reach if you don't believe me).
>
> I know that already..
I know. I just wanted to hear you say it.
>
>
> >And Chaykin.
>
> VERY early Chaykin...
Kind of THIS early... no, no, not THAT early, THIS early...
>
>
> > And Michael Gilbert etc. etc.
>
> No.
...I think you'll find-
>
>
> No.
...but really, he-
> No.
Honest, he's-
> No.
etc. etc.
> >> >Personally, any time I see Moore’s Pictopia and Clowes’s Caricature in a
> >> >list like this I get suspicious. Pictopia is a good story about the malign
> >> >influence of recent superhero comics: first person to post the length of
> >> >time it took Moore to sign up with Image after writing it gets a copy of
> >> >Spawn no.8 (if I feel like it).
> >>
> >> Six years. Spank you very much.
>
> >Six years to lose all credibility whatsoever and become just another hack.
> >Sounds about right. (Or am I overstating the case?)
>
> Yes.
No.
> Yes.
No.
> etc. etc.
> >> >And it’s a fact: Calvin & Hobbes is shite.
> >>
> >> Oh, come on! Last week you didn't even know that Hobbes is
> >> imaginary! Calvin & Hobbes is *the* shit.
>
> All this below: it's 5am, damnit. I can't think clealry enough to
> argue...
>
> >Did too! Oh, all right. It, er... slipped my mind. That's the trouble with
> >these syndicated strips, they all blur into one. Saying someone's artistic
> >output over ten years is shite is just stupid and I take it back. Obviously,
> >the guy is a talented artist and a good writer. He's also fatally (for me)
> >compromised by being a popular newspaper cartoonist -
>
> So popular that he could get away with doing everything that his
> edoitirs said he couldn't.
His "edoitirs"? I never do what those bastards want. All they want is to suck my
juices...
>
>
> >his popularity, like most
> >of them, depends on him turning out happy endings and patronising resolutions
> >to his stories (not always, but often enough). I read a few pages of Yukon Ho
> >the other day (having read a few pages I'm qualified to give everyone the
> >benefit my opinions about anything, of course) and story after story started
> >off with Calvin saying something intelligent or weird or perceptive or whatever
> >and end with his parents patting him on the head and saying (words to the
> >effect of) "isn't he a cute little boy?" Thus anything slightly uncomfortable
> >or thought-provoking or, God help us, dangerous brought up by the strip can be
> >quietly put back to bed with Calvin; the bourgeoise can rest easy, the
> >revolution is postponned for another week etc. etc.
>
> BAD misreading of the strip.
When you say bad-
> BAD
er... OK, but-
> BAD
etc. etc.
(Sorry about the piss-taking but well, single-words do not an argument make. Yes,
I'd need to read a complete set of Calvin & Hobbes to have a truly worthwhile
opinion on it; no, I'm not going to because it irritates me; yes, I can see its
quality and understand its value anyway; no, that doesn't make a lot of difference
because there are dozens of good quality and popular strips out there which I know
from experience I'm not going to like no matter how many times I read them; yes,
I'm nevertheless open to a half-decent argument as to why C&H isn't at heart a
warm, reassuring and fundamentally decent comic strip; no, I don't really know why
I find warm, reassuring and fundamentally decent comic strips slightly nauseating,
or why they make me suspicious of the writer's intentions, but I'll let you know
about it all the same...)
> >This is the reason, imo,
> >that Gary Groth (I think it was) was wrong in saying in that TCJ debate that
> >'alternative' comics could be as popular as the likes of C&H. You couldn't
> >syndicate Love & Rockets, say, in a mainstream newspapers without a dose of
> >self-censorship from Los. Bros. This mis also the reason for the prevalence of
> >critters and cute kids, of course...
>
> I'm tired. Fuck you! So there.
Now you're talking.
> >I said all this to one of my local comicshop owners this morning, who loves
> >Calvin & Hobbes, and he said I didn't like that sort of thing because I hadn't
> >grown out of all those high adventure, bloodsoaked horror and sword & sorcery
> >yarns I enjoyed in my youth. So I took out my mighty broadsword, Gutspewer,
> >from the back of my loincloth and with one titanic stroke I split his body from
> >shoulder to groin, wrenched back the sword in an arc of glitttering crimson
> >etc. etc. etc.
>
> You know you're not meant to pull out that "mighty broadsword" in
> shops anymore, let alone start spraying arcs of fluid around...
>
> >> >Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
> >> >too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
> >> >Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
> >> >face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
> >> >makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations.
> >>
> >> Aye. Wish he wasn't waiting until 2001 for the next one.
>
> >I was being snotty. It's an interesting list. I think it could've done with a
> >couple of sub-divisions as I said before.
>
> Valid snottiness.
Valid snottiness? The right arc of body fluid maybe...
> Some of the classifications are just wonky...
Yeah, like my "mighty broadsword".I got you a copy of AARGH! (or whatever the hell
it is) this morning so you'd better not get another one from elsewhere. Pretty
cheap, too...
(Got a copy of American Splendour no.2, too. Yowza!)
Kevin J. Maroney
>Its not about politics, its about Gary Groth and his rather petty feuds.
That, of course, would be why Dave Sim has been featured on the cover
_The Comics Journal_ more than any other creator.
Tom Spurgeon has already said that Sim isn't on the list because
people didn't vote for him. What has Spurgeon ever done to you to
merit you calling him a liar to his face?
Anyway, I can easily see people not voting for _Cerebus_ as a whole
because of the aesthetic mire which it became after the end of _Church
and State_,. and then the active toxic waste which was _Mothers and
Daughters_. It's harder to see not voting for _High Society_, which
was (mostly) a discrete work, unmistakably influential, almost
unprescedented in its artistic ambitions, and, for the most part,
brilliant. But that later work leaves such a bad taste....
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
"Love doesn't have a point. Love *is* the point."--Alan Moore
Tom Spurgeon
Rosenfelder) wrote:
> In article <tom-210399...@c05-camilla.blarg.net>,
> Tom Spurgeon <t...@tcj.com> wrote:
> >I don't have anything to say about your differences in opinion; everyone
> >has a personal list better than the final group list, according to their
> >own views. I will say that everyone who contributed is aware of the work
> >of Alison Bechdel. She received some votes. I know people feel very
> >strongly about her work, but I find it hard to believe you can't imagine
> >anyone having a critical objection to her work.
>
> You can find folks who'll make critical objections to, oh let's say Calvin
> & Hobbes or Carl Barks. The question was whether any are strong enough to
> warrant preferring Hank Ketcham to her.
Well sure, that's what I think. You stated your objection Bechdel's
absence in absolute terms.
Incidentally, Gary was the main advocate for Ketcham, whom he considers
the finest draftsman to ever do a panel strip. He's familiar with all of
Bechdel's work, so he would prefer Ketcham to her.
> (There goes my chances of ever writing for TCJ, I suppose. :)
Oh, like we agree with everything Ray Mescallado says.
> >Tim Barela also received a couple of votes.
>
> Hmmf... gay comics bland enough to give to your grandmother.
I agree with you.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Fred Sullivan
X>> What can I say?
I should apologise. I know that in reality the reason that everyone
at the journal marches lock-step with gary is that you are all such a great
bunch of scholars and have such a depth of understanding about comics that
you simply never disagree.
So in reality, the journal staff is a meeting of great minds, the quality of
which is such that each finds the great common truths. Its not at all true
that Gary Groth has a flaw in his personality that leads him to rabidly turn on
people he used to get along with.
And there is no question of an editorial mandate that certain people are
to be trashed in letters, news, articles and interviews with other creators.
So when the word goes out to trash sim or miller, its not really happening.
Its just all the "great minds" at the journal collectively reaching the only
true conclusion all in harmony.
For example, dave sim being ignored in favor of multiple listings
of the same fanatagraphics product and marvel superhero books in a top 100
list is something that there could be no disagreement on. Just as Herge
could be kept off the list because the great minds at the journal had no
comprehension that tintin is multinational and has as many (or more) readers
in english than in french. But why not keep Herge off....more spots for
Fantagraphics product.
X>>Fred's reasoned, fact-filled arguments have won me over.
X>> Look, I'm going to go stand on the corner of 75th and Roosevelt. Can
X>> someone pick me up and get me away from this place? I'll say I'm going for
X>> coffee...
There is a good way to put together a top 100 list and then there is the
journal way. The good way is to find people who understand the subject
area and have some at least conceptual independence. The other way
is load it up with hacks that will make the "right decisions" which in
this case seems to be to exclude Groth's enemies and promote fantagraphics
product.
I dont think any of this matters to you though. You are just a hollow
mouthpiece for your company and as such, you dont really have any opinions
of your own.
If you did, you and several others who work for the journal would leave
and start a true review publication for comics without all the negative
energy, fanboy stupidity and baggage of Gary Groth dragging it down.
Martin Wisse
>X>Tom Spurgeon wrote:
>
>X>> What can I say?
>
> I should apologise. I know that in reality the reason that everyone
>at the journal marches lock-step with gary is that you are all such a great
>bunch of scholars and have such a depth of understanding about comics that
>you simply never disagree.
Umm. I've seen TCJ editors/staffers disagree with each other. It ain't pretty.
You know we're talking about Gary Groth, not Gorrilla Grodd?. He has no
mind control powers.
>So in reality, the journal staff is a meeting of great minds, the quality of
>which is such that each finds the great common truths. Its not at all true
>that Gary Groth has a flaw in his personality that leads him to rabidly turn on
>people he used to get along with.
Why do i have the feeling you're one of the people he turned on... You
certainly seem aroused by him.
>And there is no question of an editorial mandate that certain people are
>to be trashed in letters, news, articles and interviews with other creators.
>So when the word goes out to trash sim or miller, its not really happening.
>Its just all the "great minds" at the journal collectively reaching the only
>true conclusion all in harmony.
Are they trashing Sim and Miller? News to me.
>For example, dave sim being ignored in favor of multiple listings
>of the same fanatagraphics product and marvel superhero books in a top 100
>list is something that there could be no disagreement on. Just as Herge
>could be kept off the list because the great minds at the journal had no
>comprehension that tintin is multinational and has as many (or more) readers
>in english than in french. But why not keep Herge off....more spots for
>Fantagraphics product.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. It all a conspiracy. Look out for the black helicopters,
Martha!
>X>>Fred's reasoned, fact-filled arguments have won me over.
>X>> Look, I'm going to go stand on the corner of 75th and Roosevelt. Can
>X>> someone pick me up and get me away from this place? I'll say I'm going for
>X>> coffee...
>
>There is a good way to put together a top 100 list and then there is the
>journal way. The good way is to find people who understand the subject
>area and have some at least conceptual independence. The other way
>is load it up with hacks that will make the "right decisions" which in
>this case seems to be to exclude Groth's enemies and promote fantagraphics
>product.
One track mind, eh.
>I dont think any of this matters to you though. You are just a hollow
>mouthpiece for your company and as such, you dont really have any opinions
>of your own.
Funny that he's leaving next friday... Oh wait, that's all a part of the
conspiracy!
>If you did, you and several others who work for the journal would leave
>and start a true review publication for comics without all the negative
>energy, fanboy stupidity and baggage of Gary Groth dragging it down.
Break the mindcontrol Tom! Leave the dark side!
Martin Wisse
--
You have permission to read as much sarcasm into that statement as you like,
so long as you start with "lots".
-Ailsa Murphy in rasfw.
Lee Randall
Wolk) writes:
>
>
>Omissions from the list that didn't surprise me but that I woulda put
>pretty high up: _Big Numbers_ and _Through The Habitrails_.
>Omission from the list that _really_ surprised me and that I woulda
put
arguments
>against it? and what were they?
One of the main arguments is that it features an aardvark as the lead
character who often has sexual intercourse with human characters, and
no one in the book bats an eye. Apart from all the crap in _Reads_.
Though I am kinda surprised that at least one book, say, _Jaka's Story_
or _Melmoth_ or something didn't make it in. Of course, maybe if all
the voters who'd nominated a Cerebus book had nominated the same one,
maybe it would have made the list.
Didn't the AFI list have a ballot of possible inclusions? Why else
would _The Jazz Singer_ be on it?
As far as _Big Numbers_, well, I haven't read it, but it's very
unfinished.
And I like _Through the Habitrails_ a *lot*, and I think it's quite
overlooked by fans and critics alike, but I don't think it's got the
merit of most of the other stuff on the list. Nicholson's new epilogue
weakens its unity, and some of the episodes aren't too strong. I do
think it's a great book as a whole, though, just not "top 100" calibre.
Bill
(on Lee's account)
Tom Spurgeon
<sull...@aud.alcatel.com> wrote:
Fred, you're exactly right. I'm particularly impressed how you saw through
that 70,000 word interview with Sim and last issue's Miller coverage. And
the fact that Gary has mended his fences with Pekar and Eisner and Marvel
without letting anyone know.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Tom Spurgeon
(Douglas Wolk) wrote:
> Omissions from the list that didn't surprise me but that I woulda put
> pretty high up: _Big Numbers_ and _Through The Habitrails_.
>
> Omission from the list that _really_ surprised me and that I woulda put
> _very_ high up: _Cerebus_. And from the number of other people who've
> mentioned it as a serious omission, I'm curious, Tom: were there arguments
> against it? and what were they?
I think Sim would have made the Journal's top 100 cartoonists very easily.
He's a tremendously skilled craftsmen, an engaging writer, has a fine
line, a way with voices and dialects, and is a walking dictionary of
narrative solutions in the comics form. He's also a good letterer.
Cerebus as a work is a difficult thing, though. I voted for it in its
entirety, and consider it flawed but often fascinating. Other people voted
for portions of Cerebus, specific graphic novels, and were pretty adamant
that Cerebus as a whole did not work for them. So there was simply no
critical consensus.
I don't know why this should be surprising to fans of Cerebus. It's a
difficult, sprawling work, and simply isn't done yet. I know my opinion of
it has changed at least once, probably twice, in the last four years. Bone
is the same way for me -- I think the ending in something that asks to be
taken a single narrative, like the ending in similar works in other media,
becomes very important. It makes it that much harder to come to a
conclusion about it, and you're forced to either project or look at
sub-units.
So if there's a list in 2020, I bet that they have a much easier time
dealing with Cerebus as a whole.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
Steve Lieber
> I dont think any of this matters to you though. You are just a hollow
> mouthpiece for your company and as such, you dont really have any opinions
> of your own.
Tom is leaving the Journal in less than a week, presumably to pursue goals
that might pay more than four figures annually. He has very little to gain
by squelching his own views and parroting Gary's. And I should note that
I've never seen any indication that he's done that, in this discussion, or
any other.
It's amazing how bent out of shape some people are getting about this. The
list refelcts the critical consensus of nine opinionated guys with broad
tastes in comics and cartooning. Some people here are reacting as if the
Journal had dumped toxic waste into the Seattle reservoir, or had set up an
index of allowable comics with enforcable orders to burn the rest.
It does look like fun to spill bile though, so let me give it a try:
--
It's obvious that the bullies who produced this list are a bunch of
snobbish, drunken sociopaths. Also, I've heard that at least three of them
are fat. Fat elitists! Telling us what comics we're allowed to buy! What
else can you expect from the people who *intentionally* excluded Mort
Meskin's "Golden Lad" stories from their oh-so-biased "top" 100 list. I
know for a fact that at least twice a day, Gary Groth sticks his hand right
up Robert Boyd's ass and throws his voice while making Robert's mouth move
like a ventriloquist's dummy. I'm not gonna put up with this any longer.
I'll write a letter to CBG proving that the best 100 comics of the century
were the first hundred copies printed of WHITEOUT number one, and my wife,
who reads real BOOKS, thinks so too, so its obviously true.
--
I've got to do that more often.
--
My web page: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Museum/8914/
WHITEOUT tpb coming in May. The sequel is coming later this year.
Read a preview of WHITEOUT at http://www.easystreet.com/~kodiak/Whiteout.html
Jason Fliegel
Todd VerBeek <ver...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>>Tom Spurgeon wrote:
>>>> One small point: the list doesn't skip the '50s at all. We have three runs
>>>> of ECs, Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts, and Barks.
>
>>On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 16:30:14 +0000, Duncan <dun...@airstream.co.uk> wrote:
>>>My mistake: one among many. Shows what I know about these guys. Although I
>>>did mean the time they started: weren't Feiffer, Pogo, Peanuts and Barks
>>>around pre-War?
Feiffer got his start as Will Eisner's assistant on THE SPIRIT in 1946,
and came into his own in the late 1950s, doing SICK, SICK, SICK for the
VILLAGE VOICE.
POGO started in 1948, although it wasn't nationally syndicated until 1949.
It wasn't until the 1950s -- Eisenhower, Nixon, and Joe McCarthy in
particular struck Walt Kelly's artistic fancy -- that the strip began
including the biting satire work that earned it its fame. The strip faded
by the late 1960s and limped along until 1975 or so, a few years after
Walt Kelly died.
Schulz started doing PEANUTS in 1950, although a precursor, LI'L FOLKS
appeared two years prior to that.
Barks's first work on the Ducks appeared in the April, 1943 issue of WALT
DISNEY'S COMICS AND STORIES and retired in the mid-1960s.
>I don't know the dates from memory, but I did a "history of comics"
>calendar as a school design project recently, and picked two or three key
>series/characters to represent each decade. "Pogo" was in the 1940's
>slot, so it may have been "War-era", but not "pre-War". "Peanuts" was one
>of my picks for the 1950's, and I remember specifically picking an early
>sample (first appearance of Snoopy) to go in that slot. Plus, "pre-War"
>was 60 or more years ago... Sparky Schulz has been drawing Good Ol'
>Charlie Brown for a long time, but not =that= long.
>
>Anyway, as long as TCJ is listing the cognoscenti consensus, and various
>folks are offering rebuttals, why not I? Here's a run-down of the rest of
>Yeah, I included a work of my own, even though it's still only in the
>plotting stage. But it will be done by 2009, so it fits the specified
>timeframe and it'll certainly capture the flavour of the decade for =me=.
>Besides, aren't I allowed to have some fun with my art homework? {smile}
I like the timeline. There are tons more I'd include in the 1930s, but
I wouldn't remove any of the three you listed to make room for THE
PHANTOM, BUCK ROGERS, or CAPTAIN MARVEL. Like you said, there was limited
space.
I'm also not sure about putting POGO in the 1940s -- like I said, he
didn't really come into his own until the 1950s -- but he *did* debut in
the 1940s, so I guess that's technically the place to put him. Of course,
by those standards, CEREBUS and MAUS are misplaced, since they both
premiered in the 1970s (though both are more closely associated with the
1980s).
The byline for SERGEANT ROCK is Robert Kanigher and Joe Kubert. Rock
probably belongs in the 1960s -- that was the heyday of his popularity --
although he debuted in the 1950s, so perhaps he should be there. I'd
squeeze him into the 1960s (dump Spidey if you *have* to dump someone),
and replace him in the 1970s with Claremont & Byrne's X-MEN.
I'm surprised nothing Vertigo appeared in the 1990s -- SANDMAN probably,
although PREACHER or HELLBLAZER would work, too.
I like the inclusion of yourself for the 2000s -- it aptly shows that the
fans of today are the pros of tomorrow. So what's ICARUS about, anyway?
--
Jason Fliegel
j-fl...@uchicago.edu
3L, University of Chicago Law School
Kevin J. Maroney
> I should apologise. I know that in reality the reason that everyone
>at the journal marches lock-step with gary is that you are all such a great
>bunch of scholars and have such a depth of understanding about comics that
>you simply never disagree.
That, to me, is the defining mark of the ignorant crank on this
subject: Believing that "everyone at the journal marches lock-step
with gary". There aren't even words to describe how untrue that is.
Jarret Cooper
>
> the fact that Gary has mended his fences with Pekar and Eisner and Marvel
> without letting anyone know.
Shows what I know...I've been reading TCJ religiously for 10 years and I
didn't realize there was a "feud" (real or perceived) with Harvey. I
know he quit writing his column quite a long time back, but I figured
that could have been for any number of reasons, notably his health
problems.
By the way, Tom, you're a saint to even want to wade through all this
bullshit, let alone deal with all the hurt feelings and conspiracy
theorists as tactfully as you have. Cheers.
j
c
Jarret Cooper
"Kevin J. Maroney" wrote:
>
> "Fred Sullivan" <sull...@aud.alcatel.com> wrote:
>
> > I should apologise. I know that in reality the reason that everyone
> >at the journal marches lock-step with gary is that you are all such a great
> >bunch of scholars and have such a depth of understanding about comics that
> >you simply never disagree.
>
> That, to me, is the defining mark of the ignorant crank on this
> subject: Believing that "everyone at the journal marches lock-step
> with gary". There aren't even words to describe how untrue that is.
Remember the house ad for Acme Novelty Library? RAVE reviews from all
manner of diverse publications, and ONE negative soundbite -- from the
Comics Journal.
j
c
--
Jarret Cooper
Audio DSP Engineer / PC Development
Arboretum Systems, Inc.
Duncan
Steve Lieber wrote:
> In article <7d945u$q...@news01.aud.alcatel.com>, "Fred Sullivan"
> <sull...@aud.alcatel.com> wrote:
>
> > I dont think any of this matters to you though. You are just a hollow
> > mouthpiece for your company and as such, you dont really have any opinions
> > of your own.
>
> Tom is leaving the Journal in less than a week, presumably to pursue goals
> that might pay more than four figures annually. He has very little to gain
> by squelching his own views and parroting Gary's. And I should note that
> I've never seen any indication that he's done that, in this discussion, or
> any other.
>
> It's amazing how bent out of shape some people are getting about this. The
> list refelcts the critical consensus of nine opinionated guys with broad
> tastes in comics and cartooning. Some people here are reacting as if the
> Journal had dumped toxic waste into the Seattle reservoir, or had set up an
> index of allowable comics with enforcable orders to burn the rest.
-sigh- this is all far too reasonable
>
>
> It does look like fun to spill bile though, so let me give it a try:
> --
>
> It's obvious that the bullies who produced this list are a bunch of
> snobbish, drunken sociopaths. Also, I've heard that at least three of them
> are fat. Fat elitists! Telling us what comics we're allowed to buy! What
> else can you expect from the people who *intentionally* excluded Mort
> Meskin's "Golden Lad" stories from their oh-so-biased "top" 100 list. I
> know for a fact that at least twice a day, Gary Groth sticks his hand right
> up Robert Boyd's ass and throws his voice while making Robert's mouth move
> like a ventriloquist's dummy. I'm not gonna put up with this any longer.
> I'll write a letter to CBG proving that the best 100 comics of the century
> were the first hundred copies printed of WHITEOUT number one, and my wife,
> who reads real BOOKS, thinks so too, so its obviously true.
YES! Much better.
Duncan
>
>
> >I tell ya, first thing you notice when you start picking up 70s/early 80s
> >indie comics is just how much the people involved are indebted to Starlin.
> >Including Dave Sim, I might add (see Star*Reach if you don't believe me).
>
> I know that already..
>
> >And Chaykin.
>
> VERY early Chaykin...
>
> > And Michael Gilbert etc. etc.
>
> No.
Just for the record ('cos you know how I *never*, ever get anything wrong on
rac.alt. ...wha? what d'ya mean?) I checked out Strange Brew last night. Way back
when, when Gilbert was working with Sim he did a story called, I think, 'A Very
Abreviated Conversation' (probably appeared in the back of an early Cerebus?) which
is influenced by Starlin. Admittedly, although it is Gilbert's artwork, it was
originally done by another guy. One panel is repeated over and over again which is
a ringer for a panel that came at the end of Warlock. Doesn't count? OK, before
that, Gilbert did an UG fantasy title called New Pfaltz (three issues, pretty
goddamn rare, I'd love to get hold of 'em). One or two stories only made it to
Strange Brew and one of 'em, Replay, has a certain Starlinesque quality. I'd lay
odds that a great deal more of New Pfaltz shows the same influence - which is
probably why Gilbert never reprinted the stories.Around the same time, Gene Day was
putting together *his* fantasy series, Black Zeppelin. He died before publication
but Renegade put it out and you can see Starlin's influence in a lot of it. Not to
mention Imagine, Star*Reach, Alan Moore (you're going to argue with me about *that*
too, ain'tcha?)
Here's a question for ya. Here's a bunch of artists we've been rabbiting about on
rac.alt recently: Robert Crumb, Spain Rodriguez, Frank Stack, art spiegelman, Alan
Moore, Jim Woodring, Michael Gilbert, Bill Griffith, Joe Sacco, Gilbert Hernandez.
Three of them never worked with Harvey Pekar - name those artists. (I can't promise
I've got it right, mind.)
Mute
>Good that you've added:
>Mutt & Jeff
>Little Orphan Annie
Wasn't this on the list? Gary Grodd's mind-control rays must have
ben malfunctioning that day...
>Bone
> (Yeah, I'm suprised TCJ passed on this - didn't they? It's a wonderful,
>life-affirming strip... )
>[Go on. Say something mutey... I know you wanna...]
LIfe-affirming? It fair scared my poor nephew half to death! Bloody
giant mountain lions, and scary hooded blokes, and bad computerised
lettering on the head baddie.
Actually, this is one thing were the anthropomorphing is really
fucked up. I kept wondering if it was going to come up in the Critter
threads...
-Mute.
________________________
Mute
>> >> > On the other hand, I’d agree about
>> >> >the Weirdo Crumbs - unless you’re including those horrible photoshoots from
>> >> >the early issues.
>> >>
>> >> Okay, I recant my quibbles about "Crumb's Weirdo stories"- the
>> >> voting was right!
>>
>> >Wozzat mean? You mean you actually... *like* that stuff? Nah. It just can't
>> >be...
>>
>> Zwigoff was the photographer on most, you know?
>No, I didn't know. That's nice. I think whoever did it would have a hard job not
>ending up with a lot of cheesy snaps of some skinny geezer climbing over a group of
>bemused-looking women. I just hope they got paid, is all.
They were paid in warm, vibrating *honour*.
>> > the people involved are indebted to Starlin.
>> >Including Dave Sim, I might add (see Star*Reach if you don't believe me).
>>
>> I know that already..
>I know. I just wanted to hear you say it.
Playful, eh?
>> >And Chaykin.
>>
>> VERY early Chaykin...
>Kind of THIS early... no, no, not THAT early, THIS early...
>>
>>
>> > And Michael Gilbert etc. etc.
>>
>> No.
>...I think you'll find-
>>
>>
>> No.
>...but really, he-
>> No.
>Honest, he's-
>> No.
>etc. etc.
Arf!
>No.
>> Yes.
>No.
>> etc. etc.
Beware the tap...
>> >his popularity, like most
>> >of them, depends on him turning out happy endings and patronising resolutions
>> >to his stories (not always, but often enough). I read a few pages of Yukon Ho
>> >the other day (having read a few pages I'm qualified to give everyone the
>> >benefit my opinions about anything, of course) and story after story started
>> >off with Calvin saying something intelligent or weird or perceptive or whatever
>> >and end with his parents patting him on the head and saying (words to the
>> >effect of) "isn't he a cute little boy?" Thus anything slightly uncomfortable
>> >or thought-provoking or, God help us, dangerous brought up by the strip can be
>> >quietly put back to bed with Calvin; the bourgeoise can rest easy, the
>> >revolution is postponned for another week etc. etc.
>>
>> BAD misreading of the strip.
>When you say bad-
>> BAD
>er... OK, but-
>> BAD
>etc. etc.
>(Sorry about the piss-taking but well, single-words do not an argument make.
Yeah, but it was 5am and I had to get up in a few hours. So now of
course I'm too tired from no sleep and aggravation to be coherent. And
the bloody screen is all red again, and it hurts to look at. I broke
my toe tonight too. Take that!
>Yes,
>I'd need to read a complete set of Calvin & Hobbes to have a truly worthwhile
>opinion on it; no, I'm not going to because it irritates me; yes, I can see its
>quality and understand its value anyway; no, that doesn't make a lot of difference
>because there are dozens of good quality and popular strips out there which I know
>from experience I'm not going to like no matter how many times I read them; yes,
>I'm nevertheless open to a half-decent argument as to why C&H isn't at heart a
>warm, reassuring and fundamentally decent comic strip; no, I don't really know why
>I find warm, reassuring and fundamentally decent comic strips slightly nauseating,
>or why they make me suspicious of the writer's intentions, but I'll let you know
>about it all the same...)
Start a thread about it next weekend or something. I'll try and
borrow a book or two and get ready.
>> >This is the reason, imo,
>> >that Gary Groth (I think it was) was wrong in saying in that TCJ debate that
>> >'alternative' comics could be as popular as the likes of C&H. You couldn't
>> >syndicate Love & Rockets, say, in a mainstream newspapers without a dose of
>> >self-censorship from Los. Bros. This mis also the reason for the prevalence of
>> >critters and cute kids, of course...
>>
>> I'm tired. Fuck you! So there.
>Now you're talking.
Yeah. You know, I *want* to answer, but there's just too much damn
rac* to read since this list thing started, let alone engage with it
significantly...I did start working on my own list on the train today
though. Having heard that Tom and Kim and Gary all ran out of steam by
70 or 80 is making me wonder how much crap I'll have to pad with...
>> >I said all this to one of my local comicshop owners this morning, who loves
>> >Calvin & Hobbes, and he said I didn't like that sort of thing because I hadn't
>> >grown out of all those high adventure, bloodsoaked horror and sword & sorcery
>> >yarns I enjoyed in my youth. So I took out my mighty broadsword, Gutspewer,
>> >from the back of my loincloth and with one titanic stroke I split his body from
>> >shoulder to groin, wrenched back the sword in an arc of glitttering crimson
>> >etc. etc. etc.
>>
>> You know you're not meant to pull out that "mighty broadsword" in
>> shops anymore, let alone start spraying arcs of fluid around...
>>
>> >> >Maybe I’m being too snotty about it. It’s big fault is that it concentrates
>> >> >too much on American comics and specifically on the comics that
>> >> >Fantagraphics publish (something that TCJ has been accused of before, let’s
>> >> >face it). I always thought the Staros Report was a bit too parochial: this
>> >> >makes it look like Chris Staros works for the United Nations.
>> >>
>> >> Aye. Wish he wasn't waiting until 2001 for the next one.
>>
>> >I was being snotty. It's an interesting list. I think it could've done with a
>> >couple of sub-divisions as I said before.
>>
>> Valid snottiness.
>Valid snottiness? The right arc of body fluid maybe...
>> Some of the classifications are just wonky...
>Yeah, like my "mighty broadsword".I got you a copy of AARGH! (or whatever the hell
>it is) this morning so you'd better not get another one from elsewhere. Pretty
>cheap, too...
Never even seen a copy, and I'm broke, so no worries there.
>(Got a copy of American Splendour no.2, too. Yowza!)
Missing any others you want me to keep an eye out for when I start
going to comic shops again?
-Mute.
________________________
Arthur van Kruining
> In article <1dp2u0m.1yu...@ip195-86-48-97.dyn.wirehub.net>,
> Arthur van Kruining <arth...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >* Bicot président de club - Martin Branner (1920)
> >
> >This is _Winnie Winkle_, a American comic more popular in Europe and
> >especially France.
>
> Wow, why? I have to admit I've only read the later years of this.
Probably because Europeans were more familiar with the pre-war Sundays,
which focussed on Perry Winkle's antics.
> >* La Rubrique-à-brac - Marcel Gotlib (1970)
> >
> >Way too wordy for my taste.
>
> I loved the first volume-- the others fall off, IMHO. But then I love
> Kurtzman's Mad, too. I have a soft spot for Gai-Luron, too.
_La Bédéthèque Idéale_ also mentions _Les Dingodossiers_ by Gotlib and
Goscinny. I think I'll like this better than Gotlib's solo stuff. With
c.'70 Goscinny at the helm you can't go wrong...
> >* Le Petit Cirque - Fred (1973)
>
> Is this part of Philemon, or a separate story?
Separate story, but you can see it as a prequel.
> I've just read one of his,
> "L'histoire du corbac aux baskets", which is sort of a cross between Kafka
> and Krazy Kat.
A tad too light and Kafkaesque, IMO. Teensy disappointing. Sure, it's
better than 99% of what's available these days, but I don't consider it
a step forward from _Philemon_.
> >* L'Art moderne - Joost Swarte (1980)
> >
> >Holland spreekt een woordje mee!
>
> Why just that one?
You mean: why is it the only Dutch entry? If so: it's a long story...
My edition of _La Bédéthèque Idéale_ (97/98) actually mentions four
Dutch comics. (Five, if we claim Todd's great grandfather, Gustave
Verbeek.)
* Coton + Piston - Joost Swarte [superb kiddie comic]
* Horizon - Lian Ong [highly recommended]
* all 5 available titles - Willem [I never liked his work; maybe when
I'm older and wiser...]
* Léon-la-terreur - Theo Vandenboogaard & Wim T. Schippers
> >* Tragique destins - Vuillemin (1985)
> >
> >*Not* the apotheosis of the ligne clair.
>
> La ligne moutonnee?
I think it's offically called 'ligne crade'.
> I've just seen his "Sales blagues", which are amusing
> but hardly top 25 material.
I liked his stuff when I ran out of Reiser books to read. Now I don't
care so much about it. It will always be sub-Reiser, because it lacks
emotional depth.
> >* Lagaffe nous gâte - André Franquin (1977)
> >
> >Extremely popular in Europe, virtually unknown in the English-speaking
> >world. His B/W work would surely end up in my top 20.
>
> One of those series, like Valerian, that should succeed here but doesn't.
Perhaps, like _Achille Talon_, it's too European. One of the things I
like best about _Gaston Lagaffe_ is Franquin's depiction of 60's and
70's Brussels. It fills me with a kind of nostalgia, but it may leave
the anglophones cold.
> I'm a bit surprised at no Crepax.
The Raphael of comics. Perhaps the smut label worked against him. (It
certainly worked against me checking his work out.) Again, _La
Bédéthèque Idéale_ makes up for this omission: it lists _Anita_ in the
'Erotisme' section (along with, among others, _Birdland_, _Omaha_ and
_Little Ego_). _Valentina_ is the better-known work, but it's not listed
because it's no longer in print.
> Who would appear if the list were compiled today? I'd add Bilal,
> Bourgeon, Schuiten & Peeters. Trondheim, perhaps? And since Argentina is
> in Europe, at least in its own mind, Quino's Mafalda.
+ David B., Aristophane, Mathieu, Breccia, those three autobio books by
Lat, Bernet/Abuli, Comes maybe, Henk Sprenger... In short, the usual
gang. I don't like making up my own list, because I don't learn anything
from it.
Proost,
Arthur.
"Kom jongens, het leven roept, de zon schynt
en ik heb honger, gauw naar huis!" -- Kick Wilstra
Duncan
Mute wrote:
> Missing any others you want me to keep an eye out for when I start
> going to comic shops again?
Yes indeed, nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. Also Fox Comics 1-13, 15-17, 19-25. Ink Spots 1 & 2
and - OH NO! It's Ronan...!
Todd Morman
> kmar...@crossover.com (Kevin J. Maroney) wrote:
> >mute...@hotmail.com (Mute) wrote:
>
> >>What makes Crumb's stories from Weirdo a distinct work, or even group?
>
> >Aren't the _Weirdo_ stories both more coherent and obviously
> >autobiographical than Crumb's earlier work?
>
> But weren't things like When The Niggers Take Over and some of the
> Psychopathia Sexualis stuff in Weirdo, too?
The "Boswell's Diary" thing, too, I believe. I've always felt that the
strongest stories Crumb did in Weirdo were the historical pieces; I used
to flip through back issues and buy them based on what kind of Crumb
story they had (Mode O'Day: eh). I'm not sure if "Crumb's stories from
Weirdo" makes sense as a distinct work; I'd love to know the panel's
reasoning on that one. Maybe it was "the most convenient way to include
as much of his later career as possible"?
Btw, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to vote for Cerebus as a
whole (I wouldn't), but I can't freakin' believe that Sim's absolutely
brilliant _High Society_ didn't make it, and can't help but wonder,
given Sim's sometimes aggressive opinions, if personal grudges didn't
play a part in the glaring omission.
todd idiosyncracies 'r' us of course volume one of Morrison's Invisibles
or Morrison's Doom Patrol run would have certainly made my list morman
Kevin J. Maroney
>Btw, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to vote for Cerebus as a
>whole (I wouldn't), but I can't freakin' believe that Sim's absolutely
>brilliant _High Society_ didn't make it...
Tom S did say that the Cerebus vote was very fragmented, and that the
people who voted for specific works were aggressively unwilling to
have their vote count for the entire work. (And I would agree, were I
voting.)
He didn't say whether the vote-counters asked the whole-work voters if
they would like to respecify a single work; I suspect that _High
Society_ would be the first choice of most _Cerebus_-as-a-whole-work
voters, but perhaps they were equally fragmented.
Tom Spurgeon
kmar...@crossover.com wrote:
> Todd Morman <to...@alienskin.com> wrote:
>
> >Btw, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to vote for Cerebus as a
> >whole (I wouldn't), but I can't freakin' believe that Sim's absolutely
> >brilliant _High Society_ didn't make it...
>
> Tom S did say that the Cerebus vote was very fragmented, and that the
> people who voted for specific works were aggressively unwilling to
> have their vote count for the entire work. (And I would agree, were I
> voting.)
>
> He didn't say whether the vote-counters asked the whole-work voters if
> they would like to respecify a single work; I suspect that _High
> Society_ would be the first choice of most _Cerebus_-as-a-whole-work
> voters, but perhaps they were equally fragmented.
As I recall, all of the Cerebus voters would have had to throw their
weight behind one work. I think High Society is a charming comedy, but is
not a great work the way that the overall story is. If our goals were to
try and get Dave on the list and avoid all this bitching, I guess I could
have finessed it, but we really didn't want any sort of political
consideration to seep into it.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ
ben schwartz
todd morman wrote:
> Tom S did say that the Cerebus vote was very fragmented, and that the
> people who voted for specific works were aggressively unwilling to
> have their vote count for the entire work. (And I would agree, were I
> voting.)
Given the all or nothing sentiment behind _Cerebus_, my question to the
Journal judges is how do they rationalize voting for huge bodies of work
with which they couldn't possibly be familiar? How can you vote for
entire runs of "Li'l Abner" or "Polly and Her Pals" or CC Beck's _Captain
Marvel_ stint when much of this work isn't available? At least a dozen
years of Capp dailies and all but a handfull of Sundays are out. There
are other examples -- but who really read most of (forget all) of Harold
Grey or Chester Gould? And if you did, where'd you get it, cuz I want
one.
TCJ cops to this somewhat in the list's CC Beck assessment, noting that
much of -- my guess, literally 99% and up of -- Beck's work is out of
circulation. But what are you basing these evaluations on besides the
accepted idea that, well, uh, we _have_ to include Harold Grey, don't we?
But nobody knows Grey (or Capp, or Gould) well enough to say which period,
so we'll say everything. Meanwhile, altho I don't think Fantgraphics
product placement drove this list, obviously the judges are much more
familiar with Los Bros. so they can differentiate "Wig Wam Bam" from other
story arcs while Beck's whole run is guessed at.
BTW, I have no trouble with the likes of Beck, Capp, Grey, etc. on the
list -- in fact, I like the list over all and the discussion its started
-- but it makes you wonder if this isn't more a Hall of Fame recitation
than anything brought about by critical evaluation. We all have an idea
that Grey is great, but its just the tip of the iceberg.
Ben
PS to Tom Spurgeon, please pass on my heartfelt request to Gary G. to
please put out hardcovers for the "Little Orphan Annie" dailies series.
ben schwartz
be...@earthlink.net (ben schwartz) wrote:
Oops, I said:
>At least a dozen
> years of Capp dailies and all but a handfull of Sundays are out.
Actually, a good twenty-five years plus of Capp is out; I meant to say
that a good dozen years and all but a handful of Sundays are still _out_
of circulation.
Ben
Ty Templeton
all that. It was something of a summer hobby last year for about three weeks.
Nice to be remembered.
And for whoever said I don't talk about no other people's comix....let me randomly toss out
an opinion on a fellow cartoonist that I don't know at all...
Ain't Lynn Johnston currently creating some of the best and most unsung comic art on the
planet with FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE? Just got the latest collection, and I tells ya...this
stuff makes me laugh out loud, choke up with sentimentality and admire the writer's
observations of life and wit on a fairly consistent basis. Man o' man, we get so little of
that kind of sheer craft in the world of comix, I just like to see someone do it so
well...even in the very limited form of the strip collection.
Just thought I'd toss that in.
And since this is an alternative newsgroup...I MISS PETER BAGGE! When's he coming back? (I
demand so much.)
Ty the Guy. Going back to just lurking now....(but ya'all were talking about me!)
Slink43809
theComics Journal. I really liked reading this column. Is it going to come
back?
Todd Morman
> Todd Morman <to...@alienskin.com> wrote:
>
> >Btw, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to vote for Cerebus as a
> >whole (I wouldn't), but I can't freakin' believe that Sim's absolutely
> >brilliant _High Society_ didn't make it...
>
> people who voted for specific works were aggressively unwilling to
> have their vote count for the entire work. (And I would agree, were I
> voting.)
I understand that. It's just that the nature of the voting seems odd to
me; maybe there should have been more of a consensus at the start about
how best to measure votes for single issues, longer one-piece works,
arcs from longer series, and entire epics, to avoid something so
completely absurd as _Cerebus_ not making the list, while three separate
arcs from Jaime's L&R did. I don't think that an anomalous entry for
Cerebus somewhere in the top 25 or 50, with an asterisk explaining the
situation, would have been such a horrible bastardization of the
process. The work certainly deserves to be represented on any list like
this. Period.
> He didn't say whether the vote-counters asked the whole-work voters if
> they would like to respecify a single work; I suspect that _High
> Society_ would be the first choice of most _Cerebus_-as-a-whole-work
> voters, but perhaps they were equally fragmented.
Could be. I don't know if there was any chance for voters to modify
their votes after a first round ballot. I haven't gotten a copy of the
issue yet; is there a description of how the process worked?
Oh, and hi, Kevin. :)
todd hope you're doing well morman
Mark Rosenfelder
>mark...@xochi.tezcat.com (Mark Rosenfelder) wrote:
>>>> 2. It's absurd to give five entries to the Hernandez brothers.
>>>
>>>More absurd than treating them like one person?
>
>>5 - 3 = 2.
>
> There are actually at least three Hernandez Bros...
I personally wouldn't put Mario in the top 100.
Why do I vaguely recall that there's 6 Hernandez siblings? I can't find
where I read that, if I did.
Mark Rosenfelder
Kevin J. Maroney <kmar...@crossover.com> wrote:
>Anyway, I can easily see people not voting for _Cerebus_ as a whole
>because of the aesthetic mire which it became after the end of _Church
>and State_,. and then the active toxic waste which was _Mothers and
>Daughters_. It's harder to see not voting for _High Society_, which
>was (mostly) a discrete work, unmistakably influential, almost
>unprescedented in its artistic ambitions, and, for the most part,
>brilliant. But that later work leaves such a bad taste....
IMHO only Reads was toxic waste... the first two parts are merely
forgettable, and Minds is delightful.
Fred Sullivan
X>In article <36fa5f57...@client.ne.news.psi.net>,
X>kmar...@crossover.com wrote:
X>> Todd Morman <to...@alienskin.com> wrote:
X>>
X>> >Btw, I can understand why someone wouldn't want to vote for Cerebus as a
X>> >whole (I wouldn't), but I can't freakin' believe that Sim's absolutely
X>> >brilliant _High Society_ didn't make it...
X>>
X>> Tom S did say that the Cerebus vote was very fragmented, and that the
X>> people who voted for specific works were aggressively unwilling to
X>> have their vote count for the entire work. (And I would agree, were I
X>> voting.)
X>>
X>> He didn't say whether the vote-counters asked the whole-work voters if
X>> they would like to respecify a single work; I suspect that _High
X>> Society_ would be the first choice of most _Cerebus_-as-a-whole-work
X>> voters, but perhaps they were equally fragmented.
X>As I recall, all of the Cerebus voters would have had to throw their
X>weight behind one work. I think High Society is a charming comedy, but is
X>not a great work the way that the overall story is. If our goals were to
X>try and get Dave on the list and avoid all this bitching, I guess I could
X>have finessed it, but we really didn't want any sort of political
X>consideration to seep into it.
If your goal was to identify great works, leaving Sim off such
a list is totally absurd. Especially considering that the list is loaded
up with multiple entries for fantagraphics material which generate exactly
the same "problems" you claim Cerebus has. You can't find enough votes
for Cerebus, but somehow various arcs of a well-known fantagraphics product
all individually get enough votes for placement on the list. How did
that happen?
Its just amazing that you find all these "problems" in putting
Cerebus on the list while there is no problem at all putting (for example)
EC's "new trend" horror as a whole on the list as a work (along with
EC's war books as a seperate work). The EC stuff isn't even specific
enough to know what in the work is being recognized.
And the other rather obvious inconsistancy is that in Sim's case
you are applying a "story criteria" to the work whereas many items on
that list can't even have a criteria like that applied to them.
ronan
> TCJ cops to this somewhat in the list's CC Beck assessment, noting that
> much of -- my guess, literally 99% and up of -- Beck's work is out of
> circulation. But what are you basing these evaluations on besides the
> accepted idea that, well, uh, we _have_ to include Harold Grey, don't we?
> But nobody knows Grey (or Capp, or Gould) well enough to say which period,
> so we'll say everything. Meanwhile, altho I don't think Fantgraphics
> product placement drove this list, obviously the judges are much more
> familiar with Los Bros. so they can differentiate "Wig Wam Bam" from other
> story arcs while Beck's whole run is guessed at.
I would guess that someone like R.C. Harvey (one of the list voters) is very
familiar with both Beck and Grey. yes, these strips are "out of circulation"
(don't get me started on the collecting-fetishism as the root of comics lowly
stature) but that does not mean folks dont have access to them. there is a
lively market for tearsheets on ebay, there is APA distribution, and there are
collectors whose collections include massive numbers of both Beck and Grey. my
point is that just because you or I don't have them in front of us, or
available at the local Comics Dungeon, does not mean others don't have them.
ronan
Tom Spurgeon
Not everyone agrees with you that Cerebus is a Top 100 work. Get over it.
Tom Spurgeon/TCJ